Notes on Introduction of Kaiser’s “Recovering the Unity of the Bible”

The Introdution

   Kaiser points out “The Concept of the Unity of the Bible in Church History” on page 13. It’s not a new thing. In my opinion maybe a lost thing. Interestingly he notes first a quote from Josephus (c. AD 37-38-C.99), a first century Jewish historian. Josephus stated in his Contra Apion (1.8) that the Jews “have not an innumerable multitude of books among [them], disagreeing from and contradicting one another [as the Greeks have], but only twenty-two books [i.e., equal to our present thirty-nine Old Testament books], which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine; and of them five belong to Moses, which contain his laws and the traditions of the origin of mankind till his death.”

   He goes on to quote Justin Matyr from his Dialog with Trypho and  Augustine’s De consensus euangelistarum to support the early belief of the unity of the Bible. Kaiser states there are many other similar quotes that could be taken from Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, and others on page 14.

   The terms “unity of Scripture” and “unity of the Bible”  were not used by the early church but the concepts are there, Kaiser points out. He goes on to state that some say the reason there is little evidence of this concept early on was that it really did not face any opposition until the Enlightenment. “Only then did numerous alleged contradictions to Scripture begin to appear”, Kaiser cites on page 14.

   Kaiser goes on to state on page 15, “Nowhere can the cohesive quality of the interconnectedness of Scripture be seen more dramatically and graphically than in its comparison with the sacred writings of other religions.” Then, he quotes James Orr making comparisons with the Koran, Zoroastrian and Buddhist Scriptures reflecting their lack of order and cohesiveness.

   Furthermore, Kaiser goes on to state that in our day and age scholars are likely to point out diversity than attempt to harmonize or try to see the unity of the Scripture’s.

Types of Unity in the Bible, page 18

   Kaizer utilizes W. Graham Scroggie’s observation of two types of unity that are used from his book Ruling Lines of Progressive Revelation: Studies in the Unity and Harmony of the Scriptures. Scroggie basically uses the metaphors of a building and that of an organic composure like a body or plant. If a building has any part removed it could come crubling down. If the body has any part harmed, it forever hinders the unity of the body. “In like manner, if one book or part of a book of the Bible were lost, the truth of the Scripture would similarly be maimed,” Kaiser states on page 18.

  Georges Cuvier’s laws of the unity of scripture are utilized next from Scroggie’s book above. “Cuvier’s first law was: Each and every part is essential to the whole. When this law was applied to salvation, the various parts of the Bible yielded these types of patterns:

Genesis to Malachi: Salvation was promised and typified.

The Gospels: Salvation was provided in the death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.

Acts to Revelation: Salvation was proclaimed, applied, and consummated. (page 18)

   Wow, what a great over all breakdown of Salvation through the Bible. In my opinion, there is no greater way to see this than a Messianic Jewish Passover Seder celebration. G-D’s redemptive acts of freeing Israel from Egypt are parralleled to Yeshua’s redemptive acts that free believers from the curse of sin. G-D’s promises can be pointed out with the Passover stories using all our senses to symbolize and teach of these promises.

   It doesn’t end there though. The accomplishments of these promises can be told by quoting and pointing to the Gospels. The afikomen is usually used to discuss the reality of these promises revealed more clearly in the Gospels and Epistles. Not to stop there, the promises of the second coming can be proclaimed, also.

   The Messianic Jewish Seder really just reveals a great unity of G-D’s work from Genesis to Revelation. It tells of G-D’s redemptive story from Genesis to Revelation using parallels, promises, symbolizing, and experiencing a picture of this redemptive process from the death of Yeshua to His resurrection to His second coming. Praise Adonai!!! Praise Him All Nations!!!

   “Curvier’s second law was: Each part is related to, and corresponds with, all the other parts- that is, all the parts are necessary to complement each other. Scripture has a structure to it so that the combination of its parts yields a complete picture. Accordingly, Scroggie noted how the first and the last books of the Bible form a nice inclusion and a complete chiasm:

a First Heaven and Earth (Gen. 1)

   b Husband and Wife (Gen. 2)

        c Judgment Pronounced on Satan (Gen. 3)

        c’ Judgment Executed on Satan (Rev. 20)

    b’ Husband and Wife (Rev. 21)

a’ Last Heaven and Earth (Rev. 22) (page 19)

“Thus the opening and closing of history are part and parcel of each other.” (page 19)

“Cuvier’s third and final law is: All the parts of organism are pervaded by one life principal. The biblical text claims for itself that the word of God is “living” and “enduring” and “stands forever” (Heb. 4:12; 1 Peter 1:23, 25). Just as a seed, or a living organism, has life and vitality, so the Scripture shares that same vitalizing force that comes from God. The fact that God’s Word is alive can be seen in the life it produces in all who take it up and act on its instructions.” (page 20)

“The Nature of the Unity of the Bible” (page 20)

“The Bible’s cohesiveness can be examined under six general categories of unity: (1) structural, (2) historical, (3) prophetical, (4) doctrinal, (5) spiritual, and (6) kerygmatic.” (page 20)

The structural unity of the Bible

   It was written over sixteen hundred years, by around forty writers, in three languages, and on three continents, yet the Bible presents a strong unity of the plan and purpose in the story of redemption. The two testaments appear to be built around a similar structure both containing “a historic section, a didactic part, and a prophetic section”, per page 20.

   Kaiser states on page 21, “As is said in America: e pluribus unum. Surely there is a diversity in Scripture as there is in America, a diverstiy found in unity and a unity found in diversity.” I really like this statement. I believe there is more room in the Church to acknowledge diversity without having to raise more divisions. It seems that we divide too easily.

   This is a rabbit trail but I really like a quote a friend quoted by John Frame on divisions.

Why is it, I wonder, that in our circles whenever anybody gets an interesting idea, it produces a party that makes it a test of orthodoxy, leading to another party that opposes it, and then to battles between these parties in the churches? Why can’t those who think they have new insights quietly teach them to others while embracing them as brothers and sisters in Christ? If some don’t get it, why should that amount to heresy? Why not simply permit both views to be taught until the Spirit convinces God’s people generally that one view is scriptural and the other is not? 

 

     In recent Reformed history, we have had these partisan battles over Van Til’s apologetics (and now, different schools of Van Tillian apologetics), common grace, the incomprehensibility of God, supra and infralapsarianism, theonomy, the relationship between grace and law in the covenants, Shepherd’s view of justification, nouthetic counseling, exclusive psalmody, contemporary worship, means of church growth, and redemptive-historical preaching, None of these is resolved in our Reformed confessions, but partisans act as if they were. They think that their view alone is orthodox, and their opponents are dangerous heretics. Can’t we just lighten up a bit? Can we never admit our fallibility? Is there not a place, on some issues, for teachability, even tolerance? Can’t we ever agree to disagree in peace and love, working together on those matters we agree?  

John Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life – pg. 296 

   Well, seeing that this post is getting really long, I will finish up on the other 5 natures of the unity of the Bible another day:)

Shalom and grace be with you,

In Yeshua Messiah,

Coley

 

Advertisement