God's Word Alone, Part 1 & Against the Darkness, Ch. 3

Works under review:

Barrett, Matthew. God’s Word Alone: The Authority of Scripture. The 5 Solas Series: What the Reformers Taught… and Why It Still Matters, edited by Matthew Barrett. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2016. Part 1, “God’s Word under Fire, Yesterday and Today.” Chs. 1-3. pp. 33-150.

Cole, Graham A. Against the Darkness: The Doctrine of Angels, Satan, and Demons. Foundations of Evangelical Theology, edited by John S. Feinberg. Wheaton: Crossway, 2019. Ch. 3. pp. 51-78.

Summary

In Part One, “God’s Word under Fire, Yesterday and Today,” of the book God’s Word Alone: The Authority of Scripture, Matthew Barrett argues that biblical authority, sufficiency, inerrancy, and infallibility are central to Christian orthodoxy (pp. 23-27). Therefore, his task is to “answer contemporary challenges to sufficiency from traditionalism (with a particular focus on Rome and her view of the canon) to science and reason, and finally experience and culture” (p. 30) in defense of sola Scriptura, the book’s namesake. Barrett seeks to achieve this tremendous task through a historical lens demonstrated in Part One’s three chapters: “The Road to Reformation: Biblical Authority in the Sixteenth Century,” “The Modern Shift in Authority: The Enlightenment, Liberalism, and Liberalism’s Nemeses,” and “Today’s Crisis Over Biblical Authority: Evangelicalism’s Apologetic and the Postmodern Turn” (p. 10). In each chapter, Barrett addresses various unorthodox views concerning the authority of Scripture while simultaneously presenting the orthodox position.

In Chapter One, Barrett focuses on the Catholic Church’s corruption and the Reformation’s response. While several figures are mentioned, a few are of focus: Martin Luther (pp. 33-52), Huldrych Zwingli (pp. 52-54), William Tyndale (pp. 58-62), John Calvin (pp. 63-75), and the Council of Trent (pp. 70-74). Through these figures, Barrett demonstrates that, in contrast to the position of the Catholic Church, Scripture is God-breathed, “perfect and flawless as a source of divine revelation,” and is, therefore, the primary authority for Christians (p. 45). However, sola Scriptura is not equated to nuda Scriptura or bare Scripture (pp. 54-55), for tradition is still a ministerial authority, not a magisterial one (p. 45).

Chapter Two proceeds similarly, addressing the Enlightenment, or the “Age of Reason,” and the “‘new papalism’: the infallibility of the biblical scholar” (pp. 76-78). This movement morphed into what is known as theological liberalism, in which reason is valued over faith, and a “theology from below” (man-centered) rather than a “theology from above” (God and Scripture-centered) is endorsed. Barrett mentions several key liberal characters: Baruch Spinoza (pp. 83-87), H. S. Reimarus (pp. 87-90), G. E. Lessing (pp. 90-91), Friedrich Schleiermacher (pp. 91-94), German higher critics (pp. 94-95); David F. Strauss, F. C. Baur, and the Tübingen School (pp. 95-98); Julius Wellhausen (pp. 98-99); Albrecht Ritschl, Adolf von Harnack, and Wilhelm Herrmann (pp. 99-100). He contrasts these men of varying liberal ideologies with men of more conservative ideologies: the Neo-Orthodox Karl Barth (pp. 100-104), evangelical and Reformed theologians such as Cornelius Van Til (pp. 104-107), and old Princeton, including anti-liberal theologian J. Gresham Machen (p. 107-114). It is in Machen that Barrett rests his case, for he advocates that Scripture is inerrant and infallible and is not “dead” and “artificial,” as the liberals claim (p. 113). Rather, it is alive and real since it is God’s Word.

While old Princeton seemed to set this reality concerning the Scripture straight, a new beast approached in postmodernism, and Barrett refutes this ideology in Chapter Three. Postmodernist ideology in relation to Christian thought is characterized by relativism (pp. 131-132), deconstructionism (pp. 132-134), and anti-authority (pp. 135-136), claiming that all truth is relative and, therefore, authorities are no longer authoritative. However, Barrett acknowledges that postmodernism has done well in warning Christians of the problems of modernism (pp. 136-137). Yet postmodernism is not without problems itself, “fall[ing] into the same trap as modernism precisely because it does not begin with God and [H]is revelation to mankind” (p. 140). Barrett argues that Christians must not be sucked into “the black hole of relativism” (p. 143), for “rationalistic modernism and subjectivist postmodernism are inadequate and inherently unbiblical” (p. 145). In contrast to these ideologies that fall short of orthodox Christianity, Christians must listen to the Word “not derived from human beings, but from God” (p. 145). Barrett concludes the chapter and Part One by introducing the next part and its goal: “to apply sola Scriptura afresh in light of today’s hermeneutical challenges” (p. 150), which is exactly what Graham Cole does through substantive use of Scripture in Chapter Three of Against the Darkness: The Doctrine of Angels, Satan, and Demons.

Chapter Three of Cole’s book is titled “Angels: Their Activity on Earth with Individuals and Nations” (p. 51). In it, Cole argues that angels serve on Earth in several ways. They serve as guardians of the sacred, such as in the case of cherubim placed in the Garden of Eden (pp. 52-53), the bridge between heaven and Earth (pp. 53-54), guardians of God’s people (pp. 54-55), communicators of God’s law (p. 55), deliverers and interpreters of God’s messages (pp. 55-56), rescuers of God’s servants (pp. 56-57), directors of God’s agents (p. 58), caregivers of God’s people (p. 58), reconnoiters of the Earth (pp. 58-59), administers of judgment (p. 59), and servants of Christ (pp. 59-61). Cole also examines “the Angel of the Lord” found in numerous instances of Scripture, concluding that the Angel is not Christ, as many assume (pp. 62-65). Furthermore, he declares that it is wrong to pray to angels (pp. 69-70), it is right to ask God for assistance from angels (pp. 70-71), angels are not designated guardians (pp. 71-73), new age angelology should be condemned (73-75), and discernment is mandatory when hearing contemporary stories of angels (pp. 75-76). He concludes the chapter with a brief excursus on angelophanies in the Scripture (pp. 76-78).

Assessment

Part One of God’s Word Alone: The Authority of Scripture, “God’s Word under Fire, Yesterday and Today,” is an exceptionally well-written and detailed argument of the relation between tradition, whether it be ecclesiastical Tradition or rationality, and Scripture that has developed over the past five hundred years beginning with the Reformation and progressing through the Modern and Postmodern Eras. This structure of Barrett’s first part is helpful as it breaks the thorough history into understandable sections and demonstrates how they build off one another. Still, the chapters are quite long, and readers may struggle to follow Barrett’s argument. For this reason, it would have been beneficial for Barrett to break down the part into a total of five or six chapters. Doing so would promote a far more readable book for lay audiences. Regardless, the information, evidence, and arguments Barrett presents are helpful for anyone seeking to understand sola Scriptura to a high degree and its relation to tradition, rationality, philosophy, and human experience.

Likewise, Cole does a tremendous job in the third chapter of Against the Darkness: The Doctrine of Angels, Satan, and Demons, “Angels: Their Activity on Earth with Individuals and Nations.” He presents his argument in charity to other opinions and in conviction through the substantive use of Scripture. Moreover, throughout the chapter, Cole remains grounded in the texts of Scripture and establishes historical opinions of specific verses and arguments, creating a well-rounded work. Even when Cole advocates for a particular conclusion, he still presents other opinions fairly. One such instance is when Cole declares that the Angel of the Lord is a mere angel, not God as some suggest (p. 62-65), yet Cole also mentions Wayne Grudem’s position: the Angel of the Lord is God Himself, more specifically the pre-incarnate Son (p. 63). Otherwise, all of Cole’s conclusions are commendable.

Reflection

I greatly benefitted from reading these two sections of Barrett and Cole’s works. I believe they will prove greatly valuable in helping me determine the meaning of various opinions on Scripture and tradition and articulate such positions in a well-thought-out yet clear and concise manner. To begin this reflection, I will start with Barrett’s work.

I believe Barrett’s God’s Word Alone: The Authority of Scripture is foundational for understanding the historical context of sola Scriptura. Before reading this work, I wrongly assumed that sola Scriptura was more akin to nuda Scriptura. Therefore, I preferred the term prima Scriptura or primary Scripture, even ignorantly telling a friend of mine how I thought sola Scriptura was ridiculous and stupid. After reading Barrett’s work, I now know that the content of my previous position belongs within historic Protestantism as I acknowledge the primary authority of Scripture and the inferior yet real authority of tradition. For this reason, my position on the authority of Scripture has not changed in definition but in vocabulary, for I previously did not understand that sola Scriptura meant “only infallible authority.” However, while I was ignorant, it was not entirely my fault. There seems to be a large group of Protestants who overemphasize sola Scriptura so that they ignore all other forms of authority. I now understand that I allowed these theologians and pastors to influence me rather than doing the research for myself. Primarily, this realization occurred when I read the following statement:

[Sola Scriptura does] not mean that Reformers like Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin were posing a strict either/or dilemma: Scripture or tradition. While the Reformers rejected Rome’s understanding of tradition (as an additional extrabiblical and infallible source of revelation alongside Scripture) and upheld the supremacy and final authority of Scripture over tradition, it would be a mistake to think the Reformers did not value tradition or see it in some sense as a subordinate authority. The Reformers believed tradition was on their side (pp. 54-55).

Thanks to Barrett, I am happy to identify as a firm believer and advocate in sola Scriptura. I am exhilarated to agree with the teaching of faithful men of God such as Calvin and Luther, who followed the tradition of the early church regarding the primary authority of Scripture alone.

Reading God’s Word Alone: The Authority of Scripture alongside Against the Darkness: The Doctrine of Angels, Satan, and Demons illuminates Cole’s theological process and method, for Cole acknowledges a supreme authority in Scripture yet does not neglect the church’s traditions in his various arguments. He recognizes that the two authorities coincide at times, yet at other times, the opinions of various theologians and church fathers conflict with the Scripture. In such cases, Cole is inclined to agree with the text of Scripture rather than the opinions of men, for he knows the views of men are inferior to God’s declarative Word. I would like to be of this mentality. I never want to value manmade traditions over Scripture. Moreover, I desire not only my opinions to be subjected to the Word of God but also my whole being, for Scripture is authoritative in all things, both doctrinally and devotionally. The Scripture itself speaks of this: “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work” (English Standard Version, 2 Tim. 3:16-17). In reference to these verses, Paul describes that this teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness is for a reason: completeness and readiness for good work or ministry.

Through these books of Barrett and Cole, I have learned that Scripture is my only infallible authority for doctrine, devotion, and ministry. Therefore, I believe these works and the practices and information they have provided me will be useful in serving the people of God, for they point not to themselves but to Scripture. Moreover, I have learned that Scripture will guide and equip me for the work of ministry.