Sufficiency of Scripture

From Neoredemptive

The reason some evangelical theologians are nervous about charismatic gifts actually has very little to do with what scripture itself says on the subject (it is crystal clear), and everything to do with their doctrine of the sufficiency of scripture.

In popular english, "sufficient" conveys adequacy but hardly completeness; gruel is sufficient to live on, but it is hardly a complete expression of what we can or should eat. Not so in evangelical theology; scripture's sufficiency (according to Wayne Grudem) means:

The sufficiency of Scripture means that Scripture contained all the words of God he intended his people to have at each stage of redemptive history, and that it now contains all the words of God we need for salvation, for trusting him perfectly, and for obeying him perfectly.

It should be readily apparent where the conflict with charismatic (and particularly revelatory) gifts arises: if all that God has ever intended to say and will ever say is present in Scripture, then there can be no prophecy, only preaching; there can be no words of knowledge, only parallels with Biblical characters; there can be no laying bare of a man's heart, only psychology.

Having noted this conflict, neither do we think it wise to consider casting this doctrine aside; rather, we should retain it in a slightly more modest ("chastened") form.

Scripture is our baseline, our gold standard, the root of the content of our faith and praxis, because it is the true and reliable record of God's self-disclosure to us.

But we do not believe (and we think Grudem would agree) that merely reading the Bible is sufficient to bring anyone to salvation; the Spirit of God must move upon the reader to validate the scriptures and convict him of his place within their story and categories.

Neither do we believe that all true revelation is ultimately contained in Scripture; rather, we understand Scripture as having lain out the playing field and the rules of the game, but God still shouts instructions to the players as both coach and captain. These instructions are neither universal nor (necessarily) authoritative (since their means of delivery are tied up with our fallen, broken humanity); this does not, however, diminish their veracity.

Speaking more technically, we would reformulate this doctrine as such: /TODO/