The Sufficiency of Scripture and Resolution 9

"That precious doctrine which is being propelled to the front line of battle is the doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture. But I do not believe that phrase or the doctrine is being properly represented." - SBC Voices

1229 reads

There are 3 Comments

Aaron Blumer's picture


Appreciate this peace. A pet peeve of mine. We really aren't doing our bibliology a favor--or the Bible a favor--when we claim a kind of sufficiency for it that it doesn't claim for itself. And when we claim sufficiency for these other kinds of things we weaken the Bible's practical effectiveness on the things it really is sufficient for.

(It's objective sufficiency remains unchanged. I'm just saying we do harm to our relationship to it.)

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.

Larry's picture


A problem with the article is that it doesn't define CRT. In the comments, he tries to say it doesn't matter. But I can't see how it doesn't. People hear CRT and think very different things and it is not clear what the author is affirming and what he is rejecting.

What if CRT is itself a fundamental denial of Scripture? In what sense can a fundamental denial be an interpretative tool? Until we know, we should cautious

Mark_Smith's picture

Following the fight in the SBC over Prop 9 and CRT, no one wants to define CRT. That is the problem. The pro-CRT crowd want it to remain a nebulous recognition that there is racism in society and culture and the SBC. Nothing more.