How much of Scripture is inspired?

[Guest]

You're welcome

[Guest]

Distortion by Bible Teachers and Preachers.

Some pastors, preachers, and teachers are also guilty of this "the Lord gave me this verse" abuse of Scriptures, though they may often

give the appearance of being faithful to the Word. But just as some believers distort the Word by seeking the contemporary meaning of the Bible without regard to its historical, cultural, and grammatical meaning, so also do these pastors, preachers, and teachers use the Bible merely as a launching pad to recycle their opinions.

What often parades as biblical teaching and preaching in today's churches is more of form, rhetoric, and antics than of substance.

To give the impression that they are explaining the Bible, these teachers and preachers may sprinkle a few Greek and Hebrew words on some selected Bible texts, and having performed this ceremonial rite, they launch into: (i) moralistic advice or pep-talks on some

techniques of modern psychological therapy, (ii) a rousing speech on politics or some other ideological fad, (iii) a pursuit of comedy, theatrics or even occultic exorcisms of alleged

demonic oppression, (iv) creative or moving stories to tickle the ears, or (v) recycled public opinions or the opinions of experts.

All this is done in the name of "relevance" or of meeting the needs of church members, with the teachers and preachers thinking that such gimmicks and high-sounding human words will revitalize the church and cause it to grow. Meanwhile, the world and the church languish in a great famine for the unadulterated Word of God (cf. Amos 8:11-12).

A Los Angeles Times Magazine article illustrated the results of this famine. A Protestant church in Southern California distributes flyers advertising their church as "God's Country Goodtime Hour," with a bold promise: "Lne dancing following worship." The reporter wrote:

"The pastor is dancing, too, decked out in Wrangler boots and Levis." She continued: "Members listen to sermons whose topics include the pastor's '70 Ford pickup, and Christian sex (rated R for 'relevance, respect, and relationship . . . and more fun than it sounds'). After service, they dance to a band called--what else?--Honkytonk Angels. Attendance has been steadily rising."

The apostle Paul had the solution to today's problem: "I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom. Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy

ministry" (2 Tim 4:1-5,).

[Guest]

Diminishing Popular Distortions.

Sound principles of Bible interpretation (hermeneutics) can reduce some of the distortions of the Word. By studying the Bible in its historical, grammatical and literary context, comparing Scripture with Scripture, we can come to a better understanding of what a text meant to its original readers. Only as we understand what a text meant to its writer and original recipients can we be in a position to know what it means for us today.

In the next chapter we shall show that "rightly dividing the Word" means avoiding spiritualizing or allegorizing the Bible in the name of relevance or meaningfulness. We must first ascertain the historical-grammatical meaning of Scripture, and from there proceed to draw valid principles for contemporary application.

[oldsailor29]

Diminishing Popular Distortions.

Sound principles of Bible interpretation (hermeneutics) can reduce some of the distortions of the Word. By studying the Bible in its historical, grammatical and literary context, comparing Scripture with Scripture, we can come to a better understanding of what a text meant to its original readers. Only as we understand what a text meant to its writer and original recipients can we be in a position to know what it means for us today.

In the next chapter we shall show that "rightly dividing the Word" means avoiding spiritualizing or allegorizing the Bible in the name of relevance or meaningfulness. We must first ascertain the historical, and from there proceed to draw valid principles for contemporary application.

Richard - I can agree with you about the importance of ascertaining the historical-grammatical meaning of Scripture in order to learn what it should mean to us, but I draw the line before I get to contemporary application. I believe Jesus gave us our contemporary applications.

[phkrause]

All scripture is inspired. If not than Jesus would not have quoted from the Bible that he knew, which would be the OT as we call it today. And as far as the NT, God made sure that what was not inspired didn't make it in. Like the book of Thomas (the only one that I can think of right now). He made sure that these outlandish books were thrown out on there you know what.

pk

[there buster]

Quote:

I believe Jesus gave us our contemporary applications.

So "contemporary" means 2000 years ago. Hmmm.

[Guest]

Quote:

I believe Jesus gave us our contemporary applications.

So "contemporary" means 2000 years ago. Hmmm.

I see what you mean.

[Guest]

All scripture is inspired. If not than Jesus would not have quoted from the Bible that he knew, which would be the OT as we call it today. And as far as the NT, God made sure that what was not inspired didn't make it in. Like the book of Thomas (the only one that I can think of right now). He made sure that these outlandish books were thrown out on there you know what.

pk

Some people don't believe that, but I do.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Just FYI:

The word "contemporary" when used in reference to antiquarian books, refers to the time period in which the book was written.

[Guest]

Just FYI:

The word "contemporary" when used in reference to antiquarian books, refers to the time period in which the book was written.

I see.....I wonder if oldsailor knows that.

[Musicman1228]

All scripture is inspired. If not than Jesus would not have quoted from the Bible that he knew, which would be the OT as we call it today. And as far as the NT, God made sure that what was not inspired didn't make it in. Like the book of Thomas (the only one that I can think of right now). He made sure that these outlandish books were thrown out on there you know what.

pk

How did Jesus keep that which was not inspired by the Holy Spirit from getting into the New Testament? If that is the case then Jesus is confirming the authority of the Roman Catholic Church to set the agenda for truth because it was the RCC that Emperor Constantine authorized to put the NT together at the Council of Leodicea in 325-25 CE. If this is the case then we should stop trashing the RCC and become members of that church. You can't have it both ways; you either believe that the RCC has the authority to do what they did, or there is a good possibility that some uninspired material actually got into the New Testament.

[Guest]

How did Jesus keep that which was not inspired by the Holy Spirit from getting into the New Testament?

How did he keep it out of the old testament? Do you think HE has a short arm? You should read the book I'm posting on this thread, you might learn something about how the Bible was really put together. It does go against your Anti-Paul agenda though, and I know how your mind is closed, and locked up pretty tight where that's concerned. I think it's against your religion to read this sort of thing.

[Guest]

Scholarly Distortion: Evaluation as Interpretation

The scholars' most common form of scriptural distortion is viewing interpretation as evaluation. Rather than simply seeking to understand what the Bible writer said or wrote, such scholars think that they must declare whether a given passage is truthful, ethical, or factually accurate.

Scholars thus impose upon the Bible passage their own assumptions or presuppositions regarding what constitutes truthfulness, right and wrong, or factual accuracy, and on these assumptions they reconstruct the Bible, distorting biblical exposition into an ideological imposition.

In other words, in the scholarly approach (the historical-critical method), what should have been a sound exegesis (reading out of the biblical text what is already there) is reduced to a dubious eisegesis (reading into the biblical text what is not there).

In this respect, both the scholarly approach and the popular approach are expressions of the proof-text method. They differ only in kind and degree. To understand how scholars are manufacturing difficulties from the plainest revealed truths of Scripture, imposing their unbiblical assumptions on Scripture, we shall need to take a look at their attitude toward the Bible and the kinds of doubts they raise concerning its inspired message.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Quote:

The scholars' most common form of scriptural distortion is viewing interpretation as evaluation. Rather than simply seeking to understand what the Bible writer said or wrote, such scholars think that they must declare whether a given passage is truthful, ethical, or factually accurate.

Scholars thus impose upon the Bible passage their own assumptions or presuppositions regarding what constitutes truthfulness, right and wrong, or factual accuracy, and on these assumptions they reconstruct the Bible, distorting biblical exposition into an ideological imposition.

I see that happening on the forum sometimes.

[Guest]

Me too

[Guest]

The Critical Scholars and the Bible

In the Seventh-day Adventist church, just as in other Bible believing conservative churches, criticism of the Bible is carried out by moderate liberals. As we explained in Chapter Three, moderate liberalism or accommodationism is old-fashioned liberalism in new

and respectable garb: "The only significant difference between the new Liberalism and the old seems to be that the former lays more stress than did the latter on the importance of believing the more or less mangled Bible that comes out of the critical mincing-machine."

Unlike the classical or radical liberals whose loud critical voices are heard from time to time in Christian churches, accommodationists are not so radical or vocal in their rejection of some portions of the Bible. This is why they appeal to many Christians as earnest,

"progressive," and "open-minded" Christians.

They argue eloquently that the Bible is not as simplistic or ordinary as the radical liberals want people to believe; neither is it wholly trustworthy and dependable as the Bible-believing

Christians want to maintain. But accommodationists are closer to radical liberals than to Bible-believing conservatives in their views on biblical authority and interpretation.

[Guest]

Biblical Authority.

Even though they claim to make the Bible central in their Christian

faith and practice, accommodationists do not take the Bible as the final word on any issue. The Bible only opens possibilities for its readers, but the determination of what to believe and practice is the individual's responsibility. The Bible, they claim, does not have answers for every issue; more often it raises questions.

One non-Adventist accommodationist writer stated: "There is a natural and understandable human desire to have some authority available to us that would answer all questions. What God has given us, instead, is a Word which prompts more questions than it answers

In Scripture, God has uttered for us not the last word but the first--a Word designed to set us off on a pilgrimage, in pursuit of that life that he has willed for us to have."

When this author writes that "in Scripture, God has uttered for us not the last word but the first," he is stating subtly that the Bible is not the sole or normative authority for the Christian.

In this view, Scripture has only a "primary authority" over experience and empirical data.

[Steve Billiter]

The Critical Scholars and the Bible

In the Seventh-day Adventist church, just as in other Bible believing conservative churches, criticism of the Bible is carried out by moderate liberals. As we explained in Chapter Three, moderate liberalism or accommodationism is old-fashioned liberalism in new

and respectable garb: "The only significant difference between the new Liberalism and the old seems to be that the former lays more stress than did the latter on the importance of believing the more or less mangled Bible that comes out of the critical mincing-machine."

Unlike the classical or radical liberals whose loud critical voices are heard from time to time in Christian churches, accommodationists are not so radical or vocal in their rejection of some portions of the Bible. This is why they appeal to many Christians as earnest,

"progressive," and "open-minded" Christians.

They argue eloquently that the Bible is not as simplistic or ordinary as the radical liberals want people to believe; neither is it wholly trustworthy and dependable as the Bible-believing

Christians want to maintain. But accommodationists are closer to radical liberals than to Bible-believing conservatives in their views on biblical authority and interpretation.

Well Richard, As Paul said, we must all be persuaded in our own minds as to what is truth. If we teach and live what we believe without hypocrisy perhaps some will be turned to the Holy Scriptures. The bottom line for me is that those who never have a relationship with Jesus Christ will also never know what the Bible is really about. Why? Because they have not submitted to its teachings for positive change in the life.

I try to keep this in mind for my life's journey here until this planet expires.

Heb 4:12 For the word of God is living, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

The power of the Bible is totally unlike no other book. It has all of the authority of the Sovereign of the Universe behind it. How sad and tragic when sinful men, made out of dust, sit in judgment of God Himself, because professing themselves wise, they become fools.

For me,the Holy Spirit writes the best advertisement for the Bible and expresses my belief far better than I can:

Chapter 13 —The Bible

In the Scriptures thousands of gems of truth lie hidden from the surface seeker. The mine of truth is never exhausted. The more you search the Scriptures with humble hearts, the greater will be your interest, and the more you will feel like exclaiming with Paul: "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out!" Romans 11:33 101 {CCh 86.1}

Christ and His word are in perfect harmony. Received and obeyed, they open a sure path for the feet of all who are willing to walk in the light as Christ is in the light. If the people of God would appreciate His word, we should have a heaven in the church here below. Christians would be eager, hungry, to search the word. They would be anxious for time to compare scripture with scripture and to meditate upon the word. They would be more eager for the light of the word than for the morning paper, magazines, or novels. Their greatest desire would be to eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of God.

And as a result their lives would be conformed to the principles and promises of the word. Its instruction would be to them as the leaves of the tree of life. It would be in them a well of water, springing up into everlasting life. Refreshing showers of grace would refresh and revive the soul, causing them to forget all toil and weariness. They would be strengthened and encouraged by the words of inspiration. 102 {CCh 86.2}

In its wide range of style and subjects the Bible has something to interest every mind and appeal to every heart. In its pages are found history the most ancient; biography the truest to life; principles of government for the control of the state, for the regulation of the household—principles that human wisdom has never equaled. It contains philosophy the most profound, poetry the sweetest and the most sublime, the most impassioned and the most pathetic.

Immeasurably superior in value to the productions of any human author are the Bible writings, even when thus considered; but of infinitely wider scope, of infinitely greater value, are they when viewed in their relation to the grand central thought. Viewed in the light of this thought, every topic has a new significance. In the most simply stated truths are involved principles that are as high as heaven and that compass eternity. 103 {CCh 86.3}

Every day you should learn something new from the Scriptures. Search them as for hid treasures, for they contain the words of eternal life. Pray for wisdom and understanding to comprehend these holy writings. {CCh 86.4}

If you would do this you would find new glories in the word of God; you would feel that you had received new and precious light on subjects connected with the truth, and the Scriptures would be constantly receiving a new value in your estimation. 104 {CCh 87.1}

The truths of the Bible, received, will uplift the mind from its earthliness and debasement. If the word of God were appreciated as it should be, both young and old would possess an inward rectitude, a strength of principle, that would enable them to resist temptation. 105 {CCh 87.2}

[Guest]

A big hearty AMEN to that.

Thanks for the quotes. You are an asset to this forum.

[Steve Billiter]

Thanks Richard for the kind words. We also need all the positive, respectful, considerate persons like your self on Club Adventist that we can get!

[Kevin H]

All scripture is inspired. If not than Jesus would not have quoted from the Bible that he knew, which would be the OT as we call it today. And as far as the NT, God made sure that what was not inspired didn't make it in. Like the book of Thomas (the only one that I can think of right now). He made sure that these outlandish books were thrown out on there you know what.

pk

Most if not all of us believe that all scripture is inspired. The issue of differentation is how inspiration works. Is it what the Fundamentalists, Pipin and Haskell say; or does it work like Ellen White teaches in Selected Messages, The Great Controversy, the original writer who Mrs. White copied from for those passages (except of course her change from it being more subjective to more objective) and what she said about the reform dress, testimony 11, and her conversations and letters with Haskell on how inspiration works.

Is it the way the people who over-threw the General Conference in 1923 believed it to work, or like A. G. Daniels, W. W. Prescott, Willie White, the religion department at Washington Missionary College at that time, and even Elder Spicer (although some of these, such as Spicer who definetely did, may haveheld both views of how inspiration worked, he saw the one way as how the Bible was written and the other way for Mrs. White).

[oldsailor29]

All scripture is inspired. If not than Jesus would not have quoted from the Bible that he knew, which would be the OT as we call it today. And as far as the NT, God made sure that what was not inspired didn't make it in. Like the book of Thomas (the only one that I can think of right now). He made sure that these outlandish books were thrown out on there you know what.

pk

[Guest]

I noticed that Jesus did not quote the entire OT.

There was no need for Him to quote the entire OT, so why would He?

Just because Jesus didn't quote something, doesn't make it invalid.

[there buster]

Quote:

I noticed that Jesus did not quote the entire OT.

Precisely how did you 'notice' that?

Perhaps you refer to the fact that the gospel accounts do not record Jesus as quoting the entire OT. But then, the gospel accounts do not claim to be exhaustive concerning Jesus' words and deeds. In fact, John says the opposite: "Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written." John 21:26

So, first, you do not know whether Jesus quoted the entire OT or not. And second, even if he did not, that constitutes an 'argument from silence' which is always a weak argument.

[oldsailor29]

Perhaps you refer to the fact that the gospel accounts do not record Jesus as quoting the entire OT. But then, the gospel accounts do not claim to be exhaustive concerning Jesus' words and deeds. In fact, John says the opposite: "Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written." John 21:26

So, first, you do not know whether Jesus quoted the entire OT or not. And second, even if he did not, that constitutes an 'argument from silence' which is always a weak argument.

I believe I do know that Jesus did not quote the entire OT. But even if He did,all the quotations of the OT by Jesus were reinterpretations, which He used to effect conversions to His Gospel. While the new covenant is the same as the old covenant, it was being misinterpreted. Jesus interpreted it correctly. In order for us to correctly interpret whatever Jesus didn't, we must start following His example of interpretation, and not make the same mistakes made by the OT leaders. And I don't think we can really trust ourselves not to make those mistakes. So I think our safest course will be to just read what Jesus said, and trust that. After all that is the only way to follow His command to eat His flesh and drink His blood. Reading and promoting what Jesus said is the only way to lift Him up. I think we must believe Jesus when He says "No one comes to the Father but by me." Jesus gave His followers His message and His proof texts for the purpose of converting people from their current OT interpretation to His interpretation. We have done wrong by going back in the direction of the doctrines held by those Jesus was aiming to convert. I have said several times, we are on the wrong road, and everyone has probably read my explanation of that statement. If not, just read "Life Sketches" chs. vii & xxx.