A few days ago, Banned by HWA published a brief post entitled Does Jesus really care about...the Bible? That question, of course, offended some folks. "Methinks Jesus cares about the Bible. A lot," one commentator replied. Another commentator added, "Yes, those old pesky scriptures are still important and much needed!!!" Indeed, for many Christians, the Bible is their "final authority" in matters of faith. For them, it is the "Word of God," and anything that questions its importance is tantamount to blasphemy!
Now, along these lines, the Armstrong Churches of God have always been quick to point out that Jesus clearly said: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." (Matthew 5:17, NIV here and throughout this post) But does that statement underscore the importance of Scripture or Jesus Christ? After all, if Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of Scripture doesn't that imply that he is more important than Scripture?
In this connection, the Gospel of John records a number of statements about Jesus Christ that clearly point to his superiority over Scripture. Indeed, in the opening to the Gospel, Jesus is declared to be the "Word of God." (John 1) A little later, in the same Gospel, Christ told his disciples that he was "the way and the truth and the life," and that no one came to the Father except through him. (14:6). In other words, HE WAS THE REALITY that Scripture alluded to!
In Christ's day, there were a great many Jewish religious leaders who had a very high opinion of their Scriptures. Nevertheless, in the fifth chapter of John, we read that Jesus told them: "You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life. I do not accept glory from human beings, but I know you. I know that you do not have the love of God in your hearts. I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not accept me; but if someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him. How can you believe since you accept glory from one another but do not seek the glory that comes from the only God? But do not think I will accuse you before the Father. Your accuser is Moses, on whom your hopes are set. If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?" (Verses 39-47) I don't know about you, but that certainly sounds to me like Christ is more important than Scripture!
Finally, in the opening of the anonymous Epistle to the Hebrews, we read: "In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word." (1:1-3) Now, this is NOT meant to suggest that Scripture is unimportant - It is simply meant to reinforce the fact that Christ is SUPERIOR to Scripture! The Old and New Testaments offer us a shadowy reflection of Jesus Christ, but Jesus is the REALITY! (Colossians 2:16-17) And that's NOT blasphemy, it's just plain old FACT!
You have constructed an unassailable defense of Jesus as the Word of God and superordinate to the Bible. It is compelling that the Bible demonstrably reflects the influence of human authors and editors and yet the Logos did nowhere disparage it when he came to the earth. It is clearly a work of literature yet this was not grounds for deprecation from Jesus. In fact, as the Word of God incarnate, he subsumed the Bible incarnate into himself. And in his accomplished work he reversed the Kenosis of both.
ReplyDeleteThe implication of the previous paragraph is that Jesus did not have the same attitude towards the Bible as the solo scriptura literalists. Jesus owns the Bible. He managed its production. When editorial liberties were granted, he granted them. And when it came time to fulfill the OT part, he fulfilled it and superseded it.
This would not set well with some of the Arianists in the Millerite Movement. They would likely see the Bible as the God-breathed and resplendent eternal truth and Jesus as only a created being whose status might not be at parity with the Bible. He was the EpikoinonÃa and not the Logos. Jesus was an instrument of communication not the divine source of the content. And in this we see a logical meltdown. The scripture that they elevate to such a high status is what speaks of the primacy of Jesus as you have deftly argued.
The assertion that the proposition that the Law of Moses is written on your heart equates to the proposition that Jesus is living his life in you might hold if the Epistle of James were the only epistle in the NT. It is a blessing that we have Pauline theology to expand and clarify the Gospel and place James in context.
The Bible is important with the NT preceding the overridden theology of the OT. The OT is there for pedagogical purposes in support of the NT. But both are the creation of Jesus. And the creation does not displace the creator (unavoidable adumbrations of Armstrongist ideas about divinization).