The Word of God

[Guest]

I'd like to get as many opinions as possible on this topic. Christians call the bible the "word of God" but I'm curious what this phrase means to you personally. The more I study and seek to understand the scriptures the more I'm uncertain of how to define them. Here we have a collection of 66 writings by people the church recognizes as mostly prophets or spokesmen of God. In this way we can say these writings are "inspired" since these writers actually had things revealed to them directly from God.

Most Christians therefore believe the bible to be infallible since it's inspired. This is a notion I can sympathize with to a degree but since the bible is a collection of documents and not a book written by a single human author I question the "all or nothing" attitude of most. One of the reasons I don't think in completely black and white terms about this issue is because a number of passages are impossible to understand with any certainty for modern people. Paul's teaching on head coverings falls into this category because he never says what a head covering is.

Using another Pauline example, he opens 1 Corinthians by stating that he only baptized Crispus and Gaius, then immediately corrects himself to include the hosehold of Stephanas. Why would God inspire Paul to include this in his epistle? There are other examples, as we are all aware, of personal anecdotes in the bible which seem to have no relevance, other than to the person whom the letter is addressed. I've heard word of faith preachers use John's salutations to teach doctrine! I find this absurd to say the least. My question here is, what parts are inspired and which are merely anecdotal?

[Guest]

Most Christians therefore believe the bible to be infallible since it's inspired. This is a notion I can sympathize with to a degree but since the bible is a collection of documents and not a book written by a single human author I question the "all or nothing" attitude of most.

But isn't it all inspired by one Author? If it is all inspired from a single source, why wouldn't it be a "all or nothing" situation? He is God or He is not. He is trustworthy or He is not. This is His revelation to us or It is not.

One of the reasons I don't think in completely black and white terms about this issue is because a number of passages are impossible to understand with any certainty for modern people. Paul's teaching on head coverings falls into this category because he never says what a head covering is.

Paul was writing a letter to people that didn't need it explained to them. They already knew. Prostitutes of that day would have uncovered heads to show that they were available...in more than one sense. Temple prostitution was common. Putting the verses in that context, Paul was saying that women should not be advertising their availability, showing off their sexuality, in the church. The universal truth here is that women should dress modestly.

My question here is, what parts are inspired and which are merely anecdotal?

It may not all be applicable to us today, like passages that say "if you are coming my way, bring me my coat", but that does not mean that we should question the validity of any of it just because some of it may not apply to us. Setting up the question of which applies versus which is inspired is, to me, a false dichotomy.
D.

[Guest]

Most Christians therefore believe the bible to be infallible since it's inspired. This is a notion I can sympathize with to a degree but since the bible is a collection of documents and not a book written by a single human author I question the "all or nothing" attitude

But the bible does'nt claim to be infallible it only claims to be true and God breathed or inspired but recorded through fallible men who can make mistakes. And there may be some minor mistakes but that would'nt change the truth of the bible.

[Guest]

Hello

I like the way dj replied to this question. I would say I am in agreement with him.

I know as my kids were growing up I always explained to them the bible was Gods instruction manual on how we "worked". Like a person who invented a bike or car etc would write an instruction manual and explain how it worked, how it could be fixed,how the parts went together etc.

You can always try to modify the original design manual which many do with bikes, cars, etc. instruction manuals. I believe many of us even do it with the bible, in personal inteprutations , church leadership and how they decifer it passing it on , even different publishers.Some on purpose, some by blindness.

I would think scholars treat it so important that the books of God are authentic because they want to make sure we are getting Gods "instruction manual for us" as complete and untampered as possible ( I am not including those in power over the years that had less than pure motives )So many scholars are envolved in word origins, how other lands decipher things etc and how that is interpruted into our language etc.

It's beyond my reach some times in understanding some of Gods words, but I respect those that have a calling for it and pass it on.And I think it is important we all share our "piece of the pie" we have. I myself believe I can follow Gods word on my level of interprutation and walk a fairly good life for my Lord, still trying to improve daily if I continue to read His "word", pray, listen and incorporate it into my life as "my" instruction manual. .

I like in 1 Corn. 12:14 through 26 where we are spoken of as one body all parts needed.I believe all the folks in the bible are all part of the body or the "bodies" story over time showing us how we are all needed and where we make mistakes, or go right etc. inspired by God or in turning our back on him and the results.

An excellent manual written by a master in my mind.....And being that it is written "inspired by God it has a supernatural component that goes beyond just words on a page but connects some where deep inside us in our spirit where we just "know" it is Him speaking to us.....I can't say I have ever read anything else that has ever had an effect like that on me...

thats my input anyways. Glow

[Guest]

But isn't it all inspired by one Author? If it is all inspired from a single source, why wouldn't it be a "all or nothing" situation? He is God or He is not. He is trustworthy or He is not. This is His revelation to us or It is not.

Not to sound like Bill Clinton but it depends what you mean by "it" in that first sentence. Jesus confirmed that the Old Testament was inspired by God but the New Testament doesn't make this claim about itself. I do believe what's written in our New Testament is true, but is it inspired in the same way the Old Testament was inspired? If so, how do we know this since the closest thing we have is Peter calling Paul's letters "scripture."

Let me attempt to answer my own question here and get your thoughts. When I read the book of Pslams or Proverbs it certainly seems like this is the same person that wrote Romans or 1 Corinthians. Intellectually I know that David, Solomon and Paul are different people but they seem to speak with a single voice. This is difficult to find in other literature, even comparing two works by the same author. This would be considered subjective but there does seem to be an eerily common element among all the books of our bible. In fact, this is the only "evidence" in my mind that tells me the New Testament is inspired by God. Otherwise, it's just a collection of historical documents that are written by honest men... which isn't a problem for me.

My problem with the whole inspiration idea is how that word is applied. For example, consider the following verse from 3 John 1:2:

Beloved, I pray that you may prosper in all things and be in health, just as your soul prospers.

I've heard this verse cited half a dozen times by Christians who tell me this is a promise from God that he will not let his people suffer from sickness or disease. I'm sorry but God isn't speaking in this passage. Paul is simply greeting a close friend in the customary manner of his day. This is where the "inspiration" of scripture gets dangerous. I think we certainly need to make a dichotomy here.

[Guest]

Beloved, I pray that you may prosper in all things and be in health, just as your soul prospers.

I've heard this verse cited half a dozen times by Christians who tell me this is a promise from God that he will not let his people suffer from sickness or disease. I'm sorry but God isn't speaking in this passage. Paul is simply greeting a close friend in the

JC, Even here Paul says "that you may" which hardly sounds like a promise. In the OT much of it was simply recording historical events and in Acts it's like a narrative of the early church and Paul's initial Christian life. Throughout the NT we have doctrine mixed in with just normal sounding events so we need to read with discernment and "rightly divide the Word of God."
Paul did claim he wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and he did say "all scripture is God breathed" and i don't think this refers to only the OT. And Jesus said we shall live by "every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God", so did Jesus not know what would be in the NT?

[Guest]

STEVE7150, you raise good points. But many of these New Testament books weren't officially canonized until Hippo/Carthage in the fourth century. Some of the church fathers didn't accept Hebrews, Jude, and 2nd Peter. Now don't get me wrong, I believe in the inspiration of scripture (though not in the word of faith way). I'm just curious as to what others thought about this and how they define "inspired." Obviously you disagree with the word of faith definition, as do I.