Anabaptists and the Authority of Scripture

[R7ehr]

Isn't God's word eternal? "Written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts."

The Word is. I don’t think the Bible is necessarily. The Bible is written in ink and on tablets of stone.

[Ernie]

George Washington was the first president of the United States. Because I know this from a book, doesn't make the book the first president. Jesus was the perfect revelation of God. Because I know this from a book, doesn't make the book the perfect revelation.

Suppose someone proved to me, beyond a shadow of doubt, that there are some errors in the Bible. Would I stop believing in Jesus?

There are a lot of underlying assumptions in this statement and question that would need to plumbed in some depth to really get at it.

My short answer is, "no."

This question is what put through a faith crisis over a decade ago.
I eventually came to the same conclusion... that the scriptures do not need to be error free in the manuscripts we have available, nor in the original writings, in order for them to be inspired, trustworthy and reliable.

[Neto]

Yes, Jesus IS the Revelation of God. He Himself said that those who have "seen" him, have seen the Father. The Scriptures tell us this. So, as you say, the Scriptures are a "reliable written record" of that fact. He also said (and it is recorded in the Scriptures) that He would send the Holy Spirit, the One who is NOT a snake or a scorpion, but who is the the Good Gift from the Father, the Comforter of those who believe, and the Convicter of sin and unrighteousness, for both believers and for the disobedient (unbelievers). This Spirit of God, of Jesus, is with us in every moment of our lives, and, He is there as we read and study the Scriptures, revealing the truth contained in them, especially that about THE TRUTH, Jesus, the full Revelation of the Father.

God chose to preserve the written words of the Scriptures, in order that we can know the WORD. In His unlimited power He was not limited to this choice, but this is the avenue through which we can hear the message of truth, that He loves us, that He wants to have relationship with us, and that He wants us to "work in His fields", the world, to take His Love into the lives of every person, all of whom he loves and all with whom He desires fellowship.

But the question I was referring to is regarding the attitude of the early 'anabaptists' (specifically the Dutch baptism-minded, and more specifically Menno Simons in particular) toward the Scriptures - what place did the Scriptures have in terms of establishing truth in their/his world and time, to arrive at THE Revelation of God, Jesus, about whom they tell.

So maybe I could phrase it this way: The Scriptures are the authority (small 'a) about the AUTHORITY, who is Jesus, the WORD made flesh, the Only True Revelation of God. They are the vehicle through which the Holy Spirit gives us knowledge of, and thus access to, the TRUTH, Jesus. They are, in that sense, 'only' a "means to an end". Forgive me for belaboring this point, but I am a Bible translator. That is the burden and task I was given, and that to which I dedicated my life.

The Living Word is the subject of the Written Word. The Written Word is subject to the Living Word.

To use Steven Brubaker's analogy (my application - I am not one hundred percent sure he would agree though I think he might), it is a first things second things frame. The Word of God (that is Jesus), is the first thing. It is the preeminent thing. And this dictates how we interpret the books of the Bible.

I am having difficulty keeping up on responding to all of this, as the thread is moving along rapidly. But I think you are missing the context of what I have been saying from my first interaction in this discussion (or at least a good bit back). The issue I have been attempting to deal with is this, what was Menno Simon's position regarding the authority of the Scriptures. I'm not talking about whether the Swiss Brethren agreed with him, or whether I, or anyone else here agrees with him (although I do, and I do not know if the SB agreed, or not, or if they every made a statement regarding this subject). I am not talking about how we understand the place of the Scriptures in reaching the lost around us in the world and time in which we live now, or if it is different now, or not. I am certainly not attempting to pit the Scriptures against Jesus. (Anyone who claims to be an anabaptist can make statements like "We anabaptists believe so-and-so", but what they say may or may not be true of anyone but themselves, and it's a bad habit to project one's own opinions onto people who are long gone from this earth.) I was only attempting to clarify what I still feel was a misrepresentation of what Menno taught. I'm not saying that just because he said it, it is true. I have been merely trying to show what he wrote, and thus what he thought, to allow him to answer the question himself. I recognize that Menno is not well respected among the Swiss Brethren. That's fine with me. Yes, I have replied with comments that deal with these other issues, but this was the reason I jumped into the discussion to start with. (I quoted a section out of The Complete Writings about this, but not sure now what day it was, or where it is in this thread. I didn't paraphrase his comment - I quoted it word for word out of the Dutch to English translation. If it appears to differ with the Dutch to German to English translation, I cannot speak to that, because I cannot read Dutch.)

[Bootstrap]

Isn't God's word eternal? "Written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts."

The Word is. I don’t think the Bible is necessarily. The Bible is written in ink and on tablets of stone.

I agree with you. I think we are all agreeing that the Bible is centrally important, we need the Holy Spirit to understand the Bible, and Jesus is the lens through which we understand all of Scripture, which testifies to him.

We are disagreeing about details of how you would put that together into a systematic theology. And fortunately, I suspect nobody in this thread puts any faith in systematic theology. So there may not be a lot worth disagreeing on here.

The issue I have been attempting to deal with is this, what was Menno Simon's position regarding the authority of the Scriptures.
!!! SNIP !!!
(I quoted a section out of The Complete Writings about this, but not sure now what day it was, or where it is in this thread. I didn't paraphrase his comment - I quoted it word for word out of the Dutch to English translation. If it appears to differ with the Dutch to German to English translation, I cannot speak to that, because I cannot read Dutch.)

I suspect that this quote you provided needs to be read together with other quotes from Menno Simons to get a full picture, but I could have gotten it wrong. Does anyone know if there's a particularly good edition of Menno Simons in the original Dutch?

[Neto]

....
Does anyone know if there's a particularly good edition of Menno Simons in the original Dutch?

I thought I would have saved the website address, but I cannot find it if I did. (I have a PDF of it.) I vaguely think I might have posted the address here, at the time I found it.

I do not read or understand Dutch, so I don't know if this is "a particularly good edition", but I downloaded it anyway, about 7 years ago. (The PDF file is over 1 GB.)

If this helps, the full name of the book in Dutch is:

OPERA OMNIA THEOLOGICA, OF ALLE DE GODTGELEERDE WERCKEN VAN MENNO SYMONS.

EDIT:
This might give access to an eBook version:

https://books.google.com/books?id=muVjA ... &q&f=false

Or this?
http://prdldev.juniusinstitute.org/auth ... type=Opera

[Neto]

A additional note regarding the original language in which Menno wrote:
See
https://gameo.org/index.php?title=Menno ... 96-1561%29

I mistakenly thought he wrote in 'standard' Dutch from the beginning, but he first wrote in at least two regional dialects, and it is thought that all of the earliest writings were revised into the second dialect soon after Menno relocated outside his home area. The full Dutch version is believed to have been first produced only a few years before his death, in 1561.

[Judas Maccabeus]

I would frame it differently. God had been revealed primarily through the incarnate son. The scriptures are a reliable written record of that revelation, but not the revelation itself. The scriptures are not sufficient for the Revelation of God or Jesus need not have come in the flesh.

Been reading Karl Barth,eh? That has historically been an expressway to liberalism, as well as to intellectual snobbery. Seen this many times in my former circles.

Not to mention the total immorality of the messenger.

Or perhaps he has been reading 2 Corinthians 3? Without the Spirit and Jesus, the Scriptures are not sufficient.

Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, transitory though it was, will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!

Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold. We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to prevent the Israelites from seeing the end of what was passing away. But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

We see this also in Luke 24:

They stood still, their faces downcast. One of them, named Cleopas, asked him, “Are you the only one visiting Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened there in these days?”

“What things?” he asked.

“About Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied. “He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him; but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. And what is more, it is the third day since all this took place. In addition, some of our women amazed us. They went to the tomb early this morning but didn’t find his body. They came and told us that they had seen a vision of angels, who said he was alive. Then some of our companions went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but they did not see Jesus.”

He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?” And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.

When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, “Do you have anything here to eat?” They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate it in their presence.

He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”

Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. He told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things. I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.”

If Jesus does not open our minds so that we can understand the Scriptures, they are not sufficient. The example of Jesus, what he said and taught, and the presence of the Holy Spirit among us are the means to understanding Scripture in the first place.

At least, that's what Scripture tells us.

True. But I suspect you are trying to say inspiration is the same as what some would call illumination, the step in the process wherein the Holy Spirit enlightens us, and opens its meaning to our minds. The bottom line is that the Barthian view of Scripture moves authority from the written word, as delivered, to some nebulous concept as “the living word.” I will persist in suggesting that view diminishes the authority of the Scripture as delivered to the Church by God.

As I have said, I have never seen it end well. Barth himself was grossly immoral, and we know how his star student, JHY turned out. I have seen a number of my classmates from grad school go this way. My advice, don’t.

[Judas Maccabeus]

Suppose someone proved to me, beyond a shadow of doubt, that there are some errors in the Bible. Would I stop believing in Jesus?

There are a lot of underlying assumptions in this statement and question that would need to plumbed in some depth to really get at it.

My short answer is, "no."

This question is what put through a faith crisis over a decade ago.
I eventually came to the same conclusion... that the scriptures do not need to be error free in the manuscripts we have available, nor in the original writings, in order for them to be inspired, trustworthy and reliable.

Same thing, back in the late 80s. I concluded that while transmission may not have been perfect, there is no final conflict between manuscripts we have. We KNOW what God intended to deliver.

[HondurasKeiser]

It seems clear to me that the "Word" John is referring to is a person and not a text.

Changing the scriptures??? The Word... is the Word... Logos... now why would the word be a person and not a text? Words aren't people, words are text

Hebrews 4:12

For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

The word of God is ALIVE...

"...and the Word was with God and the Word was God..."

I think it's pretty clear that John is referring to Jesus in that opening salvo of his gospel. Indeed, it's from this text that much, but not all, of trinitarian theology is derived. Read in concert with the opening chapter of Genesis; the layers of meaning are incredible e.g. God speaking creation into existence - Jesus identified as "The Word" and signaled as the modus by which everything was created. God's creation of Man - The Word becoming flesh. God creating light and separating day from night - The Word acting as light of the World such that Darkness cannot comprehend/overcome it.

This opening chapter is my favorite in all the Bible. John 15 "I am the Vine..." analogy is a close second.

[Bootstrap]

If Jesus does not open our minds so that we can understand the Scriptures, they are not sufficient. The example of Jesus, what he said and taught, and the presence of the Holy Spirit among us are the means to understanding Scripture in the first place.

At least, that's what Scripture tells us.

True.

I'm glad we agree. I think that's the simple teaching of Scripture.

But I suspect you are trying to say inspiration is the same as what some would call illumination, the step in the process wherein the Holy Spirit enlightens us, and opens its meaning to our minds. The bottom line is that the Barthian view of Scripture moves authority from the written word, as delivered, to some nebulous concept as “the living word.” I will persist in suggesting that view diminishes the authority of the Scripture as delivered to the Church by God.

I have no idea why you suspect I am trying to say something different. Neither Barth or Yoder are major influences on my thought. I have read perhaps a few articles by Barth in my life, I read one book by Yoder and was not terribly influenced by it. There's a reason that I use the method that I do, over and over: I quote Scripture directly and summarize what seems to be its clear teaching on a subject, as I did above. That's pretty deeply embedded in the way I approach this kind of question.

Perhaps we can focus on what I am actually saying? I'm really rather surprised to be seen as Barthian. I don't have any idea how much I agree or disagree with him on the things I am saying.

But I think John 1 is quite clear that Jesus himself is the purest revelation of God.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overtake it.

There was a man sent from God whose name was John. He came as a witness to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him. He himself was not the light, but he came to testify to the light. The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world.

He was in the world, and the world came into being through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to what was his own, and his own people did not accept him. But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God.

And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth. (John testified to him and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks ahead of me because he was before me.’ ”) From his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. The law indeed was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God. It is the only Son, himself God, who is close to the Father’s heart, who has made him known.