Section three is fundamental Christian doctrines. Fundamental Christian doctrines. You know, there are some things that we believe as a church that we can say are fundamental doctrines to our faith. If you reject those doctrines, then you are in danger of even being viewed as a Christian, okay? When we talk about salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, we talk about who Christ is. We talk about the nature of God's word. These doctrines are so serious and so important that if we reject them, then what we're calling Christianity really is not Christianity in the literal sense. And so we're going to go ahead and go through a lot of these teachings. Now, there are a few things as we get later on in our teaching that I wouldn't necessarily categorize in that fundamental doctrine area, but we would say they're important. doctrine. So when we talk about some of the issues of eschatology, there are many godly people who disagree with the timing of the rapture. OK, even within independent Baptist churches, there are many people who disagree about the exact timing of the rapture. And so I'm going to lay out some of what I believe about those things, what our church has historically taught. But we do have to recognize on some areas they're not in the category of fundamental doctrine, but they're still important doctrines. When we come into the issue of Baptist distinctives, again, we're talking about a narrower, a more narrow segment of our doctrinal beliefs. But I wanted to go ahead and start out by looking at our church constitution, because it does lay out several of these things. But I want to develop them beyond what we have. Under Article III, we have We call our doctrinal statement. And if you look at our church constitution, it's very, very condensed, but it has some great points that I think need to be expounded a bit. And I'll read it. The members of Anchor Baptist Church accept the Bible as its absolute authority. We're going to go ahead and expand that statement because it's a very important statement in matters of faith and practice. We believe in the verbal plenary inspiration of scripture, verbal plenary inspiration of scripture. Also, I want to make a few statements about that as well, because that's very, very important, if you will. That is our church's statement on bibliology. OK, needs to be expanded a little bit, but it's a good statement. We believe that the word of God, not just the concepts, the very words, are the words that God wanted there. He gave them and he preserved them for us. We believe that that document, what we call the scriptures, it is our final rule for all matters of faith and practice. We need to go ahead and expand that a little bit. So today's lesson is going to be why do we embrace the sole authority of scripture? Or maybe you've heard the phrase sola scriptura. Sola Scriptura, that's a very popular phrase that was coined during the Reformation time period, which basically means scripture alone. What exactly do Christians mean when they say we believe that the Bible, the scriptures, are our final authority for all matters of faith and practice. I want to begin by giving you a little bit of historical perspective. And when I say a little bit, I mean a little bit. I'm not going to expand this tremendously. I just want to maybe emphasize a couple of statements so you can get an idea of the fact that there has been, we could say, a battleground throughout times of human history when it comes to the issue of what we call tradition versus what we call scripture. Tradition versus scripture. What do we mean by tradition? I'll give you an example. Well, for the last 20 years, we didn't do that at BBS. That's called a tradition. Over the last 20 years, we did it this way. OK, so maybe it's work, but I mean, there's nothing authoritative about it, honestly, unless it's rooted in the Bible. When we talk about tradition, I know I'm just joking about that one. But the truth is that Christians, Bible believers, whether we'd like to admit it or not, there are a lot of things that we do that have no scriptural backing at all. It's completely, fully based on, well, that's what my daddy did and that's what his daddy did and that's what his daddy did. You understand what I'm saying? And so it's really important that we learn to hold fast to what is truth. what is scripturally merited and we hold loosely. I'm not saying we throw out everything that we would put in the realm of tradition, but we hold it loosely or gently because it is simply tradition. During the, yes. Sure, absolutely. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, it's a tradition. You'll never hear me say you're sinning by not coming to the Wednesday evening service. Now, I might say I think it'd be good for you spiritually to be there, but I would never say that. I know you're sinning by being there. Yeah. Your question. But I'm not going to throw out the major backgrounder. If a tradition is scripturally based, then if it's been practiced over and over and over again, it's a tradition. If it's scripturally based, based upon and opposed to a custom, we may not have any basis Well, Sunday night services, the way that we practice Sunday night services at our church is not in the spirit of how it was initially started. And that really goes back to the time of Spurgeon. And Spurgeon believed that the gospel needed to be preached in the church to unbelievers. And he said, why am I going to do it on Sunday morning? A lot of them are not coming to church. Some of them are hungover. They're just getting out of bed. And so Sunday evenings were evangelistic services. And to this day, a lot of British Baptist churches still practice an evangelistic service on Sunday nights. In American Baptist churches, and I don't mean that in the sense of American Baptist, but in our Baptist churches in general in the United States, we tend to have more common, you hear evangelistic preaching on Sunday morning, then Sunday night is more like to the church congregation. But that is not really where that tradition, if you will, started. And I will also say this, there is a passage where I believe it was Peter mentioned hold fast to the traditions that have been laid out by the apostles. And when he used that term tradition, he was speaking of apostolic instruction. So I'm not suggesting that if it's a tradition, throw it in the garbage can. But I am suggesting that the way that we hold to that, we have to be much gentler about it. We have to ask, what is its root? Is this really something that we absolutely need to do or not do? And the fact that people have done it for many, many years may very well be that it's been a really good idea for many, many years. But it's up for debate sometime. Yes? Yeah, yeah, so yeah, I'm gonna No, no, no, not at all not at all Yeah People form traditions over the Bible? Well, there's different levels of tradition, if you will. We have some traditions that are great ideas that are, we could say, trying to follow a biblical instruction. There are some traditions that actually have usurped biblical authority. Those we have to absolutely outright reject, okay? The ones that are trying to follow a biblical instruction, those traditions, if you will, are things that we should examine, but really they're there for a good reason. And then there are some that are traditions that have no biblical basis. They are, I could put them in the realm of fairly neutral. They're not really good or bad. Yeah. And so we have, we could say various levels to which we should hold fast to those things or even outright reject them in some cases. Yeah. When you use the term tradition, it's, Got the potential to bring up a little controversy. So we talk about these three periods. The intertestamental period was a time that was dominated by rabbinical Judaism and its traditions. And to get a sense of what I'm talking about, Mark 7, Jesus says. Full well you reject the commandment of God that ye may keep your tradition. Okay, that's exactly what you're talking about, Eliza. That wasn't Roman Catholicism. That was not invented yet, but it was in the same vein. It was rabbinical Judaism. And so rather than people obeying God's law and seeing what God's instructions were straight from the word, they were adding traditional elements that actually were usurping the authority of scripture. In Colossians 2.18, he says, or Colossians 2.8, Paul writes, beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy or vain deceit. And listen to the phrase after the traditions of men, after the rudiments of the world and not after Christ. The fact that someone is religious does not mean that they are biblical in their approach at all. Religion simply means it's a system of religious duty. It doesn't necessarily mean it's rooted in scripture. And so one of the major issues that the early church was facing was those with a background of rabbinical Judaism were trying to infiltrate the church, were trying to get a voice in the church, were trying to dominate the discourse in the church. And Paul says, beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy or vain deceit after the traditions of men. And 1 Peter 1 18, Peter writes, You were not redeemed by corruptible things as silver and gold. And I love this statement received by tradition from your fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ. Peter's thinking about a very specific segment that was affecting the church. And so during the intertestamental period, during the time of Christ, there was a huge conflict between the authority of tradition versus the authority of scripture. We then come to Europe in the Middle Ages. And I think that this is the one that tends to get our attention the most because it's a little closer historically. You know, it's only 500 years away instead of 2000. Right. But there was a dominance of Roman Catholic tradition on the European continent. And it really came to a head in 1517 when Martin Luther began to realize that the church, if you will, was not biblically founded, it was all built on traditions. In fact, it infuriated him, and he wanted to get a discourse going. So he wrote a document, 95 thesis, in Latin. His desire was not to have a discussion in the public setting, but it was to have a discussion within the church, if you will. And some individuals decided to translate it into the German dialect, and all of a sudden there was a huge discussion all throughout Germany, and it ended up getting into the rest of Europe. Well, several years later in 1521, he's called to stand before the religious authorities. And if you will, these people had the power to kill him, to execute him, because the Roman Catholic Church and the governments in Europe were blended together and they had absolute authority and power. And so Luther was brought into that assembly and basically all his papers and documents, all this work that he's been doing, his We could say tremendous attacks against the Pope and the establishment of Roman Catholicism were laid out in front of him. And they said, are these your writings? He said, yes, they are. And they said, recant or die. And he says, let me think about it and I'll get back with you. Basically, what happened? OK, well, when he came back to stand before them, they said, what's your final decision? This is what he said. unless I'm convinced by the testimony of scripture or by evident reason, for I can believe neither Pope nor counsel alone, as it is clear that they have erred repeatedly and contradicted themselves. I consider myself conquered by the scriptures. My conscience is captive to the word of God. Great statement, of course in English, so it may not have gone exactly that way. In German, maybe it was a little harder hitting, I would say, knowing how Luther's personality was. But what that does, it gives you a glimpse into this huge conflict during their time period between the traditions of the establishment, if you will, and real biblical Christianity. In fact, in Europe, the church, if you will, that the genuine bodies of believers were very small and were just scattered around. There was not a strong establishment and they were persecuted, tremendously persecuted during that time period. We then come to the English Reformation and in England, the same thing happened. Think of William Tyndale. William Tyndale translated the Bible. He was the first individual to translate from the original languages, the entire Bible into the English language. And William Tyndale was betrayed by a close associate. He was captured. He was killed. And they well, if you read the history, they wanted to make a statement about the way that they killed him, as they did all the people that were trying to put the word of God before the people. But when we come to 1689, we could say biblical Christianity, as opposed to Roman Catholic tradition, was beginning to take a lot of root in the British Isle. And in 1689, the Baptists wrote the London Confessional of 1689. And I want to read to you what they said in that document. The London Baptist Confession was, if you will, the Baptist version of the Westminster's Confession. They were not Protestants. They were Baptists. They didn't believe in baptizing infants. And so there were some things that were different in the Westminster Confession versus the London Baptist Confession. But listen to what they say. It's a great statement. Although this is Article 1, Section 1, although the light of nature and the works of creation and providence give such clear testimony to the goodness, wisdom and power of God that they leave men without excuse, yet they're not sufficient. to give the knowledge of God and his will that is necessary for salvation. Therefore, it pleased the Lord to reveal himself at various times and in different ways to declare his will to the church, to ensure the preservation and propagation of the truth, and to establish and support the church against human corruption, the malice of Satan. The Holy Scriptures are absolutely indispensable for God's former ways of revealing his will to his people have now ceased. Great statement, right? Boy, we've really gotten weak in our documents. But that's just part of it. Here's Article 1, Section 6. The whole revelation of God concerning all things essential for His glory, human salvation, faith, and life are either explicitly set down or implicitly contained in the Holy Scriptures. Nothing is ever to be added, whether by new revelation of the Spirit or by human traditions. Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward enlightenment of the Spirit of God is necessary for saving understanding, of the things revealed in his will. And then it says at the end, there are also some aspects of worship, church government, common to human activity and organization, which may be determined by the light of nature and Christian common sense in accordance with the general rules of the word, which must always be observed. I would really encourage you to read that document, that particular section on the Bible. because these individuals sat down and they wrestled with articulating what we call Sola Scriptura. And it's a very historic document, wonderful document. So we move to this question of why do we hold that kind of a view of scripture? That's the question. And I want us to look at many, many, well, several key texts. First of all, 2 Timothy 3 is a passage we'll be looking at. Second Timothy or second Peter, chapter one is one we'll be looking at Psalm 19 as well. So if you could just kind of be prepared to move to those places. The first passage that I want to look at is second Peter 116. There's nothing in this world, nothing that is like the scriptures, nothing. I asked or somebody asked the question when we were doing the vacation Bible school with the kids. And they said, is there anything in this world that's perfect? And the answer is, well, apart from when God gave us his word, as Peter and Paul and those individuals were writing those things down, we really have nothing in this world that is perfect. All of us are tainted by sin. Everything that we interact with is tainted by sin. But God's word stands out as unique and different from everything else. Let me read to you the passage, and then I want us to focus on some key points that Peter states in this text. 2 Peter 1 16. We have not followed cunningly devised fables when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. Don't miss that statement. But we were eyewitnesses of his power. Skip down and he says this. We also have a more sure word of prophecy where unto you do well to take heed as to a light that shineth in a dark place. Continue down, knowing this first, no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. The prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. Let's notice the details of that text, because the statements that Peter makes when he refers to the word of God, they are profound statements. There are statements that tell us that this is a book that is unlike any other book. It is unique. It is pure. It is perfect. It is the word of God. The first thing that we see is this. The scriptures are not the product of human ingenuity. Now, when we talk about tradition, how would we describe that? Okay, here's the statement. The scriptures are not the product of human ingenuity. How does that relate to tradition? How would you describe tradition? Yeah, why not? Okay. Now, that doesn't mean that all tradition is, you know, it has no sense or no value. I mean, people are intelligent creatures. God made us this way, right? We have the ability to reason and think through how things work. And so a lot of times the reason that a tradition sticks is because it works. It's a good thing in many ways. But there is a problem. It is something that came from the human mind and the human heart. And so it has the potential to have problems. OK, it doesn't mean that it absolutely does, but it has the potential. On the other side, the scriptures do not. Because the scriptures did not find their source in Peter or in Paul or in John or Luke. God used them as instruments, but they're not ultimately the source of the words. OK, that's a very, very important thing for us to recognize. A lot of times people say, I don't believe the Bible's God's work is written by a bunch of men. OK, there is a sense in which you are technically correct. It was written by Paul. We can see that Paul's, we could say, His personality, his language skills, his background, who he's writing to. Paul is really thinking he's actively engaged in this process. But we can't say that it's absolutely Paul's work. God was moving through Paul. He was using Paul's personality and language and all those things. And so what ends up on paper? Yes, it reflects the instrument God used, but it's ultimately God's word. And that's a very profound thing for us to say. Yes? Okay. Well, we can put it this way. God's word, it says in Psalms, was forever settled in heaven. We can we can put it this way. God knew exactly what he wanted on paper for us to have. And when God is going to give us his word in time, he uses instruments. He hand selected certain people and he worked in their lives and their experiences. And so when Paul is writing, he's not writing, dictating as a secretary would. OK, not saying that there weren't places where God did do that. When God tells Moses to write the law, he tells him exactly the words, okay? The Ten Commandments, writes, and they wrote it, okay? Or when Isaiah says, thus saith the Lord, God is putting those words in his mouth. But there are also times where God is, we can say, moving through these instruments to give them exactly what they want in the sense of the way someone plays a musical instrument, okay? You know, I'm a trumpet player. If I want a certain sound, then I blow into the instrument a certain way. If I blow into a tuba, it won't make that sound. OK? I guess if I blow into a violin, it won't make any sound. If I blow into a clarinet, it'll make an awful sound, let me tell you. Or a saxophone. So based on the sound I want to make, I choose the instrument, and with my skill, I play it. And so while the trumpets, we could say distinction of sound is certainly being heard, It's the musician who ultimately is controlling that instrument. And that's how God worked through people like Paul. So when we look at Paul's writings, we can analyze and say Paul's personality and how he writes is different than John's. And it's very different than Luke, the writer of Hebrews. OK, you can see their personality and even the kinds of words that they use. But that does not mean that what they wrote was their words. It was God's word. OK, so we have this dual nature, if you will. And if we just say that they were dictating, well, we can read our Bibles and realize that's not the case, though there are places where he did that. But if we say, well, that's just Paul, that's not God's word, then we have made a serious error, serious, serious error. Frank, you have a question? You look like you were thinking over there. I was thinking. No problem. Yes. I think the very first instance of this happening in water and eating between Adam and Eve. Because I think Adam probably established this tradition when God said, don't eat in the tree. I don't know, maybe Eve resisted or whatever. It was like, well, why did God say that? And Adam maybe just don't eat. Look, just don't even touch it. something that would maybe facilitate... Sure. The first example of a standard in the Bible. God said, don't eat it. Don't touch it. I don't know. And then that maybe was, and you know, I'm just kind of wondering, maybe she touched it before she actually violated the Word of God and ate it. And so, oh, well, I didn't touch it. Nothing happened to me. Yeah. Well, it does give the impression she held her hands and looked at it. Yeah, interesting. OK, next point, the scriptures are not the product of man's recall. Now, again, when Peter writes, he says we were eyewitnesses of these things. OK, so he's not suggesting that these are people who are writing without having seen the events. But he makes this statement in in the text. We have a more sure. Word of prophecy, more sure than what? The eyewitness account. OK, so if you're a judge and you do this for years and years and years, well, you're going to recognize something just because somebody was at an event and saw it doesn't mean that they processed everything exactly how it was. OK, even if they're an honest individual, they're trying to state it, how it was. They don't recall and remember everything. They just don't. Most people don't pick up on every single detail. Sometimes we connect dots without even realizing it. That really weren't meant to be connected. And so when Peter says we were eyewitnesses, that's not the point of authority. He says we have a more sure word of prophecy because not only was it not was I an eyewitness account, but God's spirit. You remember in John where it says when the Holy Spirit comes, he will bring to your remembrance what I have said and he will show you things to come. That is not talking about all of us are going to remember something when we're in a difficult situation. That's not really what he's talking about. He's talking about the role the apostles would play when they penned the scriptures. And so when they came to write those things, the recall that they would have would not just be based on what they remembered and had they seen and how they interpreted those things. but the Holy Spirit will bring to their remembrance the things that they have seen, and what they will write will be perfect and accurate, not because of their recall, but because of the work that God is doing through them. So very, very important statement. Question, comment? Three. You can come back if you need to. The scriptures are not the product of man's interpretation of events and concepts. I love this statement partially because it's totally destroyed in how it's explained many times. Knowing this, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. Now, how do you typically hear people explain that? No prophecy of the Scriptures in any private interpretation. They tend to use it to say, okay, you can't have your view of that text, and I have my view of that text, and they have their view of that text, and we're all correct. Now that is a true principle, if you will, of Bible interpretation, but that's not what Peter's saying. He's saying what we wrote was not just our interpretation of those events. In other words, when Peter was processing what was going on, when Christ was betrayed and when Christ went to the cross and when he rose from the dead, don't think that Peter understood with full significance everything that he saw. His interpretation of those events obviously changed from point A to point C, if you will. And that happened with all the disciples. And even after those events, they didn't fully understand all the implications and all the details. So when these men wrote the scriptures, it wasn't just their interpretation of what they witnessed. It was the Holy Spirit of God moving them to write the correct interpretation of those events, if you will. Very important point. And lastly, the scriptures are the product of God's perfect, deliberate communication through human instruments. He writes, Holy men of God, spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. Now, is there anything in the world that has those qualities? No, no. You know, how many times do you go up to somebody and say, hey, didn't you say, and they're like, ah, maybe, I don't know. That happened to me a couple of times this week. Pastor Joel, you said this, and I'm like, I don't know, maybe I did. I've had so many things going on in my head, I don't know. Maybe I did, maybe I didn't. Okay, sure. Yes? I think this is important because everybody perceives everything differently. You may perceive things closely. as someone else, but just like you and your wife don't perceive things exactly the same, no other two humans are going to perceive things the same. Yeah. So, I mean, it's important that you can see that this had, those scriptures had to be given directly from the Holy Spirit, or there would be total contradictions in the scripture. Sure. Because every man, woman, whatever, every person perceives things differently. Yeah, in a court of law, there's a reason that they ask questions to those who are going to be on the jury, because they want to see if there's a bias that's going to affect their judgment of that case. There's a reason that sometimes a lawyer has to recuse themself from a case, or a judge has to recuse himself from a case. Why? Because of a conflict of interest. Whenever we look at a situation, we look at it through a set of glasses. If you are kindly disposed towards a person, like yourself, and you're presenting how you saw what you did, we all do this. We give the best, rosiest impression of what we did, okay? And if we are not kindly disposed towards someone, we take what they've done and we give them no benefit of the doubt at all. And whether we like to admit it or not, it's reality. We all come to situations with a bias, whether good or whether bad, yes. And I think that's one of the reasons that the word of God lasts, and it still applies to people in so many different cultures. Yes. Yes. Yes. That's a great point. Our blind spots, if you will, many times are the product of the backgrounds that we come from. the way that we grew up, it's going to affect how we interpret things. Even when you study the Bible, when you have a group of people from the same background that never branched out from that little group or whatever, there are gonna be a lot of similar interpretations to the Bible that if you were never associated with that church group and you sat in their congregation and say, how in the world do they believe that that's what that said? I'm being honest. I mean, especially, you know, from a missions context, when you go into another culture, sometimes you're like, wow, the way that they understood that passage is something that never occurred to me. And all of a sudden you start realizing, they see it and I don't. And then there's other times that when you're laying something open to them, they're like, oh, that's just the way you guys do it over there. And it's not. Okay. Yes, there was a, go ahead. I have this discussion with people all the time when they're talking about God's word. And I always say, if you were to write a letter to someone, you have a specific meaning in that letter. How they perceive it is one thing. But you have to take the context, like when he was a doctor, and take his context. But the words were inspired by God. They were breathed into those men, the exact words that God wanted to say. And so there's one meaning to these words, not multiple meanings. The man didn't write the letter saying, I want this to mean this to one person, I want this to mean that. Exactly, exactly. When Paul's writing his epistle, he has in his mind what he wants to communicate. And what's in his mind is what God wants in his mind. And the way that he's going to express it is going to reflect his personality and what he wants. But it's being formed, if you will, not just the concepts, but the very words that God wants him to write down. He is putting them down. Now, it is possible that that someone who is penning scripture did not understand all of the implications of what they were writing. Absolutely. Especially in the Old Testament, when you're dealing with prophecy, a lot of times those individuals, when they wrote down what they did, they did not understand the entire significance of what they were writing. And so what happens when we come to Christ, he says, this is the fulfillment of, and all of a sudden they're like, oh, now it makes sense. Well, it didn't make sense prior to that time period because of that lack of, I mean, there's a reason in the New Testament it talks about God's relationship to Israel and the Gentiles is a mystery, because in the Old Testament it was not fully revealed. And so the Jews, while, if they knew what we know, could have seen it back then. They didn't know what we know, so they didn't see it. You get what I'm saying? There was another? Yeah, there's this thing, well, it's real obvious, like, when, he's not, wasn't writing this down, but it was written down, actually, in Scripture, but, like, when Caius, and it says, because he was high priest that year, he prophesied, and what did he say? He said, better for one man to die than the whole people Sure. He had no idea what you were saying. How about when Balaam was called on by Balak to curse the Jews and he goes into a trance and he begins to prophesy about the Messiah. Think you know what he was doing? What an interest. So yeah, there are times that the person may not have fully understood what they're doing. But I would say as a general rule, they had something they wanted to communicate. It was not just the thought that God put in their mind, but God is also shaping what is coming through that individual. So that when he writes it down, that's God's word. Not just the concepts, but the words. And that, by the way, is what we mean by verbal plenary inspiration. Every word that was given is God's Word. That's not saying that it wasn't in Paul's mind too, okay? It's not saying that Paul was a robot, but it's God's Word. And we have to view that as fully authoritative and pure and perfect, because its ultimate source is God. 2 Timothy chapter 3, verses 15 to 17. And by the way, if you just If you just spend all your time meditating on 2 Peter 1 and 2 Timothy 3 passages, you're going to have a pretty good, solid understanding of bibliology, to be very honest with you. I'm not saying you'll understand it entirely, but just those two passages, if you meditate upon them and think about the weight of what's saying, you'll understand that God's Word is perfect. You'll understand that God's Word is pure. You'll understand the nature of inspiration. You understand that if God gave his word perfectly, but now what we have is completely tainted, then what God gave us really doesn't have a whole lot of value. So you even understand the concept of God preserving his word. OK, Second Timothy 315, that from a child that has known the holy scriptures. And by the way, when he makes the statement, you've known the holy scriptures. What that tells us is that Timothy understood that there are a body of documents called the Holy Scriptures. Okay. And this even gets into the question of canonicity. How do we know which books should be in our Bible? Well, if Paul tells Timothy, you've known the Holy Scriptures, well, Timothy knows what they are, right? And Christ knew what they were and Christ identified it. But it's a whole other discussion. That is a side topic that is out of the scope of this class today. Okay. He says these holy scriptures are able to make the wise into salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. And by the way, kind of an interesting thing. You cannot be saved apart from having the scriptures expounded to you. And where does that faith come from ultimately? It comes from the word of God. The word of God is not preached or taught, then you will not believe because you have no content to believe on and you don't have the source that God uses to give us that understanding that we believe. Kind of interesting. We'll mention that also in Romans chapter 10. Faith comes by hearing the word of God. So if we don't preach and teach the word of God, people will not believe because that's what God uses to bring them to faith in himself. He says this, all scripture is given by inspiration of God. And that phrase means that all of scripture is breathed by God. It is God's breath, if you will. It is the results. And when we talk about breath, we're talking about communication. You don't talk without breath. If you can't breathe, you can't talk. So when he says that the scriptures are God breathed, that's God communicating his word. And it is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, instruction, righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect thoroughly furnished unto all good works. So let me make a couple of comments. The scriptures have the ability to open our eyes to bring us to salvation. In Romans 10, verse 17, it says then, so then faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God. Faith finds not only its object in the word of God, but really that is the source ground as well. If the word of God's not presented, people won't believe. And you know, how many times have you been sitting in a sermon or something like that, and as the word of God is presented, there's something inside of you that is feeling compelled to respond. Do you understand what I'm talking about? You're like, how is it that I was sitting here totally fine, and all of a sudden, after the scriptures are being read and expounded, there's something inside of me that is pressing me to respond? You get what I'm talking about? Well, that's what he's saying. Faith comes by that work. When the word of God is presented, the Holy Spirit presses our heart. It's like we have the ability to recognize and hear and perceive because of the word of God being expounded. So the scriptures have the ability to open our eyes, to bring us to salvation. Two, the scriptures are in their entirety the breath of God. And when I say the scriptures, I don't just mean the concepts. I mean, the words. OK, there is a difference between saying concepts and words, because if the words are God's word, then obviously the concepts are, too. But if the concepts alone are, we could say, find their source in God, then we begin to have debates about the word. Well, does that really matter? That was just Paul. He's just expressing a concept in his own words. It's not what the Bible is. It's much more than that. Three, the scriptures give us all the information we need to know in several categories. And he mentions them. Doctrine. What is true about us and God and his ways with us? If you will, the word of God shapes our worldview. How I think about God, how I think about me, and how I think about how I relate to God. That's what I mean by worldview. And that's what we mean by doctrine. We have to teach doctrine or our worldview won't be shaped by a biblical Christian worldview. Two, it shapes our conscience. When he uses the term reproof, it has the idea of bringing conviction to the conscience. We can be going along and we are doing something that we have absolutely no sense of guilt or shame about. And all of a sudden, as the word of God is expounded, we feel guilty. Why is that? Because the Bible brings reproof. It has the ability to awaken our conscience, if you will. It also has the ability to correct us. The word correct has the idea of to restore us to an upright state when we have stumbled. If you will, it's like therapeutic care. So somebody gets hurt, they have a major injury, And what do they do? They go to therapy once a week, twice a week, three times a week, whatever they need. And somebody kind of works through that with them. You've got to lift your leg. Oh, I cracked when I did that. You've got to lift your leg or your foot. That's my foot. You've got to lift your leg. You've got to lift your arm. Do this motion right here. No cracking yet. Got to do this, there we go. So, you know, somebody has to kind of work with you through that. And so they're incrementally building and strengthening you because you've had a major injury, okay? Well, when he talks about correction, reproof, correction, that's really the concept. It's that therapy that a person receives after a major injury. It's helping them build back up. And the word of God has the power to do that. And lastly, preventative care for instruction in righteousness. If you will, it's what builds us into a healthy disciple of Christ. There is a difference between going to a rehab place and doing this, okay? And then doing this, and then laying on a bench and doing this. You get what I'm saying? Big difference. One is getting you to a place where you can do normal activity again, and one is building you so that you're strong. And you have the ability to do things that the average person, your age or your size, whatever, can't do that. There's a difference. So the word of God addresses all those things. It shapes our worldview, convicts our conscience. It helps us when we've stumbled to get on track and begin to, we could say, have that therapy, if you will, to correct those issues so that we're in a healthy state so that we can begin to build. Very, very important. There's nothing in the world that's mentioned that does those things like that. Nothing. The word of God is unique in that capacity, and it says this is so that the man of God may be perfect, that has the idea of fully matured or complete, and it says thoroughly furnished unto all good works. If you will, the word of God gives us all the tools that we need to address those issues. Very, very important. The Word of God is so precious and so unique. Any questions, comments at this point? I will make one or two simple observations for clarification. Let me skip the Psalm 19 passage. Not that it's insignificant. It's very significant. But I don't want to get bogged down. I wanted to kind of mention some clarification so that we're aware. When we say that the scripture is sufficient, we mean that it alone is sufficient for all matters of faith and practice. OK, we're not saying that the Bible gives you all the information you need to do brain surgery. OK, it's a totally different realm. OK, totally different realm. It's talking about our knowledge of God, our knowledge of our souls, how we're made right, with God, that's the realm that we're talking about. It's directly addressing, it's not suggesting that every area known to man is directly addressed. It's not suggesting that studying church history or we could say historical theology, how certain beliefs began to become prominent in the church. We're not saying that those things are a waste of time or wrong. In fact, they're very, very beneficial and very helpful for us to do. We're not saying that we should isolate ourselves from the good tools provided by godly people throughout church history. We should read old sermons. We should listen to preaching and teaching. We should use commentaries when we are studying God's word. Those things, we shouldn't isolate ourselves from those things. Those are good tools that God has blessed us with that can help us in our study of the scripture. And we're not saying that we're able to comprehend and apply the intent of scripture without the spirit's work in our hearts. If it's not for the Holy Spirit to work in your heart, you won't get saved. It's that simple. If it's not for the Holy Spirit's work in your heart, when you have stumbled and when you have, we could say, begin to divert, if it wasn't for his work, you wouldn't turn back. He's persistent and he works in our heart. He works through the means of the word of God. But there are people who study the Bible and they have absolutely no faith in it at all. They study it simply from an academic standpoint. If it's not for the Holy Spirit's work in your soul, humbling your heart so that you understand the significance and the weight of those truths and applying them to your soul, you won't believe, you won't grow. You will not, we could say, respond correctly. And so when we talk about sola scriptura, we're not suggesting that the Holy Spirit has no role in bringing us to faith in Christ. He uses the tool of scripture. I also want to make these clarifications as well. When we say the scripture is sufficient, we mean it alone is sufficient for all matters of faith and practice. God alone is qualified to speak to the church, It's final authority. All traditions of human invention are not to be permitted or perpetuated that rival the authority of scripture. Now, please don't miss the last part. I'm not suggesting that if it's in the realm of tradition, we just throw it out. If it rivals the authority of scripture, then not only do we not permit it, but we don't perpetuate it. And so we have to recognize that. When we came to Christ talking to those religious Jews, He's saying, your traditions have usurped the authority of scripture. When Luther was standing at the Diet of Worms, he's saying, I'm held captive to the word of God. Your traditions have no authority. Very important. We do not go to scripture to back what we believe. We formulate belief out of the scriptures. Let me just make a comment about this. I think this is really important. There are a lot of people that start with a belief And they go to the Bible to convince themselves that it's what God said. OK, that's not what we should be doing. We should be going to the word of God, understanding what it says. And out of that, we formulate our beliefs. There's a big difference. And there are a lot of folks that go around and I say I've been guilty of this many times. This is one of the dangers of always preaching topically. Rather than letting the Bible speak for itself, we pick the topic that we want, and we already have in our mind what we want to say about it, and so what do we do? We go through and we try to find the verses that fit our agenda to convince people that this is what they're supposed to do. And so when I say we don't go to Scripture to back what we believe, I mean we don't do that, or we strive not to do that. I'm not saying you'll ever, you'll never see Pastor Joel do that in a moment of weakness, if you will. In a careless time, okay? I try hard not to do that, but I'm human, and we all do that. But we should go to the Bible, understand what it says, and from that formulate belief. Some final implications, and then we're done. We cannot be healthy Christians if we neglect the word of God. You can't do it. The church must emphasize the reading and memorizing of scripture. We must encourage and equip people to study the scripture. We should emphasize exposition over topic, not saying topic's bad. This is technically a topical study, okay? But that should not be our primary diet. We have to be cautious that we don't go to the Bible with our agenda and then make it say what we want it to say. And the church should cultivate a humble community of students of the scriptures. And when I use the term humble, it's very important. Because when we come to the Bible, we all have biases, we all have blind spots, and we all come with agendas from time to time. And so we have to be willing to admit that that's the case and ask God to help us as much as possible to let our beliefs flow from scripture, not force the scriptures to meet our beliefs. Any final questions or comments?