<1!nurnrbtu
lH4tnlngirtt! ' !lntd41y
Continuing
LEHRE UND WEHRE
MAGAZIN PUER Ev.-LuTH. HOMILETIK
THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLy-THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY
Vol. X July, 1939 No.7
CONTENTS
Page
lDfant Baptism. E. w. A. Koehler __________ .... 481
Holy Scripture or Christ? Th. Engelder ___ 491
The False Arguments for the Modem Theory of Open Questions
Walther-Arndt . __ ._ .. _ ... _ ...... ___ ..... __ . ___ 507
The Institutional Missionary and the Spiritual Rehabilitation of
the Prisoner. E. A. DuemllDg __ .. _______ . _____ 514
Anfechtung und Trost im Spaetmittelalter. Th. Laetsch _. ___ 520
Predigtentwuerfe fuer die Evangelien der Thomasius-
Perikopenreihe .... _ .. ____ . ______________ . 528
Theological Observer. - Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches ___ _ 537
Book Review.-Literatur .. ... ___ . __ . _ .. _____ ._. ____ ._ 553
ElD Prediger mUSII Dicht alleln tDei-
deft.. alIo dass er die Schafe unter-
weise. wle lII.e rechte Christen IOnen
1eIn. sondern auch claneben den Woel-
fen tDeh'l"eta, daII lII.e die Schafe Dichl
anarelfen und mit falBcher Lehre ver-
tuebren und Irrtum elDfuebren.
Luthet".
Es 1st keln Ding. daI die IAuta
mehr be! der Klrche bebaelt dean
die gute Predigt. - Apolo~. Are. JL
U the trumpet give an uncertaJn
sound who IIhall prepare h1mMU to
the battle? - 1 CM.14. I.
PubUshed for the
Ev. Luth. Synod of MIssouri, Ohio, and Other States
CONCORDIA PUBLISJUNG BOUSE, St. Louts, Mo.
!i:_ ~ ~ I" )
~¥
ARC lVE
Holy Scripture or Christ? 491
must learn from the Bible that Baptism is the means through
which God bestows grace and works regeneration in the heart.
Whoever understands the Biblical teaching of the natural depravity
of children and of the benefit and power of Baptism will not
hesitate to have his children baptized.
River Forest, Ill. E. W. A. KOEHLER
.. ~
Holy Scripture or Christ?
In his History of Christian Doctrine G. P. Fisher points out
that "among Protestants and Roman Catholics the old question
respecting the seat of authority in religion is once more eagerly
disputed. Since Coleridge and Schleiermacher insisted that the
primary object of faith is not the Bible but Christ, there has
been a growing tendency to regard the Scriptures less as an
authoritative manual of revealed tenets in theology and morals
than as the medium of disclosing to us the personal Christ and
the import of His mission and teaching. The absolute inerrancy
of Scriptural statements, especially in the narrative portions of
the Bible, is no longer maintained in England and America by
numerous theologians who are firmly attached to the principal
doctrines of the Evangelical system" (p. 547). Is Christ the pri-
mary authority in religion, or is it Holy Scripture? In other
words, is the source and fountain of the Christian faith (fides quae
creditur), of the Christian doctrine, the Bible, or Christ? And
that means, Is saving faith (fides quae creditur) based on the
word of Scripture or on the word of Christ?
1
Christ is the sole authority in religion. That goes without
saying, among Christians. Only His Word counts, only His Word
gives life. Christ Himself declared that "one is your Master,
even Christ" (Matt. 23: 10), and the Father's voice spoke out of
the cloud: "This is My beloved Son; hear ye Him," Matt. 17:5.
There can be no other authority: "No man hath seen God at any
time; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father,
He hath declared Him," John 1: 18. And these words of Christ
are the source of life. They offer us the life eternal, gained for us
by Christ; they create faith, and faith relies upon thern. "The
words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life,"
John 6: 63. They give us confidence and assurance. We are sure
of the forgiveness of our sins, because we have Christ's word
for it. - There is but one authority in religion, so that "if any
man teach otherwise and consent not to wholesome words, even
the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, he is proud, knowing nothing,"
492 Holy Scripture or Christ?
1 Tim. 6: 3 f. Saving faith has but one object, one foundation, one
source, even Christ. The disciples declare: "Lord, to whom shall
we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life," John 6: 68.
Scripture is the sole authority in religion. That goes without
saying, among the Bible Christians. "They have Moses and the
Prophets; let them heal' them," Luke 16: 29. Men are seeking
other authorities, but the Lord declares: "To the Law and to the
Testimony! If they speak not according to this Word, it is because
there is no light in them" (Is. 8: 20), "surely there is no morning
for them" (Rev. Vel's.). "To the Law and to the Testimony"-
that means "to Scripture." For "all Scripture is given by inspira-
tion of God and is profitable for doctrine," 2 Tim. 3: 16. And being
the source of doctrine, it is the source and foundation of faith, for
"the holy Scriptures are able to make thee wise unto salvation
through faith which is in Christ Jesus," 2 Tim. 3: 16. The Bible
Christians accept no other authority than that of Scripture. They
declare: "We receive and embrace the prophetic and apostolic
Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the pure, clear
fountain of Israel, which is the only true standard by which aU
teachers and doctrines are to be judged." (Form. of Con.,
p.851.) The Bible Christian Walther declares: "The Ev. Lutheran
Church recognizes the written word of the apostles and prophets
as the only and perfect source, rule, norm, and judge of all teach-
ing." (Walther and the Church, p.122, Thesis XIII.) The Bible
Christian Krauth declares: "It is a fundamental principle of the
Reformation that God's Word is the sole and absolute authority
and rule of faith and of life, a principle without accepting which
no man can be truly Evangelical, Protestant, or Lutheran." (The
Cons. Ref., p.17.) And the written Word, the sole source of all
teaching, is the sole source and the sole foundation of saving faith:
"Faith is conceived from the Word." (Apology., Trigl., p.141.)
We have no greater treasure in this world than the Bible. It is
the Book of Truth, revealing the saving doctrine; and it is the
Book of Life, creating saving faith.
Christ is our one and only authority. The Bible is our
one and only authority. That means that whatever Christ
would say to us, He says through Scripture. And whatever
Scripture tells us, Christ tells us. It is Christ's Word we hear
when we read our Bible. What the prophets wrote, they wrote
not of themselves but by "the Spirit of Christ, which was in
them," 1 Pet. 1: 11. Asking us to accept "the wholesome words
of the Lord Jesus Christ," Paul points to his epistles and declares:
"The things that I write unto you are the commandments of the
Lord." (1 Cor. 14:37. "What I write that is of the Lord.") And
whatever power unto salvation inheres in the words of Christ,
Holy Scripture or Christ? 493
whi.ch "are spirit and life," inheres in the word of the apostles:
Men "shall believe on Me through their word," John 17:20. There
is but one Master, one Teacher, but you can hear His voice nowhere
but in Scripture. Holy Scripture is profitable unto doctrine, Scrip-
ture alone. Men shall believe in Christ through no other word
than that of the apostles. "These are written that ye might believe
that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that, believing, ye
might have life through His name," John 20: 31. What men hear
outside of, and apart from, Scripture is not the voice of Jesus.
It is a Satanic delusion. In the words of Luther: "God will not
permit us to rely on anything else, to place our trust on anything
which is not Christ in His Word, let it be never so holy and full
of spirit. Faith has no other foundation on which to stand. . . .
Everything else is useless and futile. You are seeking Christ in
vain. Only one thing will do, and that is that you turn away
from yourself and all human comfort and throw yourself on the
Word and nothing but the Word." (XI, pp. 453,455.)
Christ is the chief, the only authority in religion. But we
have to state just as emphatically: Holy Scripture is the chief,
the only authority. When men ask, what is the primary object of
your faith, what Christ says or what is written in Scripture? we
ask them not to discuss a situation which does not exist. The
authority that Christ wields is lodged in the Bible and nowhere
else. It is only when we hear the Bible speaking that we hear
Christ speaking. If a man says that Christ is his authority and
says nothing else, he is saying absolutely nothing. And if in
saying this he means to give Christ the primary place and the
Bible the secondary place, he is putting Christ out of the only
place where He may be found by men. There is only one authority
in religion: Christ speaking in the Bible.
And Christ is speaking to us everywhere in the Bible. Let
us emphasize this point in dealing with the question whether
Christ or Scripture is the primary authority. There is not a single
passage in Scripture from which men may appeal to the higher
authority of Christ. Every word written in the Bible was spoken
by the Spirit of Christ (1 Pet.l: 11); what Paul writes is "of the
Lord," written by His authority, 1 Cor. 14: 37. Moreover, every
word has to do with Christ. Everything in the Bible is Christ.
That is Luther's strong expression: "Thus the entire Scripture is
throughout nuthing but Christ, the Son of God and Mary's Son;
all of it concerns Him. . .. Scripture is open to him who has the
Son, and as his faith grows stronger and stronger, the light of
Scripture shines the more brightly for him." (III, p.1959.) Luther's
expression is no stronger than that of St. Paul: "Whatsoever things
were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we
494 Holy Scripture or ChriEit?
through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope"
(Rom. 15:4). Luther and Paul are not saying that only some por-
tions of Scripture deal with Christ, but they are saying that every-
thing was written with a view to the creation and strengthening of
faith and hope in Christ. When St. Paul said: "I determined not to
know anything among you save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified"
(1 Cor. 2: 2), he did not mean to say that he preached only the
Gospel, but he did say that whatever else he preached and wrote
when he expounded the Law and dealt with historical matters,
served the preaching of Christ, of the Gospel. Even so, when Moses
related the story of creation and Matthew dealt in genealogies, they
were driving forward to their real theme. The Bible contains, says
the superficial theologian, much useless material, of no spiritual
value. He would be right if these things stood by themselves. Says
Luther: 'Tolle Christum e Scripturis, quid amplius in illis invenies?"
(Take Christ out of the Scriptures, and what will you find remaining
in them?) (XVIII, p.1681.) Or, as H. Sasse puts it: "Without this
Gospel, the Scriptures would be either an unintelligible, frag-
mentary document of a chaotic history of religions or a revelation
of the incomprehensible wrath of God." (Here We Stand, p.ll5.)
But you will no longer speak of useless material and a chaotic
condition in the Bible if you accept the truth of Rom. 15: 4 and
say with Luther: "Christ is the center of the circle, and all stories
in Holy Scripture, viewed aright, have to do with Christ."
(VII, p.1924.) Everything in the Bible has spiritual value; all
Scripture is profitable for doctrine and every spiritual need (2 Tim.
3: 16); and if you are ready to accept Christ as your Teacher,
you will accept all that the Bible tells, for in all of it Christ is
speaking.
But that would be making out of the Bible a manual of doc-
trine! And it would be putting Christendom under a yoke of
legalism! We thank God that He has given us such a perfect
manual, in which every doctrine is set down in clear, definite
terms. Things would be in a chaotic condition if we had to wait
till a conclave of theologians settled these terms. But are we
bound to the letter of Scripture ? Would that not be a legalistic
proceedure, demanding of us a slave mentality? You do not
know your Bible, who speak of it as a taskmaster. Scripture
requires of us indeed that we accept its teachings, unconditionally
and absolutely; but in presenting these teachings, it exerts a
divine power upon us, a gracious power, a gentle persuasion.
Through these teachings it creates faith and willing obedience.
"The Word of God is quick and powerful," Heb. 4: 12. "Our
Gospel came not unto you in word only but in power," 1 Thess.1: 5.
"My preaching was in demonstration of the Spirit and of power,
Holy Scripture or Christ? 495
that your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men but in the
power of God," 1 Cor> 2: 4, 5> And remember that this powerful
Word of God is nothing else than Scripture. Scripture and Word
of God are interchangeable terms. Scripture is the Word of God
that makes us wise unto salvation through faith in Jesus, 2 Tim.
3: 15.1) What Christian will say, when Scripture is creating in him:
willing acceptance of the saving truth and filling his heart with
joy and happy obedience, that he is being enslaved and subjected
to a hard "code"? Luther did not think so. To him "Scripture
was the foundation and evidence of our faith." It "filled his heart
with joy and happiness" (XI, p. 1025). And "if you take the
Word of God away, that would be the same as taking the sun out
of the world" (IV, p. 1806). Oh, how gladly we accept the in-
struction of Scripture, how joyfully we bow to its authority! The
Word of Christ is not a heavy burden upon us. "To a careful
hearer the message of Jesus in its purity still has the challenge
of acceptance as an authoritative appeal. Its authority can be
accepted or rejected, but the latter attitude does not destroy its
authority. When the Word of Christ is accepted, men bow under
its authority joyfully and gladly." (J. A. W> Haas, The Truth of
Faith, p.34.) This writer is speaking of the Word of Christ in
contradistinction to Scripture> But what he says of the Word of
Christ we say of Scripture. When the Christian reads Scripture,
he declares: "The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the
heart," Ps. 19: 8. He rejoices in the word of Scripture, because it
is the Word of Jesus. We want to hear the voice of Jesus teaching
us, comforting us, admonishing us, and we can hear Him only in
Scripture. - The question "Is it Christ or is it Scripture that
teaches the saving truth and implants it into the hearts?" is easily
resolved by us. We do not set the two in opposition. As far as
the instruction in divine revelation is concerned, Christ and Scrip-
ture are one.
2
Others make a distinction here - a fatal distinction. There
are those - and they constitute the majority of present-day
theologians-who say: Not Scripture but Christ! First go to
Christ and then use whatever portions of Scripture you may find
profitable! It seems incredible that Protestants in general, and
1) "The efficacy of the Bible is that property by which the Bible has
indissolubly united with the true and genuine sense expressed in its
words the power of the Holy Spirit, who has made it for all times the
ordinary means by which He operates on and in the hearts and minds
of those who properly hear and read it. Rom. 1:16; 1 Thess. 2: 13; Ps.19: 8;
Rev. 1: 3," etc. (A. Graebner, Doctrinal Theology, p.12.) Cf. Baier, I,
p.153: "Scl>iptura habet vim av,t potentiam activam, supernaturalem ac
vere divinam, ad prodv,cendos sv,pernaturales efJectus, scilicet mentes
hominv,1n convertend(!s, T,egene'randas et renovandas," etc>
496 Holy Scripture O'r Christ?
Lutherans in particular, should thus put Christ in opposition to
Scripture. We submit a few statements, samples of many similar
ones, to show that they are actually doing this.
W. Hermann: "It would be unchristian if this principle of the
authority of Scripture adopted by the Evangelical Christianity
meant the acknowledgment of any chance sentence of the Scrip-
tures as God's word, by which a Christian ought to be guided in
his life, and the community in its doctrine. Such a principle of
the authority of Scripture would set a book above God's revela-
tion, which we can receive only through personal influences, above
all from the personal life of Christ. . .. What we should appre-
hend in the Scriptures as the indispensable means to salvation j,s
what God is seeking to say to us through the personal life reveal-
ing itself there, and preeminently through the power of the person
of Jesus." (Systematic Theology, p. 58 f.) A. Deissmann: "This
dogma of verbal inspiration of every letter of the New Testament,
which rightly can be called mechanical inspiration, is now aban-
doned in all scientific theology. . .. The only basis of our faith
is the present living God, and Jesus Christ when He has become
for us in some way or other a present and effective Reality,"
(The New Testament, etc., pp.12,174. See C. T. M., I, p.234,)
Th. Harnack: "Die Frage nach der Schrijt ist darWin imme1" eTst
die zweite; die erste ist und bleibt Christ1ts." (See Lehre u.
Wehre, 32, p.346.) L.lhmels: "Today also only that is real faith
in Christ which is thrust upon man by the appearance of Christ
Himself." (Zentraljragen, p.89.) The Commission on Christian
Doctrine (Episcopalian) states that "stages of Biblical revelation
are to be judged in relation to its historical climax," the standard
being "the mind of Christ as unfolded in the experience of the
Church and appropriated by the individual Christian through His
Spirit" (The Living Church, March 9, 1938). At the World Con-
ference at Lausanne, 1927, the extreme Liberals expressed their
teaching thus: "The object of our faith is not any statement about
Christ but the Lord Jesus Christ Himseli."2)
2) Most certainly Christ is the object of saving faith. Most certainly
we tell men: ''Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ," Acts 16: 31. But when.
these men ask, What should we believe concerning Christ? we tell them:
"Believe the Gospel" (Mark 1: 15), accept by faith those wonderful "state-
ments about Christ" which you will find only in Scripture, those state-
ments containing the offer of the forgiveness of sins gained by Christ.
And what happens? "So then faith cometh by hearing'; (Rom. 10: 17), not
by hearing what some apparition is telling you, but by hearing the word
of Scripture. - Consult Dr. Pieper's Christliche Dogmatik: "One party
contends that justifying faith does not spring solely from the word of
the Gospel and consequently does not have only the word of the Gospel
for its object, but that faith springs primarily from 'historical impres-
sions' and has for its object historical impressions and 'the facts of sal-
vation' separate and apart from the Word of God. The other party
Holy Scripture or Christ? 497
All of this sounds familiar. We have been hearing it here
m America. The Lutheran of Nov. 22, 1928, declared: "We are
not founded upon any book nor even on the Scriptures. Chris-
tianity is founded upon the living Christ." J. A. W. Haas: "It is
not a set of writings nor the unity of the Scriptures as such and in
themselves upon which we can rest as authority that is infallible
apart from their connection and derivation from Jesus and the
guidance of His Spirit. The eve1'-living Christ is our infallible
norm and standard." (The Truth of Faith, p. 38. Italics our own.)
The Lutheran Church Qua1·terly, April 1937: "What Luther meant
by the Word of God, as is well known, was something different
from the original words written by the original authors on the
original parchment. It was the Word that was spirit and life,
free and not bound. . .. There is a tendency to identify the object
of faith with doctrines instead of with the living Christ, whom the
doctrines are intended to set forth. This naturally happens where
the Word of God is so identified with the written Scriptures that
no differentiation is made between them" (Pp.195, 194) .3)
This modern teaching: Not Scripture but Christ, is nothing
new. Schleiermacher indeed popularized it in this form, but it is
an old heresy. John Goodwin, Independent (t 1665), wrote:
"J esus Christ and not the Scriptures was the foundation of the
Christian religion. . .. The true and proper foundation is not
ink and paper, not any book or books, not writing or writings
whatsoever, whether translations or originals, but that substance
of matter, those glorious counsels of God concerning salvation of the
world by Jesus Christ." (See Bibliotheca Sacra, 1931, p.152.)
And before him the "heavenly prophets" of Zwickau and the rest
of that ilk had said the same in principle.
Just how these men who make Jesus, not Scripture, the source
and foundation of saving knowledge, get into communication with
Jesus, they do not tell us. John De Witt tries to tell us when he
writes: "All historic, prophetic, and didactic revelation of God
in the inspired books of the Old and New Testaments is inferior
and subordinate to His revelation of personal truth and grace in the
Christ of the historic Gospel; and whatsoever the former may con-
teaches that any faith outside and apart from God's Word and promise
is enthusiasm. . . . Therefore the Lutheran Confessions so strongly
emphasize the fact that the object of justifying faith is the forgiveness of
sins offered in the Word: Diximus promissionem et fidem correlativa esse,
and: Fides justificans est velle et accipere oblatam promissionem remis-
sionis peccatorum et justificationis." (II, pp.505, 537.)
3) "Not Scripture, but Christ" comes under the general heading of
"Not Scripture, but the Word of God." The discussion of the concept
"Word of God" as opposed to the word of Scripture must await another
opportunity. It will suffice to point out here that the moderns are using
these two terms ("Christ" and "Word of God") indiscriminately.
32
498 Holy Scripture or Christ?
tain that is incongruous therewith, whatever be the explanation
of the incongruity, is not to be held as authoritative for us, but is
virtually superseded as an imperfect and provisional inspiration ....
Let the disciple of Christ come closer to Christ in His pervasive,
effluent, and communicative moral purity. Let him take John's
position, pillowing his head on the Master's bosom, where he can
hear His faintest whisper and feel every throb of His pure, tender,
and loving heart, and he will come to a better mind. . . . We go
fearlessly, therefore, to the old inspiration, approving or rejecting
it, as it may be." (What Is Inspiration? pp.168, 180.) That is
a fine Christian phrase: "pillowing his head on the Master's
bosom." On Jesus' bosom we find comfort and rest. But resting
on the bosom of Jesus, you will never hear a voice telling you to
reject certain portions of Holy Scripture. And where will you
find Jesus apart from Scripture? The directions De Witt gives are
just as hazy as those of Prof. John Oman, who, rejecting the
authority of Scripture, says: "The true ambassador of Heaven
sits in heavenly places, seeing visions and dreaming dreams"
(Vision and Altthority, p.166), or those of Prof. J. F. Vichert, who
says: "The ground of my confidence is not something written long
ago, though that has helped me, ... but a song, a light, a life, within
my own soul" (Watchman-Examiner, Feb. 28, 1929). That is
exactly what the "heavenly prophets" of Zwickau said.
So much is clear from the statements submitted that these
men refused to accept the Bible as the primary, the chief, the only
authority. We do not have to point that out to them. They are
pointing it out to us. We shall enlarge on the disastrous results
of such a theology later on. For the present we want to emphasize
the fact that, according to their own statements, they have deposed
the Bible as the chief and only authority. They have much to say
in praise of the Bible; but submit to its authority absolutely?
Never! - We know, of course, that it will be useless for us to quote
2 Tim. 3: 15 f.; 1 Tim. 6: 3 ff.; Is. 8: 20; etc., to them in this connection.
That will make no impression on them. They will tell us to save
our breath since they do not accept the Bible as the chief authority.
They will ridicule us for operating with the obsolete method of
quoting Bible-texts. Well, let them, if they must. It will clarify
the situation. We will know that we are dealing with men who
think nothing of rejecting certain statements, certain portions of
Scripture.
They tell us that very plainly. We submit a list of statements
to that effect. These statements are of the same general nature as
the preceding ones, but emphasize the teaching that the authority
of the Bible ceases where the alleged authority of Christ sets in.
That is to say, on the authority of Christ or of the Spirit of Christ
Holy Scripture or Christ? 499
or of the Gospel of Christ or whatever other term may be used,
certain portions of Scripture must be ruled out; not every word of
the Bible counts, but only such words as are stamped with the
authority of Jesus.
Dr. De Witt told us that a moment ago. Read once more the
first part of his statement. The Bible contains incongruities, which
are no longer authoritative for us! W. A. Brown: "But if the Bible
records such widely different stages of spiritual development, how
are we to discriminate between them? How can we tell what part
of the Bible is revelation and what is setting? There is one very
simple and effective way to do this. It is to bring everything the
book contains into touch with the central personality in whom the
story culminates - the Lord Jesus Christ." (Beliefs That Matter,
p.226.) H. F. Rall: "Is not the authority of the Bible gone if we
cannot say of every word that it is the Word of God? . .. The final
authority for our faith is God, and God alone. The Bible is
authority for us only in so far as it brings God, only so far as
through the Spirit of God it wakens conviction in our heart. . . .
The Bible has a center toward which the old tends from which
the new flows - Jesus Christ. Bring all else to that test, make
Him supreme." (A Faith for Today, p.232.)4) E. Brunner: "It is
well known how Luther himself freely criticized the writings of the
Old and the New Testament, without being in the least shaken
in his faith. When he used his critical understanding, he did what
the pearl-fisher does when he wipes away the sand from his new-
found pearl to uncover its pure whiteness. He removed what
covered the meaning of God's Word .... It is like chiseling off the
incrustations of the past from the old inscription, to make it legible.
No doubt we have to chisel off much more than Luther believed
necessary, but the inscription has remained the same: Jesus Christ,
the Word of God." (The Word and the World, p.l02.) E. Schaeder:
"The Spirit-wrought faith applies a sifting process to the Bible-
word. Through this sifting process it gets the Word of God, the
Word of Christ, to which it pneumatically adheres." (Theozentrische
Theologie, II, p. 69.) F. Holmstroem: "Die Spitze [von P. Althaus'
Darlegung der 'Methode der Eschatologie'] ist ja eigentlich gegen
die schlendrianmaessige biblizistische Reproduktion der apokalyp-
tischen V orstellungen gerichtet. . .. Eine theologisch haltbare
Eschatologie muss vielmehr ihre Aussagen organisch aus dem le-
bendigen Zentrum der biblischen Offenbarung, der 'Christustat-
sache,' herleiten." (Das Eschatologische Denken der Gegenwart,
4) Both Luther and Rall put Christ in the center of the Bible. But
Luther goes on to show that therefore everything in the Bible is of
value; Rall, however, finds therein his authority to discard much of
the Bible.
500 Holy Scripture or Christ?
p.312.) That is to say, the single texts treating of eschatology (or
any other doctrine) are not decisive. What counts is the living
center, "die Christustatsache." If an individual statement of the
Bible does not agree [in your judgment] with "Christ," with the
fact that Christ lived and died, etc., you may discard it.5)
5) Let us take time to discuss the term "schlendTianrnaessige bibli-
Z'istische RepToduktion." When we base our teaching on proof-texts,
these men look down upon us as backward Biblicists and charge us with
taking things too easy, adhering to the old slovenly methods of Scripture-
interpretation. Study the Bible, these men say, but you need something
better than proof-texts to get the sense of its teaching. A writer in the
ChTistian Centm'Y of Feb. 22 says: "Back to the Bible! I am convinced
that we are to fall short of the necessary spiritual resilience which this
day demands, unless we rediscover the sources of spiritual power in the
Bible." He goes on to speak of "the inexhaustible resources of beauty
and grandeur, of sharp insight and sweeping profundity that crowd the
pages of the New Testament. There's a book!" But he hastens to de-
clare: "This does not mean that we shall be saved by a return to proof-
texting. Perish the thought!" Proof-texts!? "No fundamental doctrine
rests on a single isolated passage. Nor may several passages strung to-
gether in proof-text fashion fix faith. It requires the analogy of Scripture,
the whole Scripture corroborating and authenticating its own testimony LTl
the life of the true Church, to establish the truth as it is in Christ Jesus."
(Dr. E. E. Flack, in The LutheTan, Oct. 11, 1936.) These men look down
with infinite contempt on the Biblicists who say: "That the question of
inspiration is of vital importance for the Christian Church is easily seen,
If she has a definite and authoritative body of Scripture to which she
can go, it is a comparatively easy task to formulate her doctrine. All
she has to do is to search out the teachings of Scripture and embody them
in her creed." (L. Boettner, The Inspimtion of the ScTipt'LLTeS, p.10.) No,
say the moderns, it is not so easy as all that. That would make theology
too simple a matter. Much more is required than the study of simple
proof-texts. They have the same contempt for Luther, who also dealt
with proof-texts. Luther, too, said that it is an easy matter for the
Church to establish her doctrines, for there are the clear passages of
Scripture! "There is no clearer book upon earth than is Holy Writ ....
Some passages in Scripture are obscure, but in these you find nothing but
what is found in other places, and in clear and plain passages. . .. So the
fathers fought them [the heretics] with the clear passages." (V, p. 334 f.)
When Luther had found one single proof-text, he was sure of his case
and declared: "The text stands there too mightily." (XV, p. 2050.) Poor,
backward Luther, piddling around in theology, imagining that he is get-
ting anywhere with his proof-texts! Solch ein SchlendTian! Zwingli
used to scoff at Luther for clinging to "fuenf arrne und elende W oTte."
The moderns deride him for staking his doctrine, his salvation, on
a string of insignificant proof-texts, and Luther answers: "They are
revealing what kind of spirit is in them and how much they think of
God's Word, ridiculing these precious words as five poor, miserable
words; they do not believe that they are God's words. For if they
believed that they are God's words, they would not call them miserable,
poor words, but would prize one tittle and letter more highly than the
whole world." (XX, p.1040.) And what is that great and strenuous
work, calling for the best effort and deepest thought of the theologian,
far surpassing the piddling, easy-going, slovenly method of the proof-
text theologian? They say: "Theology must derive its truths out of the
living center of the Biblical revelation, out of the 'Clwistustatsache.'''
G. Wehrung says: "Der evangelische Schriftgebrauch sucht nicht Lehr-
formeln oder Beweisstellen (proof-texts) dafuer, sondern lebenweckende
Zeugnisse; er sucht in und hinter diesen mannigfachen Christusbekennt-
Holy Scripture or Christ? 501
W. C. Berkemeyer had declared in the Alleman Commentary that
he disagrees with St. Paul's "allegorical exegesis of Genesis" and
"the belief in the literal historicity of the Biblical account of
creation of man and woman" and that he "doubts the traditional
Pauline authorship of the Pastoral Epistles." He was taken to
task for this, but insists that he has the right to reject certain
statements of Scripture on the principle "that we judge Scripture
by Christ." (See Luth. Church Quart., 1938, p. 67 f.)
One can hardly trust his eyes. Have Christian theologians
written these things? The Church has indeed come upon evil
times. The majority of her leading theologians, liberals and con-
.3ervatives, Reformed and Lutheran, is claiming the right, and
exercising it to the full, of revising the sacred oracles of God, of
deleting great portions, sifting the wheat from the chaff, chiseling
off the incrustations, removing the blemishes, and discarding the
harmful elements - and they insist that they are doing this on the
authority of Christ!
They also appeal to Luther as their authority for treating
nissen die innei:e Einheit, das eine Evangelium, das eine Gotteswort in
den vielen vVorten .... Eine gesetzliche Benutzung eLrxzelner Saetze oder
gar der ganzen Schrift kann dem Glauben nicht in den Sinn kommen;
er muss ueberall die Linien zum Mittelpunkt ziehen, aus allen Stimmen
den einen evangelischen Klang heraushoeren." (Geschichte und Glaube,
p.306.) H. Wheeler Robinson says: "The revelation must be sought in
that experience which God has made the medium of His revelation, in its
entirety, rather than in particular 'texts' taken from it .... We may con-
fidently claim that the fuller recognition of mediation, by throwing us
back on the inner content of the revelation instead of its literary expres-
sion and record, is part of the unceasing providence of God over His
people." (The Chr. Experience of the Holy Spirit, pp.170, 175.) And it is
not an easy matter to establish what revelation "in its entirety" really
reveals. F. Buechsel tells us: "SelbstverstaendJich kommt diese Be-
deutung ["Wort Gottes"] nicht einer Anzahl aus dem Neuen Testament
herausgehobener 'iVorte zu, sondern nur seinem Gesamtzeugnis," and
then warns us: "Dies Gesamtzeugnis des Neuen Testaments zu erheben,
erfordert ein betraechtliches Mass theologischer Arbeit." (Die Offen-
barung Gottes, p.112.) To get at the sense of revelation "in its entirety,"
of the Gesamtzeugnis, calls for an adept. We have always thought that
it takes the best efforts of the Christian theologian to lift the treasures
which these simple proof-texts carry. But now come the moderns, the
adepts, and engage themselves to do better, more thorough work than
that of piddling, slovenly Luther. Yes, better work than that of St. Paul.
For the "literary expression," the words of Paul, as Robinson just told us,
is inadequate. Go back of the "literary expression" to get the inner con-
tent of the revelation! - What intolerable conceit! Luther describes their
conceit thus: "Grund und Ursach solches ihres Duenkels (conceit) ist
erstlich, dass man diese Worte 'Das ist me in Leib'" (the proof-text!)
"muesse aus den Augen tun und zuvor durch den Geist die Sache be-
denken. . ,. Da hast du eine gewisse Regel, die dich bessel' leitet in alle
Wahrheit, denn del' Heilige Geist seIber tun kann, naemlich, wo die
Heilige Schrift deinen Duenkel irret oder hindert, da tue sie aus den
Augen, und folge zuerst deinem Duenkel, so triffst du den rechten Weg
gewiss aller Dinge fein." (XX, p.1022.) The word which St, Paul uses
in this connection is TETV