At the core of the issue of Biblical authority is the issue of revelation. For some, Biblical authority is based solely on revelation itself. This begs the question: what exactly is revelation? This is the question that Bloesch deals with in his third chapter, "The Meaning of Revelation." I'll discuss it here.
Bloesch's major concern in this chapter is to recast revelation, as he does with Scripture, as a work of the Spirit. Therefore, owned and directed by God witnessed to in Jesus Christ. Fairly quickly Bloesch defines revelation as "a meeting between God and the believer whereby God speaks and we hear" (49). Bloesch states that there are two parts to revelation. The first is the personal encounter and a the second is the impartation of knowledge, "Revelation entails both divine presence and divine meaning" (49).
Implicit (and necessary) in this definition is the idea that revelation is an event. This event is one where God speaks and we listen; these are the two poles of revelation - the historical event and the "event of experience" by humans (my quotations). Here is a great quote from the chapter: "God's revelation is his commandment and his promise, and these come to us in the form of written commandments and written testimonies. Yes they cannot be confined to what is objectively written, since their meaning-content includes their significance for those who hear God's Word in every new situation (52). This echoes Barth (and von Balthasar's) concern that humanity doesn't own the revelation; revelation is a one-way path from God to us. It is only God's word as it becomes God's word to us in our situation.
"Revelation and the Bible" is his next section that deals with the question of the relationship between revelation and the Bible. A quotation summarizes his thoughts: "The bible is not in and of itself the revelation of God but the divinely appointed means and channel of this revelation" (57). Bloesch acknowledges a relationship between God's Word and Scripture, but it would be a mistake to absolutely equate one with the other. The Bible is not merely "stenographic notes" of God's audible Word. They are a human witness that becomes a divine witness through the revealing action of God on writers through the Holy Spirit. Bloesch summarizes that the Bible is an "instrumental" norm for faith, but not an "absolute norm."
The authority of Scripture comes from the fact that it is a faithful witness to God's Word, but is not God's Word in itself or in its totality. Scripture is one step removed from revelation, and the sermon two steps removed. For Bloesch, the focus should be on the Spirit's task of revealing God's Word rather than on humanity's attempt or ability to understand the revelation. "The Bible participates in the transcendent Word of God - not directly but through the Spirit of God" (70).
Bloesch does an excellent job at both affirming and protecting God's revelation from human manipulation as well as affirming and protecting humanity's involvement in the transmission of revelation for itself. That being said, it is clear that Bloesch's concern is much greater for the former than the latter. He does a great job at using both Scriptural and historical quotations to buttress his main point.
One can see how some would be uncomfortable with Bloesch's position. The primacy of the Spirit, though, cannot be ignored or pushed under the rug. Bloesch doesn't do what rationalists do which is to write off God's revelation as myth. He keeps his fidelity with Scripture by emphasizing God's true act in the Spirit. He merely puts the needle where it should be: on the word of God.
Bloesch's major concern in this chapter is to recast revelation, as he does with Scripture, as a work of the Spirit. Therefore, owned and directed by God witnessed to in Jesus Christ. Fairly quickly Bloesch defines revelation as "a meeting between God and the believer whereby God speaks and we hear" (49). Bloesch states that there are two parts to revelation. The first is the personal encounter and a the second is the impartation of knowledge, "Revelation entails both divine presence and divine meaning" (49).
Implicit (and necessary) in this definition is the idea that revelation is an event. This event is one where God speaks and we listen; these are the two poles of revelation - the historical event and the "event of experience" by humans (my quotations). Here is a great quote from the chapter: "God's revelation is his commandment and his promise, and these come to us in the form of written commandments and written testimonies. Yes they cannot be confined to what is objectively written, since their meaning-content includes their significance for those who hear God's Word in every new situation (52). This echoes Barth (and von Balthasar's) concern that humanity doesn't own the revelation; revelation is a one-way path from God to us. It is only God's word as it becomes God's word to us in our situation.
"Revelation and the Bible" is his next section that deals with the question of the relationship between revelation and the Bible. A quotation summarizes his thoughts: "The bible is not in and of itself the revelation of God but the divinely appointed means and channel of this revelation" (57). Bloesch acknowledges a relationship between God's Word and Scripture, but it would be a mistake to absolutely equate one with the other. The Bible is not merely "stenographic notes" of God's audible Word. They are a human witness that becomes a divine witness through the revealing action of God on writers through the Holy Spirit. Bloesch summarizes that the Bible is an "instrumental" norm for faith, but not an "absolute norm."
The authority of Scripture comes from the fact that it is a faithful witness to God's Word, but is not God's Word in itself or in its totality. Scripture is one step removed from revelation, and the sermon two steps removed. For Bloesch, the focus should be on the Spirit's task of revealing God's Word rather than on humanity's attempt or ability to understand the revelation. "The Bible participates in the transcendent Word of God - not directly but through the Spirit of God" (70).
Bloesch does an excellent job at both affirming and protecting God's revelation from human manipulation as well as affirming and protecting humanity's involvement in the transmission of revelation for itself. That being said, it is clear that Bloesch's concern is much greater for the former than the latter. He does a great job at using both Scriptural and historical quotations to buttress his main point.
One can see how some would be uncomfortable with Bloesch's position. The primacy of the Spirit, though, cannot be ignored or pushed under the rug. Bloesch doesn't do what rationalists do which is to write off God's revelation as myth. He keeps his fidelity with Scripture by emphasizing God's true act in the Spirit. He merely puts the needle where it should be: on the word of God.
RSS Feed