The Sufficiency of Scripture: Is God’s Word Enough?

Pastor Steve Spurlin

I have played the great game of basketball from the time I was in the fifth grade all the way through my college years. One thing that all teams, schools, leagues, conferences and divisions had in common was a single book; the official rule book of basketball. During any game the rules written in that book governed the competition and were binding for everyone involved whether it is the coaches, players, scorekeepers, or referees. No one involved would dare question that book for it is the final authority for all things basketball. It is also sufficient to answer any question, settle any dispute, and completely govern the game.

In each game there were at least two men, sometimes three, who were to oversee each contest to make sure the rules of the rulebook were understood and obeyed. These were the referees. Anytime there was any question concerning error or infraction concerning the rulebook these men would have the final say in deciding the answer, because these men had the rulebook memorized (theoretically). In all my recollection of the years I spent playing basketball there is not one time that I can point to when my opinion was allowed to make the final decision when there was a violation of the rulebook. That is because the rulebook had already decided the outcome, and the referees would simple make a declaration of the rules already established. Even some 15 years after I played my last college game it is still that rulebook that governs the game of basketball. Not much has changed.

For thousands of years there has been one thing that was the final authority on all things, period; "Then God said…" (Gen. 1:3). Yet, seemingly no sooner had those words been uttered that another voice was heard casting doubt on the authority of the word of God; "Indeed, has God said?"(Gen. 3:1) Or in other words, "Is what He said really accurate?" And so the battle over the authority of God’s word began.

Such a battle has raged since that first question in the Garden with various waves of victory and loss of ground for those who would hold to the authority of Scripture. Along with that battle over authority must necessarily be included the question of sufficiency, for sufficiency is inextricably linked to authority. If the word of God is THE authority, then it must also be sufficient. This has been the orthodox understanding of Scripture in both the Old and New Testaments as well as in both the religion of the Jews and of the Christian Church. It is the purpose of this paper to discuss various aspects of the sufficiency of Scripture, and will do so with the presupposition that Scripture is the inspired, infallible, authoritative word spoken by God to man.

We will attempt to offer a simple definition of sufficiency, a brief description of the millennia long battle over the authority and sufficiency of the word of God, the recent developments in the battle and its affects upon the Church, and will close with an overview of what Scripture has to say concerning its status as sufficient providing the answer to the question; "Is God’s Word enough?" It is not within the scope of this paper to delve into every deep crevasse that such a battle creates. However, it is the desire of this writer to discuss the issue as thoroughly as time and space allow.

Dr. James T. Draper has offered a simple, yet adequate definition and description of the subject of the sufficiency of Scripture. He states:

Add to this another definition offered by MacArthur; "the Bible is an adequate guide for all matters of faith and conduct. Scripture gives us every truth we need for life and godliness."

These definitions along with their corresponding descriptions will serve as our standard for the understanding and study of this most important subject.

As Schaff has stated, "The question of the source and rule of Christian knowledge lies at the foundation of all theology." Without a solid foundation all theology must rest on "sand…and great (shall be) its fall" (Matt. 7:26-27). Not withstanding the original attack upon the authority and sufficiency of Scripture in the Garden, the shift from the authority and sufficiency within the Christian Church can be seen with the first formal theory of interpretation; that of Origen (A.D.185-254). His hermeneutical system was, "in connection with the allegorical method of the Jewish Platonist, Philo…which he carried out in a long series of exegetical works…" Although born out of the best of intents the problem with Origen’s s hermeneutical method is that it left a normal interpretation for a fanciful interpretation that placed the interpreter in the place of authority instead of Scripture itself being the authority. Instead of Scripture having a static meaning (although alive and active as Hebrews 4:12 states) and simply having a basic, intended meaning that anyone could understand, "(he) considered the Bible a living organism (not as Hebrews states), consisting of three elements which answer to the body, soul, and spirit of man, after Platonic psychology." The outcome was that Origen, like Plato, would spiritualize vast portions of Scripture completely undermining, or destroying the plain, historical sense in which it was intended. In so doing the authority of the word of God was made to be subservient to the interpreter, thereby making it insufficient in itself to direct men into proper living.

Following Origen’s lead, Augustine (A.D. 354-430), once again desiring to do good, duplicated the allegorical method, but with a twist. His system is known as dualism, and the modification that he introduced was seen in "confining (allegorism) to the prophetic Scriptures. That is, he interpreted the non-prophetic Scriptures literally and the prophetic Scriptures allegorically." This dualistic method of allegorical interpretation once again pushed the subtle shift from the sufficiency of Scripture as it tore at the foundation of the authority of Scripture. Tan continues, "Unfortunately for the church, Augustinian dualism was accepted without much debate into the Roman Catholic church, and later also by the Protestant reformers", and that last fact concerning the Protestant reformers has led to many of the problems in the modern Church, which will be seen later.

One of the negative outcomes of Augustine’s dualism is the beginning creation of amillennialism. This view of the millennium was absorbed whole by the Roman Catholic Church and their theology. This had a devastating impact upon the Roman Catholic hermeneutical method, and, therefore, to the authority and, in turn, the sufficiency of Scripture.

Directly effected by Augustine’s form of allegorical interpretation is the Catholic system of hermeneutics. The Catholic system is very closely related to Augustine’s dualism, and completely swallowed up the amillennial idea of prophetic Scriptures.

"It would be over-simplification to assert that the only method of exegesis during the Middle Ages was the allegorical method. It would not be, however, be an exaggeration to assert that the preponderance of exegetical work was allegorical." They divided Scripture into two categories; 1.) Literal and 2.) Spiritual, or mystical. Yet, as damaging as this aspect of their system is, it is merely the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

The real greater damage is found in another of Ramm’s observations;

Here we have the logical outcome of the destruction of the authority, and therefore the sufficiency of Scripture by the introduction of the allegorical method of interpretation. When the normal sense of Scripture is not the true or deepest meaning of Scripture, then interpretation must be left up to those who have been granted the divine right of interpretation, i.e., the Church. In turn, that transition of the divine right of interpretation from the individual Christian to the Church placed the individual Christian under the authority of the Church, and since the method of interpretation placed the interpreting body in control of what Scripture means the Church became the authority, Scripture lost both its authority and sufficiency, and direction for all areas of life fell under the authority of the church; the Roman Catholic Church held the sufficiency. The Bible was taken out of the hands of the average man on the street and given only to the church to dictate to the individual what was held within its pages.

The Catholic Church’s denial of sola Scriptura was solidified at the Council of Trent in 1545. Although affirming the Bible as inspired revelation from God, as has already been established, the Church became the only competent interpreter of Scripture.

Two major errors occurred. Upon the church’s establishment of itself as the only sound interpreter of Scripture, membership in the Catholic Church became necessary for salvation. Therefore, the church and not Scripture, is sufficient for salvation.

Secondly, they established that the guidance of the Roman Catholic Church is absolutely necessary for correct understanding of the Bible. Popes and bishops are the only competent interpreters of the Scriptures; therefore, the individual cannot grow, serve or obey without the guidance of the Catholic Church. Scripture alone is not sufficient for salvation or daily living.

With the Bible taken from those who were not in authority in the church the natural progression was to drift into deep superstition and mysticism. Although mysticism came along with the allegorical interpretation, its filtering into public life in the form of superstitions and pagan practices was caused by the individual’s inability to read, let alone understand the words of Scripture, as well as by example of their "spiritual" leaders.

By the time the Reformation came about the damage was so ingrained that even the Reformers never quite returned completely to sound biblical interpretation. Granted the hermeneutical principles established by the two most influential Reformers, Luther (1483-1546) and Calvin (1509-1564), were sound and good; in practice they did not always follow their own rules.

Luther rejected the allegorical method completely. As he said, "When I was a monk, I was an expert in allegories. I allegorized everything. But after lecturing on the Epistles of the Romans I came to have knowledge of Christ. For therein I saw that Christ is no allegory and I learned to know what Christ is." Because of his turn from allegorical method Luther developed a form of literal, grammatical hermeneutics. Briefly, his principles were as follows:

1. The psychological principle. Luther believed that the illuminating work of the Holy Spirit was of absolute necessity.
2. The authority principle. Scripture is the final and supreme authority above all church authority.
3. The literal principle. Literal interpretation is key.
4. The sufficiency principle. Luther held to the perspicuity (clarity) of Scripture and therefore believed that any devout Christian is capable of understanding them apart from the church’s authority.
5. The Christological principle. Luther believed that the function of all of interpretation is to find Christ.
6. The Law-Gospel principle. Luther believed that there must be a careful distinction held between Law and Gospel.

John Calvin also established sound hermeneutical practices. "Calvin stressed the Christological nature of Scripture, the grammatical, historical method, exegesis rather than eisegesis…the illuminating ministry of the Holy Spirit, and a balanced approach to typology."

The problem that existed with both of these great scholars, and men of God, was that they each continued to hold to allegorical/spiritual interpretation when it concerned the Church, Israel, and end times prophecy propagating the Catholic Church’s teaching of amillennialism and that the Church is the Kingdom of God. Therefore, despite the great success and blessing from God that the Reformation was, its success was incomplete leaving the door open for building bad doctrine on top of bad doctrine. The end result is that through all the years both prior to and after the founding of the Church the sufficiency of Scripture has always been challenged, whether by interpreters seeking to help make Scripture plain or by the Roman Catholic Church seeking to centralize the power of Christendom.

Shortly after the Reformation, there was a move toward what is termed Rationalism. In other words the authority and sufficiency of the human mind, reason, and the religion of humanism replaced the authority and sufficiency of Scripture.

Although not the first to push the idea of rationalism, Rene’ Descartes (1596-1650) is seen by some to have begun the era of rationalism and many see him as the father of modern philosophy. In his system of philosophy, "human wisdom replaced divine revelation in trying to understand God…his philosophic thinking impressed many others to do the same."

Following Descartes was Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) respected French scientist, and Christian apologist. Despite his belief in fulfilled prophecy, miracles, the witness of Christianity throughout history, and Scripture’s testimony concerning itself, "he opened the door to move away from the Bible by his belief that the evidence in the heart is the strongest proof about God." Once again, Scripture is place in a subservient position to the interpreter instead of Scripture being in authority over the interpreter. The interpreter’s reason is sufficient to guide him, not Scripture.

As influential as these two men were Francis Schaeffer believed that there were four other men who were more crucial in directing the mindset of philosophical thinking, which in turn filtered over into the overall view of the sufficiency of Scripture. They were Jean-Jaques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, George Wilhelm Hegel, and SÆ ren Kierkegaard. For the purpose of this study the focus will be upon Kant, Hegel and Kierkegaard, with the edition of Friedrich Schleiermacher, the father of liberalism.

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804). By the time Kant came on the seen in the 18^th century the train of philosophical thought was undergoing a shift in attitude. As Schaeffer explains:

The shift that was taking place that Kant helped to perpetuate was a move from that former optimistic view to a pessimistic view of life. In their minds, and in truth, the humanistic ideal had failed. Philosophers gave up hope of a unifying answer to all of life’s questions. Therefore life itself was divided into two "stories". The upper story, which was above and beyond mere human reason, and the lower story, the realm of human thought, understanding, and the physical world. As others before him, Kant could not find the key to unifying these two stories – In truth, a feat only possible in the pages of Scripture for only it is sufficient to answer life’s question and provide that unifying principle – and the philosophers were coming to the horrifying truth; "There was no way beginning from man alone to bring the (two stories) together."

Yet Kant refused to return to the Christian view of reality. He reacted against both "mystical and pietistic Christianity, thinking it was too superstitious and spiritual…(and) the scholasticism that dominated Lutheranism…(arguing that) such rational proofs of God violated the limits of reason and had little to do with faith."

Kant’s conclusions served to move the Christian Church farther from the sufficiency of Scripture and towards mysticism and liberalism.

George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831). Hegel was one of Kant’s followers and went a step further in chipping away at the sufficiency of Scripture. In Hegel is found the foundation for all relativistic thought and the perfect example of Paul’s statement, "Professing to be wise, they became fools" (Rom. 1:22), for in Hegel’s system opposing propositions can both be true and must be synthesized into one new truth. This was his dialectical system. The result of Hegel’ s conclusions was a move further away from the traditional understanding that the propositional truth claims of Scripture were sufficient to answer all of life’s fundamental questions and guide mankind in every area of life, and a move further into the realm of mystical, even occult thought. For Hegel man was the consciousness of the universe, and all is ever evolving in this dialectical system.

Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834). As previously mentioned, Schleiermacher is often seen as the father of liberalism. In Schleiermacher it seems that many of the elements of liberalism merge into one; German rationalism, higher criticism, enlightenment thought, etc., all merge at Schleiermacher. He rejected most of the orthodox Christian beliefs and did not trust any form of authority. Yet, he seemed to understand the damage that his beliefs would cause mankind, therefore, "he did not want to reject Christianity, recognizing that mankind needs religion." To Schleiermacher, Christianity was a necessary evil. He rejected Scripture’s inspiration, therefore also rejecting its inerrancy and authority, which necessarily meant that Scripture is not sufficient to answer life’s question. Yet, he somehow believed that keeping the shell of Christianity in public life would be necessary – this is nonsense since the very root of Christian life resides in the sufficient, authoritative pages of Scripture.

SÆ ren Kierkegaard (1813-1855). In this author’s estimation, Kierkegaard was the bridge between the damaging shift in philosophical thought and the shift away from the sufficiency of Scripture in the realm of theology. Kierkegaard was both a philosopher and theologian. Kierkegaard’s view of the two stories of reality can be seen in the following:

REASON = PESSIMISM

Thus in Kierkegaard’s system the Bible is not only insufficient in governing faith and life because it is not trustworthy, human reason must be relied upon to answer all questions in the realm of everyday life, and spirituality is brought to the point of a mere leap of faith into something that can never be known.

In this one man we can see both sides of today’s low view of the sufficiency of Scripture. On the one hand the Scripture is insufficient and human reason must be the answer. On the other hand Scripture is insufficient and some existential or ecstatic experience must be the basis for men’s faith.

Around the same time that Kierkegaard was building a bridge between the fields of pessimistic philosophy and theology, Julius Wellhausen (1844-1918) began the direct assault on Scripture. Wellhausen rejected the inspiration of Scripture – in itself a repudiation of the sufficiency of Scripture – and began the application of the Hegelian dialectical principles to the study of the Bible. This led to the damaging practice of Biblical "higher criticism".

The destruction brought by the higher critics brought an equally damaging response by those who are now labeled as Neo-Orthodox. The first influential theologian of this school of thought was Karl Barth (1886-1968). This movement is also known as "crisis theology" (due to its focus on God’s judgment), or "Barthianism" (after Barth himself). Barth sought to rescue the Bible from the liberal theologians, yet Kierkegaard’s influence can be seen in Barth’s theological product. Enns explains: "Karl Barth followed Kierkegaard in acknowledging a transcendent God and emphasizing a religion of experience. Barth taught that God could not be known objectively because He is transcendent; He must be known subjectively through experience." In Barth’s conclusion we once again see the effects of Hegel’s dialectical system, in that Barth "denied the possibility of stating propositional truths." Since God could not be known objectively through the propositional truth claims of the Bible then the words of Scripture must become the word of God in some subjective way. Once again, the sufficiency of Scripture was rejected and replaced by personal experiences throwing wide open the door to the mystical, occult experiences that have entered the Church today.

Whether meant as attacks or sincere attempts at interpreting and teaching Scripture, the cumulative effect of all of these movements can be seen in the resulting destruction of the view that Scripture alone is sufficient for every aspect of faith and conduct. On one side stands dinosaur-like view of the humanist that man’s reason is all that there ever was, is now, or ever will be needed to answer all of life’s questions and guide man through life, yet ultimately leads to despair. On the other side stands the new kid on the block; those who hold that reason must be set aside and the mystical subjective experience must be embraced, this view also leading to despair.

Fast forward a few years and we find we are fighting the same battle. Let us once again set the stage of the current state of affairs in the battle over the sufficiency of God’s word. Dr. James T. Draper has set the boundary from one direction when he states:

The natural outgrowth of this shift is visible in today’s society in the postmodern mindset, philosophy, and theology. It also has taken the need for an authority out of the picture because there is no absolute truth anyway. Couch agrees:

Ice discusses the logical outgrowth of modernism’s rationalism found in "the current postmodern mysticism, which desires to add human wisdom to God’s Word." He describes the three-step attack on God’s Word that can be seen throughout history; "(1) rationalism exalts human reason above revelation, (2) skepticism questions everything, (3) mysticism substitutes almost anything for belief. In the late twentieth century, even evangelicals had drifted toward this most serious of violations of Scripture."

Dr.’s Draper, Couch, and Ice have effectively outlined the two fronts upon which the current battle is now raging. Sadly, these two extremes have had profound impact upon the Church of Jesus Christ. On the liberal side we see the "new" form criticism. This is nothing more than warmed over Wellhausen form criticism redirected at the New Testament and the demythologizing of the Jesus of Scripture. This movement, begun by Rudolf Bultmann (1893-1976), desires to find the so-called "truth" concerning the historical Jesus. In other words, the testimony of Scripture is not sufficient to know the historical Jesus, therefore it is untrustworthy at best, misleading at the least. Thus the creation of the Jesus Seminar organization seeking to decide which portions of the New Testament accounts of Jesus are true and which are not.

On the other side of the issue is the postmodern form of "Christianity". Postmoderns do not believe in objective truth. Therefore, they are not concerned with the battle over the authority of Scripture. Scripture simply means whatever the postmodern man wants it to mean. "If there are no absolutes, the mind and the thinking processes give way to the will. People want to hear positive words from Scripture about the love of God rather than the realities of sin, death, and hell." And since there is no absolute truth based upon the sufficient revelation of God in Scripture, then any message that offers what these postmoderns want to hear is accepted into their system, or church. Therefore, in their rejection of objective truth as found in Scripture the Bible’s sufficiency is rejected, but only because it is irrelevant to them. Their feelings and personal likes and dislikes are the overriding principles determining what is right and wrong – for them as individuals. As a result, Couch makes the following observation:

Both of these opposing systems converge in todays modern, or postmodern, Church. Since the foundation of Christianity, and the direction for Christian life has been removed, i.e., Scripture is insufficient for both, there has been a vacuum created that is being filled by many different practices. There are so many different aberrant practices that an in-depth or all-inclusive study would take hundreds of pages and years of research. For this paper only a few of these practices will be mentioned.

As Ice observes, the Bible is no longer sufficient. Human wisdom, in all its forms, must be added in order for mankind to find meaning, purpose, and direction in life. In the Church this attitude takes many forms. One of those practices is the receiving of private revelations. This is due to the destruction of the belief in the authority and sufficiency of Scripture. Scripture is viewed as out of date and no longer able to speak to life in these modern times.

For the charismatic churches these extra-biblical revelations come in the form of what Draper called "logos plus rhema", that is, the Word written in Scripture, and the word spoken in new, private, personal revelations. As he observes, "Historically, this error was found only in Pentecostal and charismatic churches, but today it can also be heard coming from an alarming number of Southern Baptist pulpits." More than just Southern Baptists, almost every denomination, if not all, including the Roman Catholic Church has seen this same phenomenon creep into the practice of their congregations, and the clerical leaders. The shift from the sufficiency of Scripture has been filled with Kierkegaardian experienced-based religious practices. These new mystics "are basing their theology on experiences rather than on the foundation of Jesus Christ as found in His Word. The end result is that such people are ‘defrauded.’ They are missing out on true biblical living because of their beliefs."

In many churches the Bible has been replaced by Psychology and therapy sessions called sermons – group therapy for the church. This is especially true in Southern Baptist churches through the instruments of The Purpose-Driven Church and The Purpose-Driven Life by Rick Warren. The problem has become so ingrained that, in his book Biblical Authority, Draper buys in to the acceptability of Psychology for treating Southern Baptist Church members. He says, "There are many good and godly Christian counselors who are doing a wonderful work for the kingdom of God. Many pastors find it helpful to be able to refer those with certain problems to a competent Christian professional (emphasis mine)." What Dr. Draper has just done in these two sentences is destroy his whole argument for the sufficiency of Scripture, and demean the position of the pastor, the shepherd, to tend to all the sheep and the particular problems of each.

The Purpose-Driven model has also bought into the Psychology mind-set in that Warren has centered his approach on what are known as "felt needs". These are perceived needs that the "unchurched" have developed, all of which are not needs but selfish, self-centered desires. Therefore, the pragmatic side of the Purpose-Driven model finds whatever works, and changes whatever offends the unchurched in order to meet those "needs" to attract people to the church. The most heinous of all of these changes is the watering down of the Gospel message – because Scripture is insufficient to draw those who need to be saved. Then, when the church grows because of all of the entertainment-oriented changes that were made to attract the lost, well, it must be God blessing the church. If it works it must be okay. Yet, Scripture is left out of the Church the Holy Spirit used it to build.

On the heels of postmodernism paganism has snuck in "through the side door" as J. Vernon McGee used to say. In his book "Pagans in the Pews" Dr. Peter Jones discusses this rise of paganism within the Church:

In one fell swoop Jones covers every area of academia, Nietzsche in philosophy, Otto in theology, Eliade as historian, Jung in psychology/mysticism/occultism, and Campbell in literature and mythology. Their influence is felt within the walls of the Church today.

One of the forms that paganism takes is seen in the Emergent church phenomenon. This movement is actually a combination of paganism, Christianity, post-modernism all coming together to rebel against the Purpose-Driven church model. Gilley observes;

In what this writer believes to be the first book on the emerging church, The Emerging Church (1970) the writer’s express the view that sola Scriptura is insufficient for the Church’s continued existence. What follows are some quotes noting this fact.

When speaking of John’s Apocalypse the writer follows by stating, "Many other early Christians, whose writings are not included in Scripture, also contributed to a body of apocalyptic literature describing their dreams and visions." While not denying Scripture the authors, whether meaning to or not, commend extra-biblical "visions" and "dreams" from writers who one can only guess to be the Gnostics or mystics. Thus, Scripture alone is insufficient.

They glowingly refer to the occult psychologist Carl Jung; "In our own day we have a man like the famed psychiatric pioneer, Carl Gustav Jung, talking about Jesus Christ making possible a new rung on the ladder of evolution." Relying on the Quakers the writers make the following mystical statements when discussing, of all things, church business meetings and policy:

From this one must assume that the clear teachings in God’s word are not enough to give direction, therefore, we must wait on a mystical expression of God’s will to us.

When discussing proper goals for the emerging church the writers make the following disturbing statement; "Great preaching, in a historic sense, is no longer a proper goal for either people or the pastor. At one time, perhaps, but no longer (emphasis added)."

Finally, after basing the following conclusion on several Scripture passages the writers conclude with the following statement concerning primary sources for the Church; "With examples like these…to guide us, we come to the conclusion that the obvious primary resource for the Church is Christ alive in His people (emphasis mine)." Not the Bible upon which they just based this conclusion? This seems somewhat contradictory.

Some thirty-seven years later the outcome of this religion of dialogue and community remains void of a firm foundation. Because of this all the emergent church, along with churches of other flavors, has allowed pagan practices to enter their services. As one of their leaders explains, he was saved while practicing what is called "centering prayer" (also known as contemplative prayer), which is nothing more than Eastern mysticism with a Christian tag. This comes complete with mantra (repeating a word or phrase over and over) and trance-like state. Following on the heels of this practice is the practice of "Christian yoga". Once again this is paganism with the name of Christ attached to it. Since yoga is the center of the Hindu religion it cannot be divorced from Hinduism any more than Christ can be truly taken out of His Church.

The Emergents also desire a return to Roman Catholic practices. One of those practices would take one back to the middle Ages as "worshipers" are led through a "prayer labyrinth" complete with icons at which they should stop and pray.

As we have spent much time discovering, the modern day Church has rejected Scripture’s authority and its sufficiency to speak to every area of life. They have rejected Scripture’s sufficiency and have added man’s wisdom in the form of mere reason. They have rejected Scripture’s sufficiency and added mystical experiences. They have rejected Scripture’s sufficiency and added occult and pagan practices. These things, when placed alongside the teaching of Scripture serve to give witness to the sufficiency of Scripture.

Paul told Timothy this day would come: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths" (2 Tim. 4:3-4). This fulfilled prophecy in itself expresses the authority and sufficiency of Scripture, for that is exactly what has occurred. The time has come when very few will endure sound doctrine, and their ears can definitely find someone to tickle them in every city.

In this final section we will attempt to discover some of what Scripture has to say as to whether it is sufficient for all things pertaining to faith and conduct. However, before we go any further it is this author’s belief that an attack against the authority and sufficiency of Scripture is an attack against the very character and attributes of the Almighty God. Since the approach of this paper has been to assume that the word of God is inspired, infallible, authoritative word spoken by God to man we will speak freely along these lines without attempting to prove these presuppositions.

Scripture clearly teaches that God has foreordained the content and course of all things, people and events, in history. In the Greek language the word foreordain speaks of the fact that God planned all things before the foundation of the world, and this plan extends to all aspects of His creation. Once God established the plan for the ages he then decreed that it be done just as He planned it. Therefore, all He planned was certain to be done just as planned. Moreover, God prepared select men and nations to actively participate in carrying out His plan; some in a positive manner – those known as the elect – and others in a negative manner – such as Babylon. Since God chose certain men and nations to carry out His plan these must be instructed in how to do so. God chose to do so by speaking to those elect and, in turn, having that message recorded in written form in order that those who would follow after would have a record of direction to enable them to effectively carry out His plan. Therefore, to say that the message and direction is not sufficient to direct the chosen in how to live is to say that God’s plan is insufficient and thus to say that God Himself is insufficient, not authoritative, and not sovereign. The attack upon the authority and sufficiency of Scripture is an attack upon the nature and attributes of God Himself.

Let us examine one of the most definitive verses in all of Scripture in addressing this subject of the sufficiency of Scripture, 2 Timothy 3:16-17: "All Scripture is God-breathed (author’s preferred interpretation) and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work" (NASB).

To begin with Paul states that "All Scripture is God-breathed". Without going in depth to examine this we will simply allow Warfield’s explanation suffice:

Scripture, being the very out-breathing of God, is sufficient for all of life. It is profitable; all of it. The Greek word is ophelimos and means "profitable, useful, or beneficial."It is preceded by the word kai which is most commonly translated as "and", but in this passage it has the force of "also". Therefore, it could be translated "God-breathed, also profitable" with the idea that not only are they God-breathed, but because they are they are profitable as well.

The fact that they are God-breathed seems to force the conclusion that they are both authoritative and sufficient for all of life. Yet that is not the whole of these verses. Paul goes further in explaining what profit they hold. They are profitable for teaching those things which man cannot know by reason alone and are not accepted by the unregenerate mind. It reproves all of our wrong-doings and wayward thoughts. It gives man what is needed to correct the same, and simultaneously trains a once lost, sinful man in the ways of righteousness. That is the definition of sufficiency.

Paul goes on to explain that the purpose for doing all of these is that the man of God would be adequately equipped for every good work. What are those good works for which a man of God must be equipped? Ephesians 2:10 gives some insight; "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them." God has created the elect to carry out certain good works that He has prepared for each one who believes on Jesus Christ. Therefore, it is logical to conclude that the word He left for us, with which to instruct us for those works, is capable of completing the task for which the Almighty God has created it. God’s word is sufficient for God’s people.

The majority of those who, in practice, deny the sufficiency of God’s word would never admit to believing that Scripture is insufficient. Neither would most of these men deny the sufficiency of Christ. In his excellent book, Why Christians Can’t Trust Psychology, Ed Bulkley addresses this problem. He states; "When you say the Scriptures are not enough, you are in fact saying that Christ is not enough, for the Bible is about Christ from cover to cover." Elsewhere he states, "To claim the belief that Christ is sufficient while saying that the Bible is deficient simply will not work, for the two are inseparable foundations: It is through the written Word of God that we come to understand the living Word of God." He then turns our attention to 2 Peter 1:2-4, thus we will next examine this passage.

Peter states:

Peter establishes that the grace and peace that all men need and long for are revealed through "the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord" (v. 2). Though not specifically stated here this knowledge is found in the written word of God alone and not by some private revelation or mystical experience, for Peter states elsewhere that "no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation" (1:21). Any private revelation or mystical experience should fall under the category of "prophecy" and therefore "is (not) a matter of one’s own interpretation." It must also be seen that "no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God" (v.21). Therefore, any revelation that is apart from Scripture would not conflict with any other portion of Scripture either by content or delivery. Neither of these may be trusted as true of today’s private revelations if they are tested by the clear teachings of Scripture as has been commanded (1 Jn. 4:1).

Furthermore, Peter states that this grace and peace have at least the potential to be multiplied in those who placed their faith in Christ. Peter states that this is possible due to the fact that "His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness." "Everything" is all-inclusive. Nothing that is an essential need to the Christian’s ability to walk worthy of our calling has been left neglected or unattended by God. And He provided for our every need "through the knowledge of Him" (v.3) and that knowledge is only obtained by the written word of God. "God has provided answers in His Scriptures for every possible spiritual/mental/emotional problem that man has ever and could ever experience."

In the book of Acts Paul offers another profound proclamation of the sufficiency of God’s Holy Word. He states;

This is an even more direct and comprehensive statement concerning the sufficiency of Scripture than that of Peter’s in the previous verses. As MacArthur states, "Paul did not view any portion of God’s revelation as unimportant or insufficient to spiritual growth. Nor did he view any of it as incapable of dealing with life’s problems."

In Deuteronomy 6:4-9 God gives a basic summary of doctrine for His people Israel. His written word found in the Law was sufficient for all issues of life and godliness for His people. The commands given in this passage express the fact that the Law of God was to occupy the center of life, thought and conduct for His people.

In Psalm 119:9 the question is asked, "How can a young man keep his way pure?" The answer to follow is, "By keeping it according to Your word." Therefore, if known and obeyed, God’s word is sufficient to keep one from living an impure life.

Again in verse 105 the Psalmist states, "Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path." The clear imagery given here is that God’s word gives sufficient light to walk the path of life in a dark world so that the follower of God should not stumble off the path of righteousness.

Returning to Psalm 119 we find that this Psalm is rife with descriptions of the sufficiency of God’s word for faith and conduct. Beginning in verse 1 and continuing through verse 8 we see descriptions of those whose lives are identified as "blessed". The Psalmist states; "How blessed are those whose way is blameless, Who walk in the law of the Lord" (v.1). Those who live in obedience to God’s written word, in this case the Law, his way, way of living, is said to be blameless and in turn abundantly blessed. And so he continues through the next 7 verses.

In Joshua 1:8 God gives a direct command to Joshua;

We see in this verse that Israel had only one way by which she as a nation would be prosperous and successful; she was to hold strong to God’s law – the written word. According to His command they were to constantly be teaching the law – "shall not depart from your mouth" – and continually "mulling it over" in their minds – "meditate on it day and night." By doing these things God’s word would cause them to receive the promised blessings and have abundant success and prosperity. All of this was based on God’s sufficient word.

Perhaps the definitive Old Testament passage concerning the sufficiency of God’s word is found in Psalm 19. For the sake of brevity we will look only at verses 7-11. David writes:

David here describes the absolute sufficiency of Scripture for the believer. He says that "the law of the Lord is perfect" meaning "faultless". Unger states that it is "completely reliable as a moral and spiritual guide for God’s people, and ‘complete’ in the sense of being all we need to save us and lead us on in fellowship with God." It is "restoring to the soul", meaning it draws us back, "from the incessant downward pull of sin."

God’s law is "sure", literally "firm, faithful", with the result that it makes "wise the simple". In other words the foolish one who is ever susceptible falling into sin is given the wisdom to avoid such susceptibility.

The word is right, "in line with God’s will". "It brings ‘rejoicing to the heart’… (literally) ‘making the heart glad’." He states that it is pure expressing that God’s word has absolutely no "taint" which would direct one toward sin.

As MacArthur states, "Scripture’s purity and clarity produces the benefit of ‘enlightening the eyes’." In other words the teaching of Scripture clearly directs us to live properly in the midst of moral and spiritual darkness by its pure, untainted illumination.

Verse 9 states that "the fear of the Lord is clean, enduring forever." Scripture provokes the fear of God. In doing so men are caused to turn to God in reverential praise and worship of Almighty God. It is clean, without blemish, defect or impurity and lasts forever. God’s word is "living and active"; it endures forever and it is sufficient, even to this day, to direct and protect God’s children.

God’s judgments are true and righteous. There is no error, His word hits dead on the mark every time. God’s word is "inerrant and absolutely trustworthy."

Verses 10 and 11 declare the immeasurable value of God’s word. The value of gold is the standard of value in this world. No matter the state of the economy, one who is heavily invested in gold is secure as far as this world’s monetary system goes. Scripture’s value far exceeds all of the gold in any bank or combination of banks. It’s sweetness to the soul is infinitely greater than the delicacies of honey.

Finally, verse 11 describes the protection and rewards afforded to the one who lives by the word of the Lord. Scripture is the greatest source of spiritual protection for the follower of Christ. Scripture serves to warn the servant of God of the effects and dangers of sin and disobedience to God. Scripture serves to protect God’s servants in the face of temptation to sin and ignorance of the true way of living. Scripture also brings rewards, eternal rewards, to the one who is faithful to live according to them.

Conclusion –

There is an abundance of other Scripture passages that express the sufficiency of Scripture; Hebrews 4:12, 2 Timothy 2:15, Proverbs 30:5-6, Ecclesiastes 12:13-14, and Matthew 4:4 just to name a very few. To exhaust the passages that express this fact would take a vast amount of time and energy, and still then one would not be able to do justice to the subject.

Satan has attempted to destroy any trust in the authority and sufficiency of Scripture since his opening lines in Genesis, "Indeed has God said…?" His assault against Scripture has raged continually since, and has found many an ally in humanity over the millennia. Yet, his attacks have done nothing to diminish the fact that Scripture is sufficient in all areas of faith and conduct. God’s word speaks to the heart of man and is the instrument that the Holy Spirit uses to "convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment" (Jn. 16:8). That is why men so easily join Satan in his attempted destruction of it. Scripture gives us the whole disgusting description of who we are and holds up God’s righteousness before our eyes, thus acting as a mirror showing us who we really are in the eyes of a holy God. It is the only sufficient guide for life. It acts as the guidebook for Christian living. Its sufficiency is based upon God’s nature and attributes, therefore it is trustworthy, authoritative, and worthy of honor.

Scripture alone is adequate to teach us the way of righteousness, for, as it informs us, "The heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; who can understand it? I, the Lord, search the heart, I test the mind, Even to give to each man according to his ways, according to the results of his deeds" (Jer. 17:9-10). It points us to the One true way of salvation, and is adequate to teach how to enter into that salvation.

Though man has repeatedly attempted to denigrate, castigate, and eliminate God’s word it has proven indestructible. In truth, what else should we expect from those who could not understand the truths written in the pages of the Holy word without the illuminating work of God’s Holy Spirit? Men try to destroy what they fear most, and they most fear a righteous God who has revealed to them their sin and future judgment.

Is God’s word sufficient? Has the question been answered in this paper? That may be debatable. However, one thing is not; Scripture proves itself to be both authoritative and sufficient. God’s word is the final authority on all things "pertaining to life and godliness." It is and always will be the all-sufficient guide by which Christians are led into holiness, spiritual maturity, and right relationship with the God who created, loves and chose them for His own. May God bless His word, and all of us who attempt to understand and live by it.

To God be the glory forever, and ever, Amen.