In the previous article, we divided Biblical revelation into seven distinct stages. In this one we will examine the final four stages in depth.
Stage Four: Recognising the Scriptures
Imagine sifting through several hundred copies of documents. Some of the documents are written by apostles like Paul. Others are written by apostolic acquaintances, such as Luke. Further documents are anonymous, for example, the letter to the Hebrews. An additional complication is that some of the letters are likely to be elaborate fakes – purporting to come from well-known Christians, but actually written by others. The key challenge is to determine which subset of these documents comprises the Word of God, “given by inspiration of God” (2 Tim 3.16). This issue of canonicity faced the Church in the first few centuries of Christianity. Several people compiled their own lists of approved documents, known as ‘canons’ (a canon is an ancient measuring instrument). There was a good degree of consensus between most of these canons. Godly men were working by common principles to determine the bounds of the Word of God. The Old Testament canon seems to have been settled by Jewish scholars in pre-Christian times. The Lord Jesus ratified their choice when He affirmed that the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms all bore consistent testimony “concerning himself” and “concerning me” (Lk 24.27, 44). The New Testament canon was fixed very early in the Christian era, as godly men recognised the unique authority of certain documents, due to their “God-breathed” origin (2 Tim 3.16, AMP¹).
The main criteria used to determine canonicity could be summarised as follows:
Is the document authentic? Was it genuinely written by the named author, and sent to the named recipients?
Is the document consistent? Do the historical facts match contemporary history? Do the doctrinal statements agree with apostolic teaching? Is the Person of Christ exalted in the writing?
Is the document helpful? Do Christians benefit from reading and studying the text? Is it “profitable”, as Paul says to Timothy (2 Tim 3.16)?
Is the document applicable? While it might have been written to a specific group with specific problems, can other believers in different contexts and cultures learn lessons from their experience?
Ultimately, spiritual leaders took careful decisions, led by the Holy Spirit, to identify the books of the Bible. Down the centuries, we have confirmed their selection by experiencing the value of the Scriptures for ourselves. The words have a “ring of truth”, as J B Phillips describes it. Such a preservation of the Word was promised by Christ (Mt 24.35), and has been accomplished by divine providence.
Stage Five: Translating the Manuscripts
The Old Testament was mostly written in Hebrew, and the New Testament in Greek. While some believers may read these original Bible languages, most of us rely on translations into our native tongue. We depend on the knowledge, skill and accuracy of individuals like Darby and Phillips, or translating committees, such as that in 1611, or the revisers in 1881.
There are two styles of translation, which have different underlying philosophies, intents and outcomes. Formal equivalence is a word-for-word translation, whereas dynamic equivalence is a thought-for-thought translation, or a paraphrase. In English, formally equivalent translations include the Authorised Version (AV), the New American Standard Bible (NASB) and the English Standard Version (ESV). Typical dynamically equivalent translations include the Amplified Bible (AMP) and the Living Bible (TLB). Both styles of translation can be helpful for Bible study. For instance, I would generally turn to AV, AMP, NASB and (where relevant) Bruce’s paraphrase of Paul’s epistles, for close and careful study of a passage. Formal equivalence gets close to the original text, but may read awkwardly in places. Spurgeon criticised the Revised Version translators for being “strong in Greek but weak in English.” Dynamic equivalence is easier to read, but it relies on the doctrinal standpoint of the translator to settle potential ambiguities.
Another reason why translations may differ is due to the underlying textual sources used. The previous article in the series covers this point in detail. While textual criticism can be a minefield, statistics show that there is minimal variation between most manuscripts, and no explicit doctrinal contradictions. The challenge to us is that scholars have toiled so we can have the Word of God in our own language. In previous centuries, saints like Wycliffe and Tyndale sacrificed their lives to give us the tremendous blessing of an English Bible. Have we “reaped the benefits of their labour” (Jn 4.38, NIV²)? According to Wycliffe Bible Translators, around 1,800 of the world’s languages do not yet have a Bible translation.³ We should be ready to support valuable translation work wherever possible.
Stage Six: Explaining the Meaning
Peter acknowledged that the Bible includes “some things hard to be understood” (2 Pet 3.16). Therefore, it is vital for us to be exposed to teaching that explains the meaning of Scripture. Ezra and his colleagues epitomised good teaching when they “gave the sense, and caused them to understand” the truth of the Scriptures, as they read to the people in Jerusalem (Neh 8.8).
Following the Antioch pattern, where a number of gifted teachers publicly expounded the Word of God (Acts 13.1), the local assembly should be the primary forum for learning and teaching. There is also a place for spiritual teaching in Christian homes, where husbands teach wives (1 Cor 14.35), parents teach children (Eph 6.4), and hosts teach visitors (Acts 18.26). In today’s technological society, Bible teaching is readily available through a variety of media. Digital downloads, satellite TV channels, radio stations and CDs provide material from a broad range of doctrinal persuasions. Is this a recent issue? I don’t think so entirely. There have always been plenty of printed commentaries to peruse so, whenever we encounter Bible teaching in any form, we must adopt a Berean attitude of caution, combined with Scriptural investigation (Acts 17.11).
Stage Seven: Living the Truth
This is the final, and most intimate, stage of Biblical communication. Unlike other stages, we are all individually accountable for what we do with the Word we receive (Lk 12.48). We need to be regularly exposed to God’s Word, and also to be subject to it. Consider two contrasting kings of Judah. Jehoiakim heard the Word, but arrogantly rejected it (Jer 36.23). On the other hand, Josiah’s “heart was tender”, and he humbly responded to the Word of God (2 Chr 34.27). Do we have proud or tender hearts?
The Word needs to be internalised – this requires regular reading and pondering on our part. Jeremiah (Jer 15.16) and Ezekiel (Ezek 3.3) are both seen as eating the Word – it is food for spiritual living. One of my friends has a good motto: “No Bible – no breakfast.” Our spiritual food is more vital than our cornflakes! The Word also needs to be actioned – it is not just for our heads, but for our hands and hearts as well. We must be “doers of the word, and not hearers only” (Jas 1.22). The Lord does not want His Word simply to promote intellectual inquiry, because “knowledge puffeth up” (1 Cor 8.1). Instead, He wants to see practical effects in the lives of His people, as His Word accomplishes His pleasure (Isa 55.11). One modern writer who captures the excitement and benefit of Bible study is Arthur Farstad, who refers to “excursions on the limitless seas of adventuring into the written Word of God.”⁴
Summary
We have examined seven stages that form the pipeline of Biblical revelation. Despite the many centuries and intermediaries, the Bible that we read is still fresh and vital spiritual food for us today. Jim Baker often used to say “It’s warm with the breath of God.” May we be drawn to the Book, and to the Lord of whom it speaks.
¹ The Amplified Bible.
² New International Version.
³ www.wycliffe.org.uk/wycliffe/about/statistics.html
⁴ W MacDonald & A Farstad, Enjoy Your Bible, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Gospel Folio Press, 1999), p 8.
(Concluded)
