I have never heard the term "biblicism" until recently. At first, I had no what it meant. There are a couple of definitions for it. The first is the Bible is the only source of truth for the Christian. The Christian is not allowed to have books, commentaries, or even further teaching. Some have described biblicism as going under the tree with your Bible and sitting there. Others have used this definition to describe Solo Scriptura rather than Sola Scriptura meaning the Bible is our only authority.
The other definition of biblicism is where the Bible is our final authority for faith and practice. It is not the only authority, but it is our final authority. For example, as we sit under a pastor preaching the Word on any giving Sunday, he is exercising spiritual authority over us yet, as the Bereans did with Paul in Acts 17, we check the scriptures to see whether or not he is preaching truth or stepping out of bounds with his authority. These Biblicists practice Sola Scriptura and use commentaries and books in their study of the Bible.
Obviously, I fall under the second definition of biblicism because I do believe the Bible is our final authority for faith and practice. I also do believe the use of commentaries, books, and even sermons in studying the Bible are beneficial. As I mentioned, the Bible is not the final authority in our walk with Jesus. If I want to learn how to change the toilet fill value in the bathroom of my house, I am going to seek advice or consult the "all-knowing" YouTube (Please note I do not believe YouTube is all-knowing).
The reason why biblicism is getting a bad rap is because many think Biblicists are the only ones who can interpret the Bible or saying we should not be using terms not necessarily found in the Bible such as Trinity, which is a word not in the Bible, but it helps us describe the triunity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Others have said it will lead to heresy or will lead us to the Roman Catholic Church because there is only one opinion for Biblicist, their own, which for those in the first category that is true, however for those under the second category, that is not true.
True Biblicists seek to make the Bible the standard for which Christians live by. I am not advocating in not using commentaries, books, study Bibles, or even Bible software. I mean I have dozens of book quotes on social media and do book reviews so I cannot be under the first definition of Biblicism. Do I believe we should look at what others have said regarding the passage you are studying? Yes, but the Bible has the final say. What the theologian you are reading may not line up with the Bible so Scripture trumps what you are reading. The same can be said for the Bible you are listening to whether it is your local church pastor or one you are hearing online. By the way, it is okay to use creeds and confessions because they are expressions of our faith. If the creed does not align with Scripture, to paraphrase Charles Spurgeon, do away with it.
As I mentioned earlier, there are some who believe Biblicists will not use terms such as Trinity and omnipresent. These terms help us in our theology to understand what God has revealed about Himself in the Bible. I actually have known people that refuse to use the word "Trinity" because it is not in the Bible. Some understand the concept, but they won't use the word. What's ironic is some of these guys will say "Rapture" yet that word is not in the Bible. When studying the attributes of God, we use words that are not necessarily in the Bible, but we use them for our benefit.
So now comes the questions, how do we make biblicism great again? Jeffrey Johnson, in his book, The Revealed God, answers that:
If biblicism is the refusal to use non-biblical words to define concepts, then we need to stay clear of biblicism. But, if biblicism is the refusal to incorporate extra-biblical and contra-biblical concepts and ideas into Christianity, then let’s make biblicism great again.
Let us also make biblicism great again by letting the Bible be our final authority. Johnson continues:
The world’s wisdom may seem scholarly and impressive, but in the end, it’s merely a complicated way to suppress the truth of God in unrighteousness. It leads its disciples into an endless maze of ever-changing beliefs from one fallible philosopher to the next.
Those who become mesmerized by its lure are ever learning but never coming to the knowledge of the truth. It is one thing for pagan philosophers to craft their conceptions of reality in their rejection of God. Still, it is another thing for the church to be deceived into thinking worldly philosophies are reliable handmaidens to theology.
If rationalism, empiricism, and existentialism are of no value to unbelievers, why would they be of any value to believers? Oh, that the church would learn not to look to man but to God alone. May the church not seek to build its worldview on the faulty foundations of rationalism, empiricism, or existentialism, but upon foundational truths of divine revelation — alone!
No comments:
Post a Comment