The Word of God among the Denominations

On January 29, 2018March 30, 2024 By Jovan PayesIn Articles, Gospel Advocate, Hebrew Bible, Introduction, New Testament, Old Testament, Publications, Published, Revelation, Theology1 Comment

***Reprinted with permission from the February 2018 issue of* Gospel Advocate *Magazine.***

Hebrews affirms, “For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart” (4:12 ESV). This is part of a warning in Hebrews, which affirms that Christians who defect from God will fail to meet their rest as their Israelite counterparts did (vv. 1-11). God holds his people —and His creation— accountable by His presence (“sight”) in the word of God (Hebrews 4:13). This is a raw incontrovertible truth.

This passage makes no caveats; it makes no attempt to remedy a distinction between God’s word and God’s presence. They are both manifested at the same time. God is involved with real life (time and space) with Israel and with Christians. God makes promises and keeps his word regarding their “rest,” and God holds His people and creation accountable to His word. God is Lord of heaven and earth and everything in between, and He holds it together by the power residing in Jesus (Hebrews 1:3; Colossians 1:17). The word of God is connected not only to the authority of God but also to His nature and how He reveals Himself to the world.

Let me say the above in a differently. Our God, who is beyond time and space (God’s transcendence), enters our earthly “realm” bound by time and space (God’s immanence) with His divinity and authority (sovereignty) intact; furthermore, God enters into relationship with His creation (Abraham, Israel, Christians) by revealing Himself in creation and in His word. God is active both in creation and in His word. Creation reveals God’s existence and hints at elements of His attributes (natural theology), but it is His word that reveals God and His “will” so that humanity can enter into covenant with God. The word of God was both proclaimed orally through particular spokesmen (patriarchs, prophets, kings, apostles), but the prophetic word was not only through oracles but also in written communiqués embedded with the same divine authority (2 Peter 1:16–21). These writings reveal the mind of God (1 Corinthians 2:11–16), His purposes and mystery (Ephesians 3:1–6), His involvement in human events (Acts 17:26–27), and the righteousness by which He will bring justice to the world (Acts 17:30–31).

To say it bluntly, the Bible is the word of God set in a permanent written form. Paul declared, “all scripture is breathed out by God” (2 Timothy 3:16). The Scripture bears the character of God and is no “dead” codebook, for it transforms every “man of God” into a competent, equipped servant (2 Timothy 3:17). The profitability of all Scripture is due to its quality as “God’s breath.” There is no pecking order between the spoken or written word of God. The inspired written word is as inerrant as God’s character. There is no source outside of the Holy Spirit-given Scripture that speaks God’s transforming work since it is the depository of the gospel’s message. What the word of God promises, God will do; what God proclaims, God’s holds His creation accountable to (1 Thessalonians 2:13).

The above may seem to belabor the point, but as anticipated by the title of this piece, we will sketch how the word of God is handled among Liberal (Modern) and Neoorthodox influences. It is essential for the church to reflect on these twentieth-century influences because dialogue is healthy, truth has nothing from which to hide, and any redefinition of biblical Christianity must be given due consideration (Galatians 1:6-7).

The following historical sketches will probably not satisfy everyone, but they will be enough to see their direction and how they redefine significant elements of historic Christian beliefs and their tendency to subvert scriptural authority.

Liberalism/Modernism

The word “liberal” is a very loaded word. It is often used with contempt to show disapproval of someone else thought to be progressive (instrumental music, expanded role of women, etc.). But this is not the historic sense of the word. Liberalism emerged in the late nineteenth century through the interplay of many players, thinkers, and philosophical trends. The influence of Liberalism, or Modernism, is seen in three levels: (1) revelation is not the final answer to reality, (2) naturalism is the key to reality and religion, and (3) since the Christian documents are built on ancient myths and superstitions, the historic supernatural claims of Christianity is immaterial. To be a “Christian” is a matter of experience and the “essence” of its teaching.

Liberalism, as an intellectual revolution, is a child of the Age of Reason (the Enlightenment). The “Age” saw the elevation of human reason over the institutional “church,” which wielded divine revelation. It was “the church” that dictated to the people what to believe about reality. Divine revelation was the final answer to determining truth and what really happened in the past. This was displaced with rationalism, scientific history (criticism), and naturalism as final answers to genuine and authentic history and truth. In essence, as Stanley Grenz and Roger Olsen point out, the maxim “I believe in order that I may understand” was turned to “I believe what I can understand.”[1] Faith was overturned by a reason informed by modern findings — thus, this point of view is called “Modernism.”

Everything that was received as genuine knowledge, now, was shaped by the natural world. This was further supported by what is called “the principle of analogy,” popularized by the liberal theologian Ernst Troelsch (1865–1923), which argued that the present is the best way to understand the past. The consequence was detrimental in the extreme on the trustworthiness of Scripture. The supernatural elements interwoven in Scripture are, by definition, myths and superstitions. This meant that there are no miracles, no supernatural interventions by God, and no resurrection of Jesus Christ. Thus, many new schools of “criticism” emerged to study Scripture with mixed results.

This naturally led to an embrace of “the essence of Christianity” so long as reason and experience allowed. “Liberals” are open to the modern findings from the natural world, open to a religious humanism and science —in particularly embracing Darwinian evolution as the process by which God created. If God exists, He could only be revealed through religious “experience.” It was also immaterial if the events of Scripture happened or not because religion is a condition of the heart. Yet, the apostle Paul makes it abundantly clear that if the resurrection event has not occurred, both our preaching and faith are in vain and we are still in our sins (1 Corinthians 15:14, 17).

Another arm of Liberalism is the demythologizing of the New Testament pioneered by the “Form Critic” Rudolf Bultmann (1884–1976). Bultmann argued that historic person of Jesus is built on untrustworthy sources. The New Testament is Christian propaganda shrouded in the imagery of the Greek myths and Roman legends. As such, they are not relevant for faith nor spiritual truth claims. It is the symbolism that matters. Today, one only need to watch the latest “history” programming to find modern theological liberals interviewed. Theological liberalism has significant questions that need to be answered, but it brings Christianity to a logical dead end.

Neoorthodoxy

The Swiss theologian Karl Barth (1886–1968) ignited a movement when he published his commentary on Romans in 1919. It charted a new theological direction away from Liberalism/Modernism. Barth (pronounced “bart”) was not fond of the misnomer “neoorthodoxy,” but his strand of thinking regarding the meaning of “revelation” and “the word of God” would rival the prevailing traditional belief held historically by the church. As a consequence, many regard Barth as one of the great theologians and the father of modern theology.

Orthodoxy affirms the teaching of historic Christian truth based on Scripture. This includes, for example, the following concepts: the inerrant inspiration of scripture, the triune Godhead, the deity and virgin birth of Christ, the historic creation and fall of humanity, the bodily resurrection and ascension of Christ, the return and final judgment. Barth argued, on the other hand, that “revealed truth” was not written, but was the outcome of an encounter (an experience) with God. Thus, instead of scripture as being the objective word of God, Barth argued for a subjective experience with God initiated by reading the Bible.

Barth was offering a completely different course of thought altogether. “Revelation” does not appear in the form of propositional truths. Arguing book, chapter, verse, or appeals to the very words of scripture is insufficient to reveal God. Revelation (the word of God), it is argued, is an “event” in which God acts in history (God’s immanence). Barth even argued that revelation is not found in natural theology (Acts 17; Psalm 19; Romans 1) but, instead, in events like the call of Abraham, the exodus, and the resurrection. Millard Erickson is spot on when he classifies Neoorthodoxy as an illumination theory divorced from an objective standard.[2]

Although Neoorthodoxy is not a unified movement, there are three interconnected witnesses (modes/forms) that shape its view on revelation.[3] First, Jesus is the word of God in the truest sense, for He reveals God in the event of His incarnation, life, ministry, death and resurrection. This is true revelation, the very gospel. Second, Scripture points to Jesus but it is a flawed human (read “errant”) attempt to provide a witness to divine revelation. It is instrumentally God’s word but not properly. Third, the proclamation within the faith community —Barth preferred “community” to church— is likewise instrumentally God’s word. The Bible, then, only becomes God’s word when God uses it to reveal Jesus Christ in the encounter, contrary to 2 Timothy 3:16.

In fact, Neo-orthodoxy is quite a popular approach to handling the Word of God, even among churches of Christ. A popular theological branch of this movement is “Canonical Criticism,” popularized by the late American scholar Brevard Childs (1923–2007). It seeks to broadly bypass much of the liberal destructive criticism of the twentieth century by accepting the texts of Scripture as literary units. Nevertheless, this point of view struggles, as did Barth’s, to embrace the Bible as a very human (errant) book while appealing to its authority for theological thought as if they were inerrant. They seek, in the words of one sympathetic Abilene Christian University professor, to “articulate a doctrine of Scripture that recognizes human flaws in it.”[4] Treating the Bible as an inerrant text is simply a form of bibliolatry.

Keeping the Faith

Today, the phrase “Word of God” means different things to different believers, and that includes preachers. Liberalism ultimately rejects a supernatural Christian faith, and is at home with amputating its historic claims of a resurrected ascended Lord Jesus, in exchange for a subjective diluted Christianity. Neoorthodoxy, on the other hand, embraces a supernatural Christian faith, but it rejects the supernatural origin, inerrancy, and authority of the Scriptures which undergird its claims. The Word of God has always been a manifestation of God’s presence in our lives, in His proclamation, and in His Scripture without pecking order. Let us join Paul who declares, “Let God be true though every one were a liar” (Romans 3:4).

Notes

Stanley J. Grenz and Roger E. Olsen, 20th Century Theology (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1992), 17.
Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids, Baker Academic, 2013), 220–21.
Karl Barth, Evangelical Theology: An Introduction, trans. G. Foley (New York: Holt, 1963), 26–36.
Christopher Hutson, “Scripture as the Human Word of God: Why Faith Contradicts Inerrancy,” Lexington Theological Quarterly 44.1 (2011): 210–21. Hutson serves as a professor of ministry and missions at Abilene Christian University.

**To subscribe to Gospel Advocate, click here.**

The Public Reading of Scripture: Six Practical Suggestions

On April 18, 2017February 13, 2023 By Jovan PayesIn Articles, Church Practices, Gospel Advocate, New Testament, Paul's Letters, Practical, Publications, Published, worship

***Reprinted with permission from the March 2017 issue of* Gospel Advocate *Magazine.***

A vital element to the worship assembly of the body of Christ in the first century was the reading aloud of the Scriptures (1 Timothy 4:13; Acts 13:15). Today, it is probably hard to imagine a time when God’s word was accessible only when assembled with God’s people; it was a communal experience. The proliferation of Bibles today has truly made reading Scripture an individualized practice; yet, this has not always been so. In fact, the meaning of “church” (ekklesia; “an assembly”) presumes a people gathered to hear, to commit to, and to act upon the Word of God (Matthew 16:18; Deuteronomy 4:10-11; 31:9-13). Thus, hearing God’s Word is part of who we are as “the church” (Acts 11:26; 14:27).

The church needs to elevate the importance of the Scripture reading assignment in our assembly (Act 13:15; 2 Corinthians 3:14). There is a tendency to be too casual about this assignment. Perhaps it is because we take literacy for granted, though the capacity to read words is not the same as understanding the words being read. In this connection, we may then take for granted that anyone can read the Scripture aloud to the church. In some societies, reading is still regarded as a technical skill, much as it was in Bible times.

If reading the Scriptures will make a child of God “complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:17 ESV) when read for private devotion, then the same God-breathed writings read aloud will provide the same effect for the congregation. In the Scripture reading, God is speaking to His people. For this reason, the public reading of Scripture is a crucial element of the worship assembly and should not be taken casually or lightly.

A Note on the Context

In fact, Paul anchored to this very core principle when he wrote to Timothy to provide a strategy for the faithful to protect themselves from a departure from the faith, which will consist of Christians “devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons” (1 Timothy 4:1). The antidote against “irreverent, silly myths” (4:6-7) and any possible competitors to divine revelation is the healthy teaching from God (4:13). Public reading of Scripture inoculates against false teaching and invites faithful discipleship and commitment to God (Exodus 23:22; 24:7). It syncs us up with God.

Paul makes similar requests in other letters to the churches of the first century. When detailing the unveiling of the mystery of Christ, Paul anticipates and expects the church to share his understanding (Ephesians 3:4-6). After he writes on the supreme role of Christ in redemptive history, he expected the Colossian congregation to letter swap with Laodicea (Colossians 4:16). And, to the Thessalonians, he was quite strong when he placed “an oath before the Lord to have this letter read to all the brothers” (1 Thessalonians 5:27), for through the reading aloud of his letters they would be taught (2 Thessalonians 2:14-15). And in the final revelation of Jesus, the apocalyptic portrayal of divine victory through the gospel is framed as one that must be read aloud and safeguarded against addition and omission (Revelation 1:3; 22:16-19).

Reading Scripture aloud can bring the church into sync with God’s word. The more exposure, the better our biblical literacy; then, ideally, the healthier our churches will become. Let us switch gears, now, to provide practical suggestions for this powerful act of reading Scriptures aloud in our worship assembly.

Six Suggestions for Reading Scripture Aloud

There must be a spiritual gravitas connected to reading Scripture before the assembly. I had a mentor, Don W. Hinds, that would stop me when I misread a passage aloud. He would use the adage, “take heed how you read,” to instill in me the importance of properly reading the biblical text aloud. I would like to use this as a refrain as we consider some practical guideposts for reading the Scriptures aloud when the church is assembled for worship — although these suggestions can be applied in various settings of church life.

Furthermore, in many congregations, those who manage or arrange the various elements of the worship assembly (deacons, elders, etc) should seriously consider the points below as they select public readers of Scripture. We are worshipping God and engaging in spiritual and divine matters, we are not merely filling a roster. God’s word must be the centerpiece of our worship.

First, the reading should be met with a respect for proper pronunciation and performance. This is the “oral” spiritual heritage of God’s people, to hear and understand God’s word (Nehemiah 8:1-8). Not only should one practice to read clearly and distinctly, but some types of Scripture (genre) require an element of performance (cf. Psalms). For example, we should not read a psalm of lament (Psalms 51) as if it were a genealogy. Take heed how you read.

Second, we should consider the verbal skill set of those who will read before the assembly. The goal is to instill an understanding of God and to invite the church to obedience. There is no verse that prohibits individuals with speech problems from publicly reading Scripture. We should both be sensitive and inclusive. Fortunately, audio technology facilitates what requires loud speaking in other settings. Still, as long as the public reading reaches its goal then it has accomplished its purpose. Take heed who will read.

Third, the reading selection should be long enough to understand the message. This is especially true when the selection is independent from the sermon. Some congregations may design their readings to go through a book (Psalms) or a large section of Scripture (Major Prophets). Other times, they are connected to the sermon. The readings must be of sufficient length to provide context and understanding and should have a natural and intended connection to the worship service. All things being equal, we may ask, “why read from the Song of Solomon when the sermon is on the ‘second death’ of Revelation?” Take heed what you read.

Fourth, the readings must be the Scriptures free from alteration. From time to time some like to add a few impromptu thoughts in connection with the reading of the Scripture. The points may be very excellent, but they run the risk to be of another variety. It is important to keep to the task at hand, which is to read the assigned portion of Scripture. There are many reasons for this. The most significant reason is to elevate the word of God over the words of men. As Revelation 22:18-19 warns, the text must be read without omission and addition. Take heed that you read.

Fifth, the reading of Scripture must be purposeful. There should be communication before hand to prepare those who will read aloud in worship. Sometimes we can displace others when we lean upon “good readers” in a pinch. With a purposeful schedule, we can give enough notice so that our readers can prepare, become familiar with the text, and develop a comfort level. Preparation and practice are the best helps to reduce “stage fright.” Take heed before you read.

Sixth, the reader should not cause a distraction by what they wear. It is true that God seeks and looks at the heart (1 Samuel 16:7; Matthew 15:8), but one should dress for the spiritual occasion (Matthew 22:11-14). While attire may sometimes be a distraction, it is more important that the reader’s lifestyle should not be a distraction. If those who pray in assembly should have “holy hands” (1 Timothy 2:8), what of those who read Scripture. Paul told Timothy that he should be an example; this would make an additional influence when he would read aloud the Scriptures to the church (1 Timothy 4:12). Take heed by whom you read.

Concluding Thoughts

The public reading of Scripture was an essential component of the first-century worship assembly. If in today’s time, the church seeks to be in conformity with the early worship practices of the New Testament church, then it will seek to incorporate this practice and develop those who will read. Moreover, the church will grow when she integrates the three-fold instruction given to Timothy: the public reading of Scripture, the exhortation, and the teaching (1 Timothy 4:13). In a day and time when so many church groups are seeking new and innovative methods to “enhance” worship, the age-tested and inspired method to read aloud God’s word must be in the forefront of our worship assemblies. Blessings to the reader, and blessings to the hearer.