GOSPEL AND SCRIPTURE
The Interrelationship of the Material and
Formal Principles in Lutheran Theology
A Report of the Commission on Theology and Church Relations
The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod
November 1972
CONTENTS
Preface
Abbreviations
Introduction
I. Gospel as Norm in the Scriptures
A. In What Sense the Gospel Is Norm in the Scriptures
B. In What Sense the Gospel Is _Not_ Norm in the Scriptures
1. The Gospel Does Not Abrogate God's Law and Ordinances
2. The Gospel Is Not a Basic Principle from Which Other
Doctrines are Developed
3. The Gospel Does Not Permit a Method of Bible Study
Which Questions Lutheran Presuppositions Regarding
the Bible
4. The Gospel Does Not Permit Disregard of Lutheran
Principles of Interpretation
II. Scripture as Norm of the Gospel
A. What Lutherans Do _Not_ Mean When They Say That
Scripture Is the Norm of the Gospel
1. That There Was No Gospel Prior to the Scriptures
2. That the Gospel's Verity Derives from the Scriptures
3. That the Gospel's Power Derives from the Scriptures
B. In What Sense Scripture Is Norm of the Gospel
Conclusion
Endnotes
PREFACE
Lutheranism has always emphasized that the center of its faith and
theology is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The historic Lutheran
Confessions as well as theologians in every age have taught that
God's justification of the sinner by grace for Christ's sake
through faith is the "chief article" of the Christian faith and the
"article on which the church stands or falls." Because of its
central role in faith and theology, some theologians have described
the Gospel as the "material principle" of Lutheranism.
Lutheranism has also taught that the only source, rule, and norm
for its doctrine and life is Holy Scripture. Because it accepts the
Scriptures as the very Word of God Himself, Lutheranism has refused
to recognize any other norm for its theology or to put any other
writings on the same level as the prophetic and apostolic writings
of the Old and New Testaments. This insistence that the Scriptures
alone are the source and norm for our doctrine has been called the
"formal principle" of Lutheranism.[1]
As the President of The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod noted in
his address to the 1971 Synodical Convention there has been
increasing confusion within Lutheranism in recent years concerning
the proper interrelationship of Gospel and Scripture.[2]
Two problems in particular merit our careful attention. One is the
impression sometimes given by those who defend the authority of
Holy Scripture that they have in effect made the Bible, rather than
the Gospel, the heart and center--the "material principle"--of
their faith. Such a view is frequently criticized as
"fundamentalistic" or "biblicistic." The other problem is the
impression that sometimes the Gospel is used as the norm of
theology in such a way as to suggest that considerable freedom
should be allowed within the church in matters which are not an
explicit part of the Gospel. This view is sometimes criticized as
"minimalistic" or "Gospel reductionism."
For a number of years the Commission on Theology and Church
Relations has been involved in discussions on the proper
relationship of Gospel and Scripture. Its previous documents have
upheld the authority of Scripture while emphasizing that all
Scripture is to be interpreted from the perspective of the Gospel.
However, it has been apparent for some time that this topic should
have a more comprehensive treatment and should deal with the
question particularly on the basis of our historic Lutheran
Confessions. Already in 1969 such a study was requested by the
President of the Synod.
New impetus to the study was given in 1970 when the English
District referred to the CTCR a memorial calling for a
reaffirmation of the primacy of the Gospel. In addition, the
question continues to surface in other areas of study, particularly
in those dealing with Biblical interpretation and church relations.
In view of the problems relative to the interrelationship of
Scripture and Gospel, this study addresses itself to the following
questions:
I. What is meant by the statement that the Gospel is norm in
the Scriptures?
II. In what sense is Scripture source and norm of the Gospel?
The present study is offered to the church in the hope that it will
provide guidance in the study and discussion of an issue that is
vital to the church's life and work. It is an attempt to chart a
course that avoids the pitfall of biblicism on the one hand and of
Gospel reductionism on the other.
ABBREVIATIONS
AC-Augsburg Confession
Ap-Apology of the Augsburg Confession
Ep-Epitome of the Formula of Concord
FC-Formula of Concord
LC-Large Catechism
SA-Smalcald Articles
SC-Small Catechism
SD-Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord
Citations from the Lutheran Confessions are either from _Concordia
Triglotta_, _The Book of Concord_ (Tappert ed.), or our own
translation.
GOSPEL AND SCRIPTURE
_INTRODUCTION_
The affirmation that "through faith, men obtain remission of sins
and through faith in Christ are justified" is called by the Apology
of the Augsburg Confession "the chief topic [article] of Christian
doctrine" (IV, 1-2). While Article I of the _Formula of Concord_
refers to the doctrines of creation, incarnation, sanctification,
and resurrection as "the chief articles of our Christian faith" (SD
34-38), Article III says that the "article concerning justification
by faith (as the Apology says) is the chief article in the entire
Christian doctrine." (6)
No one who understands the Lutheran Confessions would see a
conflict between the statements quoted above. The Symbols are
saying that "the Gospel, to wit ["which teaches"; German, _welches
da lehrt_] that God, not for our own merits, but for Christ's sake,
justifies those who believe that they are received into grace for
Christ's sake" ( AC V, 3) is the foremost article of the total
Christian doctrine and the very heart of the Christian faith.[3]
But while they are saying this, they are at the same time saying
that the Gospel which "is properly the promise of the forgiveness
of sins and of justification through Christ" (FC SD V, 27) is not
the only article, or even the only _important_ article of the
Christian faith. The Symbols are saying that among the chief
articles of the entire Christian doctrine, the article which
teaches that men "are freely justified for Christ's sake, through
faith" (AC IV, 1) is chief of all. The Symbols affirm the _primacy
of the Gospel_ (Ap IV, 178; SA II, i, 1-5), but not in such a way
that other articles of the Christian doctrine are accounted
unimportant.
Jonas's translation of the Apology notes that the doctrine that we
are justified freely by faith when we believe that God for Christ's
sake is reconciled to us is "the _principal_ matter of all
Epistles, yea, of the entire Scripture" (IV, 87). In view of this
statement and of what the Symbols say about God's alien and His
proper work (namely, that God judges in order to show mercy; cf. Ap
XII, 51, 158; FC Ep V, 10; and SD V, 11) it is fully in accord
with the Symbols to hold that Scripture has been given to us
_primarily_ for the sake of the Gospel. While one cannot defend the
view that according to the Symbols only the Gospel is God's
Word,[4] it is true that the Gospel is the final word that God
speaks to us in the Scriptures.
The heart, center, and ultimate message of the Bible is that God
wishes to be gracious to sinners for Christ's sake. Unless one
hears this voice of the Gospel (Ap IV, 257, 274; XII, 39), that is,
the voice from heaven speaking absolution to terrified consciences
(AC XXV, 3: Ap XII, 99), the whole point and purpose of the
Scriptures has been missed. That is why the Apology says that the
Gospel "is of especial service for the clear correct understanding
of the entire Holy Scriptures... and alone opens the door to the
entire Bible." (IV, 2, German)
_I. GOSPEL AS NORM IN THE SCRIPTURES_
_A. In What Sense the Gospel is Norm in the Scriptures_
When the term "Gospel" is used as the Lutheran Symbols use it,
namely, to mean "the gratuitous promise of the remission of sins
for Christ's sake" (AP IV, 186; cf. FC Ep V, 5 and SD V, 27), then
in a very real sense it is norm in the Scripture. For example,
passages which speak of rewards must not be understood to mean that
men can merit God's favor (AP IV, 367 ff.). It is a foregone
conclusion that any doctrine or practice which robs Christ of His
honor, buries the Gospel, and abolishes the promises, cannot be in
agreement with the Scriptures.
The Gospel provides a rule of thumb, or norm, applicable to all of
Scripture, namely, that Scripture cannot be against Christ or be in
conflict with the chief article concerning the free remission of
sins by grace through faith in His sole mediatorship.[5]
_B. In What Sense the Gospel Is NOT Norm in the Scriptures_
1. IT IS NOT NORM IN THE SENSE THAT IT ABROGATES GOD'S LAW AND
ORDINANCES
_No Conflict Between Gospel and Bible_
The Gospel which Paul preached did not keep him from saying,
"Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right" (Eph.
6:1). Paul's Gospel does prohibit teaching that children ought to
be subject to their parents _in order to merit salvation_, but it
in no way forbids teaching that children ought to be subject to
their parents.
It is important to observe that the Symbols ask two questions
concerning a given doctrine or practice: (1) What does it do to the
Gospel of God's free grace toward sinners in Christ Jesus? (2) Does
it have Biblical foundation?
The Apology rejects invocation of saints both on the grounds that
it robs Christ of His honor (XXI, 14) and on the grounds that it is
"without proof from Scripture" (XXI, 10). Luther rejects the Mass
as a horrible abomination because it runs in direct conflict with
the chief article of our faith (SA II, ii, 1), but he holds that in
the Holy Supper the bread remains bread simply on grounds that this
teaching "is in perfect agreement with Holy Scriptures," namely 1
Cor. 10:16 and 11:28. (SA III, vi, 5)
While the Symbols are always concerned about how a doctrine relates
to the Gospel,[6] they do not hesitate to appeal directly to the
Scriptures to prove a point because they know that a doctrine
firmly founded on the Scriptures cannot possibly be inimical to the
Gospel. They are confident that Scriptures given to us for the sake
of the Gospel do not teach doctrines contrary to the Gospel.
Whatever is truly Biblical does not negate the Gospel. The true and
genuine Gospel does not negate whatever is truly Biblical.
_Gospel Does Not Abrogate Law_
When one's "gospel" is such that it makes void the Lord's
directives for his children's individual and community life, it
would seem that his "gospel" is different from the one taught by
Paul and the Lutheran Symbols. It is easy to see why such
directives are incompatible with a "gospel" that speaks of
redemption in terms of what God is doing _now_ in the
sociopolitical structures, instead of inviting us to trust in what
He did once for all on Calvary .[7] When such a "gospel" supplants
the Scriptures as norm of doctrine and life, then it is awkward to
call anything wrong, since whatever is going on is somehow what God
is doing now. But it is not a denial of the _Scriptural_ Gospel to
teach that men ought to obey God and to hold that expressions of
His will in the Sacred Scriptures are still normative for the
behavior of His children and church.
When the Symbols say that "to know Christ is to know his benefits"
(Ap IV, 101) and that we must "make use of Christ" (Ap IV, 291,
299), they do not mean that to know Christ is to understand what
God is doing _now_ through Him in the process of continuing
creation, nor do they mean that we ought to "use" Christ by being
open to the future; that is, by accepting change in social and
political structures as redemptive "advance into novelty."[8]
When the Apology says that "God will certainly accomplish
["fulfill," Latin: _praestet_] what he has promised for Christ's
sake" (IV, 101), it is not talking about change which God has
promised to bring about through Christ in social and political
structures, and through which He will effect salvation in terms of
the culmination of a cosmic process. The Apology means simply that
God according to His promise will certainly forgive those who trust
in Christ and who believe the promise spread throughout the world
by the Gospel, namely, that God will be gracious to those who trust
in the name of Christ who is "the price on account of which we are
saved." (Ap IV, 99)
The Symbols mean that we know Christ only when we know that in Him
we have remission of sins and that we must continue to rely on Him
completely for salvation (Ap IV, 238-239). So we know His benefits,
and so we continue to make use of Him. The Gospel, which is
"properly that command which enjoins us to believe that God is
propitious to us for Christ's sake" (Ap IV, 345), does not permit
us in the name of Christ to alter God's ordinances and call it
celebration of our freedom under the Gospel!
_Believers Are IN the Law_
Freedom under the Gospel is not freedom _from_ God's holy,
immutable will revealed in the Law, but freedom to obey it
_freely_, that is, without compulsion, fear, or the need to earn
God's favor thereby. The Formula of Concord describes the function
of the Law for Christian life and conduct as follows:
It is true that the law is not laid down for the just,
as St. Paul says (I Tim. 1:9), but for the ungodly. But
this dare not be understood without qualification, as
though the righteous should live without the law. For
this law of God is written on their hearts, just as the
first man immediately after his creation received a law
according to which he should conduct himself. On the
contrary, it is St. Paul's intention that the law
cannot impose its curse upon those who through Christ
have been reconciled with God, nor may it torture the
regenerated with its coercion, for according to the
inner man they delight in the law of God. (SD Vl, 5)
The Formula also states:
Although truly believing Christians, having been
genuinely converted to God and justified, have been
freed and liberated from the curse of the law, they
should daily exercise themselves in the law of the
Lord. ...For the law is a mirror in which the will of
God and what is pleasing to him is correctly portrayed.
(SD VI, 4)
The same article emphasizes that believers "require the teaching of
the law so that they will not be thrown back on their own holiness
and piety and under the pretext of the Holy Spirit's guidance set
up a self-elected service of God without His Word and command."
(20)
But are not believers guided by the Holy Spirit? The Formula
explains:
Although true believers are indeed motivated by the
Holy Spirit and hence according to the inner man do the
will of God from a free spirit, nevertheless the Holy
Spirit uses the written law on them to instruct them,
and thereby even true believers learn to serve God not
according to their own notions but according to His
written law and Word, which is a certain rule and norm
for achieving a godly life and behavior in accord with
God's eternal and immutable will. (SD VI, 3)
While believers are no longer _under_ the Law, they are _in_ the
Law. The Formula explains: "Thus though they are never without law,
they are not under but in the law, they live and walk in the law of
the Lord, and yet do nothing by the compulsion of law" (18), but
"from a free and merry spirit." (17; cf. SD IV, 17)
2. THE GOSPEL IS NOT NORM IN THE SENSE OF A BASIC PRINCIPLE
FROM WHICH OTHER DOCTRINES ARE DEVELOPED
When Lutherans speak of the material principle of theology, they do
not have in mind a basic principle according to which a body of
doctrines may be _developed_. This means that for Lutherans the
Gospel or material principle is not normative for theology in the
sense that each generation has the liberty or even the duty to
develop from this "basic principle" a doctrinal system, perhaps
even a system compatible with the dominant secular world view.
The Gospel is not normative for theology in the sense that
beginning with it as a fundamental premise, other items of the
Christian system of doctrine are developed as provisional,
historically conditioned responses to a given situation which will
need to be revised for another situation. The whole body of
Lutheran doctrine is always represented as "taken from the Word of
God and solidly and well grounded therein" (FC SD Summary, 5)
"supported with clear and irrefutable testimonies from the Holy
Scriptures" (_ibid._, 6), and based "on the witness of the
unalterable truth of the divine Word" (Preface to _The Book of
Concord_, p. 5). Lutheran doctrine is therefore called "unchanging,
constant truth" (FC SD Rule and Norm, 20) which "is and ought to
[must] remain the unanimous understanding and judgment of our
churches." (_Ibid._, 16)[9]
Especially with reference to the Bible do Lutherans reject the idea
that the Gospel serves as a core to which other teachings of the
Bible are related as a mere set of deductions relative to that
particular time and culture. Lutheran theology does not appeal to
the Gospel in such a way as to relativize the rest of the
Scriptures. Gospel is not norm in the Scriptures in such a way as
to make only the Gospel the norm of theology. This is a "Gospel
reductionism" that Lutherans condemn as a repudiation of the
authority of the Scriptures.
3. THE GOSPEL IS NOT NORM IN THE SENSE THAT IT PERMITS A METHOD
OF BIBLE STUDY WHICH QUESTIONS LUTHERAN PRESUPPOSITIONS
REGARDING THE BIBLE
_All Scripture Is Authoritative_
When Lutherans say that the Gospel is the norm in the Scriptures,
they do not mean that so long as the Gospel is not negated it is
permissible to employ a method of Bible study which calls into
question Lutheran presuppositions about the kind of a book the
Bible is, or which in any way qualifies the authority of _all_
Scripture. As our commission explained in an earlier document,
Lutherans indeed "hold that all theological questions raised by any
interpretation must be posed and answered with reference to this
central concern of the Scripture," that is, a "right understanding
of the Gospel." However, Lutherans add that "in conformity with the
Lutheran Symbols our church confesses and acknowledges the
prophetic and apostolic Scriptures to be the Word of God given by
inspiration of the Holy Spirit [and] submits unreservedly to them
as the sole source, norm, and authority for the church's
teaching." Lutherans confess that "the canonical Scriptures of the
Old and New Testaments are the inspired source and norm of all
Christian preaching and teaching" and recognize that "there is a
qualitative difference between the inspired witness of the Holy
Scripture in all its parts and words and the witness... of every
other form of human expression."[10]
_The Bible Is God's Book_
The following quotations accurately reflect the very definite and
clearly stated presuppositions of the Lutheran Symbols about the
kind of book the Bible is.
The Bible is called the "Scripture of the Holy Spirit" (Ap Preface,
9). When the opponents disregarded "passages in the Scriptures,"
the Symbols asked: "Do they suppose that these words fell from the
_Holy Spirit_ unawares?" (Ap IV; 107-108; emphasis ours). The
Augsburg Confession refers to Scripture passages which forbid
"making and keeping human regulations," and asks: "Is it possible
that the _Holy Spirit_ warned against them for nothing?" (XXVIII,
49; our emphasis)
Because the Bible is the "Scripture _of the Holy Spirit_" it is
"_divine_ Holy Scriptures" (AC XXVIII, 28, German; Latin:
"Scriptures of God"; see also AC XXVIII, 43, 49). The Apology says
that when the opponents manipulate "Scripture passages" they "twist
the _Word of God_" (XII, 122-123). Since Scripture is the Word of
God, "no human being's writings dare be put on a par with it" (FC
SD Summary, 9; see also Ep Comprehensive Summary, 2; all emphases
ours Note the obvious implications of this contrast between
Scripture and "human being's writings").
In sharp contrast to the writings of the fathers in which there is
"great variety" [_magna dissimilitude_, that is, great difference
or diversity], since "they were men and they could err and be
deceived," the Symbols regard "passages of Scripture" as "clearer
and surer" (Ap XXIV, 94-95). The Symbols do not expect to find in
the Scriptures the contradictions which characterize the writings
of fallible human authors. In the single instance where the Symbols
refer to a seeming contradiction in the Scriptures, they offer a
solution which completely removes the difficulty (Ap XXIV, 28). The
Symbols do not grant that Jeremiah contradicts Moses. The Symbols,
therefore, have no need to account for contradictions in terms of
the Bible's historical dimensions or to adopt a view of Biblical
authority which holds that since the authority of the Bible resides
exclusively in the Gospel, discrepancies here and there in the
Scriptures are of no consequence.
_The Gospel Is the Center of Scripture_
According to the Lutheran Symbols the Gospel _is_ the center of the
Scriptures. For that reason they see everything in the Scriptures
as related to the Gospel in such a way that they can say:
"Everything in the Word of God is written down for us... in order
that 'by steadfastness, by the encouragement of the Scriptures we
might have hope' (Rom. 15:4)." (FC SD XI, 12)
Because all of Scripture is God's Word written down for us that we
might have hope, the Symbols say, "It is certain that any
interpretation of the Scriptures which weakens or even removes this
comfort and hope is contrary to the Holy Spirit's will and intent."
(FC SD XI, 92)
_The Gospel Does Not Limit Biblical Authority_
Relative to the role of the Gospel as norm in the Scriptures,
however, it is important to observe that it is one thing to say
that it is contrary to the Holy Spirit's intent when Scripture is
interpreted in such a way that the Gospel is obscured; it is quite
another thing to say that since the Holy Spirit's intent in the
Scriptures is to proclaim the Gospel, it was never His intent that
His Word in Genesis 1-11, for instance, should be understood as
relating facts of history, or to say that in view of "the perpetual
aim of the Gospel" (AC XXVIII, 66; Latin) apostolic directives for
the church's life may be set aside.
It is one thing to search the Scriptures to discover ever more
fully how they witness to Christ and relate to His Gospel; it is
quite another thing to explore the implications of the Gospel for
freedom in handling the Scriptures. The interest of one is to see
the richness and the glory of the Gospel to aid preaching; the
interest of the other is to explain the alleged limitations and
flaws of the Bible in a way that avoids the embarrassment of
defending it as God's very own inerrant Word while at the same time
upholding and affirming its authority. The Gospel is the norm in
the Scriptures in the sense that it absolutely prohibits
understanding any passage to teach salvation by works. It is _not_
norm in the sense that the center of Scripture becomes a device to
sanction a view of the Bible and a method of interpreting it which
virtually denies that the _whole_ Bible is God's inspired,
authoritative Word on all matters concerning which it speaks.
4. THE GOSPEL IS NOT NORM IN THE SENSE THAT IT PERMITS
DISREGARD OF LUTHERAN PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION
_The Scriptures Give Accurate Information_
Lutherans say that the Gospel of forgiveness for Christ's sake
through faith is the key that opens the Bible because this Gospel
is, after all, the heart and center of the Bible's message. But
this must not be understood to mean that as long as this central
message is not lost or distorted it is immaterial how the student
of Scripture regards and interprets the literature which is the
medium of the message. The purpose of the Scriptures is to make us
wise unto salvation. At the same time Scripture also intends to
give us information about other matters. (2 Tim. 3:15-17)
The fact that the four Gospels, for instance, are confessions
written as history by no means excludes the possibility that they
are genuinely true and accurate records of history written as
confessions and ought therefore to be read and understood as
factual reports about the life and ministry of Jesus. It is true
that reports of the words and deeds of Jesus come to us in
documents that contain the early church's preaching. However, this
fact cannot be used with the least degree of logical force as the
major premise of an argument which concludes that therefore these
reports were never intended, in every case, to present facts about
what Jesus actually said and did, and that at least in some
instances they must be regarded and interpreted as inventions to
meet certain needs in the primitive Christian community. Such
conclusions are neither logically nor theologically compatible with
the Lutheran confessional attitude toward the Scriptures and
confessional principles for interpreting the inspired Word of God.
_Abuse of the Law-Gospel Principle_
Melanchthon states the attitude of Lutherans toward the Scriptures
in these words: "They have greater respect for the Word of God than
for anything else" (AP XXIII, 71). That is why Lutherans disapprove
when their opponents in interpreting the Scriptures "pick out
garbled sentences to put something over on the inexperienced" (Ap
IV, 280), "twist many texts because they read their own opinions
into them instead of deriving the meaning from the texts
themselves" (Ap IV, 224, 286), and "accept only what agrees with
human reason and regard the rest as mythology." (AP VII, 27)
Respect for God's Word compelled Lutherans to object to "the way
these good-for-nothings quote the Scriptures" (Ap XXVII, 29) and
clown with Bible narratives (Ap XII, 10). It is therefore a
foregone conclusion that no amount of study of Apology IV or other
sections of the Symbols will ever yield a hermeneutic that permits
similar abuse of Scripture among Lutherans. When Melanchthon
emphasized that the distinction between Law and Gospel is
fundamental to a correct understanding of the Scriptures, he at
once indicated the passages to which this rule specifically
applies. He said: "The rule I have just stated interprets all the
passages they quote on law and works." (Ap IV, 185)
A rule intended to prevent misinterpretation of those passages of
Scripture which urge good works ought not to be invoked to permit
latitude in interpreting passages that deal with other subjects.
Particularly, Melanchthon's rule must not be changed to read:
"Since it is the primary purpose of the Scriptures to proclaim Law
and Gospel, the _only_ legitimate question to address to a Biblical
pericope is: 'How can the text be used to confront the sinner with
God's judgment and mercy?'" It is an abuse of Melanchthon's rule
when it is interpreted to mean that as long as Law and Gospel are
proclaimed, the Bible student may regard and treat the Sacred
Scriptures as though they were historically conditioned human
writings which contain conflicting traditions and diverse
theologies from which no absolutely reliable historical information
or permanently valid doctrine can be derived.
_The Meaning of the Biblical Text_
It is a basic principle of interpretation that a Bible text has but
one meaning. It is not in keeping with this principle when
different meanings are ascribed to a text at various stages of its
history even if it is held that the whole development always was
intended to serve the proclamation of the Gospel. When a text is
thought to have a tradition history that made its meaning vary from
one situation to another, then it becomes a highly questionable
procedure simply to quote a Bible passage as though its entire
content were a "_Thus_ saith the Lord." By seeing multiple meanings
in a text based on its alleged precanonical use, it may happen that
interpreters "make passages of Scripture mean whatever _they_ want
them to mean." (Ap XII, 106; emphasis ours)
To operate with hypothetical precanonical sources and traditions as
determinative of the text's meanings instead of "deriving _the_
meaning from the _texts themselves_" (Ap IV, 224; our emphasis) as
they have come to us in the canonical Scriptures, is to cut away
and depart from the very text that is to be searched to see how it
testifies to Christ. As our commission stated in an earlier
document,
The authoritative Word for the church today is the
canonical Word, not precanonical sources, forms, or
traditions--however useful the investigation of these
possibilities may on occasion be for a clearer
understanding of what the canonical text intends to
say.[11]
_Every Text Is Related to the Gospel_
It is the prophetic and apostolic Scriptures _alone_ that were
written down for us in order that we might have hope, and it is
precisely because of that fact that every question about the
meaning of these Scriptures is a "Gospel question." Every Biblical
text is related to the Gospel in such a way that the interpreter
has lost sight of the purpose of the Scriptures if he regards
concern for any aspect of the text as not on the level of a "Gospel
question," or considers interest in such things as the accuracy of
the history reported in the text as somehow irrelevant and beside
the point.
About a piece of patriarchal history Paul asked, "What does
Scripture say?" because he saw a relationship between the Gospel he
preached and the incident reported. For Paul it was a "Gospel
question" whether or not Abraham cast out Hagar (Gal. 4:30). Every
question about what Scripture says or teaches is already a "Gospel
question" simply because it is a question about Scripture given to
us by God _for the sake of the Gospel!_ To dismiss any question
about Scripture as though it had no bearing on the Gospel is to
forget what the Scriptures are for.
_II. SCRIPTURE AS NORM OF THE GOSPEL_
The key that opens the Bible is itself derived from the Bible.
While it is true that the Bible was given to us for the sake of the
Gospel, it is equally true that we have no Gospel but that which
comes from Scripture. True, the Bible is norm for the sake of the
Gospel,[12] but the Bible is also norm for the Gospel.
_A. What Lutherans Do NOT Mean When They Say That Scripture Is the
Norm of the Gospel_
1. WE DO NOT MEAN THAT THERE WAS NO GOSPEL PRIOR TO THE
SCRIPTURE
To say that for us the Scriptures are the source and norm of the
Gospel's form and content is not to say that there was no Gospel
prior to the composition of the Scriptures. The patriarchs
comforted themselves with the promise of the woman's seed centuries
before Moses, and the prophets penned their inspired prophecies
concerning the coming Christ (FC SD VI, 23). Abraham, without
benefit of the Scriptures, rejoiced to see Christ's day, and he saw
it and was glad (John 8:56). In fact, the Symbols affirm that "the
Gospel, that is, the promise of grace bestowed in Christ" was first
delivered to Adam. (Ap XII, 53)
Since the Scriptures were written primarily for the sake of the
Gospel, it is just as true to say that the Scriptures derive from
the Gospel as that the Gospel is derived from the Scriptures. The
Scriptures do not _create_ the reality of the salvation events to
which they witness, but they are the only authoritative witness to
the reality of these events to which _we_ have access. Certainly
Paul preached Christ's death and resurrection out of the reality of
the "happenedness" of these events, but he proclaimed the reality
of these events "according to the Scriptures." Inasmuch as the
Scriptures are normative for us for the proclamation of these
realities, for us the formal principle is authority for the
material principle. As the Symbols point out, "Especially amid the
terrors of sin, a human being must have a very definite Word of God
to learn to know God's will, namely, that he is no longer angry."
(Ap IV, 262)
2. WE DO NOT MEAN THAT THE GOSPEL'S VERITY DERIVES FROM THE
SCRIPTURE
_The Bible Does Not "Prove" The Gospel_
When Lutherans argue for the inspiration and inerrancy of the
Scriptures and insist that the Scriptures are norm even
(especially!) for the Gospel, it is not their intention to
establish some premise on the basis of which they deduce and
attempt to prove the truthfulness of the Gospel in order to compel
a mere intellectual persuasion that the Good News is worthy of all
acceptation. Lutherans recognize that a conviction resting on such
a foundation could well be a human logical conclusion (_fides
humana_) which is hazardously dependent upon rationally satisfying
evidence for the reliability of a doctrine about the Bible, instead
of a faith worked in us by the Holy Spirit (_fides divina_) which
clings to the voice from heaven heard in the Bible.
In Lutheran confessional theology, saving faith always has as its
sole object the promise of forgiveness for Christ's sake; saving
faith is always the creation of God's Spirit through the Word. The
Apology chides scholastic theologians because "they interpret faith
as merely a knowledge of history or of dogmas" (IV, 383). "Faith is
not merely knowledge but rather a desire to accept and grasp what
is offered in the promise of Christ" (IV, 227). "To believe means
to trust in Christ's merits" (IV, 69). "Faith in the true sense, as
the Scriptures use the word, is that which accepts the promise"
(IV, 113). Again, "Faith saves because it takes hold of mercy and
the promise of grace" (IV, 338). "Such a faith is not an easy
thing" (IV, 250). "Faith in Christ and in the forgiveness of sins
...does not come without a great battle in the human heart. ...
Faith which believes that God cares for us, forgives us, and hears
us is a supernatural thing, for of itself the human mind believes
no such thing about God." (IV, 303)
When the confessors said, "We are certain of our Christian
confession and faith on the basis of the divine, prophetic, and
apostolic Scriptures," they added at once that they had been
"assured of this in (their) hearts and Christian consciences
through the grace of the Holy Spirit." (Preface to _The Book of
Concord_, pp. 12-13)
_The Biblical Gospel Is God's Voice_
When Lutherans say that the Bible is the God-inspired norm of the
Gospel, we are expressing our Spirit-wrought conviction that the
Gospel we hear in the Scriptures is indeed the "voice-from-heaven"
Gospel, not merely some human construction. We are confessing what
we deeply believe about this Holy Book from whose pages God speaks
to our anxious hearts His very own word of absolution.
Accordingly, our view of the Bible is a result of our faith in the
Gospel; our faith in the Gospel is not a result of our view of the
Bible. Because we have come to know that the voice we hear in the
Gospel taught by Scripture is truly God's voice, we treasure these
sacred Scriptures as the only source and norm of this precious
Gospel. With our whole being we resist every suggestion that the
Bible is something less than God's very own Word--not because we
feel the Gospel needs to be buttressed by a doctrine about
Scripture,[13] but because our attitude toward Scripture has in
fact been shaped by the Gospel! As Dr. Francis Pieper explained.
"Only after a man is justified does he take the right attitude
toward the entire Scripture, believing that Scripture is God's Word
(the Word which cannot be broken, John 10:35), and make diligent
use of Scripture (John 5:39)."[14]
_The Gospel We Teach Is Scriptural_
But Lutherans do appeal to the Bible to prove that the Gospel which
they teach and confess is the Gospel which _Scripture_ teaches. We
do not attempt to prove the Gospel by Scripture passages, but to
prove that the _Gospel which we teach_ is Scriptural, so that we
can say with the Apology, "for this our position we have
testimonies from Scripture" (IV, 29). On that account we can assert
that "we hold to the Gospel of Christ correctly and faithfully" (Ap
Preface, 15). We do not hesitate to claim that "this is what Paul
really and truly means" (IV, 285) or that "this is Paul's position
that we are defending" (XII, 84), namely, that by faith we receive
the forgiveness of sins for Christ's sake.
The Symbols appeal to Bible passages to prove our doctrine. That
absolution is not received except by faith "can be proved from
Paul" (Ap XII, 61). Divine monergism in conversion is "demonstrated
from clear passages of Holy Scripture" (FC SD II, 87). In support
of the teaching that distinctions among foods are unnecessary,
Lutherans add testimonies "from the Scriptures" (AC XXVI, 22).
There are clear passages which forbid the establishment of human
regulations for the purpose of earning God's grace. (AC XXVIII, 43)
We show abundantly by the testimonies of Scripture and arguments
derived from Scripture that we obtain remission of sins and are
justified by faith alone (Ap IV, 117). Remission of sins occurs
through faith--as Scripture testifies in many passages (Ap IV,
273). Against the testimony of the fathers who were men able to err
and be deceived, we oppose the clearest and most certain Scriptures
(Ap XXIV, 94-95). Lutherans know "that it is only from the Word of
God that judgments on articles of faith are to be pronounced" (FC
SD II, 8). "According to the Scriptures we should and must believe"
that Christ according to His human nature received divine
attributes. (FC SD VIII, 60)
Lutherans prove their doctrine from Scripture because they think
that it is "rash" to affirm something that passages of Scripture do
not say (Ap XII, 138). It is "extreme impudence" to affirm
something contrary to testimonies of Scripture (Ap XXIII, 63). So
Lutherans ask: how can they affirm something without proof from the
Word of God? (Ap XXVII, 23); how do we know without proof from
Scripture? (Ap XXI, 10); where does Scripture teach that? (Ap XII,
157).
3. WE DO NOT MEAN THAT THE GOSPEL'S POWER DERIVES FROM THE
SCRIPTURES
To say that the Gospel comes to us in the Scriptures is not to say
that the Gospel's _power_ is derived from the Scriptures, or from
the inspiration of the Scriptures. The Gospel was the "power of God
unto salvation" (Rom. 1:16) even before holy men of God committed
it to writing. To say that the Scriptures are authority for _the
way we express_ the Gospel, is not to say that the Gospel derives
its authority or power from the Scriptures. The _normative_
authority of Scripture does not make the Gospel the living Word of
God (1 Peter 1:23-25), but the formal principle, Holy Scripture,
_does_ tell us authoritatively what Gospel truly is _God's_ living
Word and pronounces a curse upon anyone who preaches a different
gospel. (Gal. 1:8-9)
The Symbols everywhere vehemently resist every different gospel
precisely because only the _true_ Gospel is the power of God unto
salvation. "Faith is conceived and confirmed through absolution,
through the hearing of the Gospel" (Ap XII, 42). "The Holy Spirit
produces faith... in those who hear the Gospel" (AC V, 2).
"Neither you nor I could ever know anything of Christ, or believe
in him and take him as our Lord, unless these were first offered to
us and bestowed on our hearts through the preaching of the Gospel
by the Holy Spirit" (LC II, 38).
Jonas' German version of the Apology says that if there is to be a
church, the pure teaching of the Gospel must be preserved (Ap IV,
256, _Concordia Triglotta_, p. 223; see also Ap IV, 119, _Trig._,
p. 155). Melanchthon states that "this church is properly called
'the pillar of truth' (1 Tim. 3:15), for it retains the pure Gospel
and what Paul calls the 'foundation' (1 Cor. 3:12), that is, the
_true_ knowledge of Christ and faith." (Ap VII, 20; emphasis added)
_B. In What Sense Scripture Is Norm of the Gospel_
_Our Gospel Is Taken from Scripture_
When Lutherans teach that Scripture is the norm of the Gospel, they
mean simply that the content of the Gospel and the terms in which
this content is expressed must be taken from the Scriptures. The
Gospel is the effective power (_auctoritas causativa_) that begets
personal faith in the Savior (_fides qua creditur_); the Scriptures
are the authority (_auctoritas normativa_) that establishes and
regulates the statement, confession, and proclamation of the
Christian faith (fides quae creditur).
When Paul preached what was of "first importance," namely, the
chief article or Gospel that "Christ died for our sins" and "that
He was raised on the third day," he was proclaiming realities that
occurred according to the Scriptures (1 Cor. 15:3-4). Even though
Paul could claim that he received the Gospel which he preached by
revelation of Jesus Christ (Gal. 1:12), it was always a major
concern of his to show that what he believed and preached was in
agreement with the _Scriptures_ (Acts 24:14; 17:2; 18:28). Because
Paul appealed to the Scriptures (Rom. 4:3; Galatians 4:30) and
because he proclaimed what "Scripture says" (Rom. 10:11; 1 Timothy
5:18) on topics ranging from justification to a pastor's support,
his doctrine could stand up under the closest scrutiny. (Acts
17:11)
Paul reminded the Corinthians "in what terms" (I Cor. 15:1) he
preached the Gospel and said he delivered what he had received;
moreover. he did this in Spirit-taught words (I Cor. 2:13).[15]
This leaves no room for the notion that even the way Paul expressed
the Gospel, or the form in which he preached it, was his own
inventive translation into first-century thought patterns of some
general idea which came to him out of thin air about a benign
divine intent in history. It further repudiates the idea that he
then tried to communicate this "gospel" in a meaningful manner by
simply borrowing for this purpose some concepts with which people
were already familiar from Jewish apocalyptic literature or Gnostic
mythology.
In the Lutheran Symbols too, not only the content of the Gospel[16]
it but the terms in which it is expressed are taken from Scripture.
In the Symbols you have not only "_they_ teach" (see, for example,
AC IV), but "_Scripture_ teaches" (see, for example, AC XXIV, 28
and FC SD III, 30; our emphases) as authority for _the way the
Gospel is formulated_.
It is in accordance with what the apostle Paul says that the
Symbols teach the Gospel in terms of substitutionary satisfaction
and the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the sinner through
faith (Ap IV, 179, 305 ff.). The material principle of Lutheran
theology (the Gospel) is derived from the formal principle (the
Scriptures). The Apology states it is axiomatic that "it is not in
the power of man... to assert without a sure word of God
concerning God's will, that He ceases to be angry" (IV, 262).[17]
Here the material principle is tied inseparably to the formal
principle, so that we cannot affirm the former except on the
authority of the latter.[18]
_Interdependent Formal and Material Principles_
Because the Lutheran Symbols are correct expositions of
_Scripture_, they teach the _Gospel_ purely. Because "the
adversaries are in no way moved by so many passages of _Scripture_,
which clearly ascribe justification to faith," they consequently
"altogether abolish the _Gospel_ concerning the free remission of
sins." (Ap IV, 107, 110; emphasis added).
In the Symbols the formal and material principles are very closely
related and mutually interdependent. Opinions which disagree with
Scripture at the same time diminish the glory of Christ's passion.
When the Gospel is lost sight of, the Scriptures are distorted.
Compare these two statements carefully. The first is: "Concerning
these opinions our teachers have warned that they depart from the
Holy Scripture and diminish the glory of Christ's passion" (AC
XXIV, 24). The second is: "This teaching [the Gospel] must always
be kept in view in order to oppose those who reject Christ, destroy
the Gospel, and maliciously twist the Scriptures to fit human
opinions" (Ap IV, 260). The first statement indicates that there is
a direct relationship between departing from Scripture and robbing
Christ of His glory. The second statement indicates that there is a
direct relationship between rejecting Christ and distorting the
Scriptures.
_Scripture as Source: Election_
Probably nowhere in the Symbols does the formal principle receive
more emphasis as the source of the material principle than in
connection with the Formula of Concord's presentation of the
article of our eternal election in Christ Jesus to salvation (SD
XI). This article of faith, which is integral to the Christian
Gospel, is to be set forth according to "the pattern of the divine
Word" (2). The mystery of predestination (_Vorsehung_) is revealed
to us in God's Word [Latin: "Holy Scripture," 43].[19] In order to
avoid misunderstandings this article must be explained "on the
basis of Scripture." (3)
When we organize our thinking about this article according to the
Scriptures, we can easily orient ourselves in it (24). It is
possible to organize our thoughts about this doctrine according to
the Scriptures because the Scriptures discuss this article not
merely incidentally and superficially, but frequently and in great
detail (2), and also because "everything in God's Word [Latin:
"Holy Scripture"] is written down for _us_" (emphasis ours).
(12)[20]
Scripture itself teaches this doctrine in no other way than to
direct us to the Word (_Verbum Dei revelatum_; 12). That is why we
must carefully distinguish between what God has expressly revealed
in His Word [Latin: "Holy Scriptures"] and what He has not revealed
(52). The Formula urges: "Cling to His revealed Word" (55),
"operate constantly with the Word" (56), "adhere exclusively to the
revealed Word" (53). Only from God's Word are we able to learn His
will toward us and to retain the foundation of our comfort and
consolation. (36)
_Scripture As Norm of Doctrine_
The Symbols appeal to the Scriptures as the norm of doctrine not
only for the article of election but also for all the articles of
faith. The following are some examples of this:
1. The entire content of the Augsburg Confession,
including the article on justification (the material
principle), was "compiled out of the divine, prophetic,
and apostolic Scriptures" (Preface to _The Book of
Concord_, p. 3). The electors and princes ordered this
confession to be prepared "on the basis of God's Word"
(Latin: "Sacred Scriptures"; FC SD Preface, 3). The
doctrine confessed in the articles and chapters of the
Augsburg Confession is "drawn from and conformed to the
Word of God" (FC SD Rule and Norm, 5).[21] The
Augsburg Confession is "grounded on the testimony of
the immutable truth of the divine Word." (Preface to
_The Book of Concord_, p. 5)[22]
2. When our fathers were preparing the documents that
became the Formula of Concord, they asked for
suggestions as to how the Christian doctrine... might
be fortified with the Word of God [Latin: "Sacred
Scriptures"] against all sorts of perilous
misunderstanding" (Preface, _The Book of Concord_, p.
7). The Symbols are a summary of the doctrine which
Luther set forth "on the basis of God's Word" (Latin:
"Sacred Scriptures"; FC SD Rule and Norm, 9). This
summary of doctrine is normative because it is "drawn
from the Word of God." (_Ibid._, 10; see also 16)
3. That faith alone saves is manifest "from God's Word"
(Latin: "from the testimonies of the Sacred
Scriptures"; FC SD IV, 35). The Apology shows "both by
testimonies of Scripture and arguments derived from
Scripture... that by faith alone we obtain remission of
sins for Christ's sake." (IV, 117 )
4. The doctrine of divine monergism in conversion is
grounded in God's Word (Latin: "has solid testimonies
in sacred Scriptures"; FC SD II, 28 ) and is thoroughly
demonstrated by clear passages of Holy Scripture.
(_Ibid._, 87)
5. The communication of divine attributes to the human
nature of Jesus Christ is something that God has
revealed in His Word (FC SD VIII, 53). "According to
the statement of the Scriptures" divine and infinite
qualities have been given to the man Christ; "according
to the Scriptures" we should and must believe that
Christ received all this according to His human nature
(_ibid._, 55 and 60). The Formula affirms that
wherever the Scriptures "give us clear, certain
testimony, we shall [German: _sollen wir_] simply
believe it and not argue." (_Ibid._, 53)[23]
6. Errors are rejected as contrary to our doctrine
which is based on God's Word (Latin: "Sacred
Scriptures"; cf. FC SD VII, 107). The adversaries are
rebuked for teaching as though their notion of
satisfactions had "authority in Scripture" when it is
"without the authority of Scriptures." They are asked,
"Where does Scripture teach that?" (Ap XII, 122, 119,
157)
7. Without the authority of Scripture it is not safe to
institute forms of worship in the church. (Ap XXIV, 92)
8. It cannot be affirmed that obedience, poverty, and
celibacy are services which God approves as
righteousness before Him when there is no proof from
God's Word. (Ap XXVII, 23)
"It is written" is a motto that is found on virtually every page of
the Symbols.
_CONCLUSION_
The Gospel is God's very own Word of forgiveness for Christ's sake
to lost and condemned sinners. This Gospel Word comes to us in
God's inspired Word, the prophetic and apostolic Scriptures of the
Old and New Testaments. _As bearer of the Gospel_, the Holy
Scriptures are God's authoritative proclamation of pardon for
fallen mankind which no power in heaven or hell can challenge or
annul, and through which until the Last Day the Holy Ghost will
call sinners to faith in Christ who gives life and salvation. _As
God's inspired Word_, the Holy Scriptures are God's authoritative
rule and norm of all that His Church teaches and does in His name.
In asking about the relation of Gospel and Scripture and about the
nature of the Bible's authority, Lutherans do not formulate their
question thus: Is the Bible God's authoritative Word because it
proclaims the Gospel or because it is inspired? This way of putting
the question falsely suggests that we must choose between mutually
exclusive alternatives. A "both/and" is turned into an "either/or."
Lutheran theology has always affirmed the authority of the Bible on
a two-fold basis: (1) That as Gospel the Sacred Scriptures are the
power of God unto salvation through which the Holy Spirit begets
the faith that grasps Christ and sets men free from sin and death;
(2) That as God's inspired Word the Sacred Scriptures regulate the
faith that is believed, taught, and confessed in the church.
God has joined Gospel and Scripture together in an inseparable
unity. Lutheran theology which is loyal to the Confessions
understands the relation between Scripture and Gospel as follows:
Scripture is to Gospel as source is to summary; or, Gospel is to
Scripture as summary is to source. God had given us the Gospel _in_
the Scriptures. What God has joined together, Lutheran theology
does not put asunder. Much less does confessional Lutheran theology
pit Gospel against Scripture, or Scripture against Gospel. Can the
summary be versus the source, or the source versus the summary? Can
the source deny the central thought, or the central thought nullify
the source?
Lutheran theology lets source and summary stand together as God's
very own Word to be for the Christian church both the origin of its
life and the norm of its doctrine.
___________________________________________________________
ENDNOTES
[1] In this study the terms "formal principle" and "material
principle" are used as Dr. F.E. Mayer used them. With regard to
the formal principle he wrote: "The source of doctrine, or the
formal principle of Lutheran theology, is _sola Scriptura_, the
Scripture alone." He described the material principle as
follows: "When speaking of the material principle of theology,
Lutherans do not have in mind a basic principle according to
which a body of doctrines may be developed. The material
principle of Lutheran theology is in reality only a synopsis
and summary of the Christian truth. When Lutheran theologians
speak of justification by faith as the material principle of
theology, they merely wish to indicate that all theological
thinking must begin at this article, center in it, and
culminate in it." In _Religious Bodies in America_, 4th rev.
edition (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1961), pp. 144
and 146. See also his "The Formal and Material Principles of
Lutheran Confessional Theology," _Concordia Theological
Monthly_, XXIV, 8 (August 1953), 545 and 548.
[2] President Preus stated that "today there is a frequent
confusion of these principles, with the result that the Gospel,
rather than the Bible, is employed as the norm of our
theology." As examples of this confusion, he noted that some
"reject the factual claims of a given text on the grounds that
it does not involve the Gospel" or "assert that interpretations
of a Scripture passage need not be rejected if they do not harm
the Gospel." In _1971 Proceedings_, p. 55.
3. Throughout this paper the term "Gospel" is used in the
strict or narrow sense in which it is used in this quotation
from the Augsburg Confession. Note how the Formula of Concord
distinguishes between the Gospel in this strict sense ("solely
the preaching of God's grace") and the Gospel in the broad
sense ("the entire teaching of Christ, our Lord, which in his
public ministry on earth and in the New Testament he ordered to
be observed"). See FC SD V, 3-6.
[4] For a suggestion to this effect see _Concordia Theological
Monthly_, XXIV, 8 (August 1953), 595, where the Apology, XXIV,
69 is quoted as evidence. But see the Apology, IV, 257 and XII,
34, where the Law is called the Word.
[5] This rule of thumb does not constitute license in
interpreting Scripture just so long as we do not corrupt or
deny the Gospel. This rule tells us how a passage or pericope
must _not_ be understood; it says nothing about the way it
_may_ or _ought to be understood. Other factors come into
consideration at this point.
[6] See AC XXVIII, 66, 70; XXVI, 29; XXVII, 23.
[7] LC V, 31: The work "was accomplished" (_geschehen, peractum
est_) on the cross. LC II, 61: "Creation is past and redemption
is accomplished" (_die Schoepfung haben wir nun hinweg, so ist
die Erloesung auch ausgerichtet_). "The work is finished and
completed, Christ has acquired and won the treasure for us by
his sufferings, death, and resurrection" (ibid., 38).
[8] This expression is employed by some advocates of what is
usually called "process theology."
[9] For the force of _soll_ and _debeat_ in the Symbols, note
what Dr. A. C. Piepkorn has written with regard to the meaning
of these terms in Augsburg Confession VI and XIV: "The verbs in
AC 14 (_debeat/soll_) allow no option; they are the same verbs
which describe the indispensable relation of good works to
faith in AC 6. They have the force of the modern English 'must'
rather than 'should.'" (In _Lutherans and Catholics in Dialog
IV--Eucharist and Ministry_, 1970, p. 113.)
[10] _A Lutheran Stance Toward Contemporary Biblical Studies_,
published by the Commission on Theology and Church Relations of
The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod, 1967, pp. 8, 5, 8 and 10.
This document is available from the office of the commission,
210 N. Broadway, St. Louis, Mo., 63102.
[11] Ibid., pp. 9-10.
[12] Schlink, Edmund: _Theology of the Lutheran Confessions_,
trans. by P.F. Koehneke and H. J. A. Bouman (Philadelphia:
Muhlenberg Press, 1961), p. 6.
[13] The truthfulness of the Gospel does not depend upon the
inerrancy of the Scriptures. Because the Bible is inerrant, it
teaches the truth of the Gospel inerrantly. Biblical inerrancy
assures that the Gospel (which is true _per se_) is correctly
presented in the Scriptures. An errant medium might distort the
message. Since the truth of the Gospel is communicated to us in
words which God Himself provided, matching terms to content ( I
Cor. 2:13), the content did not suffer perversion in the
process of transmission by men who were able to err and be
deceived. (Note the inescapable implication of Ap XXIV, 94.)
[14] Francis Pieper, _Christian Dogmatics_, II, trans. by W. F.
Albrecht and others (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House,
1951), p. 424. See also F.E. Mayer, _Religious Bodies in
America_, 4th revised edition (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing
House, 1961), pp. 145-146.
[15] Note also that Timothy is urged to "follow the pattern of
sound words" (2 Tim. 1:13) and that Paul thanks God that the
Romans "have become obedient to the standard of teaching" (Rom.
6:17). In the case of the Gospel, _what_ is said and the _way_
it is said go inseparably together.
[16] "The content of the Gospel is this, that the Son of God,
Christ our Lord, himself bore the curse of the law and expiated
and paid for all our sins, that through him alone we re-enter
the good graces of God, obtain forgiveness of sins through
faith, are freed from death and all the punishments of sin, and
are saved eternally," FC SD V, 20.
[17] See Ap XV, 17; XXI, 10.
[18] See how Luther ties Scripture and Gospel together: "Whence
do they know of forgiveness, and how can they grasp and
appropriate it, except by steadfastly believing the Scriptures
and the Gospel" (LC V, 31).
[19] Attention is drawn here and in numerous other places in
this study to the fact that when "God's Word" appears in the
German text of the Formula of Concord, the Latin translation
frequently reads "Holy Scripture." This, together with a
comparison of the German and Latin texts of AC XXVIII, 35,
makes it very doubtful that Ap XXIII, 28 "intends" to
distinguish between Scripture and God's Word as has been
suggested in _Concordia Theological Monthly_, XXIV, 8 (August
1953), p. 594, and XXIX, I (January 1958), p. 2, footnote 5.
[20] The Latin text has _nobis proponuntur_, literally, "set
forth" or "prescribed for us."
[21] The Latin text reads: _E Verbo Domini est desumpta et ex
fundamentis sacrarum litterarum solide exstructa._
[22] The Latin text notes that the Augsburg Confession is built
on solid testimonies of truth which is immutable and is
expressed in God's Word. This manner of speech indicates that
the Symbols think that truth is taught in the Scriptures and
that this truth is immutable. The Symbols therefore claim that
"we base our position on the Word of God as the eternal truth"
(FC SD Rule and Norm, 13).
[23] Also here the force of the German _sollen_ is "must"
rather than "shall." See footnote 9.
_______________________________.______________________________
This text was converted to ascii format for Project Wittenberg
by Mark A French is in the public domain. You may freely
distribute, copy or print this text. Please direct any
comments or suggestions to:
Rev. Robert E. Smith
Walther Library
at Concordia Theological Seminary
E-mail: smithre@mail.ctsfw.edu
Surface Mail: 6600 N. Clinton St., Ft. Wayne, IN 46825 USA
Phone: (260) 452-2123 Fax: (260) 452-2126
Address information is subject to change. Refer to the file,
"00-address.txt" from the main directory at Project Wittenberg
for the current information.
_______________________________.______________________________
file: /pub/resources/text/wittenberg/mosynod: gospel.txt
rev :