Andy Stanley’s Poison Pill for the Doctrine of Scripture

Andy Stanley’s comments on Adam and Eve have been making the rounds since they appeared on HereIBlog.com yesterday. In short, Stanley affirms the historicity of Adam and Eve, but not because Genesis says so. Rather, he bases his belief on what Jesus says about Adam and Eve. You can listen to the entire discussion above, but here are the relevant excerpts:

The foundation of our faith is not the Scripture. The foundation of our faith is not the infallibility of the Bible. The foundation of our faith is something that happened in history. And the issue is always – Who is Jesus? That’s always the issue. The Scripture is simply a collection of ancient documents that tells us that story…

Here’s why I believe this actually happened. Not because the Bible says so, but because of the Gospels – Jesus talks about Adam and Eve. And it appears to me that he believed they were actually historical figures. And if he believed they were historical, I believe they were historical because anybody that can predict their own death and resurrection and pull it off – I just believe anything they say.

Let me say first of all that I am genuinely grateful that Stanley affirms the historicity of Adam and Eve. In this day and age, that position is under siege, and I don’t want to minimize the importance of Stanley’s affirmation in this regard.    Continue at Denny Burk

IMAGE

16 Rules of Bible Interpretation

Jesus, in the preamble to quoting a verse from the Old Testament said, “…have you not read what was spoken to you by God…” (Matt. 22:31). He then went on to quote a verse from the book of Genesis. Think about that for a moment. Jesus believed (and held people accountable for doing so) that when someone read a verse from the Old Testament, they were reading something spoken to them by God. That is a very high view of Scripture, to be sure. 

The testimony of Jesus and of the Bible is that “All Scripture is God breathed” (2 Tim. 3:16). Therefore, when we open up a page in our Bibles, we are treading upon holy ground. The Bible, although a book, is also unlike any other book. It is not simply a book giving facts about God. The Bible is a book written by God. Certainly, human writers were involved, but the text of Scripture is inspired or breathed out by God Himself. Just having this concept in place would greatly help us in our Bible studies. 

What do I mean by that? 

Well, many people view the interpretation of God’s Word as “no big deal” really. To them it is nothing more important than the reading of any other book, at least in their methodology. Continue at John Samson

C.S. Lewis

There is probably no Christian in modern times better known or more influential than Clive Staples Lewis. Born in Belfast in the year 1899, Lewis would write dozens of books on a variety of topics before his death on November 22, 1963 (on the very day of the deaths of John Kennedy and Aldous Huxley). At the time of his death his popularity was starting to wane but shortly thereafter there was a revival of interest in Lewis and, arguably, today he is more deeply admired than ever. He is considered by many to be the greatest apologist for the Christian faith to have ever lived. Whether you agree with this assessment or not, there is no doubt that Lewis was in a league almost by himself in his ability to write great truths in ways that spoke to our hearts and opened our eyes. For this reason, even those who are troubled with much of Lewis’ theology can hardly resist quoting him. There is a danger, however, of all-but-canonizing Lewis, giving more weight to his imaginative explorations and philosophical reasonings than to Scripture. Ruth Tucker writes, “Among Protestants there is only one pope of apologetics…. If C. S. Lewis said it, it must be true. In many circles it seems that the voice of C. S. Lewis is second only to the voice of God.”

There is no doubt that Lewis has earned the respect he receives.

Lewis penned over fifty books, some of them compiled posthumously. There are seventeen biblical, theological, and philosophically-related works, fourteen works of literary criticism, twenty of a more imaginative literary nature (including seven children’s books, four science fiction thrillers, and four books of poetry – two of these penned as a youthful atheist), and three compilations of his letters.

Lewis’ insights into life are often astounding, yet the discerning Christian needs to be aware that Lewis is not the final word on faith and practice. As a matter of fact, while much of Lewis’ apologetics are sound and his understanding of life penetrating, his theology was somewhat of a mess. Even his “friends accused Lewis of a rumpled dress and a somewhat rumpled theology too.”   Continue at Gary Gilley

Is Only the King James Version the Word of God?

The King James-only movement refuses to recognize any other translation in English as the Word of God. As I noted in previous posts (here and here), the Preface to the 1611 KJV is an embarrassment to the KJV-only position because in the Preface the translators themselves absolutely reject the erroneous idea that any translation has such a unique position. Unlike modern KJV-only advocates, the translators them­selves admired the work of previous translators of the English Bible.

And to the same effect say we, that we are so far off from condemning any of their labours that travailed before us in this kind, either in this land, or beyond sea, either in King Henry’s time, or King Edward’s, (if there were any translation, or correction of a translation, in his time) or Queen Elizabeth’s of ever renowned memory, that we acknowledge them to have been raised up of God for the building and furnishing of his Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posterity in everlasting remem­brance.

The preface goes on to declare that other translations are also the Word of God, even if they contain minor errors. In fact, they acknowl­edge that errorless translation is impossible since translators are not like the apostles, who were superintended by the Holy Spirit in their writing.

Now to the latter we answer, that we do not deny, nay, we affirm and avow, that the very meanest [worst] translation of the Bible in English set forth by men of our profession…containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God: as the King’s speech which he uttered in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian, and Latin, is still the King’s speech, though it be not interpreted by every translator with the like grace, nor peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, every where.…A man may be counted a virtuous man, though he have made many slips in his life, (else there were none virtuous, for in many things we offend all) also a comely man and lovely, though he have some warts upon his hand, yea, not only freckles upon his face, but also scars. No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it. For whatever was perfect under the sun, where Apostles or apostolick men, that is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of God’s Spirit, and privileged with the privilege of infallibility, had not their hand?

So according to the translators there is no justifiable reason why any good-faith translation should not be considered the Word of God, yet KJV-only proponents have denied that any English translation since 1611 is the Word of God.  Continue at Bill Combs

The Question of Canonicity

In my seminary classes this week, we have been covering the topic of canonicity. In today’s post I include just a brief portion of our class discussion.

 

Why do we consider the 66 books that make up our Bibles to be the inspired and authoritative Word of God?

While we could easily write many pages in response to this question, I believe the answer is ultimately a simple one. As Christians, we submit to the inspiration and authority of the Old Testament because Jesus Christ affirmed it as God’s Word. And, we submit to the inspiration and authority of the New Testament because Jesus Christ authorized His apostles to reveal His truth to His church.

The short answer to the canonicity question, then, is Jesus Christ. He determined the canon for us when He affirmed the Old Testament and authorized the New.

What follows is an introductory framework that fleshes this out in a little more detail:

1. By definition, the written Word of God consists of that which God has revealed through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

2 Peter 1:20–21 – “But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation [creation or origination], for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”    Keep Reading >>>

The Greatest Fight in the World

…the Word is like its Author, infinite, immeasurable, without end. If you were ordained to be a preacher throughout eternity, you would have before you a theme equal to everlasting demands. Brothers, shall we each have a pulpit somewhere amidst the spheres? Shall we have a parish of millions of leagues? Shall we have voices so strengthened as to reach attentive constellations? Shall we be witnesses for the Lord of grace to myriads of worlds which will be wonder-struck when they hear of the incarnate God? Shall we be surrounded by pure intelligences enquiring and searching into the mystery of God manifest in the flesh? Will the unfallen worlds desire to be instructed in the glorious gospel of the blessed God? And will each one of us have his own tale to tell of our experience of infinite love? I think so, since the Lord has saved us "to the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church of the manifold wisdom of God." If such be the case, our Bibles will suffice for ages to come for new themes every morning, and for fresh songs and discourses world without end.

We are resolved, then, since we have this arsenal supplied for us of the Lord, and since we want no other, to use the Word of God only, and to use it with greater energy. We are resolved—and I hope there is no dissentient among us—to know our Bibles better. Do we know the sacred volume half so well as we should know it? Have we laboured after as complete a knowledge of the Word of God as many a critic has obtained of his favourite classic? Is it not possible that we still meet with passages of Scripture which are new to us? Should it be so? Is there any part of what the Lord has written which you have never read? I was struck with my brother Archibald Brown's observation, that he bethought himself that unless he read the Scriptures through from end to end there might be inspired teachings which had never been known to him, and so he resolved to read the books in their order; and having done so once, he continued the habit. Have we, any of us, omitted to do this? Let us begin at once. I love to see how readily certain of our brethren turn up an appropriate passage, and then quote its fellow, and crown all with a third. They seem to know exactly the passage which strikes the nail on the head. They have their Bibles, not only in their hearts, but at their fingers' ends. This is a most valuable attainment for a minister. A good textuary is a good theologian. Certain others, whom I esteem for other things, are yet weak on this point, and seldom quote a text of Scripture correctly: indeed, their alterations jar on the ear of the Bible reader. It is sadly common among ministers to add a word or subtract a word from the passage, or in some way to debase the language of sacred writ. How often have I heard brethren speak about making "your calling and salvation" sure! Possibly they hardly enjoyed so much as we do the Calvinistic word "election", and therefore they allowed the meaning; nay, in some cases contradict it. Our reverence for the great Author of Scripture should forbid all mauling of his words. No alteration of Scripture can by any possibility be an improvement. Believers in verbal inspiration should be studiously careful to be verbally correct. The gentlemen who see errors in Scripture may think themselves competent to amend the language of the Lord of hosts; but we who believe God, and accept the very words he uses, may not make so presumptuous an attempt. Let us quote the words as they stand in the best possible translation, and it will be better still if we know the original, and can tell if our version fails to give the sense. How much mischief may arise out of an accidental alteration of the Word! Blessed are they who are in accord with the divine teaching, and receive its true meaning, as the Holy Ghost teaches them! Oh, that we might know the Spirit of Holy Scripture thoroughly, drinking it in, til we are saturated with it! This is the blessing which we resolve to obtain.    Keep Reading>>>

What Makes Evangelicals Different?

What is it that separates evangelicals from the rest of the world, even some other branches of Christianity? The fundamental dividing line is the belief in the inerrancy and authority of Scripture. Why does it matter if we believe this or not?

• It matters because what you think about the Bible directly affects what you believe and how you live. Is the Bible like an all-you-can-eat buffet where you pick and choose what to believe and obey?
• It matters because views of the Bible set individuals and institutions on very different trajectories. Institutions that have rejected the Bible’s entire trustworthiness have often gone on to embrace beliefs incompatible with the gospel. This controversial issue is a theological line in the sand.

How is the Bible a book like no other? It is:

A book that is God-breathed: Inspiration. God authored the Bible through humans. He did not dictate it as an executive would dictate do a secretary. If a musician plays the same tune through a variety of wind instruments, each will sound different although each is coming from the same breath. God produced the Bible through the different personalities of his “instruments.”    Keep Reading...

Image

Some Questions For The Pastor

Article by W. J. Mencarow Pastor of Reformation Church Boerne, TX
 

Here are some questions you should ask the pastor. All questions anticipate a “yes” answer. If he cannot give you a flat “yes,” and instead talks around the question, or says that the question is too complicated for a yes or no answer, or some other such evasive nonsense, find another church.

Warning: You will find very few churches in which the pastor will answer “yes” to every one of these questions. Even if he answers “yes” to all the others, the question with which he will most likely take issue is the one about worship. Sadly, there are very few churches that conform to virtually all elements of Biblical worship. And of course there is no perfect church on this earth, because they are administered by imperfect men.

However, that does not mean one has to avoid a church simply because there are elements of its worship that are lacking. For example, it is very difficult to find a church that sings out of the Lord’s songbook, the Psalms, exclusively. (most Christians are unaware that the opposite has almost always been true — there were no churches that sang hymns composed by men until relatively recently in church history. Our Christian forefathers would ask us, “Why do you want to sing words written by uninspired men and women when you have 150 songs written by God and given by Him for us to sing?”) Keep Reading>>>

J.I. Packer on Why We Need Inerrancy

Inspiration and Preservation - KJV Only Debate