CHAPTER XXIV.

DOCTRINAL AND PRACTICAL USE OF SCRIPTURE.

uses of Scrip

ture.

PAUL, the apostle, declares that all Scripture which is divinely in Paul's state- spired is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for ment of the correction, for instruction in righteousness (2 Tim. iii, 16). These various uses of the holy records may be distinguished as doctrinal and practical. The Christian teacher appeals to them as authoritative utterances of divinė truth, and unfolds their lessons as theoretical and doctrinal statements of what their divine author would have men believe. Our fifth Article of Religion (the sixth of the Church of England) says: "The Holy Scriptures contain all things necessary to salvation; so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation." The inspired word, moreover, serves a most important practical purpose by furnishing conviction and reproof (ëλeyxov, or ¿λeyμóv) for the sinful, correction (πavópvwoiv) for the fallen and erring, and instruction or disciplinary training (Taideíav) for all who would become sanctified by the truth (comp. John xvii, 17) and perfected in the ways of righteousness.

pretation by

ity.

The Roman Church, as is well known, denies the right of private Roman doc- judgment in the interpretation of the Scriptures, and trine of inter- condemns the exercise of that right as the source of all Church author- heresy and schism. The third article of the creed of Pope Pius IV., which is one of the most authoritative expressions of Roman faith, reads as follows: "I admit the Holy Scriptures, according to that sense which our holy mother Church has held and does hold, to which it belongs to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the Scriptures; neither will I ever take and interpret them otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of the fathers." The Romanist, therefore, finds in the Church and tradition an authority superior to the inspired Scripture. But when we find that the fathers notoriously disagree in the exposition of important passages, that popes have contradicted one another, and have condemned and annulled the acts of their predecessors, 1 Comp. Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, vol. i, pp. 96–99; vol. ii, p. 207. New York, 1877.

1

and that even great councils, like those of Nice (325), Laodicea (360), Constantinople (754), and Trent (1545) have enacted decrees utterly inconsistent with each other,' we may safely reject the pretensions of the Romanists, and pronounce them absurd and prepos

terous.

using one's

The Protestant, on the other hand, maintains the right of exercising his own reason and judgment in the study of the The Protestant Scriptures. But he humbly acknowledges the fallibility principle of of all men, not excepting any of the popes of Rome. own reason. He observes that there are portions of the Bible which are difficult to explain; he also observes that no Roman pontiff, whatever his claim of infallibility, has ever made them clear. He is convinced, furthermore, that there are many passages of holy writ on which good and wise men may agree to differ, and some of which no one may be able to interpret. By far the greater portion of the Old and New Testaments is so clear in general import that there is no room for controversy, and those parts which are obscure contain no fundamental truth or doctrine which is not elsewhere set forth in clearer form. Protestants, accordingly, hold it to be not only a right but a duty of all Christians to search the Scriptures, that they may know for themselves the will and commandments of God.'

Statement and

trine to conform to correct Her

But while the Holy Scriptures contain all essential revelation of divine truth, "so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any defence of doc man that it should be believed as an article of faith,' it is of fundamental importance that all formal state- meneutics. ments of biblical doctrine, and the exposition, elaboration, or defence of the same, be made in accordance with correct hermeneutical principles. The systematic expounder of Scripture doctrine is expected to set forth, in clear outline and well-defined terms, such teachings as have certain warrant in the word of God. He must not import into the text of Scripture the ideas of later times, or build upon any words or passages a dogma which they do not legitimately teach. The apologetic and dogmatic methods of interpretation which proceed from the standpoint of a formulated creed, and appeal to all words and sentiments scattered here and there in the 1 See the proof of these statements in Elliott, Delineation of Roman Catholicism, vol i, pp. 144-147. New York, 1841.

2 "If a position is demonstrably scriptural," says Dorner, "according to the evan gelical doctrine of the Church, it has an essentially ecclesiastical character; it has citizenship and a claim to regard even though it do not enjoy a formal validity; and a position which is demonstrably opposed to Scripture has similarly no claim to acceptance though it be ecclesiastical."-System of Christian Doctrine, vol. i, p. 176. Edinb., 1880.

Scriptures, which may by any possibility lend support to a foregone conclusion, have been condemned already (see above, pp. 68, 69). By such methods many false notions have been urged upon men as matters of faith. But no man has a right to foist into his expositions of Scripture his own dogmatic conceptions, or those of others, and then insist that these are an essential part of divine revelation. Only that which is clearly read therein, or legitimately proved thereby, can be properly held as scriptural doctrine.'

ology to be dis

tinguished.

We should, however, clearly discriminate between biblical theolBiblical and ogy, and the historical and systematic development of historical the Christian doctrine. Many fundamental truths are set forth in fragmentary forms, or by implication, in the Scriptures; but in the subsequent life and thought of the Church, they have been brought out by thorough elaboration, and the formulated statements of individuals and ecclesiastical councils. All the great creeds and confessions of Christendom assume to be in harmony with the written word of God, and manifestly have great historical value; but they contain not a few statements of doctrine which a legitimate interpretation of the Scripture proof-texts appealed to does not authorize. A fundamental principle of Protestantism is that the Scriptures only are the true sources of doctrine. A creed has no authority further than it clearly rests upon what God has spoken by his inspired prophets and apostles. All true Christian doctrine is contained in substance in the canonical Scriptures. But the elaborate study and exposition of subsequent ages

"In the domain of Christian doctrine," says Van Oosterzee, "the Scripture is rightly made use of, when it is duly tested, interpreted according to precise rules, employed in explaining, purifying, and developing Church confessions, and is consulted as a guide in individual Christian philosophic investigation of truth."-Christian Dogmatics, vol. i, pp. 220, 221. New York, 1874.

2 Thus Martensen: "As the archetypal work of the Spirit of Inspiration, the Scriptures include within themselves a world of germs for a continuous development. While every dogmatic system grows old, the Bible remains eternally young, because it does not give us a systematic presentation of truth, but truth in its fulness, involving the possibility of a variety of systems."-Christian Dogmatics, p. 52. Edinb., 1866.

3 "The history of doctrines," says Hagenbach, "presupposes biblical theology as its basis; just as the general history of the Church presupposes the life of Jesus and the apostolic age."-Text-Book of the History of Doctrines, p. 16. Eng. trans., revised by H. B. Smith, New York, 1861. He observes further (p. 44): "With the incarnation of the Redeemer, and the introduction of Christianity into the world, the materials of the history of doctrines are already fully given in the germ. The object of all further doctrinal statements and definitions is, in the positive point of view, to unfold this germ; in the negative, to guard it against all foreign additions and influences." Similarly Schaff: "In the Protestant system, the authority of symbols, as of all human compositions, is relative and limited. It is not co-ordinate with, but always subordinate

may be presumed to have put some things in clearer light, and the judgments expressed by venerable councils are entitled to great respect and deference.

above what is

Most of the great controversies on Christian doctrine have grown out of attempts to define what is left in the Scriptures Human tendundefined. The mysteries of the nature of God, the ency to be wise person and work of Jesus Christ, sacrificial atone- written. ment in its relations to divine justice, man's depraved nature and the relative possibilities of the human soul with and without the light of the Gospel, the method of regeneration, and the degrees of possible Christian attainment, the resurrection of the dead, and the mode of immortality and eternal judgment—these and kindred subjects are of a nature to invite speculation and vain theorizing, and it was most natural that everything in the Scripture bearing on such points should have been pressed into service. On such mysterious themes it is quite easy for men to become "wise above what is written," and in the historical development of the blended life, thought, and activities of the Church, some things came to be generally accepted as essential Christian doctrine which in fact are without sufficient warrant in the Scriptures.

methods to as

Inasmuch, then, as the Scriptures are the sole source of revealed doctrine, and were given for the purpose of making True and false known to men the saving truth of God, it is of the ut- certain Scripmost importance that we study, by sound hermeneutical ture doctrines. methods, to ascertain from them the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. We may best illustrate our meaning by taking several leading doctrines of the Christian faith, and indicating the unsound and untenable methods by which their advocates have sometimes defended them.

Nothing is more fundamental in any system of religion than the doctrine of God, and the catholic faith of the early The catholic docChristian Church, as formulated in the Athanasian trine of God. Creed, is this:

That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the substance. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Spirit. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one: the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the

to, the Bible, as the only infallible rule of the Christian faith and practice. The value of creeds depends upon the measure of their agreement with the Scriptures. In the best case a human creed is only an approximate and relatively correct exposition of revealed truth, and may be improved by the progressive knowledge of the Church, while the Bible remains perfect and infallible."-The Creeds of Christendom, vol. i, p. 7.

Son, and such is the Holy Spirit: The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated; the Father incomprehensible (immensus), the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible; the Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal. And yet there are not three Eternals, but one Eternal; as also there are not three uncreated, nor three incomprehensibles, but One uncreated, and One incomprehensible. So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, and the Holy Spirit Almighty; and yet there are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God; and yet there are not three Gods, but one God.

Here is a very succinct and explicit statement of doctrine, and its definitions, so far as quoted above, have obtained all but universal acceptance among evangelical believers. Though commonly ascribed to Athanasius, this symbol of faith, like the Apostles' Creed, is of unknown authorship, and furnishes one of the most remarkable examples of the extraordinary influence which some works of that kind have exerted.

Doctrinal sym

But are the definitions and sharp distinctions set forth in this creed according to the Scriptures? May we read them bols not un- therein, or prove them thereby? No one pretends that scriptural. the several clauses, or any of the formal definitions, are taken from the Bible. All such systematic presentations of dogma are foreign to the style of the Scriptures; but this fact is no valid reason for rejecting them, or supposing them to be unscriptural. "A creed," says Schaff, "ought to use language different from that of the Bible. A string of Scripture passages would be no creed at all, as little as it would be a prayer or a hymn. A creed is, as it were, a doctrinal poem written under the inspiration of divine truth. This may be said at least of the ecumenical creeds."1 Hence a well-constructed creed is supposed to express the sum total of what the Scriptures teach on a given subject, but not necessarily in the language or terms of the sacred writers. Nor are its statements to be supposed to depend on any one or two particular texts or passages of the Bible. It is quite possible that the general judgment of men may legitimately accept as a positive doctrine of Scripture what no one text or passage, taken by itself alone, would be sufficient to authorize. The catholic doctrine of the Trinity is very much of this character. A calm and dispassionate review of ages of controversy over this important dogma will show that, on the one hand, the advocates of the catholic faith have made an unscientific and inconclusive use of many Scripture texts, while, on the other hand, their opponents have been equally unfair in rejecting 1 The Creeds of Christendom, vol. i, p. 7, foot note.