Replies

1. The Bible is a Single Book
Erroneous Claim: That the bible stems from the church, not the church from the bible.
a. The Bible is not one book but a collection of books: true, strictly speaking.
b. The Christians took 24 books from Judaism and re-ordered & re-organized them into the Old Testament of 39 books: False.
i. There were significantly larger works, including the Talmud which contains exposition on the Law of Moses & the writings of the prophets.
ii. Jesus did quote from the Talmud, lending it some credibility.
iii. The Chronicles of the Kings (Kings & Chronicles) is divided because one section is from the northern kingdom’s perspective and the other from the southern kingdom’s; but, in addition to that, they cover common times. Therefore, it is as logical to regard them as one book as it is to divide them into four, five or however many divisions is convenient.
c. The origin of the new testament was derived from the church via heretics.
i. This would be like saying that the “Purpose Based…” branch of thought is the origin of church denominations; that there are heretics involved in church doctrine or theology is to be expected as their warped thoughts touch on those issues.
ii. The Council of Nicea is almost always brought up in discussions of the formation of the New Testament; what people fail to realize is that the Council simply restated, in an official capacity, what Christianity’s core beliefs were.

2. The Bible Preceded Doctrine
Logical Fallacy: A –> B; ~A so ~B.
a. This is akin to saying “If you let go of the rock then it will fall; the rock fell so you let go.” It fails to take into account any other possibilities that would produce the same results… such as getting your arm cut off with a lightsaber as you are holding the rock; you did not let go, yet the rock fell.
b. The correct way to view this is that God’s revelation to mankind of Himself must needsbe incremental; a parent does not talk of physics with a toddler or ask their opinion on politics, a maturer son or daughter is needed for that. Likewise, the bible and doctrine grew up together; like knowledge and understanding should in people.

3. True Religion is Bible Religion
“Since the Bible didn’t exist in the time of Peter and Paul. ‘No one who lived within the time period of the Bible ever had a Bible.’ (McConkie, 41) Therefore, their religion was not ‘Bible religion.’”
a. Good logic, bad application.
i. The book James, thought to be the earliest book in the new testament (it is the ONLY New Testament book which does not reference Jesus as the risen lord), has much to say on ‘religion.’ I tend to view it as the ‘smackdown’ book regarding churches.
(1) James 1:26-27
(2) James 2:3-4
(3) James 2:10
(4) James 2:15-18
(5) James 2:19
(6) James 3:1-12
(7) James 2:13-18
(8) James 4:1-3
(9) James 4:13-17
(10) James 5:1-6, 7-11
(11) James 5:12
(12) James 5:13-15
(13) James 5:16-18
(14) James 5:19-20
b. Such an argument is like saying that Abraham & Joseph & Noah were unbiblical because he never had a bible… think on that.

4. Everything in the Bible is the Word of God
This is the truest ‘myth’ presented, and is the best presented.
a. The argument is that the bible quotes others, including:
i. Adam
ii. Eve,
iii. Satan,
iv. Foreign Commanders (“You will eat dung!”)
If the bible did not contain these, then it would be useless as a historical book; past experience has shown otherwise as many unknown historical claims the bible has made have been verified archeologically. (The existence of the Hititites, or the Pool of Bethsaida, for example.)

5. The Canon is Closed
Claim 1: “Nowhere in the books of the Bible does it say that the canon of scripture is closed.”
Claim 2: “Many will refer to the last lines of Revelation to claim that the book cannot be added to. Since the Bible didn’t exist at the time of the writing of the Revelation of John, it couldn’t refer to the Bible as a whole.”
a. This is true, insomuch as many cults are of a form violating some precept set forth in Revelation, such as that the second coming of Christ will be known and recognized worldwide in an instant. (Think of all those who have claimed to be the Second Coming…)

6. The Bible can be Interpreted Independent of a Predetermined Ideology
Claim: Ideologies influence how you interpret the bible.
Conclusion: Because no interpretation is ideologically free, then all interpretation is ‘bad’.
a. It is strictly true that your worldview influences how you see the bible; trivially so, your worldview IS how you see the world.
b. There is a bit of a bias here that seems to be of the train of thought that because your worldview influences your interpretation of the bible your worldview is not influenced by the bible.
c. That the concept of trinity may not arise from someone’s intrepretation of the bible does not invalidate the concept… just like modalism, though a poor explanation theologically, may not be wholly incorrect (after all, all three persons of the Trinity claim responsibility for raising Jesus from the dead… this does not mean that they are lying).

7. To know the Bible is to Understand it
Actually, I quite agree here… the bible is, honestly, full of wonder and there is always more I don’t understand than I do; that is to be expected if it is the word of an infinite God spoken to a finite man.

8. The Bible is Common Ground in Missionary Work
This is a re-statement of Number Six, though as seen through an applicational setting.

Comments or Criticisms of my analysis?
(Sorry about the loss of tabs.)