The Authority of Scripture

  I often participate in various discussions on-line about the Creation vs Evolution debate. One of the issues that is critical in this discussion is the authority of Scripture. I am not out to prove that the Bible is reliable in this post (and I would need a MUCH longer post to demonstrate that), but I am going to compare three different ways the Bible is used in terms of being an authority in someone's life, using the Creation/Evolution debate to illustrate. The three ways are
  1). The Bible is the Ultimate or Final Authority
  2). The Bible is a authority.
  3). The Bible has no authority.

  In the first case, there are very few Ultimate or Final Authorities. As a Christian, the Bible is my Ultimate Authority. An Ultimate (or Final) Authority cannot reference anything else that is higher, otherwise that authority would be the Ultimate Authority. An Ultimate Authority can only appeal to itself. Two examples of this are mathematical axioms and the Rules of Logic. In math, an axiom is a statement that is assumed to be true but cannot be proven by outside means. It does however prove itself. Logic is the same way. There is nothing we can use to prove the laws of Logic other than with the laws of Logic. The same concept applies with the Bible. If the Bible is an Ultimate Authority, there is no authority that can prove it other than itself. It can only appeal to itself. Some may argue "God wrote the Bible, and as the author, he must be higher." That is true, but God by his nature cannot contradict his word. So I have to consider God and the Bible to be on the same tier in terms of authority and they do circularly appeal to each other. One thing I need to make clear is that ONLY with an Ultimate/Final authority does circular reasoning apply validly. Because an Ultimate Authority can only appeal to itself.

   When someone places the Bible as their Ultimate Authority, it is the deciding factor on all cases. On any issue, an Ultimate Authority trumps what any other authority says. In the Creation/Evolution debate if the Bible is the Ultimate Authority, it must trump what any other person says, no matter their degree or field of expertise. The Age of the Earth issue is frequently brought up in these discussions. The Bible gives a historic account through the Genealogies (repeated three times in Genesis 5 and 11, in 1 Chronicles 1-9, and in Luke 3. In the Genesis accounts we have the ages of the father when the son was born and it does not take much to add them up and discover that the Bible records a history that is only about 6000 years old. There are many scientists that will tell us that the earth is billions of years old. If the Bible is the Ultimate Authority, then the Bible's take on it will trump what the scientists say about it. The Bible is not a science textbook, nor a history textbook, but it does say enough to give us guidelines on how to interpret and discern what man says in fields the Bible is not very specific on. The Bible contains a lot of history, but it is not about history. The Bible does not talk about how gravity works or about the history of the Mayan Empires. But it does give a timeline for when the major people groups dispersed and it gives guidelines that God is a God of order and structure, and that his creation reflects that character. It does talk about what took place and when and gives a clear enough picture to establish when and how any other events would take place.

  Many however do not treat the Bible as their Ultimate Authority.  They just use it as a authority. When it is just another authority, when you have to conflicting data points, it is arbitrary which authority is taken. I often hear people claim they can believe both "science" and the Bible at the same time, as though they think those who hold the Bible as their Ultimate Authority pit the two against each other. (Those who hold the Bible as the Ultimate Authority see science as supporting the Bible but must be carried out with the understanding that the Bible is the Ultimate Authority on the issue. That is: Science that reveals conflicting data with what the Bible declares needs to be revisited.) The primary argument sounds like this. "God is the author of the Bible and the author of nature and nature is a valid as a 67th book of the Bible." What this actually means is "the science done by secular means that does not consider the Bible as an authority is as valid as a 67th book of the Bible". The claim is that our studies of science (which does not consider input from the Bible) is on the same tier of authority as the Bible itself. And in actual practice, when something comes up that is debatable, very rarely is the Bible's take accepted. The Theory of Evolution states that all life came from a single common ancestor. The Bible says that all the life forms reproduce after their kinds. In comparing the two, more often than not, the Evolutionary approach will take precedence over the Bible when the Bible is just a authority and not the Ultimate Authority. When the Bible is just a authority, it gives liberty to pick and choose which parts are worthy of being authoritative and which ones are not. This makes the person the judge of which is a quality authority on whatever subject they want which makes themselves the authority. Many people say the Bible is only authoritative on religious matters but does not have the authority on history, science, etc. It just does not work that way. The Bible's religious matters are rooted in the historical documentations. Many will say the Genesis account of Creation, Noah's Flood, and the Tower of Babel are just myths based on other Middle-Eastern cultures. It does not take a genius to follow that logic and say the same thing about Christ. Many do make the arguments that Jesus' birth, life, death, and Resurrection were just a myth as well. If the Bible is just a authority, there is no logical place to determine where you use it and where you don't. And most of the time, in actual practice, it is "don't".

  The last case is those that do not consider the Bible to be authoritative at all. These are the people that never open up the Bible, never read it, and do not seek to follow it in any regard. They see all the historical accounts as myth at best, or just fairy tales. They have no regard for the Law established by Moses, which Jesus upheld. They only follow the parts of that Law that coincides with what society has already established. When one does not have the Bible as any authority, discussions with said people can be a challenge. Paul had this challenge in Athens in Acts 17. He was dealing with the best of the best of the best of the philosophers in the world who had never heard of the Biblical account. It was foolishness to them. So Paul had to address them by establishing a new worldview for them, referencing the "statue to the Unknown god" and then making a Gospel appeal from there. He did not win many converts like Peter did in Acts 2.

  So where does the Bible fall in your list of authorities? Do you ever think about it or follow what it says? Do you only follow some of it, the parts that seem and feel good to you? Or do you let it guide and direct every area of your life? The Bible is my Ultimate Authority. I do not always follow it as I should and when I fail, that is sin. And that is also WHY I need a Savior. But because I place the Bible as my Ultimate Authority, I must align my worldview and how I look at things in accordance to how the Bible does it. I must conform to what the Bible teaches, which will also conform myself to Christ himself. Now all this being said, if the Bible is the Ultimate Authority, it does not strip away what anyone else has to say. But as the Ultimate Authority, what anyone else has to say must be aligned with the Bible, and if what they say contradicts the Bible in any way, then they are wrong. Romans 3:4 says "Yea, let God be the truth and every man a liar." This includes me. What I say is subject to be tested in accordance to Scripture. If what I say goes against what the Bible says, I am wrong, period. If what I say is not explicitly stated in Scripture but does not go against what the Bible says, then I could be right. And if what I say matches what is explicitly stated in Scripture, then I cannot be wrong. What is your ultimate authority? Many people when they dig down will often find it is themselves which is arbitrary and often "what feels good at the moment". For me, I know I fall short. I know I am not a reliable judge of my own abilities. I stand in accordance to what the Bible teaches and when I judge, I seek to judge using the Bible as the standard. And when I call out a sin for what it is, I must also remember that I too am just as guilty and apart from the Grace of God, I would be no different than said person.