The idea taught by the Church of Rome is, that there are two channels of
divine truth, two streams conveying the same water, the written, and the
unwritten word, the written found in the Bible, the unwritten, in the
traditions and decrees of the Church. {5} Thus by attempting to blend
the two, they throw the Bible virtually into the shade; and like the Jews
of old, “make void the commandment of God by their traditions.” The
opposing principle of the Church of England, is, that the written word is
itself sufficient; that it contains an ample and complete statement of
the whole truth of God.
“Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to Salvation: so that
whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be
required of any man, that it should be believed as an Article of the
Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. In the name of
the Holy Scripture we do understand those canonical books of the Old and
New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church.” {6}
1. And is not this evident from the _direct statements_ of the word of
God itself?
Look only at the passage from which our text is taken, v. 15. The Holy
Scriptures “are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which
is in Christ Jesus.” They are sufficient, then, for the heavenly wisdom
of the people of God; nothing more is needed; they contain God’s truth,
and make men wise in his wisdom. But this is not all: follow on the
passage: “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable
for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness.” And what is the result? “That the man of God may be
perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.” Who shall presume to
say, then, that the written word is not sufficient? There is enough in
it to form a perfect character, to leave nothing wanting in the furniture
of the religious mind. When it says, “They are able to make thee wise
unto salvation,” it teaches that they reveal all that can be needful to
make Christ’s coming kingdom ours: when it adds, “That the man of God may
be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works;” it proves that they
also supply us with the sum total of all that can be needed in our
pilgrimage through life.
2. But, even, if we had no such direct statement, we have ample proof of
the completeness of the Bible in the simple fact, that there is _nothing
else inspired_. If there be a void left, it must remain unfilled for
ever. If there be a chasm, the whole world can never close it. For if
there were deficiencies in the Bible, to whom should we go to supply the
defect? To the Fathers? They were holy, devoted, fervent men, and
multitudes amongst their number counted not their life dear unto them, if
only they might fulfil the ministry, which they received of the Lord.
But they were men after all, fallible, and often failing men; they never
pretended to inspiration; they knew far too much both of themselves and
God to presume to say of their own writings, “Thus saith the Lord.” They
never claimed either inspiration or infallibility. To whom then shall we
go? To councils? But they were human too, they were assemblies of
fallible men, so fallible, that in one instance the whole church was
actually induced to decide against the divinity of our blessed Lord.
This was the case, when the whole body of the Church, bishops, priests,
deacons, and laymen, were all arrayed against Athanasius, and Athanasius
alone stood forth as the champion for truth. Athanasius was against the
world and the world against Athanasius. To whom then shall we go? To
the Pope? But he too is a man, and as too many sad facts in the history
of popedom prove, a fallible and often failing man. To whom then shall
we go? Shall we seek for some united testimony of fathers, councils, and
popes? It would be a hopeless task, it would be to attempt an
impossibility, for they are perpetually differing, and when we had gained
it, we should after all have only the testimony of man. To whom then
shall we go? Peter must give the answer, “Thou hast the words of eternal
life.” We will not now stop to discuss the question whether it be
possible for men to fill up the deficiencies of the word of God. He that
cannot add a single inch to his own stature, he surely can add nothing to
the volume of inspired truth. He that cannot add one single leaf to the
flower, nor give one additional wing to the insect, he surely can
contribute nothing to the most perfect of all the works of God, the
revelation of his own hidden will. It was prophesied originally of the
Roman Empire, that it should be part of iron, part of clay; a fit image
of that false system, which would blend together in one whole, the word
of God, and the word of man. As well might you expect to strengthen iron
by the mixture of a little fragile clay: as well might you hold up the
candle in the vain endeavour to add to the brightness of the noon-day
sun: as well might you strive to perfect the beauty of the clear fountain
of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and
of the Lamb, by adding to it waters that have been stained and thickened
in their passage along an earthly world, as hope to add anything to the
word of God, by mixing up with it the word of man.
The fact, then, that there is nothing else inspired, is in itself a proof
that the Bible is complete. Either the Bible is sufficient, or we are
left without a sufficient guide. We may, therefore, rest satisfied as to
the complete sufficiency, as well as the supreme authority of the word of
God. But there yet remains another subject of scarcely less importance,
which we cannot leave unnoticed. Namely,