Why Believe Bible is God's Word

Why Neo-Orthodoxy Says the Bible “Contains” the Word of God

Thank you for the opportunity to study together, thank you for your word, thank you for the truth. I pray that we would be faithful to the truth especially me as the one leading the discussion today and I pray that you would keep me from error.

Thank you oh God for the fact that your word is the the very truth of God that we have to hold to and to attach our lives to and to govern ourselves by and Lord we know that ultimately you are speaking to us through the word and when we want to hear from you we hear from you by reading and examining your word.

So we pray Lord today that we would be faithful to it as we study together in Jesus name amen. Last week we began a discussion on the subject of Neo-Orthodoxy as part of a larger study of the book that some of you have, Charts of Christian Theology and Doctrine.

Basically the charts have been taking us through different theological systems, we've looked at Roman Catholicism, Natural Theology, Arminianism, Reform Theology, Wesleyanism, Methodism, those different things.

Well Neo-Orthodoxy falls into the realm of what we would typically call liberalism because it doesn't take a fundamentalist or a conservative approach to the scriptures but it takes more of a liberal, more open interpretation to the Bible than what typically a conservative Christian or evangelical Christian would take.

And this comes on the heels of our study of existentialism that was the that was what came right before this one and as we noted last week Neo-Orthodoxy has vestiges of existentialism in it. But the biggest thing that I wanted to talk about today and actually as I was telling some of you earlier I actually wrote this lesson on my way back from my trip I was thinking about...

Well my wife was typing as I was reading as I was thinking and outlining what I wanted to say today. And because this is something that I mentioned in our last study was that you know we need to understand why we believe the Bible is the Word of God.

And I made mention last week and it was the last thing that I said and it was sort of it was a negative way to end but I said it is naive to think that the Bible is the Word of God simply because someone else told us that it's the Word of God.

That's sort of a naive way of looking at anything is simply because well somebody told me this because in reality the Muslims believe the Quran is God's Word, the Mormons believe the Book of Mormon is the Word of God, you know it goes on and on and on.

And just because someone believes something is the Word of God doesn't make it so. You understand that? Just believing in something doesn't make it something. And Neo-Orthodoxy argues that the Bible itself isn't the Word of God but rather it's not the Word of God inherently but rather it becomes the Word of God as God uses it to reveal himself to individuals and thus it becomes very subjective rather than the propositional objective truth of the Bible as God speaking it becomes a very subjective individualized God speaking to you.

And so I put on the board today two propositional statements. These propositional statements are ones that really create the subdivision between Neo-Orthodoxy and what we would call traditional conservative orthodoxy or biblical Christianity.

These two statements create the line of divide. The first one and I know you guys can read it but because I have a recorder I'll read it to you. The first one is the Bible contains the Word of God and then the second one is the Bible is the Word of God.

Now just looking at these two statements in and of themselves as a conservative Christian, as a Bible believing to use that term Christian, I can affirm both of these as true but I understand that there is a difference between them.

What is the difference? Yeah, yeah, it's obviously it's the verb, right? One, you know, the Bible contains versus the Bible is. And when we say that the Bible contains the Word of God what we're saying is that within the contents of the book the Word of God exists but also within the contents of the book there can be other things that are not the Word of God and that is the heart of the Neo-Orthodox argument.

You see we, at least I would say I specifically, would hold to, and I would assume we all would but I'm always careful to make assumptions, I would hold specifically to the second statement. The Bible is the Word of God, that it is God speaking, that as the scripture says about itself it is theanoustos.

Theanoustos means God breathed and that's when the Word of God speaks. It's God himself who is speaking so we would affirm the equality of God's spoken word and God's written word. In fact the word is is oftentimes, if you're just thinking of how language works, the word is is an equal sign.

If you think about, if I say Mike is a man what I'm saying is there's a man and there's Mike and they're the same because that's what Mike is, right? The word is is a derivative of the word to be. The verb be is expression of something, how it is, how it actually is.

And so when we say the Bible is the Word of God we're saying the Bible equals the Word of God. That's what it is. It's not part and parcel, it's not half and half, it doesn't just contain it, but it is it.

It's God spoken word. But you go to the statement by the neo-orthodox and the neo-orthodox position is well the Bible contains the Word of God but it also contains the words of men. And so the the position then becomes well we get to go through and determine what's God's Word and what's man's Word, what's what's God saying and what's Paul saying.

It's interesting that oftentimes you will hear, and I've heard it in this very church years and years ago, people will say well that's Paul saying that, right? Specifically I remember on a on the issue of female elders in the church.

We had a discussion years ago and that was a hotly debated topic as to whether or not a woman should serve in the office of the elder or the pastor of the church. And the Bible clearly says that that's not correct, that a woman is not to exercise authority over or to teach men.

Second Timothy or First Timothy 2 .15 rather says a woman is not to teach or to exercise authority over a man and the office of the elder is a teaching and authoritative position. So it's obviously it takes that position and and sets it aside and says this is for men only.

And then later of course whenever you read the description of what an elder is, obviously a man is the only one who would fit that particular category. So that issue came up and it was a hotly debated topic.

I mean it was one where my predecessor, who was much more liberal than than I am and I don't say that to be ugly, just it is a fact, and my predecessor, his position was well we need to have the courage to step out in faith and just ordain a woman elder, you know, and that was his position.

And I was very taken aback by that. I said I'm never going to have the courage to disobey God's word because that's not courage, that's foolhardiness. That's the kind of thing that gets you in a lot of trouble.

Paul’s Teaching on Marriage and the Lord’s Command

Go ahead. I can't find it but there's a section of the scripture where Paul was talking about marrying unmarried people and he says not I but the Spirit says or I says but not the Yes. You know what I'm talking about?

Yeah, actually what he says is the Lord. Okay. He says what I'm saying the Lord has not said and what the Lord has said and what he's referring to specifically is what Jesus said about marriage and now what he's saying about marriage.

He's not saying that what he is saying is not under the inspiration of the Spirit because he says in that very context is I believe I have the Spirit too and this is the Lord has said this. If you go back to Matthew 19 and a few other places, Jesus said some very specific things about marriage.

Now Paul is coming along in a different context and he's having to say some things that don't change what Jesus said but they add to because he's dealing with a different context. He's dealing with a situation where there are people who are many of them already been in divorces.

Some of them were living in slave conditions where they had been moved around and they weren't able to maintain the relationship they were in. The question is well can we get married? If we've already been married we've been divorced now can we get married again?

You know Jesus said if we divorce you know there's a situation where we might be committing adultery if we get married. You know there's this question that comes up and so Paul has to address it but he has to say the Lord has said this and I'm saying this and he's not saying that he's not speaking from the inspiration of the Spirit.

He's not saying he's not speaking under the authority of God and in fact he says the opposite. He says I speak with the authority of the Spirit but he's making a distinction between what Christ had said specifically and what he is now saying.

But there are people who use that to argue that Paul is giving his opinion and he's not speaking for God. Again we're going to talk today about why we believe the Bible is the Word of God rather than just contains the Word of God but that is a good question.

I'm glad you brought it up because that was part of it. You know what do we do with those texts that seem to be very focused on the human side of it and the Bible is a book written by men. You know one of the things that is often brought up in conversation if you're ever talking with atheists or talking with somebody who doesn't believe the Bible specifically people from the collegiate realm you know the colleges and scholastics you know they'll say well they'll say the Bible was written by men and I'll say well so were your textbooks and you believe those you know what's your problem and your textbooks are always changing.

Yeah absolutely the Bible is written by men and the assumption then by saying the Bible is written by men is that God is not the author but that men are the author and yet we would believe that the written by men has its ultimate authorship in the Spirit of God.

Holy men spoke as God carried them along. This is what the scripture describes itself as. This is how it happened as God is moving and motivating these men to write down his word. Now that doesn't mean that they became you know sort of first century xerox machines or fax machines where their mind just sort of and they started auto riding you know that's not how it worked and the reason we know that's not how it worked is because one it's never described that way but also each writer brings in his own individual ways of saying things and this is why you have people who say wait a minute well Paul said something like this James said something like this they seem to contradict well they don't contradict each other but they do say different things that you have to harmonize because it's two different men speaking about one truth and they're coming at it from a different perspective and this is actually a part of a broader conversation but back in the 70s there was something called the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy and this was a product of several scholars in the United States and abroad coming together in Chicago and having a conference on the subject of biblical inerrancy.

What does it mean when we say the bible is without error. What does it mean when we say the bible is infallible. You know these are these are questions that because liberalism had come become so popular it had had gained so much of an inrow.

These questions came up and so it became the important for biblical scholars to come together and answer the question. And some of the things that we have to realize when we talk about inerrancy one we talk about inerrancy.

We're talking about the original autographs not the copies. Obviously copies have mistakes and so part of what we have to do as textual students is look at well we're looking at copies of the original.

We're reconstructing the original based on the copies. And that's one of the questions that often comes up. Well you don't have the copies anymore. Or you don't have the originals anymore. No but we have a very large textual history that is we're able to reconstruct the originals based on the amount of copies that we have and things like that.

And that's a big conversation that comes up because the question is well how do you know that you know what the original said. Well because we have such a massive library of copies that were were all from uh you know built on these originals.

And so you're able to reconstruct the originals based on the massive amount of copy and god preserves his word. Obviously. But that's a statement of faith and it is true. And so we have the you know the faith does play a role in it.

Um but you know the bible is the most well-attested work of antiquity. There's nothing that even comes close to the the amount of uh data and the amount of copious copies that we have not only in greek and hebrew but in other languages.

The bible was almost immediately copied into coptic syriac um later into latin. It was translated in all these other languages. And you said well were things lost in translation. Yes but you can actually go back and see what the translators translated it to.

And it gives you an idea of what the original says. And you can compare that to some of the original manuscripts as far as original language manuscripts rather to be able to see what was there and what was not.

But i'm getting a little ahead of myself. My point being is when we talk about the bible is the word of god. There are you know there are reasons why we believe this there are reasons why we trust this.

And as christians we should know why. We should know why do you believe. If somebody says why do you believe the bible is the word of god you know. Well mommy told me so isn't a real good answer. And i'm not saying that to be ugly but that that's oftentimes that's the answer people have.

Well i went to church mom read the bible it worked for her. So i i i'm going to read the bible and it works for me. Well that's subjective. That's not objective. That's not something that is is is is propositionally true.

That's something that is individually true and subjective. So um what i want to just go over today. Uh well first i want to say what are the dangers of that first statement. The bible contains the word of god.

What are some of the dangers that that would be associated with that statement. Yeah i think. Yeah. Go ahead. You're it seems to me that that culture is the people like this that do it this way they want to incorporate incorporate modern culture into the bible and things like women as elders they can do that because you know that we know now that women are equal in every way and they should be leaders too and so they can just mold it into what they want.

They can say well that part's not true. But everything else i guess the other thing too that would bother me is is when you if you if you take it in one form by the true aspect of what it says the bible contains the word god then that means the god that it's only here it's not everywhere.

And the word of god is is i mean it's everywhere you know it's it's i mean it's almost like saying well god's only in this book and he is but he's not just in the book he is everything that is he's alpha and omega.

You see what i'm saying. Yeah that kind of narrative kind of it. Can it can kind of depending upon the mind looking for it squash it. Okay i see what you're saying. It can be it can be limiting also. Well my biggest concern with the bible contains the word of god is it makes man the arbiter of what is and what isn't.

Yeah the word. Because then if i open the bible it's like the conversation i had and i always tell these stories. I hope i don't bore you with my stories. I had a guy wanting to argue about some changes that were going on and back whenever we were really doing a big teaching on reform theology and some of the things that were going on in the church and and he actually came to my house and wanted to discuss with me some of the things that were going on in church which female order thing was part of it.

But it was it was all the same time. So he came to my house sat on my couch and he was sitting there and he said look he said i want you to know that i don't believe that the bible is completely true.

And i and i said you're in the wrong church. And he kind of stopped and looked at me because he'd been a member here for a long time. I said i said you're in the wrong church. And he said what are you talking about.

I said well i can throw a rock and hit 15 churches that believe like you do that the bible isn't all true. I said um but we believe that it's in our statement of faith that we've affirmed the inerrancy of the bible and that it is true.

I said so if you're not happy with that that's not going to change. You know you might want to look somewhere else. I wasn't trying to be ugly i was just i wasn't going to argue with him about the truth of the word of god.

He made a statement i don't believe the bible's true. Well you're in the wrong place. Um later in the conversation though he said well i want to talk to you about this calvinism stuff. I said i can't do that.

He said what do you mean. You can't do that. I said well a few minutes ago you told me you don't believe the whole bible is true. I said all as soon as i open the bible and show you something all you have to tell me is well i don't believe that.

I said you've cut this conversation off at the knees. There's no way we can have a lucid conversation about what the word of god says. If you don't believe it's the word of god. Because all you have to tell me is i don't believe that.

Why would i have a conversation with you about theology and doctrine when you don't have a firm foundation upon to build your theology and doctrine. The problem with the idea of the bible containing the word of god is you get to pick what is and what ain't.

That's the problem. And that's dangerous. That's the biggest danger for me. So i want to give you four thoughts today. I don't usually come in here with a broad outline like this. I'm gonna give you four thoughts and i'll be happy to make a copy of this for you.

So you don't have to write anything. This is my notes as i was writing them as i was thinking as i was driving four reasons why we believe the bible is the word of god. Number one it makes divine claims about itself.

It makes divine claims regarding itself. Now i want to say this from the beginning just because it says it's the word of god doesn't mean it's the word of god. However it's important to recognize its own claims.

Because if the bible says it wasn't the word of god or if it doubted its own integrity um then the claims of the debate would be over. If the bible says this isn't from god or we don't know if this is from god or or it said something to that effect then the whole conversation would be a moot point.

Because it would it wouldn't matter the if it didn't make the claim of divinity. If it didn't make the claim of that authority then we wouldn't need to even discuss it. Nobody asks if the iliad is the word of god.

It doesn't make that claim. You know i mean nobody asks if if you know if the writings of of of plato or aristotle or any of these guys is the word of god. Because it doesn't claim to be okay. So one of the things we have to realize from the beginning the bible claims to be the word of god.

And so it makes a statement about itself. And though that doesn't prove anything um it does give you a point to start from at least as to what it's asking me to accept what it's asking me to believe. Uh second timothy 316 all scripture is inspired by god and it's profitable for teaching for reproof for correction and for training and righteousness so that the man of god will be fully equipped for all good works all.

Right. We know that passage. 2nd timothy 316 is all scripture is god breathed. And you say now wait a minute. What is it talking about when that specific claim is talking about the old testament. Because this is paul writing in the new testament.

The new testament isn't written yet. But he's writing about the old time. He says it's god breathed. It comes from god. It's it's it's his word. And it assumes that people will know what it is. Because if you go back to the old testament and you read it thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path.

Right. Uh you know uh the scripture consistently talks about the word of god being the truth being the the statement psalm 119 all the way through is about the word of god the testimony of god the truth of god the law of god all of this being true.

Right. It's god's word. You were saying yeah the statutes have got all these things. It assumes that people will know what it is and that it's divine in origin. Jesus even challenges the pharisees for not believing god's word.

When he is talking to them about their problems he says have you not read what god said to you. And what is that. I love that phrase. And jesus. Have you not read what god spoke. You know what's the what's the assumption that jesus is making when you're reading it.

You're reading what god spoke. You're reading what he said. You haven't. Have you not read what god spoke to you saying. And he goes on to say this and that. And he's speaking to the pharisees. And what's the assumption.

You should know this. And you should know it's god's word. So the bible makes divine claims regarding itself. That's the first thing we need to remember when having this thought or conversation is the bible does make a claim regarding itself.

Doesn't make it true. But it does give you a place to start from. It's making a claim number two. It bears the evidence of divinity in itself. It bears the evidence of divinity in itself. Much of the bible is written as prophetic announcement.

And prophetic announcement can be verified historically. Key prophecies of the person work of jesus christ are found hundreds of years before he was born. I recently had a lady come to my office and she was saying she didn't really know if she believed the bible was true.

She wasn't being belligerent. She was just having doubts and issues about the bible. And i said okay i want to read you something. And i open up the bible. And i read these words. You mind. No i said i just want to read you a passage.

I dropped your bookmark there i'll be happy to. Oh i opened right to the the page right where i was going like one page over. That was nice. I said um i just want to read this to you. I said surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows.

Yet we esteemed him stricken smitten by god and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions. He was crushed for our iniquities upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace. And with his stripes we're healed.

All we like sheep have gone astray. We have turned everyone to his own way and the lord has laid upon him the iniquity of us. All i said who is that talking about. She said jesus. I said are you sure.

She said yeah. Absolutely. I said that was written 700 years before jesus was born. It's from the book of isaiah 53. Isaiah 53. And it's huh jesus on every page. Yes i said. But but that's such an obvious and you're right jesus is on every page.

But that's such an obvious reference to the coming work of christ the fact that upon him the iniquities of all people will be laid. And this is he who is going to come and be crushed for our iniquities going to bear our sins.

Isaiah 53 is such a specific outline of the of the of the work of jesus. It's the achilles heel of the jew. Because when they read that they see it's obviously a reference to jesus. And so many of them have to come up with so many exegetical gymnastics just to get around it sometimes claiming that it's israel sometimes claiming that's isaiah himself but never being allowed to say no.

It's actually referring to the coming messiah who is the suffering servant written 700 years before jesus was born again. The bible d d uh bears the evidence of divinity within itself. Um like when john is in this gospel in the beginning was the word it kind of said it right off the bat.

Here's where here's our page our benchmark for this. Yeah. Absolutely. It's right. Yeah. The divine nature of the old and new testament are so easily recognized that other religions major world religions such as islam and uh even things you know kind of outstripped like mormonism other things like that they all are interdependent on the bible.

Even though like islam would deny certain aspects of the new testament they don't deny the divinity of it. They say that it's been corrupted. But they can't write it off wholesale because it's dependent their whole system.

Islam would not exist without the bible because so much of what is said in the quran is dependent upon what is said in the bible. It's called the torah and the angel in the in the quran it talks about the torah and the angel that's the law and the gospel.

And it's dependent upon that we are the people of the book. If you read the quran it talks about the people of the book. That's us. What's the book. The bible. It's it go ahead. Not only written by one man muhammad.

Yeah yeah. And it's written 600 years. Right. Yeah exactly. It was actually dictated by him. Yeah yeah. Yeah exactly yeah one of the things over 40 different authors over a 1500 year span of time and three different languages and over uh several continents you know because eventually it's moved into europe and everything else is written there.

So so we have we have a book that has you know if you get 40 people in a room today and ask them to talk about something as controversial as god and get them to agree. Would that be. It wouldn't be possible.

But when you have in the scriptures again 40 different authors three different languages um you know through 1500 years and yet they all are consistent with them with it within itself. It's that's the amazing part.

And of course uh you know the um atheists and those would argue well there are inconsistencies in scripture you know this day but they but they but they picket nits and and and every one of them is explainable uh through harmonization.

But it's often it's so it's such a to try to find one missing uh link you know something uh and and it's often so silly um that it's it's it's ridiculous but like i said the the the bible itself bears it bears the evidence of divinity.

So we see it makes claims about divinity and it bears evidence of divinity. Number three. Um and uh moving let me see what time. Okay we're getting close to the end. Number three it's maintained its historical integrity.

I mentioned this earlier in the lessons. I don't want to spend too much time on it but the new testament is the most well attested work of antiquity. There are thousands of handwritten manuscripts some 5700 greek manuscripts alone not not including the the other languages syriac coptic and even latin which take it well into the you know 20 30 000 range as far as handwritten manuscripts.

Um and uh no other book even comes close and i don't have the exact numbers in my mind. I do have this on a on a presentation that i give uh when i teach this as a as a whole lesson but if you consider from the time that jesus lived uh you know you figure if this was a timeline you say the birth of jesus and the cross you could say was you know around 33 years and this would have put this somewhere around 33 a .d.

Obviously that's not 100 accurate because we don't know when year zero was there was no year zero. So we kind of have to kind of fudge the numbers a little here but it was somewhere around 30 to 33 a .d.

The first books of the new testament are written uh in the mid 40s possibly as late as 50 they began to be written uh most of the writing ends at 80 70. What happened in 80 70. Instructional jerusalem.

So that's a huge uh watermark or watershed moment in in church history uh it's after this that the explosion of the copies begin to uh go out into the world as actually as soon as the books begin to be written they begin to be copied they begin to be collated.

All the what was a good trivia question was the first that we know of collection of books that went out to the churches would have the pauline corpus. The writings of paul were collected together and sent out as a as a unit that was it was the first collection of the new testament that that would have happened.

It wasn't until later that the gospels and the book of acts and other things were started to be collated together. The gospels were collated early together matthew mark luke and john uh acts as well uh but the writings of paul actually the first uh the first groupings of books that we see going out and interestingly enough it did include the book of hebrews even though i don't believe paul wrote hebrews.

Uh the people who collected them did because they put hebrews in with the writings of paul. So um anyway we see this we see this grand expansion from here we have copies if you go to we'll say 100 180 right.

Less than a generation from the writing itself we have copies that start here within a generation of the original. We have hand written copies that date back to here. Now they're fragmented because most of them written on papyri and papyri doesn't last like vellum or leather or other things like that.

But we have evidence because there are people who used to argue that the gospel of john wasn't written until the 200s or the 300s and that was very late and it was used as a way to propagandize the divinity of christ because it says so much about the divinity of christ.

But then they found a copy that dated back to as early as the first century late first century early second century and they were like oh miss that. Yeah yeah because you you know when that when it was dated for certain to be this far back.

All those other arguments about the fact that it wasn't written until later were put to bed now. Wasn't that a book of marks where they counted that. Well that the mass. I'm waiting for that to be completely confirmed.

But when that's confirmed that's going to that could push that could push and mark back into the back into the first century and would be awesome would be awesome to have that. Yes all right. So here's what i want to point out though the iliad homer's iliad is the uh is the second best work of antiquity the earliest copy if i remember this correctly.

And i if i'm wrong i'll be willing to say i'm wrong. But i'll look at my evidence or look at my uh my notes. But you from when it was cut from when it was written to when it was first the first copy that we have is a thousand years from the time it was written to the earliest copy that we have.

And this is the second best work of antiquity the new testament. We have it written and our first copy is within a generation. This written first copy it's a thousand years later. It's not even close.

You ask textual scholars guys who study the iliad and things like that. You ask them if they have what we have not even close. It's ridiculous. Oh by the way. And we have thousands of copies. They have what.

Less than. Well i think there's like a hundred between a hundred and a thousand. There's more copies than anything else. But it's so much less than that. It's not even i have to bring the numbers next week just so i can actually show you.

But it's crazy. The differences are crazy. Finally and i've already alluded to this. But i do need to finish fourth. And finally and i'll be happy to give you my notes. Jesus upheld the authority of god's written word.

He demanded allegiance to god's word as being god's word. We know this did not include the new testament because it wasn't written yet. But it did prove to the concept that god had spoken and his word had been written.

And that word was authoritative because jesus demanded that men obey it. If it didn't have authority if it wasn't from god jesus wouldn't have appealed to it as the word of god. So we believe who jesus is.

And we believe that jesus was right. And jesus believed that god's word was written. So there is part and parcel of why we would believe it. But somebody says well why then believe the new testament. Because jesus died and was buried and resurrected and rescinded before the new testament was written.

The new testament also speaks of itself as scripture. Peter in talking about the writings of paul calls them scripture. He says people have twisted the scriptures. And he compares paul's writings with the rest of the old testament.

So it's in my estimation there's no reason to doubt that the new testament is just as much scripture as isaiah or jeremiah or any of the ones that jesus would have accepted now. There were questions in the first century as to which books were authoritative and which weren't.

And this often comes up when people watch the history channel. They'll say they'll hear about though the gospel of thomas for instance. And they'll say why didn't the gospel of thomas make it in to the new testament the gospel of judas.

And when some of those are so late they don't even qualify. Some of them are not written into the second third fourth century some even one the 13th century uh which is people try to argue for its inclusion which is silly.

It's written 1300 years after the fact. But the gospel of thomas is a very early work and maybe one day we'll read it. It's only a few. It's it's a couple pages. It's very short. But the gospel of thomas is so obviously gnostic influenced and it doesn't even make sense.