My point is simply to highlight that the most damaging threats (A) are within the church, (B) formally affirm either a “closed Canon” or “the sufficiency of Scripture” (or both), and then (C) in practice and redefinition eviscerate the truth, leaving Scripture drained of its God-given authority and Christians enslaved to forces and vagaries emanating either from their own glands or the mouths of their anointed leaders.

We live in a day of brazen-enough unbelief. It is as if the Christ-haunted today need to prove to their mommies what bad little boys they are, sounding out increasingly billowy boasts and denials and declamations of godlessness, complete with snazzy little samplers of depravity.

But such baldfaced rejection has never been the greatest threat to Christ’s church. I mean, if-only, right? If only heretics all wore T-shirts reading “I DENY FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS” or “HELLBOUND APOSTATE.” I suppose still some naïve souls would, in the name of a very wrongheaded understanding of “grace,” entertain such. But it would make matters simpler for others. (“Look—he’s wearing the T-shirt! How am I being ‘judgmental’?”)

No, the gravest danger to God’s people has always been the smiling subversive, the best-buddy bogus blowhard, the accommodating apostate, the helpful heretic. He wouldn’t touch a flat-out denial with a list of 10 Commandments Promises Whatevers. Like the Government, he’s “here to help.”

So this person would affirm many truths…wait, scratch that. He would affirm words that have been historically used to express many truths, many precious truths. And our Christian hearts yearn to accept these affirmations at face-value, share a group hug, and go our ways rejoicing. And so we do, until we’ve been burned, or have tried to help nourish the burnt back to health and happiness. Then we get more wary.

He embraces the words, but in this post-postmodern day, too often we have to keep listening to learn what he really means by that verbal, formal embrace.

To my mind, the central issue simultaneously affirmed and trashed today is the sufficiency of Scripture, the belief that (A) the Canon is full, and (B) the Bible contains everything for which we need a word from God. Not 95%, not even 99%, but everything.

My point in this little essay is not to flesh out that truth Biblically; that is something that we will spend some time in during the Sufficient Fire Conference here in Houston in a couple of weeks. (If you haven’t registered, do: seats are limited, and registrations are running out.) My point is simply to highlight that the most damaging threats (A) are within the church, (B) formally affirm either a “closed Canon” or “the sufficiency of Scripture” (or both), and then (C) in practice and redefinition eviscerate the truth, leaving Scripture drained of its God-given authority and Christians enslaved to forces and vagaries emanating either from their own glands or the mouths of their anointed leaders.

This is where the “But”-Monster rears his hideous grimacing head. Paul says, both retrospectively and proleptically, that Scripture is able both to lead us to saving wisdom, and fully to equip us to know and serve God (2 Timothy 3:15-17). The “But”-Monster may not argue with that statement, formally. But he reveals himself in such words as…

• “Of course I believe the Canon is closed. But God still speaks to His children!”
• “Of course I believe the Scripture is sufficient. But if you aren’t listening for fresh revelations, you’re a Deist!”
• “Of course I believe the Canon is closed. But once upon a time, as I was practicing ‘listening prayer’…”

Read More