[Note: The following is a response to comments generated by an article entitled "Why I Appeal To Historic Christianity," in which Roderick Edwards implies that Scripture should be read in light of church history.  Respondents to his post include Dr. Kenneth Talbot (president of Whitefield Seminary) and a gentleman named "Lem."  The original article appeared at Dee Dee Warren's Preterist Blog. ]

Rod/Lem/Dr. Talbot,

   Well, this is a very interesting discussion. Hope no one minds if I chip in my “two cents.” Without taking sides, I would have to say that the balance of truth lies in the revealed Word of God, rather than in ecclesiastical history. This isn’t to say that all history should be discounted. I enjoy reading early church fathers such as Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and Lactantius. But when it comes to establishing the truth of any position, I must acknowledge the final touchstone to be the written Word.

   Let me explain myself. I believe that “sovereign” is an attribute of God. But can any of God’s attributes be separated? Let us consider as many as our human limitations allow. God is not only SOVEREIGN, but He is FAITHFUL and TRUE. Because He is faithful, His providential care of His own is beyond question. That goes hand in hand with His sovereignty.

   My presupposition (if I have any) is that God has left us His word, not to confound us, but to instruct us. He has also made promises that cannot be BROKEN without impugning His faithfulness. I am talking about the promises God made to Israel. Those promises will stand, no matter what man says.

   But most importantly, God’s providence is manifested in the written Word, where He has given us all we need for our spiritual growth and nourishment. If in any respect the Word is insufficient to serve as supreme arbiter in all doctrinal controversies, then God’s faithfulness is placed in question. It would mean that He hasn’t given us enough. This presupposition leads to a “holy mother church” attitude which jacks the ‘visible church’ into apotheosis, while downplaying the true church, which is the body of Christ, the pleroma of Him that filleth all in all (Eph. 1: 23).

   Frankly, I don’t believe in a “church militant.” The church is an organism — not an organization. Until we realize this monumental fact, we will fail to gain a proper apprehension of what Matthew 16: 18 means. The reason the gates of hell will not prevail against Christ’s church is because the church is seated with Christ in heavenly places, far above all principality and power. Satan’s authority is in the air. Hence believers in Christ are seated above Satan! This denotes their PERFECT STANDING in Christ. It has nothing to do with membership in a visible organization or “club” — be it Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Baptist, or what have you. It means being spiritually baptized into the body of Christ.

   Paul’s prayer is that the knowledge of the saints will increase more and more (see Eph. 1: 17-18). He nowhere implies that anyone is vouchsafed “perfect gnosis.” Man may often err in respect to what they believe the Bible teaches. But the center of authority is not what man may think, but what God has revealed. Throughout the centuries, the issue has always been:

“God hath spoken. Will man listen?”

   This is the one great question. I don’t believe that God has controlled the thoughts of His saints for 2,000 years. (He no more controls our thoughts than He controls our acts). He has left us His word. As the Jews had Moses and the prophets, so we have the 66 books. Since the close of the Jewish economy, the church (as a visible institution) has been largely self-regulating. In the absence of inspired apostles, we are left with the inspired Word. Once again, this bespeaks God’s providence. True, the visible church has often erred in matters of doctrine. But we fix these errors by going back to the fountain of all truth, which is the Word of God. There is the single supreme and authoritative touchstone by which all doctrines must be tested.

   I believe God has given us the “talent” of saving faith (through the work of regeneration) but that growth in knowledge of His word must be by patient application and study, not to mention the spiritual illumination that the Holy Spirit gives. To me, illumination does not mean “ability to unlock riddles,” so much as the power to believe what God has revealed. When we receive His testimony, we set to our seal that God is true (John 3: 33). When we refuse to believe, we make Him a liar.

   The reason Hyper-Preterism is wrong, is not because the fathers never taught it, but because it is frankly UNSCRIPTURAL. It sets aside the revealed theology of the New Testament, and substitutes for it the vain imaginations and philosophies of men. Although the creedo-historical argument may seem a powerful weapon at first, the Word will always be sufficient. In no case should evangelical Christians discount its authority. The Word of God is the only offensive weaponry God gives us! All the other equipment we need for spiritual warfare is defensive. See Ephesians 6: 13-17. This should tell us something.

   So, in assessing these posts, my conclusion is that while church history is a wonderful help, the Word of God is still supreme. Man’s duty is not so much to “interpret” what God has written for our learning, but to BELIEVE all that He has revealed. Failure to believe God is the root cause of all the doctrinal division among Christians — past, present, or future.

Pax,

Brian