The following discussion first appeared in The Journal of Student Ministries, vol. III no. 3 (May/June 2008), published by Student Ministries Partners. www.thejournalofstudentministries.com
Sean Says:
Since we’ve started our discussions, Tony, I’ve wondered how our views on the Bible compare. We’ve both expressed concerns about the lack of biblical knowledge today among youth, but I can’t help but wonder—is it for the same reason?
I am concerned about the lack of biblical knowledge among youth because I believe an accurate understanding of the character and nature of God is critical for spiritual formation. This is why I often wonder, Can true health in the church take place apart from accurately handling the word of truth (2 Tim. 2:15)? This is why much of my concern about new movements in the church is the de-emphasis on the authority of Scripture.
Tony, why do you believe Scripture is authoritative? I believe it’s because it stems from God himself. Since God and Jesus are our ultimate authority, and the Bible contains the very words of God, therefore its message is the very message of God and thus authoritative (2 Peter 1:21). Thus, the Bible has final authority to define our beliefs and behavior.
Jesus clearly viewed the OT as authoritative. He regularly quoted from the OT as if it was completely accurate and regularly chastised the Sadducees and Pharisees for not correctly understanding the Scriptures (Matthew 22:29).
Of course, this doesn’t mean we always get our interpretations correct or live consistently with these beliefs (I’d be the first to admit this!), but it does mean our primary task as individuals and youth leaders is to properly understand God’s revelation and to live under its authority.
Tony, WHY, WHY do you think the Bible is an authoritative book? Is it something about us (how we interpret it, what place we give it in our community, etc.) or is it something about the book itself (the very words of God and thus, inerrant)?
Tony says:
Sean, I agree with so much of what you’ve said here, but let me start with a difference.You make equivalent two concepts that I do not: God’s words and “inerrancy.”Inerrancy is the doctrinal position that the Bible is without any factual error in any category, including scientific, historical, and geographical statements.I think that the number of intellectual gymnastics that one has to do to hold this position makes it ultimately untenable.The Bible does contain contradictory statements and it is sometimes inaccurate in its descriptions of geography and historical events.
But, that’s not the point of the Bible.The doctrine of infallibility, on the other hand, claims that the Bible, when read faithfully and in context, is the norming norm of Christian faith and practice.
Since you bring up Jesus’ use of the OT, that’s a good case-in-point.When you compare Jesus’ use of passages from the Hebrew Scriptures to those same passages in your Old Testament, you’ll notice that often, the wording isn’t quite the same.Was Jesus paraphrasing?Was he using a different version of the OT than you have?
Regardless of your answers to these questions, I’m sure that you and I can agree that Jesus’ use of the OT is inspired and authoritative, even if a few of the words got changed along the way.
Sean, the Bible is authoritative because it is God’s revelation to us.It is something about the document itself.But it’s not because that document is error-free.
Sean says:
Tony, I’m glad to see we have common ground that the Bible is God’s revelation to us and serves as the “norming norm” of Christian faith and practice. I disagree, though, that the Bible is contradictory and makes historical and geographical mistakes. Some statements may appear contradictory and there are some issues that have not yet been resolved, but the Bible has continually proven reliable when all the evidence comes to light.
As far as the issue of Jesus misquoting the OT, no major evangelical NT scholars I know would argue that the gospels record the “very words” of Jesus (ipsissima verba), but rather the “very voice” of our Lord (ipsissima vox). Such a distinction is consistent with a balanced view of inerrancy. When we recognize these sorts of things, many such “inaccuracy” charges disappear.
Ultimately, the reason I have a high view of Scripture is not because the Bible itself claims to be inspired (e.g., 2 Tim. 3:16), as such a claim is circular, or that I can explain away every seeming contradiction. My reason is simple: Jesus did. And we can know the testimony of the biblical writers is accurate through historical examination. Jesus often spoke about Scripture with a deeper reverence than the Pharisees and Sadducees—criticizing those who raised tradition above it or failed to handle it accurately.
Regardless, Tony, I think we can both agree that inerrancy is not an essential belief for salvation. But if Jesus is the resurrected Messiah, and he had a high view of Scripture, can we have any less?
Tony says:
Sean, I don’t understand why you stand by the word inerrancy, when you are willing to admit that scripture does not necessarily contain the exact words of Jesus and that there are apparent discrepancies between the text and facts. By admitting these things, aren’t you basically gutting the inerrancy concept? Why not just claim infallibility?
By the way—and with all due respect—it seems like a real cop-out to say that the Bible is without error, except for the places there are errors, and those are only errors because we don’t have all the facts yet.
You purport a “high view of scripture.” But I wonder, how high a view of Scripture can a person have if they repeatedly try to use science (an extra-biblical framework) to “prove” that a person can live in the belly of a fish for three days?
I’m arguing that a higher view of scripture is one that allows the authority of the Bible to rest on its own merits.
Sean says:
Tony, you are criticizing an outdated fundamentalist notion of inerrancy that neither I, nor the majority of conservative evangelical NT scholars today, hold. Properly understood, inerrancy is not a property of specific words, but the ideas behind them. In other words, all the claims that the Bible actually makes—whether on science, history, ethics, etc.—are true. You have confused individual “words” of the Bible with the truth therein.
Thus, it is not an error for Jesus to quote a passage from the OT that may have different words than a contemporary translation, anymore than it is to say there is an error between the sentences “I love Stephanie” and “I love my wife.” Different words, but identical meaning.
Finally, I don’t hold “the Bible is without errors, except in places there are errors.” My point is simply that there have been numerous alleged biblical errors which have been overturned when more information comes to light. The list of ALLEGED biblical errors continues to shrink. God is trustworthy, and so is His Word.
Tony says:
Well, Sean, any philosopher or linguist would tell you that “I love Julie” and “I love my wife” do not have “identical meaning.”In fact, the meaning of each sentence is contingent upon a host of other factors.
Words do matter, and, regardless of your assertion, the vast majority of inerrantists think that inerrancy means that every word of the Bible, in every jot and tittle, is without error.But Jesus most likely used the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures—at least that’s what Matthew has him quoting.So, was the Septuagint an inerrant translation of the Hebrew?
God is indeed trustworthy, and so is God’s Word. So why be tempted into bolstering scripture with extra-biblical “proofs” like science and history?In other words: if inspiration was good enough for theologians and everyday Christians for 1850 years, it’s good enough for me. Personally, I don’t think that the historical-critical method is any challenge at all to the trustworthiness of the Bible.
Good discussion, Sean.Next time we’ll tackle the issue of women in ministry.
Disclaimer: Worldview Weekend, Christian Worldview Network and its columnists do not necessarily endorse or agree with every opinion expressed in every article posted on this site. We do however, encourage a healthy and friendly debate on the issues of our day. Whether you agree or disagree, we encourage you to post your feedback by using the feedback button.
If you say the Bible is the final authority then all denomination will use the scriptures to prove their point. Test all things "by the Spirit" to see if they be true. It isn't greek and grammer it's the Spirit. I believe most church people don't have the Spirit, that's why they hold on to the scripture, church, celibrity preachers, creeds etc, so hard, and that's why so many denominations and confusion. The unregenerate church isn't backslidding it's just going the natural course. We were told these things would happen, you can't stop them, the broad road church will soon line up with Catholisism. Click here to reply to this post
IT IS THE AUTHOR OF THE BOOK THAT IS PERFECT
Posted On: 05/19/08 03:02:11 AM
Age 64, OH
2 Cor 4:16Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. 17For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all. 18So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.-- We are all wasting away and we are getting older or dying. Yet we believe that we have eternal life. What we see with our eyes is not the truth that we look for. It is the unseen that is eternal. This that we see will all pass away. But most have faith in what they see. So they must have faith in what they can see with their own eyes. We can see the Bible with our eyes. But we can not see the Author with our eyes. But it is the Author that we must follow and not the Book as the pharisees did. To follow a Book will lead to death. The Book did not shed any blood for us but Jesus did. I read the Book because when I do Jesus speaks to me. If I read words on the page then I always misunderstand. I must look to The Author and not the Book. Lou Click here to reply to this post
It'
Posted On: 05/14/08 07:55:59 AM
Age 49, SC
Just one little comment about 3 days in a fish's belly. Actually, I saw a special on this on television, and there have been three documented cases in which a person has been swallowed by a huge fish and lived to tell about it. One of the men was interviewed, and he said that when he was released (I don't remember the circumstances), his skin was white and wrinkled (as the fish's intestinal juices had started to work). It was a very interesting account and very similar to Jonah's! Click here to reply to this post
THE SIGN OF JONAH
Posted On: 05/19/08 03:14:27 AM
Age 64, OH
How long was this man in the fish. Jonah was in the fish for three days and three nights. Look at the prayer of Jonah when he was in the fish: From the depths of the GRAVE I called for help,
and you listened to my cry. And again; But you brought my life up from the pit, O LORD my God. Or look what Jesus says about Jonah in Matthew 12:39 He answered, "A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. 40For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.-- How was Jesus in the earth for three days and three nights. Was Jesus somehow kept from dying. No Jesus was dead and was brought back to life. Jesus said He was in the earth as Jonah was in the fish. But more important, No sign will be given except the sign of Jonah. WHAT IS THE SIGN OF JONAH ? Lou Click here to reply to this post
No wonder the emergents don't quote the Bible!
Posted On: 05/14/08 06:52:30 AM
Age 31, MN
I already knew emergents had a low view of scripture before reading this discussion with Tony but I just wanted to point out this is what I believe to be one of the main reasons emergents don't quote the Bible much. They love their discussions but keep the Bible out of it unless it is about feeding and clothing the poor. They believe the Bible contains errors and because of that you'll see emergents that believe in evolution, yoga is OK for the church and that we need to do 5 years of research to find out if homosexuality is a sin. Click here to reply to this post
I know....
Posted On: 05/16/08 04:40:38 AM
Age 26, IN
How annoying that they use the Bible to talk about "feeding or clothing the poor." Seriously, aren't there more pressing matters in the faith?
oops...I just read the Gospels again, and I found that Jesus talks a lot about "feeding or clothing the poor" and talks relatively little about homosexuality, yoga, OR evolution. In fact, He NEVER talks about any of these issues...even though homosexuality was no less a problem in His time, and the foundations of yoga were being laid in the East, along with the foundations (among the Greek philosophers) were being laid for evolution to take a foothold. Seems to me He didn't think these issues nearly as important as taking care of the poor. I wonder why?
Not to mention...James certainly thought highly of taking care of the poor. I seem to remember something about pure religion being "taking care of widows and orphans." I don't remember him saying anything regarding religion and petty arguments about homosexuality and evolution. By the way..i'm not saying that homosexuality and evolution are okay concepts. I condone neither one, however, I do think that we should be careful how we say things. When your words are parsed, it seems that you think we should ignore the poor. Your comment comes across in a sarcastic tone there. If you meant it that way, then it should be clear that priorities should be looked at more carefully. Click here to reply to this post
IF WE DO NOTHING TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT - THEIR BLOOD IS ON OUR HANDS
Posted On: 05/21/08 10:06:22 AM
Age 64, OH
Jesus did not preach against homosexuality when He became a Man born of a woman because homosexuality was not a plague in Israel at that time, as it is here in the US today. He preached against the sin of the people of the day. To see what Jesus thought of homosexuality go to Genesis 19 and see how Jesus brought fire and brimstone down on Sodom and the whole dead sea plain because of their homosexuality. Who visited Abraham in Genesis 18, where it is written that "The Lord visited Abraham". It was not The Father in all of His glory because no one can look upon His glory and live. It was not The Holy Spirit of The Lord Jesus because He can not be seen with human eyes. The scriptures say that three men came to visit Abraham. Two of them were the angels that went on to see the sin of Sodom. The other Man had to be The Lord, for there were only three. This is why John says Jesus has always existed and Jesus created everything that exists. Jesus was not truly a Man yet by being born of a woman. But Jesus looked like a Man because we are made in His image. So Abraham thought He was a Man and said so. Jesus walked with Abraham and Jesus was The Judge who judged Sodom. Jesus judged Sodom because of His mercy for the innocent who were being raped, including the poor children who were being born in that terrible town. If these evil men would try to rape angels, just think of what they would do to poor innocent children. These poor innocent children are being raped by homosexuals today in our nation, we see this everyday in the news. If we do nothing to protect these children, then our judgment will be the same as Sodom, will it not. Lou Click here to reply to this post
Read more carefully
Posted On: 05/23/08 02:09:41 AM
Age 26, IN
Your reply shows me that you certainly do not read your Bible very carefully. You read what you want to read into the text instead of letting it speak for itself. I can prove it by pointing out one statement you made in your reply. "But Jesus looked like a Man because we are made in His image." What does physical form have to do with the Imago Dei? The simple answer is "nothing." Read the Genesis account of creation. What does it say about humans? "they were created in His image, man AND woman." Whoa!! women were created in the Image of God, too?? Well, that puts a damper on trying to say that the Imago Dei is physical! Read more carefully, and you might stop taking Scripture out of context. Click here to reply to this post
GOD BECAME A MAN
Posted On: 05/27/08 12:58:19 AM
Age 64, OH
It is pretty simple really. Have you read about the appearance of Jesus is Isaiah. it says there was nothing in His appearance that we should be drawn to Him. It is speaking of the physical appearance of Jesus. Do you doubt that Jesus looked just as any man does. Man was created in His image and then woman was taken from man. It is speaking about the physical and the spiritual. No other animal looks like Jesus but man does and woman is almost the same. Woman looks more like the male than she does any other animal. It is also speaking about the fact that we have a body, soul, and spirit. Man is the only creature that is like this and is the same as God. Before you accuse and judge the heart of men you should consider the scriptures yourself shouldn't you. We are told to ask or inquire of a person if we have a difference with them. But have you not judged, when you say,"You read what you want to read into the text instead of letting it speak for itself". You are not questioning my conclusions but you are judging my heart are you not. Does not Jesus tell us not to do this. We are also told in the scriptures to consider every person above ourselves. I do not accuse you of any sin of the heart but simply point out scripture to consider. For all we know either of us could be speaking to an angel. It has happened before. If you really want to obey the scriptures you can consider 1 Tim 5:1. I have learned a lot from this scripture. Grace and peace to you. Lou Click here to reply to this post
EVERY LETTER IS PUT THERE BY GOD - BUT NOT ALL IN THE BIBLE IS TRUTH
Posted On: 05/13/08 11:46:46 PM
Age 64, OH
Any man who makes the statement that every word of the Bible is true is of course not correct. For of course the father of lies is allowed to speak and Satans words are recorded. We know that these words are a true picture of what Satan said, but we also know that the words Satan spoke are a lie. Man also speaks in the Bible and sometimes he speaks things that are not true. But we know that when it is written "Thus says The Lord" then these words are true. It is not that men can not believe that the Bible is true, but it is that they do not want to believe the Bible is true. For if the Bible is true then they are prevented from believing and doing whatever they please. The Holy Scriptures have been proven to be true in every jot and title in the original forms. All someone need do is to study the work of Ivan Panin who proved by mathematics that every letter of the scriptures is put there by God Himself. Lou Click here to reply to this post
JONAH TRUSTED IN THE GOD WHO RAISES THE DEAD
Posted On: 05/13/08 11:32:50 PM
Age 64, OH
Tony, you say the Bible states that Jonah lived in the belly of a fish for three days. Did not Jesus say in Matthew 12:40 For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.- So I ask you this, was Jesus alive in the earth for three days and three nights. NO, but he died and was then resurrected to life. Jesus tells us that Jonah was in the belly of the fish as He was in the earth. So it would seem that Jonah died in the fish and his soul was still able to have communion with God as Jonah prayed. Then Jonah was resurrected to life as Jesus was. That is why there was so much power in the preaching of Jonah. He no longer feared the wicked men of Nineveh. Jonah walked into Nineveh preaching because he was thinking "what can these puny men do to me". Jonah did not fear death for he had been dead. Jonah trusted in the God who raises the dead. Lou Click here to reply to this post
sign of Jonah
Posted On: 09/24/08 05:17:26 PM
Age 28, FL
If we all can agree in one thing is that if you are not saved you will not understand the bible, the bible itself states that the natural men will not understand the words because they are foolishness to him, so if you read about Jonah you will see that he did die and was in the (pit) which the pit meant in the belly of the fish but hes spirit was in paradise where Jesus himself also went and then was resurrected and came back with all the saints and some of those saints actually walked around like Jesus did and many people saw them, so Jonah died and was resurrected..... Click here to reply to this post
Wow.
Posted On: 05/16/08 04:44:16 AM
Age 26, IN
Seriously..that's a stretch. And believe me...it wasn't fear of the Ninevites that led Jonah to flee in the first place..so why would it be an issue whether he had been dead or not? In fact, he as much as says it's not the Ninevites he fears as much as it's the mercy of God he fears. He was afraid that God would have mercy on the Ninevites and it ticked him off! Click here to reply to this post
THE SIGN OF JONAH
Posted On: 05/19/08 03:24:13 AM
Age 64, OH
Look also at the prayer of Jonah: From the depths of the GRAVE I called for help, and you listened to my cry.-- the earth beneath barred me in forever. But you brought my life up from the pit, O LORD my God.-- Jesus said NO SIGN except the SIGN OF JONAH would be given. Are you saying that the SIGN OF JONAH is that Jesus was somehow kept alive in the grave and did not die and brought back to life. We know that Jesus died and we would all not have eternal life if Jesus did not die. So we know that the sign of Jonah is that he died and three days and three night later was brought back from the grave. What evidence do we have that Jonah did not die. I think to say that Jonah did not die is a stretch. Lou Click here to reply to this post
inerrancy
Posted On: 05/13/08 02:18:21 PM
Age 47, TX
Very interesting article, and very telling as well. The emergents get really nervous when you use the "I" word (inerrancy). The frightening part is that the emergent philosophies have infiltrated so many churches today that it is very difficult to find a good one. Click here to reply to this post
God's spiritual intent
Posted On: 05/13/08 11:46:01 AM
Age 73, NC
Great discussion. Too bad that what we DO understand, we fall short. Even then we argue over who's doing it right, best or the most. Was it Billy Graham who once said "it's not what we don't understand that bothers us, but what we do understand?" Spiritual things are spiritually understood. "Eye has not seen or ear heard what God has prepared for us who love Him, but He has revealed them to us by His Spirit." Scripture can only be understood by the Spirit, not with the carnal mind. God's intent lies with His Spirit. If we have a relationship with Him through Jesus Christ, He says the Holy Spirit will teach us all things. We study His Word, but pray for Him to renew our minds and bring to our remembrance all we need to walk in His Spirit. With our natural minds, we make a decision to agree with Him. We see His "intent" by His Spirit. Jesus used OT scripture, the law and then said, "But I say to you". Yes, He changed the verbiage because He was speaking from His Spirit, not a set of rules. He also said "if we can't understand natural things, i.e. parables; how can we understand the spiritual? We have to be born again and have our eyes and ears of understanding opened. (Eph. 1:18) His Word says that we have the mind of Christ, yet we judge things/people by our 5 senses and compare ourselves among ourselves. God's love is so great that while we were yet sinners, he died for us. He didn't "pre-qualify" us before He loved us and we should love others as He did. Tell them that Christ died for them, but don't stop loving them just because they sin. Except you be born again, you can't even see the Kingdom. Do I understand all I read in His Word? Just because it hasn't been revealed to me, doesn't mean it's not true. I could read all about how electricity works and not understand it, can't say that I would even believe it, but it sure works when I flip the light switch on. And I have found that God's Word works by His Spirit for me and it's in Him that I live, move and have my being. When I was born again, I received ALL of Jesus, not just a little piece. I received all that He is and became a joint heir with Him. He says as He is, so are we in this world. He is the author and finisher of my faith and He sent His Holy Spirit to seal, empower and teach me. I believe that I can trust Him. So far, He's never failed me and I know He's with me, cause He said He'd never leave me. Keep discussing His Word, but say what He says. That's always safe. He is "The Revelator". We both may be wrong, but God is always right and He's big enough to handle all our differences, misunderstandings and confusion. It doesn't shock Him one little bit. There's nothing new under the sun. One thing I have learned is He is the Great I AM and I am not. Jesus is Lord. be blessed. Click here to reply to this post
