LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2016, Page 221

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

IV. THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS­­—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS

Such questions lead us to consider one more example of knowing, this
one from the New Testament:
Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing
worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order
that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which
comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that
depends on faith—that I may know him and the power of his
resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in
his death, that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead. (Phil. 3:8-11; emphasis added)
The apostle Paul writes here of knowing someone, a person—Christ
Jesus—as his Lord (v. 8) and receiving from Him a new righteousness
unlike his own (righteousness by faith rather than from law; v. 9).246 Moreover, he seeks to know Christ in a way that includes knowing His power
and being made like Him. To know Christ in this way, says Paul, causes a
re-valuing of everything else: from Paul’s possessions to his understanding
of his own capabilities to his willingness to accept suffering. This intimate
knowledge of Christ is of supreme value for the apostle.
We should recognize that this type of knowing is of paramount importance not only for Paul, but for Christianity as a whole. This document argues
rationally (that is, on the basis of reason) against scientism’s biased claim to be
the final arbiter of all knowledge. At the same time, however, it is important
to confess that reason or rational arguments are not the ultimate basis for the knowing that Christianity claims for itself. Rather, Christians know that the wisdom
of God confounds all human wisdom (1 Cor. 3:19). How do we know this?
These truths flow out of knowing Christ Jesus, who is God’s very truth made
flesh (John 1:14), God in the nature of a man (Phil. 2:6; Heb. 1:3), and the very
wisdom of God (1 Cor. 1:24).

it is necessary to declare with Martin Luther that it is “pure error” to say
that human beings possess “sound reason and a good will.”248 Christianity
teaches that in a fallen world, where reason is corrupted, there is no more
certain knowledge than to know Christ by faith. Moreover, the Christian faith
recognizes that knowing Christ rightly can be done not by human imagination—for that is just as fallible as human reason is—but only by reading the
only source of certain truth about Him, the prophetic and apostolic Scriptures.249 Both the clarity and authority of God’s Word, centered in Christ and
the Gospel (Luke 24:44–48), exceed God’s book of the world.250 Christ Himself
affirms the truth of the Bible which testifies to Him when He assures us, first,
that the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) which He heard and fulfilled
were entirely trustworthy, even in seemingly little details, for their authors
are men “to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken”
(John 10:35).251 He then further assures His apostles, whose eyewitness testimony is the foundation of all the New Testament Scriptures, that His Spirit
would ensure their witness to Him (John 14:26).
Therefore, as certainly as Christians hold to Christ, knowing Him as
their Savior and Lord, with equal certainty they also hold to the Scriptures of
the Old and New Testament, knowing them to be the Word of God. We hold
fast to the Scriptures as we hold to Christ, knowing that in them we have the
testimony not only of men, but also God’s own Word and His supernatural
revelation that makes Christ known and is “profitable” for all teaching (2 Tim.
3:15–17). Therefore it is important to state clearly that even as the church
confesses its faith in Christ, so also its conviction of the complete trustworthiness of the Holy Scriptures is a confession of faith. As the CTCR expresses it
elsewhere:
Even though there are differences and variety in the Sacred
Writings which sometimes perplex us because we can find
no harmonization for them that satisfies human reason, faith
confesses the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God. Since the
inerrancy of the Scriptures is a matter of faith, it is by definition

So, although Christianity values reason highly, it recognizes that “it ought
not be praised at Christ’s expense.” 247 Indeed as beneficial as reason can be,
246

Such knowing reflects the fact that the verb “to know,” in both its primary Greek (ginosko)
and Hebrew (yada) forms, can have both a more personal dimension and also one that is more
narrowly intellectual. (Spanish and some other languages use different verbs to express these
two dimensions.) Scripture frequently emphasizes the personal sense. For example, consider
its use in Exodus 5:2. “But Pharaoh said, ‘Who is the Lord, that I should obey his voice and
let Israel go? I do not know the Lord, and moreover, I will not let Israel go.’” Here the word
“know” signifies the intimate knowledge of a relationship. Certainly Pharaoh was acquainted
with basic assertions about Israel’s God. He rejected those assertions and also what they would
require of him. So also Jesus—whose omniscience enables Him to know all things—says in
Matthew 7:21–23 of “workers of lawlessness,” “I never knew you.” A saving, intimate relationship had not been established. These negative examples are contrasted with the same positive
use of “know” in Philippians 3.
247

248
SA III.1.4; KW 311. A more detailed discussion of Luther’s thoughts about human reason
can be found in B. A. Gerrish, Grace and Reason: A Study in the Theology of Luther (Eugene, OR:
Wipf & Stock, 2005 [previously published by Oxford University Press, 1962]).
249
See CTCR, Natural Knowledge of God, 34: “Thus, even while acknowledging the fact of man’s
natural knowledge of God, the Confessions likewise consistently acknowledge its strict limitations, and even potential dangers if unchecked by the biblical revelation. As previously noted
in this regard, the Confessions do not so much stress the lack of natural knowledge about God
as they do its falseness. The natural knowledge of God sets forth a distorted picture of Him. It
is incapable of showing us the God who justifies and saves from sin.”
250
See Martin H. Franzmann, Seven Theses on Reformation Hermeneutics (Commission on
Theology and Church Relations of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, 1969), available
at http://www.lcms.org/page.aspx?pid=681. Franzmann refers to the Gospel, justification by
grace through faith in Christ, as the res, or central “subject matter” of Scripture.
251

Ap IV, 24. KW 124.

See J.A.O. Preus, It Is Written (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1971), 27–28.

101

102

a doctrine which is believed solely on the basis of the witness
of the Scriptures concerning themselves and not on the basis of
empirical verification.252

people—may deceive and mislead, but God’s word cannot deceive.”256 Thus,
this conviction is not an outgrowth of the Fundamentalist-Modernist debates
of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, nor is it a conservative Lutheran
idiosyncrasy. As Ralph Bohlmann has pointed out, historians recognize that

As God’s Word, the authority of Scripture is inextricably bound up with
the authority of God Himself. This argument has been of critical importance
to The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod throughout its history, but particularly in the 20th century.253 Thus, in its 1932 “Brief Statement,” the LCMS
declared:
the Holy Scriptures differ from all other books in the world in
that they are the Word of God … because the holy men of God
who wrote the Scriptures wrote only that which the Holy Ghost
communicated to them by inspiration, 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:21….
Since the Holy Scriptures are the Word of God, it goes without saying that they contain no errors or contradictions, but that
they are in all their parts and words the infallible truth, also
in those parts which treat of historical, geographical, and other
secular matters, John 10:35.254
Further, in its 1973 document, “A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles,” the Synod underscores that “the opinion that Scripture
contains errors is a violation of the [Reformation’s] sola scriptura [principle],
for it rests upon the acceptance of some norm or criterion of truth above the
Scriptures.”255 This is a very important argument. The stance of the Reformation is that the Scriptures alone (sola scriptura) have final authority: they
are the final court of appeal and hence cannot themselves be judged by any
higher standard.
It is important to add, however, that this is not a new doctrine or teaching, but is reflected, as indicated, both in the Scriptures themselves and in the
writings of Martin Luther and the Lutheran Confessions. Thus, in the Large
Catechism Luther confesses the complete truthfulness of Scripture, saying
“we know that God does not lie [Titus 1:2]. My neighbor and I—in short, all

252
The Inspiration of Scripture: A Report of the Commission on Theology and Church Relations (The
Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, 1975), 10.
253
Controversy within the LCMS and between LCMS theologians and Lutherans from other
traditions was acute in the latter half of the 20th century, culminating in the 1970s. This innerLutheran debate, however, was reflected within all of Protestantism as well, with a gradual
division between so-called mainline Protestants and evangelical Protestants resulting. For an
evangelical perspective, see the “Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics” (1982), available online at http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago2.html. Article 1 argues that, because
Christ himself affirms the complete trustworthiness of Scripture, “one cannot reject the divine
authority of Scripture without thereby impugning the authority of Christ.”
254

“Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod” (Adopted 1932), section
1, “Of the Holy Scriptures,” available at: http://www.lcms.org/doctrine/doctrinalposition.
255

“A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles,” The Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod.

103

221

Belief in the divine inspiration, infallibility, and authority of
Holy Scripture was common property of Roman Catholic,
Lutheran, Reformed, and other parties involved in the controversies dealt with in the [16th century] Lutheran Confessions . . . .
Indeed, the affirmation of the trustworthiness and authority of Scripture
can be traced prior to the Reformation. Bohlmann goes on to quote Arthur
Carl Piepkorn.
If there was one point of universal agreement among all of these
[Calvin, Tridentine decrees, pre-Reformation Scholasticism]
aside from the nude assertions of the Ecumenical Creeds, it was
the authority, the inspiration, and the inerrancy of the Sacred
Scriptures.257
All of this shows that there can well be and often is a very real barrier
that exists between Christian convictions and scientism. Conditioned as our
culture is by scientism, many people assume that science has the magisterial
authority to trump the claims of any other source, including Scripture. In so
doing, scientism assumes that Scripture is a merely human document consisting of fallible, revisable claims. Scripture, from the perspective of scientism,
is not a revelation from God, but, at most, a book by authors who claim some
level of spiritual enlightenment. Therefore it may, of course, contain errors.
Yet, as we have shown, this is incompatible with the assertions of Scripture,
with long-standing ecumenical Christian tradition, and with the inner logic
of Christian revelation—for it directly contradicts the very character of God,
who is omniscient, omnipotent and holy. God knows all truth (omniscience,
see Ps. 147:5; John 21:17; Heb. 4:13; 1 John 3:20). He can do all that He intends
(omnipotence, see Ps. 115:3; Jer. 32:17; Matt. 19:26, Rom. 11:36; Heb. 1:3),
including communicating the attributes of His divine nature in the humanity of Jesus (Col. 1:19; Heb. 3:1). Thus He can also communicate truthfully
through human language and the words of mortal men.258 God is holy, He
does not deceive us, and indeed, by His very nature, He cannot do so (Num.
256
Large Catechism, IV, 57; KW 464. The German text of the LC seems to emphasize the idea
that God will not lie or deceive; the Latin includes the thought that he cannot err. The difference
is not profound and the meanings are by no means mutually exclusive. See also the translation
in Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions: A Reader’s Edition of the Book of Concord, trans. W.H.T. Dau
and G.F. Bente, trans., (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006), 457.
257
Bohlmann, Principles of Biblical Interpretation, 29. The parenthetic brackets and their contents are in the original.
258
One frequently encounters the idea that what is “written” in Scripture is sure and certain
because it is nothing less than God’s Word. For example, see 2 Chr. 34:21; Jesus’ responses to
Satan in his temptation; (Matt. 4:4–11; Luke 19:46; John 15:25; Rom. 3:10; 1 Cor. 14:21; and countless other examples). A similar expression which indicates directly that God himself deigns to

104

2016 Convention Workbook