Center for Biblical Theology and Eschatology
Sola Scriptura:
The One Great Baptist Distinctive
by Dr. W. R. Downing, Pastor
- Matthew 4:4
- "But he answered and said, It is
written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every
word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."
- John 17:17
- "Sanctify them through thy truth: thy
word is truth."
- Romans 3:4
- "...yea, let God be true, but every
man a liar; as it is written..."
- Romans 4:3
- "For what saith the
Scripture...?"
- 2 Corinthians 10:3-5
- "...For the weapons of our warfare
are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling
down of strong holds... Casting down imaginations, and
every high thing that exalteth itself against the
knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every
thought to the obedience of Christ..."
- 2 Timothy 3:16-17
- "All scripture is given by
inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for
reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect,
throughly furnished unto all good works."
- 2 Timothy 4:2
- "Preach the word; be instant in
season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all
longsuffering and doctrine."
- Titus 1:9
- "Holding fast the faithful word as he
hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine
both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers."
The purpose of this lecture is to make some general
observations on the subject of Sola Scriptura. It will not
deal in depth with the specific issues of logic and irrationalism
in modern theology, and will only introduce the subject of
"good and necessary consequence" as demanded by the
main subject.
THE OUTLINE
The outline of this lecture discusses the three most basic
questions concerning Sola Scriptura:
I. Sola Scriptura: The Essence of Baptist
Doctrine and Practice. What is the significance of this one
essential Baptist distinctive?
II. Sola Scriptura and the Use of Good and
Necessary Consequence. Is it legitimate to logically deduce
aspects of doctrinal and practical truth from the Scriptures?
III. Sola Scriptura and a Consistent Biblical
Hermeneutic. What is the significance of a biblical hermeneutic
that is consistent with the pervading principle of progressive
revelation?
INTRODUCTION
There are several great Baptist distinctives which
characterize the Biblical and historic Baptist position. These
major distinctives include:
FIRST, The Scriptures as the only and all-sufficient
rule of both faith and practice. This stands in contrast to other
historic criteria such as religious tradition, ecclesiastical
authority, creeds, church councils, rationalism and modern
religious irrationalism which stresses experience and
emotionalism.
SECOND, Salvation by grace alone. Salvation by grace
implies: That salvation must be scripturally viewed in the
context of the eternal, infallible redemptive purpose of God
(Rom. 8:28-31; Eph. 1:3-14); That grace is unmerited favor in the
place or stead of merited wrath. Grace and works or human ability
cannot be commingled (Rom. 9:6-24; 11:5-6; Eph. 2:4-5, 8-10).
That grace is more than a principle. It is at once a
principle—as opposed to works or human ability, a prerogative—God
freely and sovereignly bestows this grace on whom He will,
according to His eternal, infallible purpose; and a power—which
enables the sinner to freely and effectively lay hold of Christ
by faith (Phil. 1:29); That regeneration or the "new
birth" precedes faith and repentance (Jn. 3:3, 5-8; Acts
16:14; Jas. 1:18); That Gospel holiness and righteousness are
necessary characteristics of experimental salvation and Christian
experience (Rom. 6:1-23; Eph. 1:3-6; 4:22-24; Col. 3:9-10; 1
Thess. 1:3-5).
THIRD, Believer's baptism by
immersion.1 This Baptist
distinctive derives from the truth of the New Testament as to
both mode—immersion, and subjects—believers. There is
no record of the immersion or sprinkling of infants, or the
intentional baptism of unbelievers in the New Testament. On this
New Testament distinctive, the Baptists stand in opposition to
both Western and Eastern Catholicism, and traditional
Protestantism.
FOURTH, A regenerate church membership. This is
distinctive of a true New Testament or Gospel church, and
necessarily implies:
FIFTH, The priesthood of the
individual believer. In the context of the New Covenant or
Testament, there is no priest-cult or ecclesiastical mediator
between the individual believer and His Lord. Every believer is a
"king-priest," and has immediate access to God through
the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 5:1-3; 1 Tim. 2:5; Heb. 4:13-10:18; 1
Pet. 2:5, 9; Rev. 1:6). 2 The
priesthood of the individual believer stands in the closest
relationship to soul-liberty or freedom of conscience.
SIXTH, The autonomy of the local
assembly under the Lordship of Jesus Christ. The autonomy, or
self-governing nature of each local body of Christ, presupposes
four realities:
- The terms Pastor, Elder, and Bishop all designate the same office in the local assembly. 3 There is no ecclesiastical hierarchy, or church office that exists apart from or beyond that of the local assembly.
- The New Testament does not teach an "Apostolic Succession," therefore Baptists do not recognize any authority above the local assembly, except that of the Lordship of Jesus Christ and His inscripturated Word. Matthias replaced Judas to fulfill the prophetic Scripture (Acts 1:15-26), but no one ever succeeded the original Apostles of the New Testament era into that office.
- There is no extra-biblical authority that rules beyond the local assembly, such as presbyteries, councils, synods, denominational conventions, or national churches.
- The so-called "First Church Council" held at Jerusalem in Acts 15, although attended by the inspired Apostles, was actually a conference between two churches and possessed no authority beyond the agreement of the Apostles who attended.
SEVENTH, Soul liberty or freedom of conscience. Only
the Word of God can command the conscience of the Believer. It is
foreign to the teaching of the New Testament to bind the
conscience by religious tradition, ecclesiastical decree, or
denominational standards; or attempt to enforce religious
convictions by means of the civil authorities. Church discipline,
or exclusion from membership and its privileges, is the extremity
of church action.
All Baptist distinctives derive from the Scriptures,
predominantly the New Testament. Any given church is therefore a
New Testament or Gospel church to the extent that it conforms to
the New Testament; conversely, to the extent that any given
church departs from the New Testament, to that extent it ceases
to be a New Testament or Gospel church.
I
SOLA SCRIPTURA:
THE ESSENCE OF BAPTIST DOCTRINE AND PRACTICE
THE MEANING AND SIGNIFICANCE OF SOLA SCRIPTURA
The Latin term Sola Scriptura was one of the
distinctive features of the Protestant Reformation. It means
"The Scriptures Alone," and signaled the Reformed
departure from alleged Papal infallibility and the authority of
Romish tradition contained in the writings of the Church Fathers
and oral tradition. Both Reformed and Baptist theology claim the
principle of Sola Scriptura or the all-sufficiency of
Scripture as the only rule of both faith and practice.
THIS TRUTH IS FOUNDATIONAL
TO ALL THE OTHER BAPTIST DISTINCTIVES
As Baptists, we derive our
distinctiveness from the Scriptures, and particularly the New
Testament, consistent with the principle of the progressive
nature of Divine revelation. This principle holds to the
necessary finality of the New Testament over the Old (Heb. 10:1).
The all-sufficiency of Scripture forms the foundation or inspired
and authoritative context for all other distinctives that
characterize our position. C. H. Spurgeon stated:
I became a Baptist
through reading the New Testament ... especially in the Greek
... If I thought it wrong to be a Baptist, I should give it
up, and become what I believed to be right. The particular
doctrine adhered to by Baptists is that they acknowledge no
authority unless it comes from the Word of God.4
THE AUTHORITY OF SCRIPTURE
The authority of Scripture must necessarily be discussed in
the context of both its sufficiency and our Baptist distinctives.
If we hold to the all-sufficiency of Scripture as the only rule
of both faith and practice, then we must do so intelligently and
consistently, understanding the nature and significance of
Scriptural authority.
FIRST, The Source of Scriptural Authority. The Bible
does not derive its authority from its content, the validity or
accuracy of its historical data, the uniqueness of its character,
or even the internal witness of the Holy Spirit (All of which are
vital or necessary). The authority of Scripture derives from God
Himself. He is the Self-contained, Self-disclosing God Who has
spoken (Gen. 1:1-3; Heb. 1:1-3). The Bible is therefore the very
Word of God inscripturated.
SECOND, The Significance of Scriptural Authority. The
word authority derives from the Latin auctor, which means
author, originator, teacher. It connotes the power to command, to
require and receive submission and obedience. This term carries
the status of ultimacy and finality. The Bible as the
inscripturated Word of God is the immutable and ultimate
authority as much as the Word of God spoken. Note the phrase: "It
is written... (gegraptai),
perf. "It stands written [with unchanging authority
and force]..." As the very Word of God, the authority of
Scripture is:
- Necessary. Natural revelation (God revealed in
creation, history, and in the rational and moral nature
of man) is insufficient for both unfallen and fallen
mankind. Even unfallen Adam in the state of primeval
righteousness needed special revelation or the word of
God spoken directly to him for an adequate concept of
reality and duty (Cf. the creation mandate, the commands
concerning the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,
and his duty to tend the garden of Eden, Cf. Gen.
1:26-28; 2:15-25).
- Comprehensive. It necessarily encompasses all of
life and reality. There is no sphere of life or activity
where the Word of God is not to be our guide (Matt. 4:4;
1 Cor. 10:31).
- Ultimate. Because this Word derives from God
Himself, there is no higher authority by which it can be
judged or standard to which it can be subjected! It is
self-authenticating, intelligent and absolute. All other
criteria or authorities are relative to the Scriptures.
(Psa. 138:2; Isa. 46:9-11; Matt. 24:35; Heb. 1:1-3).
THIRD, There are five essential terms necessarily
associated with the authority of Scripture:
- Revelation. God can only be known as He is pleased to reveal Himself. He has revealed Himself in creation, i.e., natural revelation (Psa. 19:1-6; Rom. 1:18-20), and in His Word, i.e., special revelation (Psa. 19:7-14; Heb. 1:1-3; 2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Pet. 1:20-21). This Word or Self-revelation of God has been inscripturated, or put down in written form. God is intelligent, non-contradictory and absolute; so is His revelation, both spoken and written.
- Inspiration. (2 Tim. 3:16, (qeopneustos), literally, God-breathed). Scriptural authority rests on inspiration in as much as Divine inspiration has given us the very Word of God in written form. Cf. Also 2 Pet. 1:20-21.
- Infallibility. "Incapable of error or
deception." The Bible is self-consistent and not
contradictory. It reflects the intelligence or mind,
and the nature and character of God Himself. Because
the Bible is the inspired Word of God, it is
authoritative and so necessarily infallible.
- Inerrancy. "Free from error arising from
either mistake or deception." Because the Bible
is the inspired and authoritative Word of God, it is
infallible and inerrant.
- Canonicity. The terms canon, canonicity,
are derived from Gk. (Kanon),
and mean a rule, measure or standard. Secondarily,
these terms denote the body of Divinely inspired,
authoritative Truth—the Word of God
inscripturated—the Scriptures.
Early Christianity possessed the Jewish Scriptures, the
writings of the Apostles and evangelists, a great body of oral
tradition, and various writings styled as apocryphal and
pseudographical. From these writings early Christianity, with
great care and by a stringent standard (or canon),
recognized [They did not establish or form] a given body
of writings as the Holy Scriptures or the Word of God
inscripturated. Canonicity, then, recognizes the body of revealed
truth inscripturated and distinguishes the false from the true,
the authoritative from the unauthoritative.
CONCLUSION
The doctrine of the Scripture alone—Sola Scriptura—as
the only and all-sufficient rule of both faith and practice is
the one great Baptist distinctive from which all others derive.
This great truth stands as foundational to all other aspects of
truth.
II
SOLA SCRIPTURA AND THE USE OF
GOOD AND NECESSARY CONSEQUENCES 5
LOGIC AND THEOLOGY
The use of logic to deduce propositional truth from the
Scriptures is as old as Christian theology itself. Most early
Christian theologians and scholars had been educated as
philosophers and assimilated their principles of formal reasoning
into their theological methodology.
Some have occasionally protested the use of formal deductive
logic, convinced that it results in a form of (eisagesis), or
rather (illegitimate exegesis), i.e., either reading
into or deriving from the text of Scripture a meaning that is
foreign or forced in its conclusion. This attitude is known as misology,
literally, a hatred of logic.
This misology is particularly evident in some aspects of
modern theology and its tendency toward irrationalism. The modern
emphasis is largely existential, or experience-oriented. This is
not only true of the Charismatics, Fundmantalists, and
Neo-Orthodox; it has even made its entrance into modern Reformed
thinking. A discussion of Sola Scriptura would be incomplete
without some reference to logical thinking from the Scriptures.
AN
HISTORICAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN
THE REFORMED TRADITION AND BAPTISTS
IN STATEMENT AND PRACTICE
The first London Baptist Confession of
Faith was written in 1644 and published in 1646. The
Westminster Confession of Faith of the Presbyterians was
first printed on December 7, 1646 and subsequently published in
1647. The First London Baptist Confession then antedated the
Westminster Confession and was thus unaffected by it. The
Second London Baptist Confession of Faith was written in 1677
and published in 1689. It is a "Baptist" version of the
Westminster Confession. The major and most well-known subsequent
Baptist confessions—The Philadelphia Baptist Confession
(1742) and The New Hampshire Baptist Confession
(1833)—were both affected to a significant degree by the
Westminster Confession. 6
Although the two major Baptist confessions subsequent to 1677
significantly reflect the Westminster Confession, they do not
include its language respecting "good and necessary
consequence," as noted below:
The Westminster Confession, Chapter I, Article VI:
The whole counsel of God, concerning all
things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith,
and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by
good and necessary consequence may be deduced from
Scripture...
Contrast this with the Second London Baptist Confession of 1689, Chapter I, Article 6:
The whole counsel of God, concerning all
things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation,
faith, and life, is either expressly set down or
necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture.
Note the alleged difference between the Reformed view of
"good and necessary consequence" and the
Baptist view of "either expressly set down or
necessarily contained in Scripture."
THE APPLICATION OF THIS PRINCIPLE IN CONTROVERSY
This alleged difference surfaced
immediately in the latter part of the 17th
century, the same century when these confessions were
formulated. Note the words of Dr. Kenneth Good, 7 who quotes from the
Baptist historian Thomas Crosby:
That the above distinction has historical
validity is borne out by an important passage from Thomas
Crosby. Many public debates were held in England between
Baptists and Paedo-Baptists in the latter part of the
seventeenth century, and Crosby records some of these in
detail. On one occasion (Feb. 22, 1699) such a
disputation was conducted at Portsmouth, as he says,
"between the Presbyterians and Baptists concerning
baptism. In the course of the debate, the words of which
are recorded, the Paedo-Baptists refer with monotonous
repetition to "consequences drawn from
Scripture," "good Scripture consequences,"
"by good consequence," "by
consequence," "the consequence of the
major," "at least consequential, it is
sufficient," "It is the good consequences I
insist upon," "good consequences from the
commission are sufficient" "I am for
consequences," and "the subjects are to be
brought in by consequences." Meanwhile the Baptists
continued to insist simply upon specific Scriptures to
which they made their appeal and which they frequently
quoted. 8
This situation seems to point out a major difference of
approach to Scripture between the Baptists and the
Reformed tradition in the area of "good and
necessary consequences," and implies that the
Baptists were more scriptural at this point, holding to
the all-sufficiency of Scripture, while the Reformed
approach implicitly denied this by the addition of human
logic. Dr. Good writes: "The Reformed speak of
sufficiency, but they add the theory of 'necessary
consequence'." (Italics his). 9
asdf
THE TRADITIONAL REFORMED APPROACH
TO "GOOD AND NECESSARY CONSEQUENCE"
What do Reformed theologians mean
by "good and necessary consequence?" In
commenting on these words in the Westminster Confession,
the following Reformed writers reveal the essence of
"good and necessary consequence."
William Cunningham: "...inferences
or deductions from scriptural statements beyond what
is contained in the mere words of Scripture..." 10
A. A. Hodge: "... nothing is
to be regarded as an article of faith—which is not
explicitly or implicitly taught in Scripture." 11
B. B. Warfield: "... either by literal assertion or
by necessary implication..." 12
THE LEGITIMACY OF
"GOOD AND NECESSARY CONSEQUENCE"
AND THE POINT OF CONTENTION
FOUR CONSIDERATIONS
FIRST, The use of logic or
formal consistent thinking to deduce distinct statements
of truth from the Scriptures is absolutely essential for
any consistent or systematic approach to theology,
preaching or the application of Scripture to the varied
situations of Christian experience.
SECOND, Abraham reasoned
from the spoken Word of God and acted upon this
reasoning-by-faith when he offered Isaac upon the altar
(Heb. 11:17-19). 13
Mark how our Lord used "good and necessary
consequences" and deductions from the Scripture to
establish the principle of doing good on the Sabbath Day
(Matt. 12:9-13; Mk. 3:1-5). Note the same inspired
approach of the Apostle Paul in referring to the matter
of financial support for Gospel ministers in the use of
the ox that was used to tread out the corn and the farmer
who partook of his harvest (1 Cor. 9:6-14). Thus we have
inspired examples of "good and necessary
consequences."
THIRD, The use of "good
and necessary consequences" is not unique to the
Reformed tradition. Baptists have historically
acknowledged the use of deductive logic from the
Scriptures. Note the 18th century Baptist
theologian and scholar John Gill on the perspicuity of
Scripture:
Nor is every
doctrine of the Scriptures expressed in so many words; as
the doctrine of the Trinity of persons in the Godhead;
the eternal generation of the Son of God; his
incarnation, &c. but then the things themselves
signified by them are clear and plain; and there are
terms and phrases answerable to them; or they are to be
deduced from thence by just and necessary consequences. 14
J. P. Boyce, Baptist theologian and
founder of the first Southern Baptist theological
seminary stated:
These constitute the
sources of our knowledge of Theology, which are two,
Reason and Revelation. . . . Reason is that power in man,
which enables him to have mental perceptions, to exercise
thought, and reflection, to know facts, to inquire into
their mutual relations, and to deduce logically, the
conclusions which may be drawn from them. . . . Reason
may be used either with reference to the natural or
supernatural means of knowledge conferred by God. 15
A. H. Strong, another Baptist
theologian whose Systematic Theology remains a standard
work, wrote:
The Scriptures [and]
. . . their teachings, when taken together, in no way
contradict a reason conditioned in its activity by a holy
affection and enlightened by the Spirit of God. The
proper office of reason, in this large sense is to
estimate and reduce to system the facts of revelation,
when these have been found properly attested. To deduce
from these facts their natural and logical
conclusions..." 16
FOURTH, The Baptist position of "either
expressly set down or necessarily contained in the Holy
Scripture" necessarily and inescapably implies
the deduction of "necessary consequences" as
the truth of Scripture is appropriated in theology and
applied to experience.
THE BASIC ISSUE
Some have objected to the principle of "good and
necessary consequence" because it has been prominent
in the polemics between the Reformed and the Baptist
positions on baptism. The issue is actually hermeneutical
and concerns one's fundamental approach to Scripture.
The true point of contention is not specifically
"good and necessary consequence," but the
general hermeneutical approach of Reformed tradition. The
objections of Baptists and others against the persecution
of Baptists and other Independents by religious and civil
authorities, and the sprinkling of infants are neither
"good" nor "necessary consequences"
deduced from Scripture. They are rather the deductions of
an "Old Testament mentality" which largely
views the New Testament as a mere continuation of the
Old. This issue will be considered in the next section.
CONCLUSION
Consistent reasoning from the Scriptures is essential for
all consistent application. The proper use of "good
and necessary consequence" is not a Reformed
characteristic that militates against the Baptist
position of Sola Scriptura, but is a necessity for
the application of Scriptural truth in theology,
preaching, and Christian experience. The basic issue is
not "good and necessary consequence," but an
"Old Testament mentality" which, while
maintaining the unity of Scripture, does not fully
recognize either its progressive nature or the finality
of the New Testament.
III
SOLA SCRIPTURA
AND A CONSISTENT BIBLICAL HERMENEUTIC
THE
MEANING AND SIGNIFICANCE OF BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS
Hermeneutics (hermaineutikos),
from (hermaineu'ein),
"to interpret," 17
is the science of interpretation and is the culmination
of Exegetical Theology. There are two basic questions
that Exegetical Theology seeks to answer:
FIRST, What does the
Bible say? —a matter of the reading of the text.
This question is concerned with such issues as textual
criticism, parallel passages, the larger and more
immediate context. It takes into consideration an
exegesis of the text in the original language, which
includes the lexical, historical, cultural, and
syntactical significance of words and their
relationships.
SECOND, What does the
Bible mean? —a matter of interpretation.
Hermeneutics is based on the first question and deals
with this second question. There is only one possible and
consistent interpretation, although there may be several
avenues of application. 18
APPROACHES TO
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION
There must be an attempt to
formulate a consistent hermeneutic, i.e., a system of
interpretation. 19
The history of Christianity reveals the following
attempts:
FIRST, the Allegorical or Spiritual. This approach
seeks a deeper meaning than the literal or common and
ordinary usage of the language (the usus loquendi).
Any method or system is only in the mind of the
interpreter. Such allegorizing of Scripture is
necessarily arbitrary, fanciful, and often irrational.
This approach began with the Greeks and their ancient
writings. It entered into early Christianity through
Alexandrian Judaism, and especially the writings of Philo
the Jew, who sought to synthesize Greek philosophy and
the Hebrew religion by allegorizing the Old Testament
Scriptures. This approach became the predominant method
of interpretation until the Protestant Reformation. It
was largely an attempt by the early Church Fathers to
make the Old Testament a "Christian Book" by
spiritualization, and so confused Old Testament typology
with allegory.
Farrar points to the first instance
in the Patristic writings:
...Clement of Rome
[c.90-100]. This ancient bishop ...is the first... who
endows Rahab with the gift of prophecy, because by the
scarlet cord hung out of her window she made it manifest
that redemption should flow by the blood of the Lord to
all them that believe and hope in God. As the pictoral
fancy of a preacher, such an illustration would be
harmless; but when it is offered as the explanation of an
actual prophecy it is the earliest instance of the
overstrained Allegory, which was afterwards to affect the
whole life of Christian exegesis. 20
The development of the allegorical
approach may be noted in examples taken from the Church
Fathers, who finally applied it to the New Testament as
well:
Clement of Alexandria (c. 155-220)
taught at least five possible meanings in any given
passage: (1) The historical sense, or actual and
literal. (2) The doctrinal sense, or moral,
religious and theological. (3) The prophetic
sense, or prophetic and typological. (4) The philosophical
sense, or finding meaning in natural objects and
historical persons, following the psychological method of
the Stoics. (5) The mystical sense, or the
symbolism of deeper truths. An example of Clement's
approach to Scripture is noted in the following:
...[Clement]
commenting on the Mosaic prohibition of eating the swine,
the hawk, the eagle, and the raven, observes: "The
sow is the emblem of voluptuous and unclean lust of
food... The eagle indicates robbery, the hawk injustice,
and the raven greed.". . . Clement of Alexandria
maintained that the laws of Moses contain a four-fold
significance, the natural, the mystical, the moral, and
the prophetical. 21
Origen (c. 155-254) held that, as
the nature of man is composed of body, soul and spirit,
so the Scriptures possess a corresponding three-fold
sense: the literal, the moral and the spiritual.
Augustine (354-430) "justified
the allegorical interpretation by a 'gross
misinterpretation' of 2 Cor. 3:6. He made it mean that
the spiritual or allegorical interpretation
was the real meaning of the Bible; the literal
interpretation kills." 22
He was forced into such an approach by his polemic
encounters with the Manichaeans and the Donatists. Thus,
he justified the use of force by the civil authorities to
"compel" dissenters to return to the Catholic
Church by interpreting the parable of the great supper to
the "Church" (Cf. Lk. 14:16-24, esp. v. 23).
Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274) typifies the Medieval
approach:
The author of Holy
Writ is God, in whose power it is to signify His meaning,
not by words only (as man can also do), but also by
things themselves. So... that the things signified by the
words have themselves also a signification. Therefore
that first signification whereby words signify things
belongs to the first sense, the historical or literal.
That signification whereby things signified by words have
themselves also a signfication is called the spiritrual
sense, which is based on the literal, and presupposes it.
Now this spiritual sense has a threefold division... the
allegorical sense... the moral sense... the anagogical
sense. Since the literal sense is that which the author
intends, and since the author of Holy Writ is God, Who by
one act comprehends all things by His intellect, it is
not unfitting, as Augustine says (Confess. Xii ),
if, even according to the literal sense, one word in Holy
Writ should have several senses. 23
SECOND, the Mystical. "Manifold depths and
shades of meaning are sought in every word of Scripture. 24 " This approach not
only characterized most of the allegorists, but included
the Medieval mystics and such later heretical writers as
Jakob Boehme (1575-1624) and Immanuel Swedenborg
(1688-1772) with his three-fold sense of Scripture: the
natural or literal, the spiritual and the celestial.
THIRD, the Pietistic or Devotional. Pietism was a
reaction against the neo-scholasticism and cold
theological dogmatism that followed the Protestant
Reformation. It approached the Scripture in a very
practical and subjective way for personal edification.
Such an approach characterized the ministry and writings
of such men as Philip James Spener, A. H. Francke of
Halle, and such groups as the Moravians and Quakers. Some
Pietists and the Quakers claimed to be guided by an
"inner light" in their interpretation of
Scripture—an extreme view of 1 Jn. 2:20. Such an
approach tended toward confusion, irrationalism and a
mystical approach to Scripture.
Much modern so-called
"devotional" use of Scripture violates basic
and consistent hermeneutical principles, such as a
complete disregard for the grammar or context of
Scripture. E.g., Gen. 31:49 is used as a benediction,
when it was actually a covenant between two deceivers who
did not trust each other, and so called upon God to watch
the other! E.g., In Psa. 118:24 the indicative
"rejoice" is changed to the imperative mode and
given as an exhortation. If one changes the grammar of
the Scripture, he necessarily changes the meaning, and so
speaks or writes without scriptural authority. E.g., Psa.
2:8 has been used as a missionary text, but the context
(v. 6-9) refers this to the reign of the Messiah-King,
who shall judge the nations! Care must be taken to make
the absolutely necessary distinction between interpretation
and application.
FOURTH, the Liberal or
Modernistic. This approach, which denies the inspiration
of Scripture, and reconstructs the contents and teachings
of the Bible on a mere naturalistic foundation, includes
the Rationalistic (The Scriptures approached by
unaided human reason, with a denial of the supernatural.
Destructive, rationalistic criticism of such men as F. C.
Baur and the Tubingen school, Julius Wellhausen, and K.
H. Graf, et. al.), Moral (The approach of
Immanuel Kant, who held that the Scriptures were given
for their practical and moral value only), Mythical
(The historical truth of the Scripture must be freed from
the alleged myths and legends, i.e., its supernatural
element. This is characteristic of such
rationalist-critical scholars as David Friedrich Strauss
and Rudolf Bultmann.), and the Accommodation Theory
(the supernatural element was actually an accommodation
to the primitive or superstitious nature ofthe peoples
and cultures of that time. The originator of this type of
rationalistic approach was J. S. Semler.). 25
FIFTH, the Apologetic,
Polemic, or Dogmatic. This is generally synonymous with
the "proof-text" method of interpretation, by
which various passages are asserted to teach or buttress
a given opinion or theological position. Such an approach
can be readily noted in any religious dispute concerning
Christianity. It is historically prominent in such
controversies as the Romanist-"heretical"
debates of the Middle Ages, The Romanist-Protestant
disputes of the 16th
century, the Calvinist-Arminian debates, the polemical
disputes between paedobaptists and Baptists over the mode
and subjects of baptism, and the disputes among
evangelicals over the "invitation" or
"altar call" system, revival and revivalism,
etc.
SIXTH, the Neo-Orthodox. The
Scriptures are viewed as a record or a witness
to Divine revelation and not the very revelation
or Word of God. God is encountered in or through
the Scriptures in a crisis experience. According to this
approach, the Scriptures are neither the inspired Word of
God nor is there propositional revelation in Scripture;
God allegedly reveals Himself in an existential way. 26
SEVENTH, the Grammatico-Historical. This is the
only valid, consistent and reasonable method of biblical
interpretation. It is such an interpretation that is
necessitated by and in accordance with the rules of
grammar and the facts of history. It is common-sense
interpretation (i.e., adhering to the principle of the usus
loquendi). It seeks no spiritual or hidden meaning
unless necessary in the normal figurative, symbolic,
idiomatic or typical expression of the given language,
culture, or historical context of a given passage. It
presupposes that God has given His revelation in an
intelligent and understandable form.
GENERAL HERMENEUTICAL
ISSUES
Within the proper, consistent, grammatical and historical
approach there are general principles of interpretation:
The perspicuity of Scripture or the Analogy of
Faith, i.e., Scripture interprets Scripture. The more
obscure passages are understood by clearer passages,
presupposing that the Scriptures, as the very Word of
God inscripturated, are not self-contradictory, but
complementary.
The textual, historical, theological, cultural and
psychological context must be determined for an
accurate interpretation of any given passage.
Within any given passage, the words must be
studied both lexically (as to their basic and
subsequently-derived meanings) and syntactically
(i.e., as they occur in a given context). Words are
to be taken in their literal or common sense and
usage (usus loquendi) unless they bear some
figurative or idiomatic connotation.
The use of figurative
language—types, symbols, figures of speech,
poetic, parabolic, and prophetic references—must
be considered in the immediate context and in the
larger context of the whole of Scripture, culture and
history.
Even within the
historico-grammatical method, there are certain
tendencies to be avoided: E.g., that of traditional,
Reformed Covenant theology which tends to obliterate the
distinctions between the Old Testament or covenant and
the New; and that of a Dispensational hermeneutic which
tends to divorce the Old Testament or Covenant from the
New without proper regard for their unity. Our
hermeneutic, therefore, determines our whole approach to
understanding the Bible.27
THE
HERMENEUTICS OF ROMAN CATHOLICISM
AND THE ORTHODOX CHURCH 28
ROMAN CATHOLICISM
The Church of Rome has three sources of authority rather
than a clear Sola Scriptura position: the
Scriptures, tradition and the Church. Romanism considers
the apocryphal books (The Old Testament Apocrypha
contains 14-15 books) to be part of the inspired canon of
Scripture, resting on some passages therein to buttress
its peculiar teachings. Tradition consists of the
writings of the Church Fathers, Church Councils, and
various papal decrees. The authority of the Church rests
in its claim of papal infallibility in all matters of
faith and practice. It is the Church alone which reserves
the sole right to interpret Scripture in the context of
its own peculiar dogmas and tradition.29
THE
ORTHODOX CHURCH
This refers to the Eastern Catholic
or Greek Orthodox Church. There is no clear position of Sola
Scriptura. While the Scriptures are held in high
regard, they are necessarily interpreted in the context
of the mind of the Church, rather than the
individual adherent. Great authority is given to the
Greek Church Fathers and to Spiritual Fathers, or
priests and bishops for the interpretation of Scripture
and its application to life. 30
THE REFORMED
PROTESTANT TRADITION
AND AN "OLD TESTAMENT MENTALITY"
There are two basic perspectives or approaches to the
Scriptures within evangelical and Reformed Christianity:
An "Old Testament perspective" that positions
itself in the Old Testament as the norm and views the New
Testament through "Old Testament eyes." There
is likewise a "New Testament perspective" that
positions itself in the New Testament as the norm and
views the Old Testament through "New Testament
eyes." The given perspective largely determines the
interpretation of Scripture and its subsequent
application to the life; the nature and character of the
church as to government, its role in society, membership,
ordinances, discipline, worship and even architecture;
and even the very nature of salvation and Christian
experience.
The Reformed tradition possesses an Old Testament
perspective, or an "Old Testament mentality" in
its approach to Scripture. The unity of the covenant is
held to such an extent that the New Testament is largely
seen as a mere continuation of the Old Testament.
The Reformed concept of the church is largely that of the
Old Testament covenant people of Israel. The tendency has
been toward state or national churches. There has
historically been a reliance upon the civil authorities
to enforce the discipline of the church with corporal and
capital punishment. It was this "Old Testament
mentality" that formed the basis of the infamous
"Salem Witch Trials" (1691-1692) in which
thirty-two people were executed for being
"witches," according to Ex. 22:18.
Congregations are comprised of both believers and their
children. The rites and rituals of the Old Testament are
simply replaced by the rites and rituals of the New,
e.g., circumcision is replaced by infant sprinkling, and
the Passover by the Lord's Supper.
This "Old Testament mentality" is the source of
the argument for infant sprinkling and other like-issues,
not "necessary consequence," for infant
sprinkling is neither a "good" nor a
"necessary consequence" deduced from Scripture!
It is rather a traditional idea imported into Scripture
from Roman tradition and a process of arguing "from
the covenant" in the context of an "Old
Testament mentality."
THE BIBLICAL AND
HISTORIC BAPTIST
APPROACH TO THE SCRIPTURES
The Baptist position is that of a New Testament
perspective or a "New Testament mentality." We
stand in the New Testament and view the Old Testament
through "New Testament eyes," giving the proper
place to the progressive principle in Divine revelation
and making the necessary distinctions between the
preparatory nature of the Old Covenant and the finality
of the New. We hold to both the necessary unity and
diversity of the covenants, neither obliterating
necessary distinctions, nor unnecessarily separating the
New Testament from the Old.
We see salvation as strictly
personal, wholly by free and sovereign grace alone, as
the out-working of the Divine, eternal redemptive purpose
(Rom. 8:28-31; Eph. 1:3-14). It is not related to any
natural descent, or church and covenant relationship
established by natural relationship or infant sprinkling.
It is an individual matter in which there is a
Spirit-wrought conviction of sin, a conscious, personal
God-given faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and a
conscious turning from sin in repentance (Jn. 1:12-13;
3:16; Acts 2: 36-42; 17:30-31; Rom. 3:21-26; Eph.
2:1-10).
The covenant-sign of circumcision
has been replaced, not by "baptism" of any
type, but by a sovereign act of God, a spiritual
"circumcision of the heart," i.e., regeneration
(Rom. 2:28-29; Col. 2:10-13). As circumcision was the
covenant-sign of the Old covenant for physical or
national Israel, so "spiritual circumcision,"
or regeneration is the covenant-sign of the New or Gospel
Covenant for believers, or "Spiritual Israel."
Baptism is distinctly a New Testament ordinance. Its mode
is immersion and its subjects are those who manifest a
credible profession of faith, after the pattern of the
New Testament. 31
The Lord's Supper is not the fulfillment of the Passover.
The Feast of Passover has found its fulfillment in the
Lord Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 5:7). The Lord's Supper is a
distinctly New Testament ordinance that centers on the
Person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is to be
observed "in remembrance of" Him. The elements
are unleavened bread and wine. Wine is a symbol of joy
(Psa. 104:15). The "bitter herbs" of the
Passover, which were to cause the Israelites to remember
their bitter bondage in Egypt have no place in the
remembrance of our Redeemer and His glorious
accomplishment.
We view the church as a distinctly new entity established
as the God-ordained institution for the New or Gospel
covenant, not an Old Testament institution carried over
into the New (Eph. 3:5-10). The New Testament church is a
local assembly, independent and autonomous under the
Lordship of Jesus Christ, a professedly regenerate body
in the midst of a composite society, not a monolithic
institution in which there is one religion for the
community. Further, the church exercises its own
discipline apart from the civil authority, and the extent
of such discipline is removal from membership, not
corporal or capital punishment inflicted by the civil
authorities.
It is from this New Testament perspective, that
"good and necessary consequence" or what is
"necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture"
may be consistently deduced.
CONCLUSION
The only proper method of Biblical interpretation is the
one that deals consistently with the ordinary rules of
grammar and the facts of history. In an inclusive sense,
the only consistent approach is one that takes into
account the principle of progressive revelation, properly
comprehending the preparatory nature of the Old Testament
and the finality of the New.
The biblical and historic Baptist position may be
characterized as a "New Testament mentality"
that properly and consistently comprehends the principle
of progressive revelation.
While we are ready to maintain our biblical convictions
and uphold our New Testament distinctives as Baptists, we
recognize our Reformed Brethren as believers and
fellow-heirs of the covenants of promise. We seek to
possess a catholicity of spirit toward all true believers
in the common bond of the Gospel and the glorious
redemption that is in Christ Jesus, yet our convictions
derive from the Scriptures after the New Testament
pattern of our Lord and the inspired Apostles, and we
understand that the closest fellowship flourishes in the
context of truth.
SOLA SCRIPTURA - SCRIPTURA MENSURA
To the Reader
Christianity is not merely a religion of
the intellect, the emotions, or the will. Christianity
is Revealed Religion. God has spoken, not only in
nature (Psa. 19:1-6; Rom. 1:18-20), but intelligently and
infallibly through men whom He inspired, and finally in
His Son (Heb. 1:1-3), Who is God incarnate, the very
"Exegesis of God" (Jn. 1:18), the only Mediator
and Redeemer (1 Tim. 1:15; 2:5).
The Word of God has been
inscripturated—written down—and we possess it
as the Bible. In this inspired volume we possess the
revealed will, word, and mandate of God. It is to be our
guide to salvation from sin and reconciliation to Him
through the Person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ. It
is to be our one objective standard that gives form,
meaning, and direction to our lives and worship.
The central message of the Bible is the
redemption of sinners through the blood of Christ for the
glory of God. Set your heart to seek the Lord. Search the
Scriptures and find the Way, the Truth and the Life (Jn.
14:6). Turn from your sin in true repentance (Acts 17:31)
and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31). Saving
faith lays hold of the perfect righteousness of Jesus
Christ for justification and reconciliation (Rom.
3:21-26).
Dr. Downing is pastor of The Sovereign
Grace Baptist Church of Silicon Valley. This church
believes and preaches the Gospel of the Free and
Sovereign Grace of God in the salvation of sinners (Rom.
1:16-17; Eph. 1:3-14). This church further believes that
an expository ministry which expounds the whole counsel
of God is the only approach which consistently glorifies
God in obedience to the Gospel mandate (Acts 20:20,
26-27). Finally, this church holds that it is the clear
mandate of God for the pastoral ministry to labor to
bring every member to doctrinal and spiritual maturity
(Matt. 28:18-20; Acts 20:28; Eph. 4:11-16; Col. 1:28-29;
1 Tim. 5:17) for the glory of God (1 Cor. 10:31).
A catalogue of the church's tape and
printed ministry is available upon request. The mailing
address is 5667 Snell Avenue, Suite 238, San Jose, CA.
95123. For further information, please call (408)
227-8417.
FOOTNOTES
Back
1There is one term used
in the New Testament for baptism: (baptizein), which denotes to dip, plunge,
immerse, or wash by dipping. It derives from the root
baf, which connotes depth. Had the inspired writers of
the New Testament desired to convey the idea of
sprinkling, they would have used the common term in the
New Testament for sprinkling, (rantizein). For a more extended discussion, see
footnote 31.
Back
2Cf. Heb. 5:5-6; 6:20;
7:1-25 for the perpetuity or everlasting nature of the
priesthood of the Lord Jesus Christ. Cf. esp. 7:23-25.
"unchangeable" is (apara'baton), lit: "inviolable,
untrespassable." No Romish, Mormon, Jewish or
Protestant priest can trespass upon the priesthood which
our Lord holds.
Back
3"Pastor" ((poimen),
shepherd) and "Bishop" ((episskopos),
overseer, one who exercises oversight) both refer to the
work of the Gospel ministry—that of pastoring or
overseeing the local assembly or flock of Christ.
"Elder" ((presbuteros), has the
primary connotation of "aged," then of
maturity, seniority of rank, or a position of
responsibility). These terms are all used interchangeably
in the New Testament for the ministerial office within
the local church (Acts 20:17, 28; 1 Tim. 3:1-7; Titus
1:5-9).
Back
4C. H. Spurgeon, Autobiography
I, pp. 148, 152.
Back
5Some years ago we gave
a lecture on this subject which became the catalyst for
further study and a paper by our Brother, Michael
Czapkay, a member of our assembly and an M. Phil. at
Oxford University, and now (1995) a tutor there and
working toward his D. Phil. I am greatly indebted to
Brother Czapkay for his further research and conclusions
concerning logic and the irrationalism or misology
[hatred of logic] that generally characterize modern
theology and the use of necessary consequences. For
further reference see the monograph by Michael Czapkay: Are
Baptists Irrational? An Examination and Defense of the
Role of Logic in Calvinistic Baptist Theology. A
response to the rejection of the Reformed theory of
"Necessary Consequence" in the book, Are
Baptists Reformed? by Dr. Kenneth Good. This
monograph of 140 pp. won the Clark Prize and, is
available through the Trinity Foundation, P. O. Box 1666,
Hobbs, New Mexico 88240.
Back
6Cf. The following works
for the Confessions, their doctrinal distinctives, their
interdependence, and the dates of their respective
publication, etc.: William L. Lumpkin, Baptist
Confessions of Faith. Philadelphia: The Judson
Press, 1959; W. J. McGlothlin, Baptist Confessions of
Faith. Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication
Society, 1912; Alexander Mitchell, The Westminster
Assembly: Its History and Standards. Edmonton, Alb:
Still Waters Revival Books, 1992; Philip Schaff, The
Creeds of Christendom. Grand Rapids: Baker Book
House, 3 Vols.; B. B. Warfield, The Westminster
Assembly and Its Work. Grand Rapids: Baker Book
House, 1981.
Back
7Although we disagree
with the late Dr. Kenneth Good in this matter of
"good and necessary consequence," we esteemed
him as a good friend and dear Brother in Christ with whom
we had blessed fellowship and the greatest agreement in
the areas of soteriology and ecclesiology.
Back
8Dr. Kenneth H. Good, Are
Baptists Reformed? p. 109. Dr. Good quotes from
Thomas Crosby, The History of the Baptists, III,
pp. 314-353.
Back
9Ibid., p. 105.
Back
10 William Cunningham, The
Reformers and the Theology of the Reformation, p.
526.
Back
11 A. A. Hodge, The
Confession of Faith, p. 39.
Back
12 B. B. Warfield, The
Westminster Assembly and Its Work, p. 226.
Back
13 Cf. Heb. 11:17-19.
God had told Abraham that his posterity and the
fulfillment of the covenant promise would come through
Isaac (Gen. 17:5-7, 15-19). Later God commanded Abraham
to sacrifice Isaac (Gen. 22:1-18). Heb. 11:17-19 states
that Abraham reasoned (logically, intelligently) that God
would raise Isaac from the dead to fulfill the promise (logisamenos
hoti kai ek nekrone egeirein dunatos ho theos).
Back
14 John Gill, Body
of Divinity, p. 21.
Back
15 J. P. Boyce, Abstract
of Systematic Theology, p. 46.
Back
16A. H. Strong, Systematic
Theology, p. 29.
Back
17(Ermeneutikos)
is derived from Hermes, the god of Greek
mythology who served as a herald and messenger to the
other gods.
Back
18It seems to be a
rather common fault of the pulpit that little or no
distinction is made between interpretation and
application. Thus, many are often led into thinking that
the application is the interpretation.
Back
19For a full discussion
of the history of interpretation and the various
approaches, cf. The following works: Louis Berkhof, Principles
of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids: Baker Book
House, 1969, pp. 19-39; F. W. Farrar, History of
Interpretation. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1961. 553 pp.; A Berkley Mickelsen, Interpreting the
Bible. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company,
1966, pp. 20-53; Bernard Ramm. Protestant Biblical
Interpretation. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1969. pp. 23-84; Milton S. Terry, Biblical
Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1964. pp. 163-174.
Back
20F. W. Farrar, Op.
cit., p. 166.
Back
21Milton S. Terry, Op.
cit., pp. 163-164.
Back
22Bernard Ramm, Op.
cit., p. 35.
Back
23Thomas Aquinas, Summa
Theologica, Part 1, Question 1, Article 10.
Back
24Milton S. Terry, Loc.
cit.
Back
25For a discussion of
the subject of Biblical Criticism and the influence and
principles of so-called rationalistic or
"Destructive Higher Criticism," See: Wick
Broomall, Biblical Criticism. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan Publishing House, 1957; Jerry Wayne Brown, The
Rise of Biblical Criticism in America 1800-1870: The New
England Scholars. Middletown, CN: Wesleyan
University Press, 1969; Louis Gaussen, Theopneustia,
or The Divine Inspiration of the Scriptures. Grand
Rapids: Kregel reprint of the 1841 ed.; R. Laird Harris, Inspiration
and Canonicity of the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan
Publishing House, 1957; Carl. F. H. Henry, Ed., Revelation
and the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1958.
Further study can be done in the various General
Introductions to the Bible, and such as the works by
H. S. Miller, Geisler and Nix, and the multi-volume work
by Thomas Hartwell Horne. Much valuable information can
also be obtained from the many critical introductions to
the Old and New Testaments. Cf. the Old Testament
Introductions by such scholars as Gleason L. Archer,
Jr., William Henry Green, R. K. Harrison, Merrill F.
Unger, and Edward J. Young; and the New Testament
Introductions by such scholars as Everett F. Harrison,
Donald Guthrie, J. Gresham Machen, Henry C. Thiessen, and
Theodor Zahn.
Back
26Cf. the works by R.
Laird Harris and Carl F. H. Henry in Footnote 25.
Back
27Baptists have
historically made what we believe to be necessary
distinctions in both the unity and diversity of the
biblical covenants (plural). Theologically and
historically, we have held to the eternal covenant of
redemption and grace or the eternal Divine redemptive
purpose in Divine election and predestination. Reformed
Covenant Theology holds to the unity of the Abrahamic
covenant (singular) to such an extent that it largely
denies the diversity. Dispensationalism, by utterly
divorcing the New Testament or covenant from the Old, is
characterized by an inherent antinomianism with its
denial of the relevance of the law of God as the
expression of His moral Self-consistency.
Back
28The statement of 2
Pet. 1:20-21 that "no prophecy of the Scripture is
of any private interpretation" does not mean that
the individual has no right to interpret the Scriptures
for himself, as the Romish and Orthodox Churches suppose.
The force of the text and context is that the Word of God
did not originate within the personality or will of the
prophet, but came from the Holy Spirit. 20 (touto
proton ginoskontes, hoti pasa prophetei'a grafeis idias
e'piluseos ou' ginetai.) 21 (ou' gar
feleimati anthropou eneksthe profetei'a pote', alla hupo
pneumatos hagi'ou feromenoi e'lalesan apo theou
anthropoi).
Back
29Cf. Loraine Boettner, Roman
Catholicism: Philadelphia: Presbyterian &
Reformed Publishing Company, 1962., pp. 75-103; 235-253;
Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma.
Rockford, IL: Tan Books and Publishers, 1974, 544 pp.
Back
30Bishop Kallistos Ware,
The Orthodox Way, Crestwood, NJ: St. Valdimir's
Seminary Press, 1993, pp. 130, 146-149, 162.
Back
31The traditional
Reformed argument from Rom. 4:9-12 that, as circumcision
was a "sign or seal of the covenant," so is
infant sprinkling, actually disregards both the statement
of Rom. 4:9-12 and the context of Gen. 17, which
describes the institution of circumcision as a token or
sign of the covenant. In Rom. 4:9-12, the subject is
Abraham, who was circumcised as a believer.
Circumcision was to him, and to him alone,
"a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he
[already] had yet being uncircumcised." In Gen. 17
Abraham is commanded to circumcise every male as a
"token" of the covenant. This covenant had to
do with the possession of the land of Canaan, and not
with the eternal promises of salvation (cf. v. 7-10).
Further, Abraham circumcised Ishmael (v. 25-27), whom
he already knew was not included in the covenant of
promise (v. 15-21). The covenant of promise (Gen.
12:1-3), as enlarged in Rom. 4:13-25, 9:1-11:32; Gal.
3:1-29 was made to Abraham's spiritual children
((tekna Abraam), Jn. 8:39) the covenant of
circumcision, having to do with the land of Canaan, was
made to Abraham's physical seed ((sperma
Abraam), Jn. 8:33, 37).
The whole issue of immersion or
sprinkling, infants or believers, can be further studied
in the following works: Alexander Carson, Baptism:
Its Mode and Its Subjects. Evansville, IN: The
Sovereign Grace Book Club, n.d., 237 pp.; T. J. Conant, The
Meaning and Use of Baptizein. Grand Rapids: Kregel
Publications, 1977. 192 pp.; R. B. C. Howell, The
Evils of Infant Baptism. Watertown, WI: Baptist
Heritage Press, 1988. 310 pp.; W. A. Jarrell, Baptizo-Dip-Only.
Splendora, TX: V. C. Mayes, 1978. 113 pp.; Paul K.
Jewett, Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1980. 254 pp.
Back To Top Of Page