Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Bible isn't the word of God. It contains the word of God
CARM ^ | 07/21/2014 | Matt Slick

Posted on 07/21/2014 10:28:13 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

by Matt Slick

One of the objections raised by critics of biblical inspiration is that the Bible is not the word of God, but that it contains the word of God.  Is this accurate?  No.  First of all, this doesn't fit what the Bible says about itself.  The collection of 66 books that the Christian Church recognized as being inspired speaks as the very words of God in many places.

  1. "Thus says the Lord" occurs over 400 times in the Old Testament.
  2. "God said" occurs 42 times in the Old Testament and four times in the New Testament.
  3. "God spoke" occurs 9 times in the Old Testament and 3 times in the New Testament.
  4. "The Spirit of the Lord spoke" through people in 2 Sam. 23:2; 1 Kings 22:24; 2 Chron. 20:14.

Of course, the errantists (those who say the Bible in its original documents had errors) will reject these scriptures' accuracy; that is, they will deny that God's word is without error--even in the originals.

If appealing to the Bible in a general sense isn't good enough.  Let's consider that Jesus said the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms (all of the Old Testament) were Scripture, and that the Scriptures cannot be broken--cannot fail (John 10:35).

Some might say that there are instances of verses that "contain" God's word, but that it doesn't mean the Bible is God's word.  The problem is addressed by Jesus.

Luke 24:44-45, "Now He said to them, 'These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.' 45 Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures."

Notice that Jesus speaks about what is written regarding him in the Old Testament.  Then Luke writes that Jesus opened their mind to understand the Scriptures.  What Scriptures?  The Law (Moses), the Prophets, and the Psalms.  This was a common designation for the Old Testament.  Therefore, Jesus says that the written form of the Old Testament is Scripture.  Jesus goes on to deal with the religious leaders who would violate these Scriptures which he called "the word of God."

Jesus never said the scriptures contain the word of God.  He said they were the word of God.  Therefore, we can see that the word of God is the written form of Scripture.  In fact, we are told by Paul not to exceed what is written.  Note, Paul doesn't say to not exceed the parts of the scripture that contain God's word; he says not to exceed what is written!

1 Cor. 4:6, "Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that in us you might learn not to exceed what is written, in order that no one of you might become arrogant in behalf of one against the other."

It is the written form that is proclaimed as being Scripture, unbreakable, the word of God, and the standard of which we are not to exceed.  This can only be true if the written form is the Word of God and not just something that subjectively contains the word of God.

What does it mean to be the Word of God?

The Bible is full of citations where it quotes God.  However, it also has citations of non-inspired individuals, such as Judas, Herod, etc. Satan, for example, lied when addressing Eve in The Garden of Eden.  This means that the Bible contains a record of a lie.  But how can such an error be included in the Word of God and still have the word of God be inerrant since a lie is an error?

The answer is that the Bible inerrantly records the lie.  It makes no mistakes in its reporting of events, in its proclamation of truth, and in its revelation of God's will.  Where it may record the lies, failures, deception, etc., of various individuals, it does so perfectly and without error.  Likewise, when it records historical events, genealogies, etc., it does so using the idioms and cultural norms of the time--yet it is without error.

Jesus acknowledged this when he said that the Word of God, the Scripture, cannot be broken.  This means that it cannot fail.  Why? because the written form of the word of God, which is Scripture, is inspired; and because it is inspired, it cannot fail; it must be fulfilled. Remember, Jesus called the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms (all of the Old Testament) Scripture; and he says that the Scriptures cannot be broken--cannot fail.  He was obviously referring to the written form of the Old Testament:

If a citation of a city was incorrect, is that not a failure of Scripture?  If a date is wrong, is that not a failure of scripture?  Likewise, would not an error in a fact likewise be a failure in the Scripture?  Of course it would!  But Jesus says the Scriptures cannot be broken.  They cannot fail.  Is Jesus wrong?

Is the New Testament also Scripture?

It should go without saying that the New Testament is also Scripture.  The early church recognized the New Testament documents as being authentic and inspired and included them in the canon of Scripture along with the Old Testament.  In fact, Paul recognized the authority that his words had in the church.  Take for example what he said to the Colossians.

Col. 4:16, "And when this letter is read among you, have it also read in the church of the Laodiceans; and you, for your part read my letter that is coming from Laodicea."1

Likewise, Peter made an interesting comment about Paul's writings when he said,

"as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction." (2 Pet. 3:16).

Peter called Paul's writings Scripture.  In turn, Paul called Scriptures "God-breathed," and Jesus said the Scriptures cannot fail.

Scripture is God-breathed

2 Tim. 3:16-17 says, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." The word "inspired" is literally "God-breathed."  This is an interesting phrase since it implies that the Scriptures are from the mouth of God.

Likewise, Peter says in 2 Pet. 1:21, "for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."  Notice that Peter is stating that prophecy is not the product of human will.  Instead, prophecy occurs by those moved by the Holy Spirit.

God spoke through the mouth of the prophets.  We see in Acts 3:18, "But the things which God announced beforehand by the mouth of all the prophets, that His Christ should suffer, He has thus fulfilled."  Clearly, Luke, the writer of Acts, understood the Old Testament Scriptures to be spoken by God through the prophets.  In fact, we find other references to the Old Testament referring to God speaking through the prophets.

Because the prophets speak for God, write Scripture, and make prophecies, the Scriptures must be fulfilled.  It is the written Scriptures that are referenced here.  It is not some vague and ambiguous reference to some areas of the Bible that "contain" the word of God.

The problem of subjectivity

If the Bible contains the word of God but is not the word of God, then we must ask which parts of the Bible are the Word of God and which are not?  The problem in answering this question is that the one who seeks to do so inadvertently places himself as the judge of what is and what is not inspired and without error.  But by what standard would such a person make such judgment?

What about the numerous contradictions in the Bible?

It is true that there are difficulties within the Word of God.  But these are due to copying errors through the centuries.  As more and more historical, archaeological, and manuscript evidence is uncovered, the fewer Bible difficulties there are. Nevertheless, for an examination of answers to the alleged Bible contradictions, please see The Bible Difficulties section in the navigation menu on the left.

Conclusion

When claims that the Bible contains the word of God but is not the word of God are made, it is done so usually because the critic of inspiration wants to assert that the original documents in the Bible contained errors.  The problem is that this undermines the very trustworthiness of God's Word.  How are we to decide what is and is not inspired and therefore true if the very breath of God moving through a sinner results in documents with mistakes?  Does this inspire trust in God's Word?  Does it promote security and rest in believing God's Word?  Obviously not.

This undermines the faith of Christians and is, naturally, a dangerous and false teaching.

 



TOPICS: General Discusssion; Theology
KEYWORDS: bible; scripture
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last

1 posted on 07/21/2014 10:28:13 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It seems to me that Matt Slick uses a lot of verbiage to confuse what should be an easy-to-understand matter, and to gain...what?. I regret reading this post.


2 posted on 07/21/2014 10:33:04 AM PDT by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
It is true that there are difficulties within the Word of God. But these are due to copying errors through the centuries.

Not all and we as Christians, especially those of us that love apologetics, must not run from them and claim copying errors. Some of the "difficulties" are nothing more than perspective and to whom the text was written. For example, one passage in Samuel relates a Philistine claimed to have killed King Saul, but another passage says that Saul killed himself. Both are true. The Bible is merely relaying an accurate account of one person boasting, coupled with the actual account of Saul's suicide.

3 posted on 07/21/2014 10:33:59 AM PDT by rjsimmon (The Tree of Liberty Thirsts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. -John 1:1


4 posted on 07/21/2014 10:36:08 AM PDT by HonkyTonkMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Revelation 19:13
And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.


5 posted on 07/21/2014 10:37:55 AM PDT by Maudeen ("End Times Warrior - Just a Sinner Saved by Grace")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
One of the objections raised by critics of biblical inspiration is that the Bible is not the word of God, but that it contains the word of God. Is this accurate? No. First of all, this doesn't fit what the Bible says about itself. The collection of 66 books that the Christian Church recognized as being inspired speaks as the very words of God in many places.
Yesterday saw...a forceful plea from a key papal advisor [Bishop Salvatore Fisichella, the rector of the Lateran University and President of the Pontifical Academy for Life] to reject the idea of Christianity as a “Religion of the Book”....

.......the big debate over Dei Verbum at the time of the council pitted what was then known as the “two-source theory,” which held that Scripture and tradition are essentially two separate streams of revelation, against the “one-source theory,” which posited that Scripture is the lone source of revelation and tradition is an elaboration of it. In effect, Dei Verbum held that Scripture and tradition are interdependent and integrally related to one another.
-- from the thread Synod: Christianity not a 'Religion of the Book'

While Catholics believe the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit and that it is true, one cannot take individual biblical quotes or passages and say each one is literally true, Pope Benedict XVI said....

....The commission of biblical scholars, an advisory body to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, met at the Vatican May 2-6 to continue discussions about “Inspiration and Truth in the Bible”....

....In his message, the Pope said clearer explanations about the Catholic position on the divine inspiration and truth of the Bible were important because some people seem to treat the Scriptures simply as literature, while others believe that each line was dictated by the Holy Spirit and is literally true. Neither position is Catholic, the Pope said.
-- from the thread How to Read the Bible as a Catholic


6 posted on 07/21/2014 10:39:37 AM PDT by Alex Murphy ("the defacto Leader of the FR Calvinist Protestant Brigades")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

If the article’s author would spend more time in the Word than trying to confuse himself and others, he would be better off.


7 posted on 07/21/2014 10:40:44 AM PDT by Maudeen ("End Times Warrior - Just a Sinner Saved by Grace")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: HonkyTonkMan; Maudeen
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. -John 1:1

My understanding is the "Word" = Christ

8 posted on 07/21/2014 10:49:02 AM PDT by newfreep (at)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
"The collection of 66 books that the Christian Church recognized as being inspired speaks as the very words of God in many places.."

The Cristian Church recognizes a collection of 73 books. This author seems a little weak on the historic Christian canon.

9 posted on 07/21/2014 10:50:24 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit.

When you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit takes residence in your body (temple - see references below).

Protestant or Catholic, it would be wise to ask the Holy Spirit to help guide you as you read the Bible. . .God’s Holy Word.

1 Corinthians 6:19-20 ESV
Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.

1 Corinthians 3:16-17
Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you? If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him. For God’s temple is holy, and you are that temple.

1 Corinthians 6:19 ESV
Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own,

Romans 12:2 ESV
Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.

1 Corinthians 6:20 ESV
For you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.

Romans 12:1 ESV
I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship.


10 posted on 07/21/2014 10:52:15 AM PDT by Maudeen ("End Times Warrior - Sinner Saved by Grace")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

RE: The Cristian Church recognizes a collection of 73 books. This author seems a little weak on the historic Christian canon.

OK, let’s say the author is weak on the Christian cannon, what ‘s your response to someone who tells you that scripture is not 100% the word of God?


11 posted on 07/21/2014 10:53:38 AM PDT by SeekAndFind (If at first you don't succeed, put it out for beta test.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

If they weren’t accepted universally, they aren’t canon. Isn’t that what being “catholic” is supposed to be about?


12 posted on 07/21/2014 11:01:18 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
104 In Sacred Scripture, the Church constantly finds her nourishment and her strength, for she welcomes it not as a human word, "but as what it really is, the word of God". "In the sacred books, the Father who is in heaven comes lovingly to meet his children, and talks with them."

Catechism, para 104

13 posted on 07/21/2014 11:04:31 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Individuals must make a decision about Scripture just like they make a decision about following Christ. Billy Graham describes his Scripture decision in "Just As I Am":

“I was trying to be on the level with God, but something remained unspoken. At last the Holy Spirit freed me to say it. ‘Father, I am going to accept this as Thy Word–by faith! I’m going to allow faith to go beyond my intellectual questions and doubts, and I will believe this to be Your inspired Word.’”

We won't know all the answers to our questions until we see Him face to face. Until then, I believe that no faith can be described as Christian unless God's Word in the form of Jesus is the center of that faith. If anyone believes things that are clearly refuted in His Word, maybe they should call themselves something other than Christian, like those who admire Jesus's life and teaching but reject Him as being God Incarnate. They are not Christians.

14 posted on 07/21/2014 11:06:21 AM PDT by Dr. Thorne ("Don't be afraid. Just believe." - Mark 5:36)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newfreep

Exactly. I’m not sure what this author is trying to prove about a difference between Scripture “being the Word” and “containing the Word” but it is clear that the Logos (Word) preexists even the wrold, and was made flesh via the Son.


15 posted on 07/21/2014 11:13:40 AM PDT by dinoparty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
Those who take themselves out of "Catholic," take themselves out of the Canon.

You might want to consider the first 1500 years. Did the Holy Spirit abandon the Christian people for 1500 years, just to pop in again in the 16th century and reveal: "You got the canon wrong"?

And as for those who had split from "Catholic," who exactly gave them the authority to subtract books from the Canon? Some king?

And if that's something the British throne and her licensed liturgists in the Anglican Church had the competence to do, do they still have it? Could Queen Elizabeth II and Abp Justin Welby split off a couple more books if they felt divinely called to do so?

Or, instead of 1500 years, switch your focus to 2,000 years. The big majority of Christians still have the full canon --- 73 books. There has been a Christian church in continuous existence for 1900 years in Mosul, Iraq. They speak Aramaic, the language of Jesus. They have the same canon as the rest of us Catholics. I think it's a good bet that they're clinging to their whole Bible as they high-tail it outta there --- as we speak. If the ISIS couldn't make them give it up, I very much doubt the Anglicans would be very persuasive.

16 posted on 07/21/2014 11:19:37 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Thorne

Agree fully with the thread up until the last sentence. My understanding is that angels will do the separating on the right and the left.

As long as they’re still living, and it is called “Today” these fence-sitters still may wake-up. As Someone said, “he who is not against us is for us.”


17 posted on 07/21/2014 11:31:46 AM PDT by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

This puts everything into perspective. One Minute & 39 seconds sermon. Why should it take any longer ?

http://www.youtube.com/embed/WGnEuGwvXqU?rel=0


18 posted on 07/21/2014 11:56:00 AM PDT by Maudeen ("End Times Warrior - Sinner Saved by Grace")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dinoparty
I’m not sure what this author is trying to prove about a difference between Scripture “being the Word” and “containing the Word”

Simple (maybe overly simple, but simple) answer: if the Bible "contains" the word of God, then there are parts of the Bible that made it in, not on the basis of God's will, but human cultural additions. To put it even more simply, if the Bible "contains" the word of God, you don't have to worry about all those silly anti-homosexual-act references, or how divorce is a really bad idea, or wives submitting to their husbands (or husbands having to love their wives sacrificially), or how God loves Israel and will whoopa$$ anyone who attacks it, etc., etc.

19 posted on 07/21/2014 12:03:58 PM PDT by chajin ("There is no other name under heaven given among people by which we must be saved." Acts 4:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Well stated.


20 posted on 07/21/2014 12:04:51 PM PDT by Lil Flower (American by birth. Southern by the Grace of God! ROLL TIDE!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson