The Sufficiency of Scripture - 3

The Form of Biblical Teaching

How could the Bible be a code for human conduct without being exhaustive on how we are to behave; should we expect an authoritative source to be exhaustive on a subject?

Dr. Weeks concludes that the Bible does not subscribe to either exhaustive detail or general principles. He gives a few different examples from both the laws given on Sinai and the laws recorded in Deuteronomy. Anyone who has read the Biblical books of Exodus and Deuteronomy would talk about the massive detail. However, we also have general principles, like the Ten Commandments. There is some interaction between general and detailed laws in the commandments.

An example of interaction is, found between Exodus 20:3 and verses 22-26. The general principle is given in Ex. 20:3 what most Protestants would call the second commandment, which forbids the worship of idols. However, Israel would have no guidance in how to make sacrifices to God if that was the end of the matter. Therefore, the details are given in verses 22-26. The point is the Bible often does not restate the obvious, but does state situation where it might be uncertain if the law applies or not.

In addition, there are also cases where commandments embody a more general concern than just what is specifically stated. For example, in Deuteronomy 25:4 the command is that one should not prevent an ox threshing grain from helping itself to the fruit of its labors. Leviticus 19:13 also prohibits withholding a hired man’s wages. The concern is to allow a worker to enjoy the fruit of their labor. Paul then, in 1 Corinthians 9:6-11, uses the law on the oxen as support for a preacher of the gospel receiving compensation for his work.

It can therefore be seen that the Bible mixes general and specific laws together when needed for clarity, but this can also be extended doctrinal teaching. For example, the issue of salvation gets talked about in Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians but Christ’s incarnation receives a briefer treatment in Philippians 2. The reason quite simple, disputed doctrines receive more treatment than undisputed doctrines.

This premise can be extended to non-theological subjects where most people think the Bible says relatively little about a subject it says nothing about the subject. The question is not: does the Bible give every last detail in science/history/ethics, etc? The real question is: does the Bible say anything, whether in general or in detail, relevant to science/history/ethics, etc?

To ask this question is to answer it, because the textbook argument would not need to be asked if there were no Biblical passages pertaining to these disciplines. However, the ability to point them out does not itself determine their meaning or importance. All it means is that we cannot refuse to consider them.