God-Breathed Scripture (Protestant/Evangelical Caucus and Devotional)

“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.” - 2 Timothy 3:16

Human beings speak with their mouths as their breath moves across their vocal cords, causing the cords to vibrate and produce sounds that are formed into letters and words by our lips, tongues, and teeth. There is a breathing out that has to take place for speech, and understanding this reality helps us to understand Paul’s point in today’s passage. Scripture, he tells us, results from God’s breathing out in speech. This is a rather clear way of saying that Scripture is the very speech of God. It is His Word.

The Greek word translated as “breathed out” in 2 Timothy 3:16 is theopneustos, and Scripture is the only thing described as such by the Apostles. Thus, Scripture has a unique character as the voice and words of the Lord. It uniquely serves as God’s special revelation, as His inspired and revealed will for His people. Nothing else today is theopneustos, so we can point to nothing but Scripture as the Word of God.

When we speak of Scripture as theopneustos, we are pointing to its divine inspiration. The Word of God written is identical to God’s speech. It is exactly what He intended us to have as the revelation of His will and how to please Him. At the same time, this does not take away from the Bible’s human character. God breathed out His Word, but He did so through the instrumentality of His prophets and Apostles. So, for example, the book of Romans is Paul’s word, bearing the Apostle’s unique style and character. Nevertheless, it is also God’s Word, given by Him. That our Lord used a man to give us the book of Romans does not in any way make it less than the very speech of God. And this applies to all books of Scripture.

Following 2 Timothy 3:16 and other passages, the Protestant Reformers affirmed verbal plenary inspiration. Verbal inspiration means that inspiration pertains to the very words themselves, not just the meaning that the words convey. If Jesus could appeal to the tense of a verb in order to settle a theological question (“I am the God of . . .”; Matt. 22:23–33), inspiration must apply to specific words and even their specific forms. Plenary inspiration means that all the words of Scripture are given by God, not just some of them. We cannot say that the Lord spoke only the words of Scripture that pertain to doctrine but not those that record history. No, God spoke it all, using the distinct style of each human author to give us His Word for all of life. Paul says all Scripture—everything received as canon—is God’s Word, not just select portions of it (2 Tim. 3:16).

The process of biblical inspiration is mysterious, for we do not know exactly how God moved the human authors of Scripture to give us His Word. Nevertheless, we know that Scripture is the Word of God, and so it can be trusted to give us nothing but the truth of God. When we want to know God’s will for us, we must turn to Scripture, for it is there alone that we will find the Lord’s guidance.

Exodus 34:27 And the Lord said to Moses, “Write these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel.”

John 10:35 If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken—

Hebrews 3:7 Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says, “Today, if you hear his voice,

2 Peter 1:21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.” - 2 Timothy 3:16

This is a fun question I like to ask Christians in the churches I visit as well as my own: What scripture was he talking about?

I also like to say this, “The bible is not the word of God. It is the word of men inspired by God and it CONTAINS the word of God.”

Then I add, “The pastor’s sermons are supposedly inspired by God, so why don’t we staple them to the end of our bible.

And “because it says in revelation you are not to add to it” is not the right answer. Revelation, like the rest of the bible, is it’s own book. That verse is talking about adding or subtracting from johns account of his vision.

The bible is a collection of books and letters. So, I ask again, why do we not staple our pastor’s sermons to the end of the bible?

I confess that the only answer I have is that all the books and letters in the NT are written by folks who had direct experience with Jesus as he walked the earth. Paul’s was as an adversary at first, but that was cleared up on the road...

Anyway, thoughts?

So, I ask again, why do we not staple our pastor’s sermons to the end of the bible?

Because they are inspired by God's word, not directly by God. If they were truly inspired directly by God they wouldn't need to prepare a sermon. They could just climb into the pulpit and start preaching.

That is like TV preachers and authors who say God gave them a revelation. If that is the case we should have the Book of Beth Moore added to the canon.

If I may speak as a non-scholar, layman with absolutely no authority or special insight I have a thought on this.

We know the Bible as a series of select books was not always the same collection of Books we use now whether we be Protestant or Catholic. The OT as used by Jews before Christ was not one book either just as you pointed out about the entire “Christian” Bible. They had a bunch of scrolls, the law, the prophets, histories all in separate parts like our “Books” of the Bible.

We as Christians are specifically responsible for our own relationship with Christ. While sermons are divine teachings they may be influenced by that Pastor’s specific relationship with Christ. While, like the Bible, it is good for teaching, each of us as believers are responsible for maintaining our own personal relationship. We are responsible for spending time with Jesus, in prayer, in the Word and in meditative quiet time.

Maybe, just throwing this out there, adding sermons to the Bible text would take away some of that responsibility to seek God for oneself.

Other than that 2 boilerplate arguments would be the amount of paper, printing and sheer volume of the work.

And we would be forever at war as to which pastors had the true word.

I need to be clear that my comments about stapling sermons to the back was just a euphemism to demonstrate through absurdity. I really don’t think that should happen.

But I completely agree with the rest of your post. That is pretty much exactly how I see the whole thing.

I moved from Seattle to the bible belt and, because I’m in a southern gospel band that visits a LOT of small churches around here, I see a lot of different perspectives and sometimes some recurring themes that kind of bother me. One is a huge emphasis on eternal firey hell for the lost (which I don’t believe in) and the other is an almost worship of the bible.

But like you said, It is really about our relationship with Him in prayer, lifestyle meditation, AND his word which has value as pointed out in the OP.

You can be a Christian without ever seeing or holding a bible. It is not necessary, though it is very useful.

But the other point is that often we read the bible as though it was written today, though it was not. It means that when the verse in the OP is used, people subconsciously infer that “scripture” means “the bible”. But that is not what he was talking about. It didn’t exist yet.

Ok, I’m not articulate enough. My previous response is muddled.

As Christians we are the faith which relies on personal relationship. Other faiths are based on laws. While we have *teachings* which contain rules to live by, Jesus fulfilled our law. So adding pastor’s sermons would equate to how Judaism kept adding to their laws. Islam created more law with sharia. We as Christians aren’t adding laws, we should be developing relationship.

Does that make sense?

I have no answer, just a thought.

Yes, I agree. I’m sure you’ve now seen my attempt at a more accurate reply. I think we’re on the same page.

The number of pages was my attempt at humor, and yet when typed you can’t see the wry grin on my face.

For many years I was active in outreach ministries. Like you said of yours, that took me into many very different churches. One of the best summations of the goodness of having all denominations was from a friend who worked in a sheriff’s office. She talked of the ministries to inmates in their jail and pointed out that some denominations provided for a lot of financial needs for inmates but were afraid of visiting inmates, some churches sent people in to minister to inmates but had no money to give, others ministered to families of inmates and some denominations provided literature for the spiritual teaching of inmates. All were needed but no one church provided all. It’s a simplistic example but at the time helped me to be more patient and accepting of the churches that weren’t “mine.” And that pertains to your original question because in relationship, we don’t each have to do ALL the work, we do what God directs us to do.

“The bible is not the word of God. It is the word of men inspired by God and it CONTAINS the word of God.”

The Bible “contains the word of God” is the precise phraseology of the self-styled “moderate” Southern Baptists who rejected Biblical authority and denied the Bible was fully inerrant and inspired in it’s original autographs. The denomination fought over the Bible for decades before the moderates finally left the SBC to form the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship 25-26 years ago. The moderates were actually liberals on the road to neo-orthodoxy.

I have a relative who was a leader among those moderates, a seminary professor. I remember a sermon I heard him preach one time. He prefaced his Scripture-reading with “the Psalms contain the Word of God, listen and see if you can find it.” His belief was that only some portions of the Bible were inspired by God. He worked hard to explain away the rest of it. In the end he didn’t find enough of the Bible inspired to fool with it because he has abandoned all vestiges of his former faith.

I prove my, “rather than it is the word of God, it contains the word of God” with Paul’s comments where he says, clearly that what he is saying is not from god but is him only. For the bible to be “The word of God rather than contains...” that verse would have to be removed.

The bible is God Breathed to men. I just leave it at that.

And it is good for all the things the OP mentions. Interestingly, many of those things are about how to live a good and productive life here on earth, as opposed to the salvation message. e.g. “spare the rod and spoil the child” as well as most of Proverbs.

For starters this is a Protestant Caucus/Devotional thread and therefore we cannot compare and contrast between the various protestant denominations and other faith groups.

In the Reformed faith our confessions are simply a guide to what Scripture teaches. Nothing else. If a new, or even old member wants to know what Scripture teaches about a topic our confessions provide a summary, along with Scriptural references.

If somebody claims to have a “new” understanding of Scripture, the first place the church looks is in the confessions to see what is taught there. Now if this person is able to build a strong Biblical case for his new teaching, the confession will be changed as Scripture if the final word.

Here is an example of a teaching from the Heidelberg Catechism:

Question 1:
What is your only comfort in life and death?
A.
That I am not my own, 1
but belong with body and soul,
both in life and in death, 2
to my faithful Saviour Jesus Christ. 3
He has fully paid for all my sins
with his precious blood, 4
and has set me free
from all the power of the devil. 5
He also preserves me in such a way 6
that without the will of my heavenly Father
not a hair can fall from my head; 7
indeed, all things must work together
for my salvation. 8
Therefore, by his Holy Spirit
he also assures me
of eternal life 9
and makes me heartily willing and ready
from now on to live for him. 10

1.1 Cor 6:19, 20.
2.Rom 14:7-9.
3.1 Cor 3:23; Tit 2:14.
4.1 Pet 1:18, 19; 1 Jn 1:7; 2:2.
5.Jn 8:34-36; Heb 2:14, 15; 1 Jn 3:8.
6.Jn 6:39, 40; 10:27-30; 2 Thess 3:3; 1 Pet 1:5.
7.Mt 10:29-31; Lk 21:16-18.
8.Rom 8:28.
9.Rom 8:15, 16; 2 Cor 1:21, 22; 5:5; Eph 1:13, 14.
10.Rom 8:14.

“Pastors’ sermons” are NOT “inspired” by God. The apostles received the Holy Spirit on Pentecost to “guide [them} into all truth.” The apostles, and only the apostles, could pass on the Holy Spirit by laying on hands. This was to give early believers miraculous gifts of prophecy, interpretation, and other things to promote teaching God’s word at a time the gospels and letter had not all been written down and disseminated. When that which was perfect (the written word word) had come, that which was imperfect (individual inspiration confirmed by miraculous signs) passed away. I Cor. 13:10. Once the apostles died, there was no one to pass on the Holy Spirit by laying on hands. And that was no longer necessary, just as Paul had said.

That sounds fine on the surface, but what good is a creed or “confession”? If it less than the word of God, it is too little. If adds more than the word of God, it is too much. If it is the same as the word of God, it is redundant. All the various creeds have done is detract from study and consideration of the Word itself and cause division and dispute, and some are directly contrary to what God has breathed.

**If it less than the word of God, it is too little. If adds more than the word of God, it is too much. If it is the same as the word of God, it is redundant.**

It is a reference. Any body of study will have quick references that serve as a refresher/reminder for those who have already studied a topic.

Those same reference provide a springboard for deeper study of a subject for the neophytes.

For instance, in my field many people use an app called “Epocrates” to do a quick search of a medicine. It does not, nor is it intended to, take the place of careful study of the authoritative texts.

Nothing I disagree with there.

Well, that is because of a technicality: I feel that I am inspired by God sometimes, but I’m not a pastor so it doesn’t count.

And, again, the Bible we read today did not exist when he penned that. So what scripture, specifically, was he talking about?

I’m sitting in a hotel coffee shop waiting for a business associate to come down the elevator, so I don’t have time to find and consider the passage you mention. Unfortunately I can’t call it to immediate memory. However, I can’t help but notice you presume the Lord didn’t inspire Paul to write that clear passage.

I won’t argue with you over your view. I will simply say, if I understand you correctly, I believe you stand on a slippery slope. I’ve seen firsthand where that road can lead, not just within my own family, but from some of my old university professors, too.

All the best, FRiend.

I also like to say this, “The bible is not the word of God. It is the word of men inspired by God and it CONTAINS the word of God.”

The Bible is the word of God. God inspired through the Holy Spirit men to write the word.

If we say it contains the word of God that opens up the door for additional revelation outside of the Bible to be accepted. If we allow this we have to allow the Mormon the Book of Mormon and the Muslim the Koran and so on.

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.