The idea taught by the Church of Rome is, that there are two channels of divine truth, two streams conveying the same water, the written, and the unwritten word, the written found in the Bible, the unwritten, in the traditions and decrees of the Church. [5] Thus by attempting to blend the two, they throw the Bible virtually into the shade; and like the Jews of old, “make void the commandment of God by their traditions.” The opposing principle of the Church of England, is, that the written word is itself sufficient; that it contains an ample and complete statement of the whole truth of God.

“Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to Salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an Article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. In the name of the Holy Scripture we do understand those canonical books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church.” [6]

1. And is not this evident from the direct statements of the word of God itself?

Look only at the passage from which our text is taken, v. 15. The Holy Scriptures “are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” They are sufficient, then, for the heavenly wisdom of the people of God; nothing more is needed; they contain God’s truth, and make men wise in his wisdom. But this is not all: follow on the passage: “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” And what is the result? “That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.” Who shall presume to say, then, that the written word is not sufficient? There is enough in it to form a perfect character, to leave nothing wanting in the furniture of the religious mind. When it says, “They are able to make thee wise unto salvation,” it teaches that they reveal all that can be needful to make Christ’s coming kingdom ours: when it adds, “That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works;” it proves that they also supply us with the sum total of all that can be needed in our pilgrimage through life.

2. But, even, if we had no such direct statement, we have ample proof of the completeness of the Bible in the simple fact, that there is nothing else inspired. If there be a void left, it must remain unfilled for ever. If there be a chasm, the whole world can never close it. For if there were deficiencies in the Bible, to whom should we go to supply the defect? To the Fathers? They were holy, devoted, fervent men, and multitudes amongst their number counted not their life dear unto them, if only they might fulfil the ministry, which they received of the Lord. But they were men after all, fallible, and often failing men; they never pretended to inspiration; they knew far too much both of themselves and God to presume to say of their own writings, “Thus saith the Lord.” They never claimed either inspiration or infallibility. To whom then shall we go? To councils? But they were human too, they were assemblies of fallible men, so fallible, that in one instance the whole church was actually induced to decide against the divinity of our blessed Lord. This was the case, when the whole body of the Church, bishops, priests, deacons, and laymen, were all arrayed against Athanasius, and Athanasius alone stood forth as the champion for truth. Athanasius was against the world and the world against Athanasius. To whom then shall we go? To the Pope? But he too is a man, and as too many sad facts in the history of popedom prove, a fallible and often failing man. To whom then shall we go? Shall we seek for some united testimony of fathers, councils, and popes? It would be a hopeless task, it would be to attempt an impossibility, for they are perpetually differing, and when we had gained it, we should after all have only the testimony of man. To whom then shall we go? Peter must give the answer, “Thou hast the words of eternal life.” We will not now stop to discuss the question whether it be possible for men to fill up the deficiencies of the word of God. He that cannot add a single inch to his own stature, he surely can add nothing to the volume of inspired truth. He that cannot add one single leaf to the flower, nor give one additional wing to the insect, he surely can contribute nothing to the most perfect of all the works of God, the revelation of his own hidden will. It was prophesied originally of the Roman Empire, that it should be part of iron, part of clay; a fit image of that false system, which would blend together in one whole, the word of God, and the word of man. As well might you expect to strengthen iron by the mixture of a little fragile clay: as well might you hold up the candle in the vain endeavour to add to the brightness of the noon-day sun: as well might you strive to perfect the beauty of the clear fountain of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb, by adding to it waters that have been stained and thickened in their passage along an earthly world, as hope to add anything to the word of God, by mixing up with it the word of man.

The fact, then, that there is nothing else inspired, is in itself a proof that the Bible is complete. Either the Bible is sufficient, or we are left without a sufficient guide. We may, therefore, rest satisfied as to the complete sufficiency, as well as the supreme authority of the word of God. But there yet remains another subject of scarcely less importance, which we cannot leave unnoticed. Namely,

III. Its clear intelligibility.

It is not enough, that the Scriptures are sufficient and complete. For practical purposes they must be within the reach of common men.

Now the Church of Rome takes the Bible out of the hands of private Christians. They acknowledge the authority of Scripture, but add that the church alone has the power to interpret it: they say there are many difficulties, and that it requires the church’s interpretation to unravel the path of life. [9] This principle places the people in absolute dependence on those who call themselves the church. It draws their attention to the church rather than to God. It teaches them to rely on man’s comment, and to lose sight of God’s decree. When looking through a painted window, your eye is fixed on the glass, and loses sight of the sun behind, which lightens it; so when we look at truth through the medium of human interpretation, the sight is caught by the human colouring, and the light of God’s eternal truth is thrown into obscurity with the neglected word. Now true Protestants gain their light, not through the coloured glass, but from heaven itself, that is, they look to the word of God, and not to man’s interpretation as the decision of christian truth.

At the same time we must not deny that there are difficulties in the Scriptures. Its subject is infinity, its range eternity, its author God; and it would be folly to suppose that poor, frail, shortsighted, and shortlived man, should be able at a glance to measure the unfathomable depths of God’s unexplored wisdom.