Progressives and the Bible
In a previous article, I traced the trajectory of progressive theology by examining a proponent’s claims. One of my chief concerns is how progressive theology engages with Holy Scripture. It does not engage the Bible as Holy Writ but as a series of documents in tension with one another and often contradictory. The Scriptures then, are not so much authoritative but illustrative. For progressive theologians, the Scriptures do not have authority because they come from God; rather, they illustrate how people in the past understood their encounters with God. If there is any authority in the Bible, it comes not from the text but from the reasoning capacity of the reader. Progressive theologians, even progressive Baptists have a problem with the way they think of Scripture.
Editor of Baptist New Global, Mark Wingfield,* just illustrated the point perfectly. In a recent article, Insufficient,Wingfield argues that the Bible is not sufficient for matters of faith. He writes
Most importantly, God still speaks today. The life of Jesus still inspires and guides us today. The Holy Spirit still leads us into all truth. No part of the Trinity is bound by the words of Moses or Paul. Thus, to say Scripture is insufficient is not a condemnation but an acknowledgement that neither popes nor potentates, neither priests nor pastors, neither seminary presidents nor podcasters have the final word
Authority belongs to God and God alone. And God still speaks
Is God Bound to the Bible?
The target of his article is the movement among some in Calvinist circles who conclude that the Bible’s sufficiency applies to practically everything. That, however, is a small group. Most who hold to the sufficiency of Scripture apply that concept to matters of life and faith. The mating habits of porcupines and the dietary needs of the Burmese python are beyond the Scriptures’ scope, after all
While aiming at his target, Wingfield makes comments that are quite revealing. The last sentences, among others in the article, are quite shocking. Notice what he has done. The Scriptures are no longer the word of God in any real sense. They are the words of Moses, Paul and the other writers. Furthermore, God is not bound to them
Outside the Norm
To say that his thinking is outside the norms of the Christian faith is to understate the issue. A look at Christian theologians across time, location, and denomination will illustrate:
Augustine says, “Let us, therefore, yield ourselves and bow to the authority of the Holy Scriptures, which can neither err nor deceive.”
Aquinas writes, “The author of sacred Scripture is God …” The human authors are “instrumental authors.”
Calvin writes, “ … it [the Bible] has flowed to us from the very mouth of God by the ministry of men.”
John Wesley writes, “ … I draw this conclusion, that the Bible must be given by divine inspiration.”
Count Nicholas Zinzendorf writes, “Holy Scripture is the book of all books; it contains, as it is, the truth from God’s heart and mouth … ”
Baptists and the Bible
Baptists, historically speaking, have held to a high view of Scripture as well. The 1963 Baptist Faith and Message states
The Holy Bible was written by men divinely inspired and is the record of God’s revelation of Himself to man. It is a perfect treasure of divine instruction. It has God for its author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter. It reveals the principles by which God judges us; and therefore is, and will remain to the end of the world, the true center of Christian union, and the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds, and religious opinions should be tried. The criterion by which the Bible is to be interpreted is Jesus Christ.
The Emergence of Liberal/Progressive Thought
Until the 19th century and the emergence of theological liberalism, the Church understood the Scriptures to have their origin in God. While there was significant disagreement about how inspiration occurred and the authority of the Christian tradition relative to the Scriptures, the Church believed the Bible was the written word of God
Most notably in the work of Friedrich Schleiermacher, theological liberalism countered the idea of God’s authorship of the Scriptures. Schleiermacher, the “father of theological liberalism,” contended that the Bible was the record of human consciousness of the divine, not the revelation of God
Wingfield’s contention here might have even dilated the blood vessels in Schleiermacher’s cheeks had the late German theologian read them. What Wingfield has done here is separate God from the Bible in such a way that the words of Scripture themselves are in opposition to what God wants to do. So, when applying the words of Scripture to Wingfield’s pet issue, human sexuality, applying them as written is an attempt to bind God
God is Truthful
No, God cannot be bound. That much is true. What is also true is that God is truthful. More precisely, God is truth itself. In the words of Jesus, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” If God is the ultimate author of Scripture, inspiring humans to compose the text, and God cannot lie, then what God has said stands
It has long been my contention that without the belief that the Scriptures are the written word of God, theology cannot help but lurch from one issue of the day to the next. Valiant keyboard warriors may think they are guarding the true nature of the Gospel without upholding divine inspiration of the text, but they are not. What inevitably happens is that culturally-driven herd mentality drives them from one absurdity to another. Their understanding of what true and right will simply mirror the values the intelligentsia treasure, even if those values contradict Scripture.
A Service
In one sense, Wingfield has done a great service. What many who share Wingfield’s views on a range of issues do is try to find loopholes in what the Bible says. The intellectual dexterity they often demonstrate is quite impressive, even if unconvincing. What Wingfield does, though, is intellectually honest. He is aware of what Scripture says and does not make intellectually embarrassing attempts to contort it. Rather, he argues that the Scriptures are not divine enough to be authoritative. They may inspire us, but the voice of God is what is authoritative.
It is a great irony that he finishes his article by saying that Popes nor potentates, priests nor pastors have the last word. God does. That is true, of course. The truth of that is why the Church insists on the inspiration and authority of Scripture
Who Has the Final Word?
If Scripture does not have the final word, then some person or some persons will have the final word. It cannot be otherwise. If the Scriptures are not the final authority, then someone’s claim to hearing the voice of God might have the last word. There have been far too many examples of this process to count, and they all end badly. How does an outsider know if a person has heard the voice of God or has ingested too many hallucinogens? How does an outsider know if a person has heard the voice of God or is responding to an overactive bladder or thyroid? One cannot.
If Scripture is not the final authority, then the pressure of culture might have final authority. The winds of social norms blow at gale force. Few structures stand their blast, and there is little protection from the winds of culture without the Scriptures
What Wingfield does is the opposite of his intent. He wants to say that people do not have the last word. What he does is ensure that people have the last word
There is only one way to prevent fallen people from having the last word: the Scriptures
Sola canonica scripture est regula fidei.“Only the canonical Scriptures are the standard of faith”
* I know Mark, and I have written for his publication on numerous occasions. Mark is gracious, and he as always welcomed me
