Biblical Revelation – The adequacy of human language and
the objective nature of Biblical truth.
1 John 1:1-5 ; 2 Peter 1:20-21 ; 1 Timothy 6:3-5
1. Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy explained…
a. It is not, nor was it claimed to be, a creedal statement.
b. It is a document clarifying the orthodox view of the doctrine of
Biblical Inerrancy.
c. This is necessary because Satan is clever in that he packages and
re-packages the same lies over and over again1 to cause confusion,
dissension and ultimately apostasy.
2. Human language is an adequate vehicle through which God can reveal
Himself to man. (Article IV.)
-- It has been argued that finite beings cannot grasp (understand) the Infinite
Being.
-- This has led to that Infinite Being (God) as being referred to as ‘wholly
other.’2
-- This idea has it’s origins in acognosticism (A.J. Ayer)
-- If God is ‘wholly other’ does that not contradict Genesis 1:26?
-- If God is ‘wholly other’ how could we know anything about Him?
-- If faith is disjointed from reason, then there is no reason to favor
one religion over another.
-- God speaks to us using anthropomorphic language.
-- We can understand what God says to a limited extent because he has given
us the ability to reason, which is a communicable attribute.
-- We can only have an limited knowledge of God, never a comprehensive one.
Our knowledge is limited because we are finite.
-- In summation, acognosticism claims that we cannot say anything meaningful
about God, but objectively it is really claiming that the Creator is incapable
of communicating with His creatures. This is silly.
3. In modern times, men have attempted to devise systems which attempted
to make Christianity more personal and alive. (Article III addresses this.)
-- A Christian Danish philosopher by the name of Soren Kierkegaard who feared
Christianity was too dry and cerebral, so he devised a system where faith
was divorced from reason in order to make that faith more personally meaningful.
(Fideism.) see Isaiah 1:18, Matthew 22:36-37, 1 Peter 3:15
-- A 20th Century theologian Karl Barth picked up on this idea and ran with
it. He divided the concept of ‘Biblical Revelation’ into two categories; Event
Revelation and Propositional Revelation
-- Barth asserted that the Bible is not itself revelation, but becomes revelation
in a special experiential way at a particular time in a believer’s life. This
has roots in existentialism.
-- Roughly stated existentialism asserts that reality is that which pertains
to the observer. 1 Corinthians 14:36
-- The Correspondence Theory of Truth asserts that the real is the true,
regardless of observation.
-- This existential influence on Christian thinking has left us with a faith
without objective foundation. That it is the relationship that is what is
important, never mind the propositions.
--The problem with fideism is that can only be an internally coherent system.
The concept of God-assigned ‘foundationalism’ is acid to this concept of ‘personal
faith.’ Jesus claimed the Scripture objectively proclaimed His coming. John
5:39 But, the Pharisees had their own ideas.
-- Existentialism is subjectivity. With such a system there would no way
to actually know if anything is actually real. Is this uncertainty acceptable?
Christian existentialism is alive and well in the modern church. God’s Word
is our anchor, our foundation, a gift from Almighty God who has objectively
revealed Himself to us. All we need to know God and His will is in the Bible.
2 Timothy 4:12-17
1. Ecclesiastes 1:9
2. "The immutable is never seen but is the Witness; It is never heard but
is the Hearer; it is never thought, but is the Thinker: is never known, but
is the Knower. There is no other witness but This, no other knower but This."
Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, III.vii.23 (Hindu scripture)