Thursday, January 27, 2022

The Quadrilateral Approach to Theology

 

As John Wesley began his quest for truth in the mid 1700’s he cunningly developed a “way” of doing theology and coming to sound doctrinal conclusions. This method would later be coined The Wesleyan Quadrilateral. It consists of four “tools” that can be used to answer doctrinal questions. They being scripture, tradition, reason and experience. It is important to understand that these four sources are not to be viewed as equal sides like a square box but rather one long side and three shorter supporting sides similar to a trapezoid. Scripture must take center stage and the other three sources work in supporting roles in order for this theological approach to work correctly.

 

Scripture

Early in Wesley’s ministry he determined that the Bible was going to be foundational to his theology. It was in 1729 that he began to read and study the Bible as the single standard of truth.[1] Other so called “holy” writings such as the Qur’an, the rabbinic Talmud or even the Apocrypha would all be viewed as heretical, instructional or helpful but not inspired by God. The Bible and the Bible alone is to be the source of truth upon which theology should stand. Vic Reasoner makes an interesting statement about the inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible. He says, “The same Spirit who overshadowed the virgin Mary so that the living Word was conceived without Adam’s sin also overshadowed the human authors so that their word became the written Word of God without error.”[2] The Wesleyan Quadrilateral takes a high view of scripture, it is the inspired, inerrant Word of God. This must be kept in the forefront as we seek to build our theological groundwork. The Bible is to be the final authority in all matters. All of our dogma must be grounded in the question, “Is this Biblical?” Is what we believe, teach, and live supported by scripture? Whatever theological conclusions we reach, it is imperative that those conclusions are based upon the Bible. In this quadrilateral, scripture is the longest of the four sides and holds the preeminence. The remaining three sides are merely “security features” that guide us to sound orthodoxy. As you look for answers to your theological questions in God’s Word keep in mind that it is important to rightfully handle the Word of God. There are different genres of writing. The Proverbs for example, are very different from the epistles of Paul. The book of Leviticus is completely different from the book of Revelation. Having a good understanding of the varying genres as you study out your topic through the Bible will be very helpful in you reaching a solid conclusion. Grant Osborne says this about genre, “The presence of genre is an important point in the debate as to whether one can recover the author’s intended meaning. All writers couch their message in a certain genre in order to give the reader sufficient rules by which to decode that message. These hints guide the reader (or hearer) and provide clues for interpretation”.[3] Believing that the Bible is the inspired Word of God and having a proper understanding of how to interpret the Bible is the first and most fundamental side of the quadrilateral.

 

Tradition

Once you have laid a solid foundation Biblically to answer your theological question, the next step is to filter that conclusion through the tradition of the church. Has your conclusion coincided with the majority of church leaders over the past few centuries? Is what you believe fit within mainstream Christianity? Although there are an array of denominations and branches within Christendom each one with their emphasis and peculiarities; yet there is an overarching general consensus on the big theological issues. Topics such as Christ’s divinity, justification by faith or the trinity have been held in general consensus for many years by the majority of Christians. Compare your conclusions to what the early church fathers, the commentators, and present-day church leaders have said about it. Is there a gap between your conclusion and the general consensus?

“Within the parameters of biblical truth there are some things the Scripture does not make clear or address in detail.”[4] This is where tradition can help to guide us. Coppedge explains that for Wesley tradition did not simply mean the laws and customs of the church. But rather “(1) the church’s understanding of Scripture, (2) it’s use of reason in formulating doctrine and (3) its models for the application of truth in experience.”[5] Using this as a filter can help us see if we have understood Scripture just as generations of Christians have done before us. This secondary source helps to orient us on the path of sound doctrine and keeps us from falling in the ditches of legalism and liberalism.

 

Reason

After a theological conclusion is born out of the study of God’s Word and is tested against the historical interpretation and application of Christian tradition, it needs a rigorous examination from reason. Wesley believed that reason came from God and that all true religion will be reasonable in essence.[6] This reason was given to man in order that he could understand what God was saying to him through His Word. Faith does not mean that what we believe cannot be explained. God’s character will not allow for unreasonable demands and capricious whims. He is a God of order and wisdom and those attributes shine through his Word.

Reason is limited however, and must be kept in balance. We must not overvalue it and raise it to the level of Scripture neither should we undervalue it and delve into mysticism. It is a tool that helps us to encapsulate in terms easily understood what the Bible teaches and how to apply that to our life. What good is our theology if we cannot explain it or understand it? If there is no sense to it, how can it be lived? Reason is a tool that helps us to comprehend and connect together some things that are implied in scripture. It also helps us to understand how we can apply this truth to our everyday lives. Our theology better do more than look good on paper, it better be something that is practical and is at the level where all people of all ages can live.

 

Experience

Wesley used experience not as a primary source to judge Scripture but rather to confirm scriptural truth.[7] If a theology is biblical, traditional and reasonable then naturally it will be experiential. There should be a record to look to that says yes, this is how professing followers of Christ have lived. These truths are being lived out.  However, there exists the danger of putting too much emphasis on experience and delving into feelings, impressions, voices and visions. This is not what Wesley was after. He wanted to see if scripture was actually working in people’s lives. It is to be used to clarify and confirm scripture. Wesley wrote, “Whereas it is objected that experience is not sufficient to prove a doctrine unsupported by scripture…we answer, Experience is sufficient to confirm a doctrine which is grounded on scripture”.[8] If we are saved by faith then there should be testimonies of that happening. If Jesus Christ truly arose from the dead and lives in us through his Holy Spirit then we should see evidence of that. If the Bible teaches that we should be holy then we should see people living holy lives. If the Word is true then that truth will be evident in our lives. Experience to put it in street terms “is where the rubber meets the road”. So important when testing whether a theological conclusion is valid.

 

Conclusion

The central focus is God’s Word. It is inerrant, powerful and the final source of truth. There is no equal. All of our theology must be based upon the Bible. But as our theology forms from the scripture, we need to analyze it in the light of tradition, reason and experience. These three secondary sources like the security features on a twenty-dollar bill, show us the validity of what we have concluded. They serve to bolster our confidence that we have not come to some heretical or extreme belief but that we are showing that we are safe and solid on God’s Word.  

 

 

 



[1] Allan C., “How Wesleyans Do Theology”. In Doing Theology in Today’s World ed. John D. Woodbridge and Thomas Edward McComiskey (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1991), pg. 268.

[2] Vic Reasoner, The Importance of Inerrancy (Evansville, IN: Fundamental Wesleyan Publishers, 2013), pg. 17.

[3] Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral (Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press, 2006), pg. 26.

[4] Allan C., “How Wesleyans Do Theology”. In Doing Theology in Today’s World ed. John D. Woodbridge and Thomas Edward McComiskey (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1991), pg. 273.

 

[5] Ibid, pg. 275.

[6] Ibid, pg. 273.

[7] Ibid, pg. 278.

 

[8] Ibid, pg. 278.

Monday, April 15, 2019

Is Bart Erhman Correct that the New Testament is Corrupted?


The name Bart Erhman has risen to prominence in recent years due to several successful books he has published that are highly critical of the New Testament text. He has five New York Times bestsellers: How Jesus Became God, Misquoting Jesus, God’s Problem, Jesus Interrupted, and Forged.[1] In his late teens, Erhman became a fundamental evangelical Christian. It was during his graduate studies when he began to doubt the inerrancy of the Bible, leading him to become a “liberal Christian” for many years.[2] However, his complete break with Christianity came when he could no longer accept the existence of God with all the pain and suffering in the world. Today he identifies as a humanist and agnostic.[3]
Erhman’s main attack on Christianity has come as textual criticism of the New Testament. One of his arguments is the New Testament text does not coincide with what was written in the original copies. Erhman believes some of the changes were purposefully made, motivated by theological dogmas.[4] He has raised doubts about the reliability of the New Testament and does not believe the Gospels can be harmonized.[5]
As Christians, how can we defend against these kinds of attacks Erhman and others like him lodge against the Bible? Does Erhman have a valid case or is this simply contaminated “evidence” given as an excuse to abandon his original beliefs? I will leave that for you to decide.

Are the New Testament Copies Corrupted?
Source criticism of the New Testament texts show overwhelming evidence that the writers did not deliberately try to mislead, exaggerate, or even lie through their narratives. If Christ’s disciples were corroborating a lie to make Jesus some kind of hero, they did it in all the wrong ways. They place Jesus eating with sinners which was looked down upon by Jews. Jesus heals a paralytic man in Capernaum and declares that his sins are forgiven despite the Jews following the sacrificial system. All four gospels mention that Judas betrayed Jesus. This would have been a disgrace for any Jewish teacher to have a traitorous student.[6] If these writers were propagating lies, they did a terrible job at it.
Some critics like Ehrman point to the fact that the first fifteen or so years after Christ’s ministry did not develop any written documents on the life of Christ. The narrative was passed down orally opening the door for mistakes and exaggeration. What Ehrman fails to explain is the Jewish culture in the first century was highly trained in oral transmission. These were not people who were clumsy and inexperienced in preserving oral narratives. Jewish school boys spent years memorizing the Old Testament. By the time they were adults, they would have had much of the Old Testament memorized. Rabbis would have the entire Old Testament memorized! New Testament scholar Craig Blomberg says, “To memorize the amount of information found in a single Gospel, therefore, was child’s play for many first-century Jews and Greeks. As the first generation of Christians, believing Jesus was God’s heavenly sent Son, began to treat the accounts of his ministry with the same respect and devotion they did their Scriptures, they would have been careful to pass them on faithfully.”[7]
Not only was the oral transmission carefully done but the copying of the original texts was held to a high standard. Scribes had to follow strict rules when copying sacred scriptures. Just the sheer number of hand-written copies that still exist is mind-boggling with 5,600 copies in Greek.[8] Even Erhman’s co-author friend Bruce Metzger admits, “No key doctrine of the Christian faith has been invalidated by textual uncertainty.”[9] If only Erhman could accept the truth.



[1] Ehrman, Bart D. 2019. Books Published. Personal Website. Accessed April 4, 2019. https://www.bartdehrman.com/books-published/
[2] Ehrman, Bart D. 2014. Interview by Scott Burdick.
[3] Ibid
[4] Rajkumar, Richard. 2016. “A Beginner’s Guide to Understand and Answer Dr. Bart Ehrman”. Christian Apologetics Alliance. August 18. Accessed April 4, 2019. http://christianapologeticsalliance.com/2016/08/18/a-beginners-guide-to-understand-and-answer-dr-bart-ehrman/
[5] Ibid
[6] Blomberg, Craig L. The Historical Reliability of the New Testament: Countering the Challenges to Evangelical Christian Beliefs (Nashville, Tennessee: B&H Academic, 2016), chap. 3, Kindle.
[7] Ibid. chap. 1, Kindle.
[8] Slick, Matt.2008. “Manuscript Evidence for Superior New Testament Reliability”. Christian Apologetic &Research Ministry, October 12. Accessed April 4, 2019. https://carm.org/manuscript-evidence.
[9] Metzger, Bruce.2011. “For Most of its Long History, the Bible was Copied by Hand. How easy was it for a Mistake to Enter into this Process?”. Christian Bible Studies, June 28. Accessed April 4, 2019. https://www.christianitytoday.com/biblestudies/bible-answers/theology/biblecopiedhand.html?start=1

Inerrancy and How it Impacts Our Beliefs

Inerrancy and How it Impacts Our Beliefs Eric Kuhns   For years now there has been a debate as to whether God’s Word contains errors...