The Liberation of Puerto Rico-The Role of Scriptures and Theology

                                                                Chapter 2

                                                                The Liberation of Puerto Rico

                                                                The Role of Scripture and Theology


Certain matters need to be clarified in order to make it possible for one to construct an argument for the independence of Puerto Rico on biblical and theological grounds.  The first issue that must be addressed is that of biblical authority.   Since Christians believe that the Scriptures are the primary authority for determining issues of faith and life, the nature of that authority must be weighed in this discussion. Furthermore hermeneutical principles (issues of interpretation) must be identified in making use of Scripture and of theology.  At some point there needs to be a synthesis between the Bible and theology. In this section of the thesis, I will attempt to clarify these matters. I will deal with the nature of biblical authority and of Liberation Theology.  I will state the principles of interpretation in my use of Scripture and Liberation Theology. Finally, I will present a synthesis of the two.


                                                           The Authority of Scripture

Throughout the centuries, the Scriptures of the Judaeo-Christian tradition have been considered the primary source of faith and practice for both Jews and Christians.  In spite of the various views of Scriptures that lay people, scholars, and theologians hold to this body of writing has been the foundation which informs the beliefs of those who believe in its message.  It is not my intention to deal with the various views of Scriptures but rather to discuss the authority of this body of writing in relation to the theme of this thesis.  If an argument for the independence of Puerto Rico is to be made on biblical grounds, then we must first deal with the nature of biblical authority.

We may begin by asking the following question: From where does the Bible derive its authority?  In order to answer that question, it might be well to determine whether or not the Bible does have any authority.  Does the Bible claim authority?

G.W. Bromiley points out the following:  In the Old Testament as in the New Testament, the claim to more than human authority is implicit, and in many places it finds direct and open expression. It is claimed, for example, that Moses received from God both the moral law and also more detailed commandments, even extending to arrangements for the Tabernacle.  The prophets maintained that they were not speaking their own words, but the message which God had given them.  Jesus Christ spoke with authority because He was conscious of speaking not merely as the historical teacher, but as the Son of God.  The Apostles, had no doubt as to the authoritativeness of their pronouncements (G.W. Bromley, "The Authority of Scripture," The New Bible Commentary, ed. Donald Guthrie. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970, p.3).

It may be objected that in the majority of these cases, the claim to authority is made only on behalf of the message delivered, and not on behalf of the written record in which that message has been handed down. Thus it may well be true that the prophets or Jesus Christ spoke with divine authority, but sometimes we have their words only at second hand.  The fact that inspiration is claimed for them does not mean that inspiration is claimed for those who compiled the record of their activity and teaching.  If this is so, there is no guarantee that what is written in the Bible is a verbatim or accurate account of the message actually delivered (Bromiley, p.3).

Against this objection we may set the fact that in the New Testament, especially with reference to the Old Testament, definite authority is claimed for the written word of the Bible.  This point emerges clearly in many parts of the the teaching of our Lord Himself.  Thus He answers the tempter with the three-fold 'It is written.' For the Jews who searched the Scriptures, He gave counsel that 'It is they that bear witness to me.'  After the resurrection, He interpreted to the disciples in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself, showing that all things must needs be fulfilled which 'were written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the Psalms.'  These and similar statements make it plain that Jesus Himself accepted the inspiration and authority of the written record, especially in so far as it gave witness to His own death and resurrection (Bromiley, p. 3).

When we come to the Apostles, we find that their testimony to the divine authority of the Bible is equally clear.  In all the Gospel accounts, great emphasis is laid upon the inspired foretelling of the work and person of Jesus Christ.  The Apostle Paul quotes extensively from the Old Testament, and his preaching to his own people is very largely an attempt to prove the Messiaship of Jesus from Old Testament history and prophecy. The statement in 2 Timothy 3:16 sums up the whole attitude of Paul. Whatever translation we adopt, it is plain from verse 15 that the Apostle has the Old Testament in mind and that he thinks of it as peculiarly inspired by God.  The other apostolic writers quote just as frequently from the Old Testament, and in 2 Peter, open testimony is borne for the inspiration of the Bible in a way very similar to that in 2 Timothy. In 2 Peter 1:21, the word of prophecy is traced back to its final author in God the Holy Spirit: 'Because no prophecy ever came by human impulse, put people of God moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.' Again in 2 Peter 3:16, there seems to be a further allusion to the written Bible as an authoritative word which must be approached with reverence and humility.  The latter verse is particularly interesting in that it couples together the Epistles of Paul and the other Scriptures, a fairly plain hint that the apostolic authors were conscious of adding to and completing the authoritative canon of the Old Testament (Bromiley, p.3).

Surveying the evidence, we may allow that the passages that treat directly of the inspiration of the Scriptures are few in number, and that there is no particular assertion of the status or authority of every individual book. On the other hand, we may note, that with the exception of Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Obadiah, Nahum and Zephaniah, all of books of the Old Testament are directly quoted in the New Testament; and when we take into account the attitude of the New Testament to such quotations, there can be little doubt that the 'Thus says the Lord' of the prophets was taken to apply to the records of prophetic activity as well as to the oral words delivered on this or that specific occasion.  The written word was treated as the inspired and authoritative form in which the content of divine revelation had been expressed and handed down (Bromiley, p. 3).

It must be said, too, that the Bible does lay serious claim to divine origin, status, and authority.  It states clearly that is message is of God.  It traces its authority through the human writings to the Holy Spirit.  It accepts the supernatural both in prophetic utterances and in historical events.  It makes no artificial distinction between the inward content of the of the written Word and its outward from.  By its self-authentication as the divinely written Word,  its message challenges us directly either to faith or to unbelief.  In our approach to the Bible, other considerations may obtrude, but the basic challenge cannot be ignored.

The matter of biblical authority is very closely related to the doctrine of the inspiration of the Scriptures.  I will again state I do not intend to deal exhaustively with the various meanings of the word "inspiration," but rather to point out that both the questions of authority and inspiration are matters that need to be looked at if an argument for the liberation of Puerto Rico is to be made on biblical grounds.  It is not necessary to reason in a circle in order to believe in the doctrine of the inspiration of the Scriptures.  The doctrine of divine inspiration is based and affirmed on the teachings of Jesus Christ.  Even if we approach the Bible as an exceedingly old and worthwhile source book for this history of Israel and early Christianity, we find pervading the sources, the doctrine of divine inspiration, and this from the lips of Jesus Himself. Scattered throughout the record in every Gospel account and in every type of record-parable, history, Passion record, etc.--from first to last, is the assurance in the teaching of Jesus that the Scriptures of the Old Testament, to which He referred so frequently are true.  He made no distinction between the religious and the practical. All the teachings of Scripture were alike true for Christ; He believed them all (Laird Harris, Inspiration and Canonicity of the Bible, Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1969,. 46).

In order to clarify Jesus's view of the inspiration of the Scriptures, I draw attention to certain passages in which He spoke on this subject.  The first passage is found in Matthew 5: 17-18 in which Jesus says, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets.  I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, nor the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished

As verse 17 shows, Jesus is referring to a book, commonly called 'The Law and the Prophets,' which are the sacred writings of the Jews (Harris, p. 46).'  One might object that there is too much emphasis placed on Matthew 5:17 because the words are only attributed to Jesus.  However, it is to be noted that these verses are found in the so-called "Sermon on the Mount," which is almost universally recognized as an authentic piece of Jesus' teaching.  Furthermore, this saying of Jesus has a parallel in Luke 16: 16-17.  The fact that this verse has a parallel in Luke, supports the conclusion that the doctrine of divine and verbal inspiration is indeed basic to Jesus' teaching.

Another Scriptural passage that clearly identifies the view which Jesus had of Scripture is found in John 10: 34-35.  Jesus answered them, 'Is it not written in your Law "I have said your are gods'?  If He called them 'gods," to whom the Word of God came--and the Scripture cannot be broken--(Harris, p. 57).

In this instance, Jesus is making use of Scripture in order to show the Jews that they did not have a basis on which to accuse Him of blaspheming for simply stating that He was the Son of God.  There is no hint of doubt expressed by Jesus that He is merely assuming this for the sake of argument.  "He rests His case upon the Scripture (Harris, p. 57)."

One final passage which should be examined is found in John 5: 39-47.  Jesus says to His audience: You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life.  These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.  I do not accept praise from humans, but I know you. I know that you do not have God's love in your hearts. I have come in my Father's name, and you do not accept me; but if someone else comes in her/his own name, you will accept them. How can you believe if you accept praise from one another, yet make no effort to accept the praise that comes from the only God? But do no think that I will accuse you before the Father.  Your accuser is Moses, on whom your hopes are set. If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me.  But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?

For vindication of His own claim, Jesus appeals to Moses, in whom the Jews claimed to have their trust.  But He says that they did not really believe Moses.  He confronts His Jewish persecutors by declaring that their Scriptures are true, even though they have misconstrued them.  In this passage, Jesus not only points to the authority of the Scriptures, but also goes as far as to indicate that their authority is derived from the witness which they give to Him.

In conclusion we can say that the Bible is an authoritative source of belief and practice. That authority is derivative and not inherent.  In other words, the authority of the Scriptures does not come from the Scriptures themselves.  This authority comes from the God who inspired the writings of the Bible. It is this authority which should be recognized when one makes use of the Scriptures.

The authority of Scripture is presumed and foundational for advocating the liberation of Puerto Rico.  Without this authority, the argument for Puerto Rico's independence would rely on the relativity of human opinion and perspective, and would in turn be a subjective argument.