The Bible
The Canon
Why do we need a Canon or "rule" for Scripture? Without such a rule, we would either omit things God intended for us or add other things God did not intend for us. Revelation 22:18-19 cautions us on the pain of eternal death not to add or take away from the Word of God. those who do demonstrate they lack the spiritual sensitivity to be called God's children. Furthermore the Bible says much about the role of Scripture in our lives. It is, for example, the very words of God (1 Thess. 2:13), reliable (Pro. 30:5-6), without flaw (Ps. 19:7) and powerful (Heb. 4:12). Indeed people come to faith in Christ through the instrumentality of the Word of God (James 1:18; 1 Pet. 1:23). Determining the extent of the canon is therefore of utmost importance.
The canon of both the Old and New Testaments developed gradually as God directed. God had Moses write down the 10 commandments and deposit them in the Ark of the Covenant (Deut. 10:5). As time went on, God employed scribes, patriarchs, and other writing prophets to record in written form His message.
So how do we determine whether or not to include a writing in the canon of Scripture? First, canonicity is decided by God, and recognized by man. Here are some good guidelines in determining canonicity:
- Authority (the books bear unmistakable marks of divine authority and are cited by other biblical authors).
- Received (the writings were received by the church of antiquity).
- Claim authority for themselves (while not the sole determination, many ancient books do not claim divine authority for themselves.
- Truthful (False books, or "Pseudepigrapha" and apocryphal books contain many serious errors and contradictory statements).
Now the Bible does at times cite sources we call "lost books," or books we no longer possess and that were not inspired. these were not "canonical" books. Here are a few of these books:
- The Book of the Wars of the Lord.(Num. 21:14-15)
- The Book of Jashar. (Josh. 10:13)
- The records of Nathan the Prophet. (I Chron. 29:29)
- The Records of Iddo the Seer. (2 Chron. 12:15)
- The Annals of Jehu the Son of Hanani. (2 Chron. 20:34)
- The Visions of Iddo the Seer. (2 Chron. 9:29)
These are but a few of the many extra-biblical sources biblical writers sometimes quote, but do not endorse as canonical. The New Testament also cites writings, sometimes even from the Apostles, that are now lost. For example, Paul wrote an earlier letter (1 Cor. 5:9), now lost, to the Corinthian Church. He also quoted a heathen poet to drive home a point (Tit. 1:12) but stopped short of endorsing all the poet's writings.
The New Testament writers followed a similar pattern, but began with the Apostles. Jesus had promised to bring all things to their remembrance by the Holy Spirit (John 14:26). The New Testament itself identifies the Apostles as the foundation of the church (Eph. 2:20). They claimed authority for themselves (1 Cor. 14:37; 2 Thess. 3:6).
Finally, let's put this into real world language. God gave us two great witnesses. First, the internal witness of the Holy Spirit. The early church considered the book now in the canon as trustworthy and inspired. They had other books to consider, but rejected them. Why? they were led of God to do so. Secondly, we have the external witness of the church throughout the ages bearing witness to the authentic New testament writings while disputing the false writings.
Check back again for updates on the study of the canon.
The Inspiration and Authority of Scripture
Our Bible is composed of 66 books, by about 40 different writers of various backgrounds and walks of life (such as kings, peasants, fishermen, herdsmen, poets, statesmen, scholars, soldiers, priests, prophets, a tax collector, a tent-making rabbi, and a Gentile doctor), living during a period of about 1,600 years, yet they present one message. Such a miracle can only be explained by there being one divine Author, who was in control of all these human writers.
The Bible was written in three different languages: Hebrew, Aramaic (Old Testament), and Greek (New Testament). The Bible employs a great variety of literary types including history, law, poetry, parables, biography, personal correspondence, and prophecy.
Supernatural Origin
Some of the Bible writers recorded their own sins, which brought them into disgrace. They risked their worldly advantages and future reputations by what they wrote. Human nature causes people to do the opposite.
Simply put, if the Bible is not God's Word, then the Bible is full of lies.
Inspiration of the Bible
Views:
- Intuition Theory (the writers simply had great insight into spiritual matters).
- Concept Theory (the concepts or ideas are inspired, not the words).
- Faith and Practice Theory (the writer was inspired in spiritual matters only).
- Dictation Theory (God dictated to the writers what He wanted them to say).
What is Inspiration?
Inspiration can be defined as follows: Inspiration is the doctrine whereby God superintended the biblical writers in all they wrote and preserved them from error in the whole and in the part. Does inspiration extend to the very words of Scripture? Indeed it does, thus we call it verbal inspiration. All the words? Once again yes. The word "plenary" means "absolute" or "full," such as a "plenary session" at a conference where all the various sub-groups reconvene for a full, "plenary" session. When we put these two together we come up with "verbal plenary inspiration."
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:16).
2 Peter 1:21, "For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit" (NASB).
In what sense were they "carried along by the Holy Spirit?" Quite clearly the Holy Spirit originated their writings and pointed them toward a finished product, as Benjamin Warfield tells us, "The men who spoke from God are here declared, therefore, to have been taken up by the Holy Spirit and brought by His power to the goal of His choosing."
By inspiration we mean something other than human inspiration, such as when Beethoven was inspired to compose great symphonies. The Greek word translated "inspired" in 2 Timothy 3:16 literally means "God-breathed." It refers not to the writers, but to what is written. Thus the Bible came from God through the men who wrote it; God, who is true (John 3:33), breathed out truth. This inspiration applies to the entire Bible, extending to the very words, not just the concepts ("all Scripture"). Jesus also affirmed this view of inspiration for the Old Testament (Matt. 5:18) and promised it for the New Testament (John 16:12-15; 14:26).
Some teach God merely inspired the thoughts of the biblical writers, not their words. But think for a moment, how do we guarantee an accurate transmission from thoughts to words if God excuses Himself from the process?
Inspiration follows on the heels of "revelation" (God disclosing truth) and occurred when God wanted His truth to be written down (or "inscripturated," put into Scripture).
For more, see glossary
If only parts of the Bible are infallible how would we determine which parts are true and which are not? For example, in Romans 5:12-21 Paul contrasts Adam's disobedience and its consequences (sin and death) with Christ's obedience and its consequences (salvation). If Adam was not a literal, historical individual, Paul's point would be meaningless. See also:
- 1 Cor. 15:14-19, where Paul says that if Christ's resurrection from the dead is not a real event in history, Christianity is worthless.
- Matthew 19:4-6, where Jesus bases His teaching about divorce on the reality of God's creation of Adam and Eve as the first humans; and Matthew 24:37-39, where Jesus affirms the reality of the flood in Noah's day by comparing it to His return.
Was the Bible given to us by a holy God who sought to communicate to His children, or merely a human product written by some early devout followers of Jesus? Modern rationalism and liberal theology have made every attempt to tone down the biblical message by attacking its authority. If God didn't write it, they say, then we don't have to follow all of its teachings nor believe its history.
Some affirm that the Bible speaks accurately in matters of faith and Christian practice, but not in matters of science or history. But how can we separate the two? For example, the ressurection was a literal physical event, but also conveyed spiritual truth (1 Cor. 15:12-17). Therefore we really cannot divide history from religious truth.
What is inerrancy?
Inerrancy affirms the Bible contains no errors of any kind in the original languages. For example, when the Bible speaks to any given issue we can fully trust it truthfulness, even in matters of science and history.
Limited inspiration and "errancy" views. Some today espouse a limited sort of inspiration. The Bible they say, does indeed speak authoritatively in matters of faith and theology, but not all matters. After all, they say, God wrote the Bible to save man, not to teach him math or science. But as noted above, we cannot separate the two. Virtually all attempts to question the Bible's veracity have already been refuted or at least neutralized by contrary evidence. The Christian need not fear what science may uncover because, in the end, such discoveries will never threaten the Bible's claims.
Messianic Prophecies Fulfilled By Jesus Christ:
Seed of woman: Genesis 3:15
Virgin Birth: Isaiah 7:14
Birthplace: Bethlehem, Micah 5:2
Forerunner: John, Malachi 3:1
God and King: Isaiah 9:6
Archaeological Support for the Bible
The Bible's accuracy and reliability has been proved and verified over and over again by archeological finds produced by both believing and non-believing scholars and scientists. Their findings substantiate all kinds of biblical practices, customs, places, names, and events.
Bible scholar Donald J. Wiseman said, "The geography of Bible lands and visible remains of antiquity were gradually recorded until today more than 25,000 sites within this region and dating to Old Testament times, in their broadest sense, have been located."
Well-known Bible scholar William F. Albright said: "Discovery after discovery has established the accuracy of innumerable details, and has brought increased recognition of the value of the Bible as a source of history."
Conclusion
Peter, just before his death, pointed his readers to a word "made more certain" and encouraged them to "pay attention to it." He reasoned that such truth never arose from the prophet's imaginative musings, but came to him from God as the Holy Spirit moved him (see 2 Pet. 1:19-21). Christians everywhere should spend much time in this love gift from God and many hours in reflecting on its truths.
Textual Criticism
Did God inspire a single translation of the Bible? Although we do have advocates today of such views, particularly those of the "King James only" persuasion, God chose only to render the original writings, sometimes called the "autographs," inerrant. Yet each child of God may rest assurred that God preserved His Word throughout the ages in the various translations carried down to us. Scholars have often wrestled with one another in an attempt to render the most accurate translations, but such tension actually does the church a great service. The biblical science of textual critcism seeks to uncover the most reliable textual readings from the surviving manuscripts.
What version of the Bible should we use? While some would answer, "Whatever version speaks to you," we should stick to accurate versions translated by competent scholars who pursued their work without bias or skewed motives. We would commend to our readers the English Standard Version as an example of a reliable translation.
Though the King James Version served a noble purpose for many years, it no longer can claim to be a modern translation simply because it no longer "translates". The latest update of the older King James occured in 1769 and differed remarkably from its earlier versions. In order for a Bilbe translation to succeed, it must translate into a receiving language, such as English, not old English or middle English. Bibletruth rejects the arguments of King James advocates (now spread liberally across the Internet) who really fail to provide any compelling arguments for their views and have not produced any reputable Bible scholarship to speak of, and who only succeed in dividing the body of Christ. See The King James Version Debate: A Plea for Realism by D.A. Carson (Baker, 1978).
For serious students of textual criticism, note the following sane links:
Rodney Decker (note the impressive links section)
Many have made this matter a test of orthodoxy, particularly those who favor a "majority text" or "King James only" view, but, to date, the best evidence argues in the other direction. The oldest and best manuscripts suggest the best Greek texts are those which underlie some of our modern translations, such as the English Standard Version, or the New American Standard Version. While we should test all evidence and keep an open mind about certain matters, the scholarly world has spoken almost unanimously in favor of these manuscripts.