Thomas Jefferson Would Be Proud: Using Human Criteria to Decide the Bible’s Authority

Canon Fodder ^ | 09/11/2013 | Dr. Michael J. Kruger

[P8riot]

This is the third and final installment of my (limited) review of A.E. Harvey’s book, Is Scripture Still Holy? Coming of Age with the New Testament. Prior installments can be found here and here.

As we have seen in prior posts, Harvey’s book is designed to critique the traditional Christian doctrine of the inspiration of Scripture. After arguing that (a) Scripture isn’t revelation anyway, only Jesus is God’s revelation; and (b) since humans were involved in writing and transmitting Scripture, then it is unreliable and likely corrupted, one might wonder whether Harvey tries to salvage any authority for the Bible at all.

At the end of chapter one, Harvey attempts to articulate how we humans might just be willing to allow the Bible to have some authority. Read carefully this remarkable statement:

[The Bible’s] credentials must be constantly reviewed, its exercise monitored, its place in the contemporary world of values seen to be defensible and appropriate. What this means, in the case of the Bible, is that…it must be show to have at least the credentials of other ancient historical writings; that as a foundation document for a religion it must have the necessary intelligibility and consistency; that for the nourishment of the liturgical and devotional life of the faithful it must have linguistic and imaginative depth; that to continue to be read as an ethical its stance on moral questions must continue to be found relevant. . . If a body of scripture is found to fail these tests, it must forfeit its authority. If it passes them, it may claim continuing authority subject to the vagaries of human transmission and application already mentioned (p.18).

[P8riot]

Since there seems to be an equal number of Thomas Jefferson fans and Bible believing Christians on FR (and many who claim both camps), I thought that this would result in some lively chatter.

[Thane_Banquo]

Either the Bible is, as it claims, the very Word of Almighty God, or it is the greatest volume of terrible lies that has ever been written. There is no middle ground.

I believe it is the former, the very Word of God.

[P8riot]

I agree, however there are many well meaning Christians who pick and choose the parts of scripture they like, and don’t even give a thought to the rest, or to the context of the writing.

[SoConPubbie]

I believe it is the former, the very Word of God.

And is has, in very fact, been proven true through the experience and testimony of the millions upon millions of Christians who have been Born Again through the blood of Jesus Christ and have had both their lives and their hearts changed in the process.

2 thousand plus years of experience and testimonies prove it to be true!

[Dr. Thorne]

Without the authority of the Bible as God's inspired Word to us, there is no Christ.

Most of the mainline churches have taken the position that the Bible contains truth, but is not all true. This gives them the opportunity to create their own Jesus - one who supports socialism, homosexuality, abortion, etc.

They often deny the deity of Christ, preferring to teach a "love your neighbor" gospel without the greatest commandment "love God with all your heart". This is the social gospel which I believe is being taught in mainline churches by Marxist infiltrators. They teach that the only sin is voting Republican.

Without sin there is no need for a Redeemer, so Jesus becomes nothing more than a nice guy who loved people. This is a lie from hell and will lead people directly there.

[Secret Agent Man]

i can use point b) then on anything written by another person. anytime i find something i don’t like i can wip that out and just claim it’s written by people and therefore it is unreliable and likely corrupted.

hell the way people misinterpret things today, that are clear, it’d be easy to just shoot down anything with this tactic.

[Secret Agent Man]

who dies voluntarily for what they believe is a bunch of terrible lies?

[jagusafr]

“He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a man, that he should change his mind”. 1Sa15:29

“I the Lord do not change.” Mal 3:6

Not much doubt who be doin’ da changin’ here, is there?

[70times7]

That is the self important wind-bag way of saying, "If you agree with what it says, do it. If not, do what you prefer instead." Gosh!! Thanks Satan!!

Years ago I was discussing "religion" with a relative. He went on and on verbally like this guy writes; using many words to say little. He became upset when I distilled his 15 minute ramble into two sentences, crushed his argument and referred to his musings as "mental masturbation". The exchange came to a halt about then. I was accurate, but unkind. Fortunately that doesn't matter here.

[quadrant]

I once heard that the Bible was a love letter from God to mankind; but in that letter was a warning, “I'm God and you're not.”

[ZULU]

The Bible is the Alpha and the Omega of scripture for Christians.

[Rashputin]

Sola Yourselfa Baby, it's the best way to rationalize whatever you want to rationalize in order to go along to get along.

Dope?
Divorce?
Extramarital sex?
Ordaining women?
Ordaining queers?
Marrying queers to one another?
Murdering infants in the womb with "contraceptives"?

All of the above are accepted by people who claim to base what they believe on Scripture Alone and who now teach and accept exactly the opposite of what they preached only a generation or two ago. Which proves that for a large number of "Christians", Scripture Alone has dissolved into nothing but Self Alone.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

Unfortunately most FR Papists take every opportunity to attack the scripture these days. They’re as bad as the modernists and the guy who wrote that book.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“All of the above are accepted by people who claim to base what they believe on Scripture Alone and who now teach and accept exactly the opposite of what they preached only a generation or two ago. “

---

Okay, please find and copy and paste a scriptural argument made by a Christian church in support of any of the following:

Dope?
Divorce?
Extramarital sex?
Ordaining women?
Ordaining queers?
Marrying queers to one another?
Murdering infants in the womb with “contraceptives”?

[Rashputin]

Attacking erroneous interpretations of Scripture it's attacking the sort of idiot who would tell a bare faced lie like accusing someone of something they very clearly did not do.

Scripture characterizes such folks with the following description

Obviously my mentioning people who are dedicated to their Self and Self Alone made at least one dog anxious to return to his vomit for a tasty snack.

[Salvation]

It seems that the new tack for non-Catholics is to say that Catholics do not believe in Scripture.

The things you posted can all be found in Scripture:

First off: “Thou shall not kill.”

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“Attacking erroneous interpretations of Scripture it’s attacking the sort of idiot who would tell a bare faced lie like accusing someone of something they very clearly did not do.”

---

I didn’t say your particular post was attacking scripture. I said FR Catholics attack scripture, which is true. I’ve debated with more than a few of them who have told me that the scripture did not exist in the early church, and that the Bible was not written until 60 or 90 years after the death of Christ, which would put it well out of the range of when the Apostles who wrote them even lived. One other Catholic I know of even renounced the Apostle Paul right here on these forums, and therefore delegitimized all his epistles. You yourself always make it a habit to viciously attack people in threads who are defending the authenticity and authority of scripture. Now, why would you make these posts if you believed in the authority of scripture? Shouldn’t you agree with Christians that the Word of God is infallible? Why do you have to attack us?