Relics: Scripture vs. Baptist Gavin Ortund

This is a transcript of the initial portion of the video, RELICS – Gavin Ortlund says NO! (But the Bible Says YES!) [10-3-25]. Gavin’s words will be in blue.

*****

Dr. Gavin Ortlund, a Reformed Baptist apologist, runs the very popular YouTube channel Truth Unites. Today we’re responding to various comments from his video, “Relics: A Protestant Critique” — from August 28th, 2021.

6:37-53 The Protestant concern is that as Church history develops, the use of relics develops and changes, and it gets to a point where it transgresses a boundary into the realm of — I’ll use the words — superstition and idolatry. 

7:25-35 One of the Protestant classical views is that if something isn’t in Scripture, it doesn’t mean you can’t do it, but you shouldn’t insist upon it. 

20:03-10 In Holy Scripture, there’s really nothing exactly like a contemporary Catholic practice of relics. 

I will provide a ton of biblical support. Not to worry, there! Gavin distinguishes between historical excesses regarding relics and Catholic doctrine and dogma and later noted that the Council of Trent condemned many abuses. This is very good and important, because dialogue must primarily be about what any given body believes; not about every excess of people on the street, because those are always present in any group. They need to be addressed, too, but the main topic needs to be what is taught and held by the group.

Gavin says that Catholics in the past (before Protestantism) were “adoring” relics. No doubt some did (and do) — one can always find examples theological ignorance with little trouble, per my remarks above, but Gavin knows that Catholic teaching utterly condemns this. We believe that only God can be adored.

At 9:22-36 in the video, Gavin disagrees with Catholic thinking, “that the power or grace of God inheres in relics, in such a way that if you draw near to the relic, or if you touch the relic, you can become a partaker of that grace or power.” 

But this aspect of relics is explicitly biblical:

2 Kings 13:20-21 (RSV) So Elisha died, and they buried him. Now bands of Moabites used to invade the land in the spring of the year. 21 And as a man was being buried, lo, a marauding band was seen and the man was cast into the grave of Elisha; and as soon as the man touched the bones of Elisha, he revived, and stood on his feet.

Methodist Adam Clarke (who lived from 1762-1832), in his well-known Commentary on the above Bible verses, admitted the validity of the principle involved here:

This shows that the prophet did not perform his miracles by any powers of his own, but by the power of God; and he chose to honour his servant, by making even his bones the instrument of another miracle after his death.

The relic (and the saint from whom it is derived) reflects the greatness of God just as a masterpiece of art or music reflects the greatness of the artist or composer. Here are four more examples of relics in the Bible:

2 Kings 2:11-14 And as they still went on and talked, behold, a chariot of fire and horses of fire separated the two of them. And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. [12] And Elisha saw it and he cried, “My father, my father! the chariots of Israel and its horsemen!” And he saw him no more. Then he took hold of his own clothes and rent them in two pieces.[13] And he took up the mantle of Elijah that had fallen from him, and went back and stood on the bank of the Jordan. [14] Then he took the mantle of Elijah that had fallen from him, and struck the water, saying, “Where is the LORD, the God of Elijah?” And when he had struck the water, the water was parted to the one side and to the other; and Elisha went over.

Matthew 9:20-22 And behold, a woman who had suffered from a hemorrhage for twelve years came up behind him and touched the fringe of his garment; [21] for she said to herself, “If I only touch his garment, I shall be made well.” [22] Jesus turned, and seeing her he said, “Take heart, daughter; your faith has made you well.” And instantly the woman was made well.

Acts 5:15-16 so that they even carried out the sick into the streets, and laid them on beds and pallets, that as Peter came by at least his shadow might fall on some of them. [16] The people also gathered from the towns around Jerusalem, bringing the sick and those afflicted with unclean spirits, and they were all healed.

Acts 19:11-12 And God did extraordinary miracles by the hands of Paul, [12] so that handkerchiefs or aprons were carried away from his body to the sick, and diseases left them and the evil spirits came out of them.

Catholics recognize three categories for relics: a “first-class” relic is from the person himself or herself (Elisha’s bones qualify). A “second-class” relic has power because it’s connected with a holy person (Elijah’s mantle; Jesus’ garment); third-class relics are things that have merely touched a holy person or a first-class relic (Paul’s handkerchiefs or aprons). We see, then, that all three are biblical.

Then at 9:53-10:03 in his video, Gavin disagreed with Catholics “thinking that prayer is more efficacious or more worthy, if it is made near or while touching a relic . . . “

It’s not an exact parallel, but there are similar instances in the Bible. The Israelites bowed down before the temple, while they prayed to and praised and thanked God. Here’s a few examples:

2 Chronicles 7:3 When all the children of Israel saw the fire come down and the glory of the LORD upon the temple, they bowed down with their faces to the earth on the pavement, and worshiped and gave thanks to the LORD, saying, “For he is good, for his steadfast love endures for ever.”

Psalm 138:2 I bow down toward thy holy temple and give thanks to thy name for thy steadfast love and thy faithfulness; . . .

And then there’s one from Joshua about the ark of the covenant:

Joshua 7:6 Then Joshua rent his clothes, and fell to the earth upon his face before the ark of the LORD until the evening, he and the elders of Israel; and they put dust upon their heads. [7] And Joshua said, “Alas, O Lord GOD, why hast thou brought this people over the Jordan at all, to give us into the hands of the Amorites, to destroy us? . . .”

And King David:

2 Samuel 6:17 And they brought in the ark of the LORD, and set it in its place, inside the tent which David had pitched for it; and David offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the LORD.

Levites talked to God before the ark as well:

Deuteronomy 10:8 At that time the LORD set apart the tribe of Levi to carry the ark of the covenant of the LORD, to stand before the LORD to minister to him and to bless in his name, to this day. (cf. 1 Kgs 3:15; 8:5; 1 Chr 16:4; 2 Chr 5:6)

It’s also noteworthy and relevant to this topic that the ark had relics in it, too: “a golden urn holding the manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant [the two tablets of the Ten Commandments]” (Heb 9:4). The manna (a type of food produced by God to feed the wandering post-Exodus Jews) was biological, so presumably it had to be supernaturally preserved if it lasted very long. In a sense, it was a relic from God Himself since it miraculously came from him. God commanded it to be kept in the ark:

Exodus 16:32-34 And Moses said, “This is what the LORD has commanded: `Let an omer of it be kept throughout your generations, that they may see the bread with which I fed you in the wilderness, when I brought you out of the land of Egypt.'” [33] And Moses said to Aaron, “Take a jar, and put an omer of manna in it, and place it before the LORD, to be kept throughout your generations.” [34] As the LORD commanded Moses, so Aaron placed it before the testimony, to be kept.

Also, Aaron’s rod that sprouted blossoms and almonds (a second-class relic of Aaron), was to be kept in the ark by God’s command, and if the blossoms remained, as a “sign” that was miraculous as well:

Numbers 17:8, 10 And on the morrow Moses went into the tent of the testimony; and behold, the rod of Aaron for the house of Levi had sprouted and put forth buds, and produced blossoms, and it bore ripe almonds.[10] And the LORD said to Moses, “Put back the rod of Aaron before the testimony, to be kept as a sign for the rebels, . . .

God also had commanded Moses to put the tablets of the Ten Commandments in the ark:

Deuteronomy 10:2, 5 And I will write on the tables the words that were on the first tables which you broke, and you shall put them in the ark.’ . . . [5] Then I turned and came down from the mountain, and put the tables in the ark which I had made; and there they are, as the LORD commanded me. (cf. Ex 25:16, 21; 1 Kgs 8:9; 2 Chr 5:10)

Thus, when Joshua, the Levites and others prayed before the ark, they were literally close to relics. The second set of tablets with the Ten Commandments are also, like the preserved manna, a second-class relic from God: the words having been written by Him (cf. Ex 31:18; Deut 9:10 about the first set of tablets written by “the finger of God”). It was also a second-class relic of Moses, commanded to be kept by God in a holy place: the ark of the covenant, which was in the holy of holies in the tabernacle and the temple. The parallels to Catholic relics and the practices and principles connected to them in the Bible are striking and very clear.

Gavin makes a dubious claim at 10:50-10:55 that “the Protestant movement started with these things [i.e., relics and their abuses] . . .” But Martin Luther’s 95 Theses, posted in October 1517 and generally regarded as the very beginning of Protestantism, never even mentioned relics. Moreover, Luther commended the practice in 1518, and even after he was excommunicated in 1522:

We ought to encase the bones of saints in silver; this is good and proper. (Sermons I, ed. and tr. John W. Doberstein; Sermon on the Man Born Blind, 17 March 1518; in Luther’s Works, vol. 51)

Many make pilgrimages to Rome and to other holy places to see the robe of Christ, the bones of the martyrs, and the places and remains of the saints, which we certainly do not condemn. (Explanations of the Ninety-Five Theses, Aug. 1518; tr. Carl W. Folkemer; in Luther’s Works, vol. 31)

These many years your Grace has been acquiring relics in every land; but God has now heard your Grace’s request and has sent your Grace, without cost or trouble, a whole cross, with nails, spears and scourges. I say again, grace and joy from God on the acquisition of the new relic! (To the Elector Frederic of Saxony, end of Feb. 1522; in Luther’s Correspondence and Other Contemporary Letters, Vol. II: 1521-1530; translated and edited by Preserved Smith and Charles M. Jacobs [Philadelphia: The Lutheran Publication Society: 1918] )

He likely became more hostile to them later on, but Gavin implied that he was before he started his revolt, and that this was the very start of Protestantism. This is clearly untrue. But if Luther was merely alarmed about abuses, we fully agree. He hadn’t thrown out the entire doctrine, at least as late as 1522, as these three quotes from him prove.

Gavin repeatedly asks how we determine a proper use of relics and a corrupt, idolatrous one. Well, we agree with him that if they become idols in place of God, that’s wrong and sinful, and the line has been crossed. The understanding of them has to be grounded in a proper biblical understanding. But we have to remember that idolatry is a wicked attitude that resides in someone’s heart: hence, almost always is difficult to determine simply by looking at a person and what they do.

Gavin notes that human beings tend to become idolaters. Yes, they do, and idolatry takes many forms. But we rectify that by reforming hearts and transforming souls by the power of God, prayer, and grace. The answer is not to eliminate every practice that might produce idolatry. Lots of people make the Bible an idol, or find doctrines in it that simply aren’t there.

Does that mean we get rid of the Bible, which arguably “caused” all the false doctrines floating around? Every heretic and cult member cites the Bible in supposed agreement. We correct people in error. We don’t “throw the baby out with the bath water”: as the saying goes. We reform the practice and foster a right understanding of the deepest, biblical meaning underneath and behind it.

Summary: We counter the arguments against relics from Reformed Baptist apologist Gavin Ortlund and provide several strong biblical arguments, followed by very vigorous discussion.