top of page
Writer's pictureRichard Brash

Scripture on Scripture: Part 1

Updated: 7 days ago

A doctrine of Scripture that arises from the Bible's own teaching about itself can draw on a range of texts beyond the "obvious" ones (e.g. 2 Tim. 3:16 and 2 Peter 1:21).

In this first of a new series of exegetical articles, we'll look at Romans 16:25-27.

25 Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages 26 but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith— 27 to the only wise God be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ! Amen.

 

These three verses of doxology (giving glory to God), found at the end of Paul’s letter to the Romans, are our starting point. It’s strange to me that these verses aren’t better known in relation to the question What is the Bible? because a close examination reveals that they are extremely pertinent. Their significance comes from the way they locate scripture in the wider field of revelation, which is itself grounded in the plan and purpose of the eternal God. This is the ultimate theological context for appreciating the nature and function of the Bible.

 

Before considering the place of Scripture in this context we need first to see how Paul relates the concepts of mystery, revelation/disclosure, and gospel proclamation as they are worked out in salvation history. Paul structures his doxology so that “my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ” is functionally parallel to “the revelation of the mystery…disclosed now”. “Preaching” (kerygma) here might be translated “proclamation”, and the reference is likely not so much to the act of proclaiming as to the content of the proclamation. Both “gospel” and “proclamation” are of Jesus Christ. He is their source and content, and as this message about him goes forth there is a “revelation of [a] mystery”. While Paul himself was of course a preacher, and he describes the gospel as “my gospel”, in the New Testament “revelation” (apokalypsis) is always an act of God. Strictly speaking, no human preacher—apostolic other otherwise—reveals the mystery of Jesus. Rather, as Paul’s message is proclaimed, divine revelation is accomplished through apostolic preaching. The “mystery” here is not some kind of puzzle, but the once-hidden-now-disclosed truth of the gospel that Jesus is the promised Messiah and Saviour of the world. A mystery refers to something covered. It was “kept secret” in the sense that it was not spoken or kept in silence. Now, however, it has been “disclosed”, in the sense here of becoming public knowledge. The Greek word Paul uses for revelation literally means the taking away of a veil or covering. This is the work that God does as Paul and his apostolic colleagues make known the gospel.

 

Notice how there is no “competition” between the divine act of revelation and the human act of gospel proclamation. Nor is there some sort of “balance” between the two, as though the uncovering of the mystery is partly achieved by God and partly by the apostles. Rather, the two acts—divine and human—are two sides of the same coin, or two ways of looking at the same “event”, from the divine side and the human side. Apostolic address and divine disclosure meet in the going forth of the gospel of Jesus.

 

How is this set of doctrines about revelation related to Scripture? Here we focus on the important reference to “the prophetic writings” in verse 26. “Scriptures” is a preferable translation to “writings” because in the New Testament the Greek word graphē (in plural form here in Romans 16) always refers to Holy Scripture. Some English translations (e.g. NASB) have “the Scriptures of the prophets” or similar in place of “the prophetic scriptures”. Either is grammatically possible, with the former reading following the translation tradition of the Latin Vulgate. But whether the focus is on the “prophetic” authors or the “prophetic” nature of their writings, the question remains as to what precise scriptures Paul has in mind.

 

Many if not most commentators think that Paul is talking about the Old Testament scriptures here. There are three main reasons for this view. First, the writings of the prophets do make up a large part of the OT, so much so that the phrase “the prophets” seems to have been used in NT times to refer to the entire OT (Acts 26:27).[1] On this basis, any reference to “prophetic” scriptures by a NT writer would seem more likely prima facie to be a reference to the OT scriptures. Second, Paul’s doxology seems to echo his introduction to the letter, where he says that the gospel of God was “promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures” (1:2). This is a clear reference to the OT prophets who prophesied “beforehand”. If the doxology functions as a “bookend” that parallels the opening to the letter, it certainly makes sense for Paul to return to the same theme. Finally, one authoritative Greek lexicon insists that “‘Scripture’ in the early Christian period always means the OT, and only after some passage of time was this term used in ref[erence] to the writings of the NT.” [2] If this claim is true, we should conclude that Paul must be referring to the OT when he writes about the prophetic graphē.

 

However, the conclusion that Paul’s reference to “the prophetic scriptures” is limited to the OT is not in fact so obvious. First, the evidence does not support the assertion that graphē in the NT always refers to the OT. In at least two places in the NT, writings that form part of our NT are referred to with the technical term “scripture” (2 Pet. 3:16; 1 Tim. 5:18). Second, it is not immediately clear how Paul could describe the gospel mystery as having been “kept silent” [my trans.; ESV “kept secret”] in ages past (presumably including the entire OT age) if that same gospel is now said to be both disclosed and revealed through the very scriptures of the OT that previously existed. This understanding could only be maintained according to some kind of doctrine of a new working of the Holy Spirit to illuminate the OT scriptures so that the people of God might understand them and their disclosing/manifest-making function might be fulfilled. It is of course possible that Paul is making a point along these lines. In other words, according to this view the OT always did testify of Christ and the gospel, yet only now the people of God have the (spiritual) eyes to see it. If this is Paul’s point, then the disclosure is the effect of the internal work of the Spirit in believers in respect of what was already written centuries before. Importantly, however, we know that Paul did not believe that he received what he called “my gospel” from the OT alone, but by new, direct revelation from God (Galatians 1:12, 16) not found in the OT. This new revelation was essential to make sense of what had been given as a mystery of old. In the development of salvation history, Paul saw himself at the vanguard of a new age, characterized by a new disclosure of the new covenant/testament. As St Augustine famously put it, “The new is in the old concealed; the old is in the new revealed.” Third, elsewhere in his letters, Paul specifically contrasts the written mystery of the OT scriptures with the new revelation of the new covenant which brings the true meaning and significance of the older mystery to light.

 

For example, in Ephesians 3, Paul makes use of similar concepts to those found in Romans 16:

 

1 For this reason I, Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus on behalf of you Gentiles— 2 assuming that you have heard of the stewardship of God’s grace that was given to me for you, 3 how the mystery was made known to me by revelation, as I have written briefly. 4 When you read this, you can perceive my insight into the mystery of Christ, 5 which was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit.

 

Here, Paul again refers to a mystery (of Christ) which was not “made known” in other (past) generations but has now been “made known” to him by revelation. Indeed, this revelation extends to God’s “holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit”. Clearly, this new revelation is given in the NT age (“now”). “Prophets by [or in] the Spirit” in verse 5 is therefore not a reference to the OT prophets but seems to be effectively a synonym for the “holy apostles”. This is the same group of people (“the apostles and prophets”) who are said to lay the foundation for the church in Ephesians 2:20. A “foundation” is, by definition, laid only once, and is then built upon. This probably indicates the doctrinal foundation laid by the “holy apostles and prophets by [or in] the Spirit” by means of their authoritative preaching and writing.

 

In conclusion, it is quite possible that by “the prophetic scriptures” Paul is referring primarily (or even exclusively) to the NT scriptures in Romans 16. The issue cannot be decided conclusively, but at the very least, it should be possible to admit that “prophetic scriptures” is a category that can apply to the NT as much as to the OT. (In future articles in this series we will return to the idea of the NT as “prophetic” when considering other NT texts that combine the categories scripture and prophesy, in particular the final chapters of the book of Revelation in the next section.)

 

If this point be granted, we come to the last stage of Paul’s doxology (vv. 26b-27) in which we see that the revelation given in the scriptures (both old and new) is “according to the directive of the eternal God” with a dual end in view: the discipleship of the nations and glory to God. This section hints at both the efficient cause and the objective (final cause) of written revelation, namely the eternal will/command of God on the one hand, and the glory of God by means of the nations submitting to him on the other.

 

To sum up, “revelation” happens by the command of the eternal God that the disclosure of the mystery of Jesus Christ should be committed to the prophetic scriptures, to fulfil God’s plans for the world, for his eternal glory. Notice how the widest context in which we must account for revelation in general—and Scripture in particular—is eternity. The divine work of revelation “begins” with the command of the eternal God, which by definition is an eternal directive. (God does not change his directive or “decretal” will.) And it “ends” with the eternal glory of God.

 

In this sense, Scripture “serves” the wider category of revelation, just as the gospel and apostolic proclamation do. Some theologians have pressed this point: for them, Scripture is not itself revelation, but it is a sign or witness to revelation and no more. Already we have seen that this distinction is not one that can be maintained: in Paul’s doxology revelation, the apostolic proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ, and the prophetic scriptures all share a distinct content, and cannot be cleanly disentangled along the lines of sign/thing signified, or witness/event. To clarify this point further, we will need to look elsewhere in the Bible for specific teaching about written revelation, this time in the New Testament book of Revelation.


[The Holy Bible, English Standard Version® (ESV®)

© 2001 by Crossway,

a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers.

All rights reserved.]


[1] Note that both David (Acts 2:30) and Moses (Deut. 18:15) are considered prophets in Scripture, even if the written works ascribed to them are not typically understood as part of the “prophetic” corpus of the OT.


[2] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 206.

88 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


bottom of page