Do Translations Matter?

Some cults (like the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints or Mormons) and conservative circles prefer the Authorized or King James Version, as you may well know. This was the favorite translation of evangelicals for decades before the NIV replaced it in 1978. Still today many conservative circles swear by the KJV. I've heard it said that the KJV is the "original" and that all other translations are corruptions (actually Wycliffe was the first to translate the Bible into modern English). I think this is a "Bible-club mentality" or exclusive spirit (which is what a cult has) and can lead to a narrow interpretation of the Scriptures.

First of all, the original translation into English was by John Wycliffe (not counting King Alfred translating some Psalms into old English or Anglo-Saxon), but those were before the printing press. Also, Tyndale (who prayed to God to open the eyes of the king of England--King Henry VIII) is considered the Father of the English version, and Coverdale finished his work. The Geneva Bible (the first one in regular type and verses) was the most popular one of the 16th century and England was not happy that the Bishop's Bible was not as popular so they commissioned a new translation. The 54 scholars who translated the Authorized Version relied upon this former work heavily. Tyndale was a student of Luther's and relied upon Luther for his translation of the Old Testament.

Remember, it is not the translation per se that is infallible and inerrant, but the original autograph--and these are not extant today. If you really want to be accurate in your study, you really should not just go to the KJV or any other version, but to the original Koine Greek or Aramaic or Hebrew text! (Exegesis involves a working knowledge of the original tongues.) Modern translations rely on more accurate and better manuscripts than the translators of the Authorized Version had.

I think that one should read a translation that he feels comfortable with and "graduate" to more sophisticated or scholarly Bibles as he matures. I don't think one should base his doctrine upon a certain translation and I don't think any major doctrine depends upon any certain translation--God protects His Word, and that means you can get saved reading the Roman Catholic Bible or a Jehovah's Witness can be shown wrong from his own version (New World Translation).

The "Englishisms" in the KJV are hard to understand by beginning Bible students, and some words are archaic and have changed meaning since the Elizabethan English days of 1611. The New King James Version stays loyal to the KJV and just removes the "Thees and Thous" et al., and the words that are now obsolete or vague (or have changed the meaning) now, making it more readable, but staying loyal to the beautiful language as much as possible. Remember this: The goal is to get you into the Word!

There is a difference between a translation and a paraphrase. A paraphrase isn't a literal word for word, but translated thoughts into idioms or appropriate phrases instead of being literal, even if it is not understandable. There is always a balance to be drawn in how literal to be and where to paraphrase a thought to give the idea. We simply don't understand some of the expressions, idioms or euphemisms of antiquity and need to relate them to our century. Newer translations usually rely upon better manuscripts that were not available to the KJV translators.

There is a niche for every translation out there and God has a place of them. The NASB is considered to be very literal, while the Living Bible is a paraphrase, and the New Living Translation is cross between the two, and the NIV is a translation that looks at thoughts more than words for an easier understanding but keeps the KJV where it is considered accurate. Sometimes being literal means we can't understand it; the goal is to understand and apply!

It is good to have a favorite translation; let it be an educated or advised decision, though. For instance, some well known Bible teachers prefer the NASB as being the most literal. The next best thing to knowing the original languages is having a favorite translation, but know why it is your favorite. It is not good to just compare translations and pick out the one that suits your fancy or is the most convenient to your school of theology. Remember, it is the autographs in the original tongue that are inerrant, and all translations are fallible.

In short, the best translation for you is the one you will read or that God connects with you in.  Soli Deo Gloria!

Knowing The Bible Is Authentic...

Pertinent quotes:

"Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established."--Frederic G. Kenyon, archaeologist   
"There can be no doubt that archaeology has confirmed the substantial historicity of the Old Testament tradition."--Dr. William Albright, archaeologist 
"It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference."--Nelson Glueck, the renowned Jewish archaeologist 
"There are more marks of authenticity in the Bible than any profane history."--Sir Isaac Newton
"The existence of the Bible, as a book for people, is the greatest benefit which the human race has ever experienced.  Every attempt to belittle it is a crime against humanity."--Immanuel Kant
"I believe the Bible is the best gift God has ever given to man.  all the good from the Savior of the world is communicated to us through this Book."--Abraham Lincoln
"In all my perplexities and distresses, the Bible has never failed to give me light and strength."--Robert E. Lee
 "I know the Bible is inspired because it inspires me."--Dwight L. Moody
"The studious perusal of the Sacred Volume will make better citizens, better fathers, and better husbands."--Thomas Jefferson
"The New Testament is the best book the world has ever known or ever will know." Charles Dickens, author of The Life of Our Lord


NB:  IN A COURT OF LAW, A DOCUMENT IS ASSUMED GENUINE AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF FOR ITS FALSITY LIES WITH THE SKEPTIC  (SOCRATES' DICTUM).  

We don't just have blind faith that the Bible is for real and accept it with no more credence than we would a fairy tale, legend, or myth--we have sound reasons and evidence for our acceptance of its authenticity.  The Bible is based on history and is the foundation of a faith founded in fact not fiction.  The historicity of the Bible has been established by archeology with over 25,000 digs; many have attempted in vain to disprove it but have ended up believers.  

For instance, Luke is a first-rate historian and his many facts referring to events, places, and persons have been fully accredited and not disproved in any detail.  Christianity is the only historical faith, and believers have nothing to fear from any so-called new discoveries or so-called scientific facts.  It is a sad commentary on our education system that when a secular historian says one thing and the Bible another, the Bible is held suspect, not the so-called authority.

The Bible's veracity, integrity, credibility, and fidelity have been vouched for by the facts despite centuries of attack by skeptics.  The very fact of its existence is a miracle in itself due to the many attacks on it, such as being banned and rulers, like Diocletian, attempting to wipe out all extant manuscripts.  

The Bible is known for its simplicity (for even a child can comprehend its basic theme); its clarity or perspicuity (there is no double meaning or secret truths known only to the chosen or an elite, but it's plainspoken for all); its infallibility (its inerrancy is assured in its original documents when the authors were inspired by God and kept from error);  its reliability; its sufficiency (the Bible is all we need to know about our abundant life and way of salvation--all God requires us to know); its necessity (the Bible as the vehicle of Truth is required for knowing the Way to salvation and how to live appropriately to please God in His will); its corroboration by secular sources and historians of the main facts; the Bible is not obtuse nor abstruse--it's easy to understand with the aid of the Holy Spirit as the Illuminator and Holy Guide or Beacon making the Bible our Owner's Manual and Holy GPS or Celestial Guide--there are no hidden meanings or secrets; and finally, by experience, anyone that has put it to the test has found it true and proven, because it speaks to every heart in time of need.

It is a sheer myth that science has undermined the Bible.  In fact, science wouldn't be possible without the biblical worldview, and Christianity is the mother of modern science, with most early scientists being Christian.  The Bible does make scientific statements but isn't a science document either.  There are no scientific absurdities in Scripture, and many times the Bible has been proven right where it did make a scientific statement.  For example, the Bible told of the ocean currents (cf. Ps. 8:8), the water cycle (cf.  Ezek. 47:8), the laws of nature (cf. Job 38:33) before modern science conceived of them.

What is the miracle of the Bible?  First, it was inspired by the Holy Spirit and given to man as the writers, but God is the true Author.  Second, its canonization or selection by the Church Fathers deciding which books were authentically inspired and worthy of inclusion, and afterward, closure of the canon.  Third, the transmission or copying of Scripture has been to the utmost fidelity and its reliability has been confirmed.  For instance, when the Dead Sea Scrolls were found of the 166 words in Isaiah 53, only 17 letters are in question (ten for spelling, four for style, and three remains), and they are from someone adding an implied word; and so we can be assured of at least 99.5 percent accuracy of the text (freedom from discrepancy)--since the autographs are no longer extant and we only have explainable copyist error.  Many so-called inconsistencies or variants are merely changes in style or spelling such as honor and honor, both of which are correct--but no doctrine is in question or up to debate due to text variance.  With over 5,000 Greek manuscripts, scriptural integrity and fidelity have been firmly documented.

Two authoritative and scholarly books have been written to dispel any notion of contradiction in Scripture:  Gleason Archer's Encylopedia of Bible Difficulties, and John W. Haley's Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible.  It may be categorically affirmed that no alleged discrepancy has not been clarified and addressed, and no one is going to come up with some new challenge or question after twenty centuries of scholarship by Church Fathers and theologians.  It can also be stated unequivocally that no archeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference and also that any unbiased jury would confirm the historicity of the resurrection and New Testament record of the early church being founded upon this fact.   According to D. James Kennedy, the resurrection is "arguably the best-attested fact of antiquity," and Luke, in Acts 1:3, says it's vouched for by many "infallible proofs."  One cannot deny the Bible's credentials when examining the evidence!

One glaring difference between Holy Scripture and the writings of other faiths (note that of twenty-six writings in the world claim to be "scripture" none but the Bible have prophecy!) and note this is the fact of the presence of the unique abundance of prophecy in the Bible; Islam's Koran only contains one prophecy--the self-fulfilling one of Muhammad returning to Mecca!  There are over 2,000 specific, predictive, fulfilled OT prophecies, and 333 concerning Christ, that meet completion in his first advent, mentioning and delineating 456 details of His life.  These are not just a few lucky guesses, but very exact in nature, detailed and explicit.  If the Bible can be relied on to fulfill prophecy and to be accurate historically, why not trust it on its spiritual truths concerning eternal life?

The most compelling reason for the Bible's authenticity is its ability to change lives and transform character to those who choose to live by its precepts.  Many stories have been told of how someone has been inspired by the Word.  We know it's inspired because it inspires us.  But not in the way that Shakespeare is inspired--you could read him all day and your life wouldn't change, but the Bible has power inherent to change your life.

The Bible claims to be inspired in the sense of being God-breathed and directly-given by the Holy Spirit with men as the writers.  Many people, who are skeptics about the power of the Bible, have never read it nor are aware of its inner and main message or point for man.  The point is that you don't have to become a believer in the Bible first to become a Christian, but God will make a believer out of you and use it to transform your life; the end result being a profound love for the Word.

Indeed, the reasonable evidence is there to be discovered, one must just have an open mind and a willing spirit!  You don't prove the Bible, it proves itself; when asked to prove it, ask them to prove it by reading it themselves!  Remember, if the Bible can be dehistoricized, it is fully discredited, and many have attempted and failed, becoming believers in the process.  In short, the Bible is historical and given by God or it's nothing.

Caveat:  As you read the Bible, it reads you; as it feeds you, it makes you hungry; its promises have been tried and found proven and fulfilled--none have failed!  Though Muslims claim the Bible's fidelity has been corrupted or compromised, there's no evidence to that premise; au contraire, God has indeed preserved His Word with ultimate integrity through the ages.  Any honest man, examining the compelling evidence (which is not easily dismissed as bogus, but must be reckoned with or explained), would concede that the Bible is based on incontrovertible facts.

Let me mention in passing that the Bible's ultimate integrity was ultimately proven by the veracity of its writers, who were in many cases called to lay down their lives as martyrs as the test of their veracity--people will die for a lie if they believe it, but not a known lie. The evidence is abundant and sometimes compelling; one cannot disbelieve due to lack of evidence, that would even stand up in a court of law--even of the Resurrection.

In review, we verify Scripture in manifold ways:  inspiration; canonization; transmission; internal consistency; historicity; corroboration; its inerrancy--it doesn't contradict any known fact; verification by witnesses; its miraculous preservation despite attempts to eradicate it by authorities; and even personal experience and testimony of the readers including martyrs.  "We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty" (2 Peter 1:16, NIV).

The most compelling evidence for the authority of Scripture is that it's its own authority--its self-attestation, for if it appealed to science or some so-called authority figure, you would be placing your faith in something other than God's Word--the comforting thing though, is that you don't have to believe the Bible to be saved (belief in the gospel precedes it), but God will make a believer out of you by regenerating your heart and its convicting power to change your life.  Acknowledging that the sense of Scripture is Scripture and it can meet all our needs, like giving a balm for every sore, an answer to every problem, because it comes from the Answerer Himself.   In response to skeptics:  have you considered the evidence with an open mind?  The believer has nothing to fear from the facts because Christianity is a religion based on fact.

In conclusion, the man of integrity must acknowledge the Bible's impeccable credentials and yet the necessity for finding the truth known in Jesus, the incarnate Word of God; we must "cater to his intellectual integrity," but not "pander to his intellectual arrogance," according to the famous remark of John Stott.    Soli Deo Gloria!

Doubting The Bible?

"The Bible has more marks of authenticity than any profane history."--Sir Isaac Newton
"It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference."--Nelson Glueck, the renowned Jewish archaeologist
"There can be no doubt that archaeology has confirmed the substantial historicity of the Old Testament tradition."--Dr. William Albright, famed archaeologist

The Bible is like a caged lion that can defend itself.  It is self-authenticating, meaning that the highest authority it appeals to is itself because if it appealed to any outside source, that would become the highest authority and arbiter of truth.  When they ask you to prove the Bible, just tell them, "No, you do it!"  They can do it themselves by reading it--it reads you as you read it!  All documents without apparent self-contradiction or reason to disregard legally must be accepted with the burden of proof going to the skeptic--otherwise, it's assumed true and genuine.

It sure is a wonder that if a secular historian says one thing and the Bible another the secular one is considered legit?  The Bible has never been found mistaken historically and that should be ample reason not to doubt its historicity on any fact.  Christianity is primarily a historical religion or it's nothing, and there are no historical absurdities or inaccuracies in it.  You would think with all the historical references there would be some mistake, but none have been verified, though many have tried to discredit the Word and in the process have become believers.

You don't need to believe the Bible to become a Christian; after all, the Greeks Paul appealed to, didn't either; however, if a person doesn't believe it he should be able to tell you what its main point is and what it's about and why he doesn't believe.  The Bible is one of those books like Das Kapital by Marx, The Origin of Species by Darwin, and Mein Kampf by Hitler, that people refer to, but have not read or studied--their knowledge is second-hand and unverified.

The Bible is alive and powerful and can radically change a person from the inside out through faith, repentance, and regeneration.  A person is never the same after an encounter in the Word and finds out for oneself that it's for real.  The Bible claims to be able to divide asunder soul and spirit and can discern the thoughts, intents, and attitudes of the heart (cf. Heb. 4:12).  It's the sword of the Spirit (cf. Eph. 6:17) as the offensive weapon of choice for the believer and knowing it gives us the answer to life's issues.  Even Thomas Jefferson said that it makes men better citizens, fathers, and husbands.  It doesn't become the Word of God upon an existential encounter but is the Word of God regardless of your experience with it.  The Bible feeds you, but then makes you hungry!  It is applicable to all of life and life's academic disciplines.  It is God's voice and method of communication to the believer and He promises to speak to us via the Word.

Even a casual observer will notice the uniqueness of Scripture.  It's inspiration from God and propositional truth; it's canonicity or selection as to which books belong--the Church Fathers didn't vote on it, but recognized them as genuine using key checkpoints or criteria as standards; and it's faithful transmission and copying, showing utmost fidelity and integrity to the originals--indeed the evidence shows it has been preserved and not corrupted, as the Muslims claim.

The Bible's very existence is a miracle since it has withstood many attempts at annihilation and suppression.  It's the most loved and probably the most hated book on earth because there is room for little middle ground of attitude.  With over 2,000 predictive prophecies fulfilled, it shows accuracy and not a few lucky guesses. Archeology has confirmed it's historicity with over 25,000 digs without a contradiction!  There is much corroborating evidence in extra-biblical sources to verify key facts of Jesus' life.   Indeed, the stones cry out, as Jesus testified (cf. Luke 19:40)! Thousands of times Scripture directly claims divine authorship as it quotes God, saying: "Thus saith the LORD," or its equivalent.   If it can be verified on so many levels (there are no scientific absurdities either), then why not trust it on the level of spiritual truth and revelation?  It's more than great literature, though some do see it that way, and you don't just read it once and put it aside; it's a lifelong adventure that you never put back on the shelf for storage or show.

It's blind faith not to have credible and rational reasons and facts to support one's faith or to believe for no sound reason.  The skeptic who is just playing mind games or engaging in a power trip has blind faith if he's not willing to reading it with an unbiased, open mind. You don't need all the answers to believe the Bible--all knowledge begins in faith (cf. Prov. 1:7)!  We believe in order to understand according to Augustine.  

The trouble is that many have preconceived notions and opinions and only believe what they want to believe and reject all other facts.  The Bible has withstood centuries of criticism and attack, and no one will come up with some question that hasn't been encountered and answered, or cannot be reconciled after nearly 2,000 years of preaching.  It's a miracle we even have the Bible!  We don't need to be reformed nor informed, but transformed!  Finally, the Bible wasn't written to increase our knowledge, but to change our lives!

   Soli Deo Gloria!

Why Read Scripture?

"The Spirit of the LORD speaks through me; his words are upon my tongue"  (2 Sam. 23:2, 
NLT).

"Then the LORD reached out his hand and touched my mouth and said to me, 'I have put my words in your mouth'"  (Jeremiah 1:9, NIV).

"I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come.  I say, 'My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please'" (Isaiah 46:10, NIV).

"For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:21, NIV).  

 "The  LORD continued to appear at Shiloh, and there he revealed himself to Samuel through his word"  (1 Sam. 3:21, NIV).  

"[Till] what he foretold came to pass, till the word of the LORD proved him true" (Psalm 105:19, NIV). 

"... Not one word has failed of all the good promises he gave through his servant Moses"  (1 Kings 8:56, NIV).


There are a few books that people refer to, and even quote, but have not even read cover to cover:  Das Kapital by Marx; The Communist Manifesto by Marx and Engels; On The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life, by Darwin; The Muslim Qu'ran, the Book of Mormon, Mein Kampf  by Hitler, and surprisingly, even the Bible!  Most people who don't believe the Bible have never read it, and if they have read some of it, they don't even know its main message or theme, which they don't understand, nor can they articulate.

The Bible is the best-selling book of all time and its authenticity is vouched for by more sources than any secular history of antiquity; in fact the resurrection is arguably, according to D. James Kennedy, the best-attested fact of the ancient world or antiquity, and more variously proved than any other of the time--Luke says there are "many infallible proofs" for it in Acts 1:3.  More than 150 million copies are printed each year and it has been attacked ever since the first century by foes who have even tried to wipe it out, but it has miraculously survived.

A point in fact: There is an abundant reason to check it out and see why so many are devoted to it.  It is the English language at its best, and the best of literature the world has ever known.  As a contrast to other so-called holy books, the Bible is the only one based on and in history and it's historicity has never been contravened.  The Bible has impeccable credentials, unlike any secular work, and there is abundant evidence for anyone willing to investigate--no one can disbelieve due to lack of evidence!   In fact, Gen. Lew Wallace intended to disprove it and ending up writing Ben Hur:  A Tale of the Christ, after coming to faith in Christ!  One famed Archaeologist, Sir William Ramsay, an atheist, and from Oxford University, set out to disprove the book of Acts and found himself declaring himself a believer instead!  Dr. Simon Greenleaf, a famed expert on law and evidence from Harvard, was a skeptic, who examined the evidence for the resurrection, and ended up writing The Testimony of the Evangelists in favor of Christianity instead!


They may say they don't believe it but have no legitimate or rational justification for their faith.  You don't have to prove the Bible, it can prove and defend itself:  if they ask you to do it, just say, "No, you prove it--all you have to do is read it sincerely with an open mind!"  If the Bible depended upon outside attestation, it would be no greater than the source of proof--Scripture relies on internal evidence!  Because it's self-attesting and self-authenticated!  If someone were able to prove it, the Bible would be no greater than their mind.  It assumes you believe it's the Word of God and is the only scripture claiming any authority that gives ample evidence from history and fulfilled prophecy.  No other of the twenty-six scriptures or holy books have any prophecy, except the Bible (not just a few lucky guesses, but over 2,000 fulfilled predictive prophecies), because only God can foretell the future.  The point is that you don't have to believe the Bible to become saved, but you will after salvation if the salvation is genuine.  Believing the Bible is the Word of God doesn't save!

They may say that you shouldn't take it literally, but Christians aren't literalists, in that they believe everything literally, even obviously figurative parts and figures of speech--to be saved one must simply place unqualified faith in Christ as Lord with the ownership of your soul and life, trusting in Him categorically.  Much more, it was written during the time of the events by eyewitnesses:  "We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty"  (2 Pet. 1:16, NIV).  In contrast, Buddhist literature was compiled 200 years after the fact!

The Bible feeds you, then makes you hungry, quenches your thirst, then makes you thirsty for more--you can never read it enough, because it's not the kind of book you read once and put aside back on your shelf, but devote your entire life to knowing and being familiar with, because God speaks to us in it.  As we read the Bible, it reads us, they say and this is true because it alone discerns the thoughts and intents of the heart and is able to penetrate the soul and spirit of man (cf. Heb. 4:12).  The Bible tells it like it is, both the revelation of God, the revelation of the nature of man, with no whitewashing or cover-ups, and even the revelation of our enemy and dilemma.  Paul tells Timothy to give himself wholly to the Scriptures in 1 Tim. 4:15 and this applies to all of us who name the name of Christ, not just the clergy.  The Bible is our lifeblood and food that satisfies.  The fool feeds on trash, according to Proverbs 15:14, while the wise feed on the Truth (Jesus called Scripture Truth in John 17:17).


The Bible has never been proven wrong historically, archaeologically, scientifically, morally, or even psychologically.  For example, over 25,000 digs have only verified the historicity of Scripture; though not a science textbook, it has no scientific absurdities nor inaccuracies (it referred to the laws of the universe that science is based on before science realized there were any--Job 38:33); the Bible mentions all 52 virtues (the Virtues Project lists these as traits respected in seven world traditions, but no other faith has them all), and though there are competing theories of psychology, Christianity is better psychology than psychology!  The Bible doesn't gloss over man's sin but is also the greatest source of wisdom known to man and doesn't need to be rewritten, but reread.

Unfortunately, when a secular historian makes a claim and the Bible doesn't agree, scholars agree with the secular historian first; however, legally, the burden of proof is on the skeptic to disprove the validity and historicity of the Bible, not vice versa.  Quoting D. James Kennedy:  Dr. William Albright says, "There can be no doubt that archaeology has confirmed the substantial historicity of the Old Testament tradition";  and Nelson Glueck has stated, "It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference."  Many archaeologists have tried to disprove the Bible and have failed, becoming believers instead--indeed Christ was right:  "the stones cry out" (cf. Luke 19:40)!  Lawyers have examined the evidence for the resurrection and have become believers.

Skeptics doubt the authenticity, reliability, integrity, fidelity, and veracity of Scripture, but the legal burden of proof is always on the one making the challenge to disprove the given claim. The skeptics mainly have blind faith, for they cannot prove their claims or don't even know why they don't believe, they just don't want to believe it and their doubts are irrational.  The point is that if the Bible has never been proven to be erroneous, why not trust it in spiritual matters too?

We don't just read the Bible to be wise, the power is in putting it into practice:  believe it to be saved; practice it to be holy, and apply it to be successful and fulfilled!  We don't just want to be experts or scholars in the Word without any real relationship with God coming from an application.  The Bible wasn't written to expand our knowledge about Scripture or about God, but to save us, increase our faith, and give us the knowledge of the Lord, as the byproduct as He speaks to us in His revealed Word.  It is one thing to know Scripture, and quite another to know the Author!

It has been said that it's an elixir for low spirits, balm for sore hearts, immunization for bad habits, a pick-me-up for dreary days, a stimulant for positive nerves, and a booster for high spirits.  There is no mood not duly represented in the Bible, even depression and discouragement and despair.  You can take every problem to the Bible and find solace and comfort. If you could only have one book to read, it would meet your every need--bring every question and problem to it for solving!  Just like G. K. Chesterton said, "We have found all the questions, now let's find the answers!"  (They're in the Bible!)   If you don't know the answer, get to know the Answerer!  All that God has revealed and that we need to know is written in the Word. We don't read it for purely academic reasons, to increase knowledge, but to change our lives!   In sum, the best habit you can learn is to develop a taste for Bible reading--discover it for yourself; don't just take someone's word for it!  Soli Deo Gloria!  

Bible Skeptics Challenged

In the nineteenth century, academia was beginning to doubt the historical authenticity and even historicity of the Old Testament tradition. They even doubted that Jesus ever lived!  They even doubted that Moses could've known how to write and that he was literate because they didn't believe people were in his day. The Holy Bible is dramatically different from the many (some twenty-six) books in the world claiming to be Scripture and deemed holy, such as The Qur'an or Koran, the Book of Mormon, the Bhagavad Gita, the Brahman Vedas, the Buddhist Canon of Sacred Scripture, et al.

Let's inspect the differentiation and how the Bible is unique:

None of these "bibles" or scriptures have a word of predictive prophecy that isn't self-fulfilling like when Muhammad said he'd return to Mecca and then did.  The Bible, on the other hand, has over 2,000 fulfilled predictive prophecies, which are not a just random chance, but in great detail--shouldn't we trust it with the future, since it has proved worthy of our faith?  To be specific, 456 details of Christ were fulfilled in his life, which would be an astronomical chance event, if one didn't believe in a God who used Providence and orchestrates all history at will.

The Bible's authenticity and veracity are backed up and verified by archaeology, with over 25,000 digs which confirm the Bible's records, and there are no contradictions that would be evidence against the accuracy of the writers and their integrity.

One need only peruse the Scriptures to notice they are dramatically different from all other books--over 3,000 times they claim to be a declaration from God and repeatedly claim to be the Word of God--no other book does this.  Jesus spoke, not as the teachers of the Law, but with authority, and didn't footnote his pronouncements:  His formula was not, "So and so say," but "Amen, amen, I say unto you."  No man ever spoke like this man! You can take the miracles out of other scriptures and the religion remains intact, but not so with Christianity!   He spoke as one having authority and if He had never performed miracles he would've only been a footnote in history and His movement wouldn't have amounted to anything, but His followers would have disbanded and become demoralized after His death--but He rose from the dead and changed history (this is either the most fantastic event in history or the biggest and cruelest hoax ever perpetrated on mankind).

Some say that the Word of God is inspired because it inspires them: Shakespeare, Bach, and Michelangelo were also inspired, but in a different sense--their works don't change lives and transform sinners!  Some skeptics say they don't believe the Bible, but I don't believe you have to accept the Bible to be saved, but God will convict you afterward.

If they insist it's untrue and full of lies and modern man doesn't accept it anymore because it's pre-scientific, ask them what's the main message--chances are they don't even know what it's the main point is nor understand it (salvation in Jesus from our fallen nature)  The Bible is one of those books that people are against but have never read it themselves.  What you ought to tell them if they ask you to prove the Bible is that they can prove it themselves by just reading it--you don't defend a caged lion; it can defend itself!

Christianity is a religion of salvation and deals with the sin issue and problem--no other faith does; they may deal with enlightenment, or self-control, or legalistic rules, but not victory over sin, like Matt. 1:21 (NIV) says, "[Y]ou] are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins."  We need forgiveness from what we've done, and deliverance from what we are!   This makes the Bible radically different, in that it deals with the issue that man is inherently evil and full of sin and needs salvation, not enlightenment or to just get religion to reform himself. Religion can change your life, but Christ transforms it and renews it!

What really makes the Bible stand out as unique is that it is a historical document, unlike those of all other religions (Buddhism is basically just philosophy because Buddha was agnostic and said that if there was a God, He couldn't help you find enlightenment--you must find it on your own as you are an island to yourself).

No historical fact in the Bible has ever been disproved or demonstrated as unreliable--but it seems like if a secular historian says something he is automatically assumed to be right and the Bible erroneous; the Bible has always ended up vindicated!  History cannot be proved scientifically, but relies on the veracity of the witnesses and records, because history is nonrepeatable it takes faith to believe it. You cannot prove that Julius Caesar ever lived unless you accept historical evidence.

There are no scientific absurdities in Scripture, and where it does say something pertaining to science it is correct, such as describing the water cycle. But the Bible is not a scientific document but meant to show the way of salvation as Galileo said when put under house arrest for disagreeing with church dogma of his time.  According to Paul Little, The French Academy of Science produced a brochure that cited fifty-one scientific facts that controverted Scripture in 1861; today none of these so-called facts are believed anymore! The Bible never changes but science is like a moving train--who knows what they'll believe in a thousand years?

Another fact that makes the Bible so unique is that there is so little "copyist error" found among some 5,000 Greek manuscripts that show that God has protected and preserved His Word from corruption and we have it largely unchanged from the original manuscript and has great integrity. The utmost fidelity of manuscripts examined has proved the texts reliable.

The main historical fact of the Bible, the Gibraltar that everything rests on, is the resurrection of Christ;  this is arguably the most attested fact in antiquity, though, and has much circumstantial and historical evidence; Luke says it is given "many infallible proofs." The Bible has withstood attacks and attempts at abolishing it out many times throughout history, yet is survives by God's intervention.  The books were written by eyewitnesses and are not fables, or cleverly made stories. They are not the creation of deluded madmen, nor consummate liars neither; these are not the rantings and ravings of madmen. All the apostles, except St. John the Elder, died as martyrs--one usually tells the truth in that type of situation, and these men were in a position to know the truth, they just didn't believe it and become fanatics (not knowing it as fact by personal encounter).

One fact that cannot be contravened is that the New Testament was written within a few decades (c. AD 50-90) of the events in question--all writing within the lifetime of living witnesses, by eyewitnesses. The Buddhist writings were not compiled till two centuries after Buddha lived. The Bible claims to be history, written by witnesses and it's veracity would be confirmed in a court of law looking at the evidence with an impartial jury examining the evidence.

The Bible is relevant to everyone in every culture and every age and language throughout history--it's never obsolete, outdated, nor passe. Truth is truly timeless!  It doesn't need to be updated but speaks to everyone with a needy heart, an open mind, and a willing spirit.  It doesn't need to be rewritten, just reread, as Billy Graham says.  It has been translated into over 1800 languages and sells over 150,000,000 each year as the number-one bestseller of all time.  It is the Highest Law of God and has been called the blueprint of the Master Architect.  It has the solution to every ailment and problem or issue we face.

Rick Warren in, God's Power to Change Your Life,  tells a story of an anthropologist in the South Seas who approached a cannibal reading his Bible:  "What are you doing," he asked.  "The native replied, "I'm reading the Bible."  The anthropologist scoffed and said, "Don't you know that modern, civilized man has rejected that book?  It's nothing but a pack of lies.  You shouldn't waste your time reading it:"  The cannibal slowly replied, "Sir, if it weren't for this book, you' d be in the pot!"

In the best-selling book, Through the Valley of the Kwai, by Ernest Gordon, chaplain at Princeton,  American POW's in the Malay peninsula during WWII, discovered that their Bible reading dramatically changed their lives simply by reading it--they had resorted previously to becoming mere savages, and they decided to read the New Testament together, and became a loving fellowship.

The best proof of the inspiration of Scripture is its many testimonials of how it changes lives and sets people free form their sin and even civilizes pagans--Western culture has forgotten the paganism that the church saved them from.  You don't make an AA pledge, nor reform yourself, nor turn over a new leaf, nor even make a New Year's resolution--you get exposed to the transforming power of God in the Word to change lives from the inside out.

Religions are all the same--your performance and good works ingratiating you. They all are based on lifting yourself up by your own bootstraps and are all a do-it-yourself proposition. You can be inspired to change your life yourself from other scriptures, but the Bible changes you by its own power to transform as the inspired Word of God.  Soli Deo Gloria!

Hermeneutics Made Simple

Fundamentalists are those who believe in the fundamental doctrines by definition, but they were known from the 1925 Scope's monkey trial as those who took the Bible literally, whatever that means.  We believe that the Bible is literally true, but not everything is meant to be taken literally.  This is a loaded question and you lose either way:  Do you take the Bible literally?  They want to make a fool of you and prove you don't know how to read a book!  We are to learn the basic principles of interpretation and avoid what is called subjectivism.  We are to take the Bible at face value and not spiritualize it or think there is some secret or hidden interpretation that God has revealed only to us ("no Scripture is of any private interpretation" means you don't have a monopoly on truth or a secret revelation)--it God doesn't show this to the church body it is not truth and it must stand the test of time as orthodox and not contradict anything already accepted.

lSt. Bonaventure taught that there were seven ways to interpret Scripture and Thomas Aquinas taught four (historical, allegorical, moral, and anagogical).  Way back to the church fathers, Origin taught three ways (literal or what happened, moral or how it applies, and spiritual or what it teaches regarding our faith).  Erroneous interpretation results when people insist on spiritualizing or not taking something literal that was obviously meant that way.  Jesus believed in a literal Jonah, for example.  Even the ancient Jews didn't regard Hosea's narrative as an allegory but literal too.

The Word of God is alive but today's understanding of a "living document" like the US Constitution, doesn't apply--truth is timeless!   According to Hebrews 4:12, that means it is always relevant and never gets dated or becomes obsolete or passe, and it works on the believer's heart.   It doesn't mean that it is alive in the sense that we are free to indulge in modern-day interpretations that are clearly not what the writers meant--you must ask what the writer meant by what he said and not take it out of context (context of the language, the customs, the history, the paragraph, the chapter, the book, and even according to what the whole analogy of Scripture teaches).

There are no special methodologies to interpreting Scripture that you wouldn't use in any other book, except that you interpret it as it is written (this is called genre analysis:  regarding poetry as poetry, parables as parables, history as history, didactive portions as teachings, etc.).  Sometimes the Bible does use poetic license for instance, but in historical accounts, it is meticulous to be exact and mention details to show how much attention the writer paid to them.   All the laws of logic apply to the Bible just as to any book we cannot make illogical deductions on presuppositions or what is called eisegesis or reading into the Bible instead of exegesis or reading out of the Bible what it really means to say.  You can make any book say anything you want it too if you ignore the principles of hermeneutics, much more the Bible.  Satan was adept at taking verses out of context and trying to use the Word to his advantage.

The Bible is said to be its own Supreme Court because "Holy Scripture is its own interpreter" (or sacra Scriptura sui interpres in Latin):  If you don't understand an implicit passage or obscure one, check out an explicit or clear one that is parallel. That's why we have to cross-reference and study Bibles and commentaries: to take advantage of centuries of scholarship by God's people.

There are many basic principles one should heed:  We interpret the Old Testament in light of the New Testament and vice versa--you can distinguish but not separate them (before the New Testament was written for the first 20 or so years they considered the Old Testament the Scriptures).  We must learn not to make false inferences by taking a verse out of immediate context--it is easy to jump to the conclusion that it is plain as day when that isn't the rest of the story on the subject matter.  We must guard against forcing our prejudices into the passage and make it a proof text for what we want to believe--especially if our interpretation depends upon a certain translation and not the Greek text itself.

There are many errors because students don't realize that only the original texts are authoritative in any doctrinal dispute or misunderstanding.  We must realize that the Bible uses virtually every figure of speech known and they are to be interpreted appropriately:  For instance, a parable cannot be interpreted to the nth degree, but is only meant to teach one main idea.  It is a good idea to make sure your interpretation is not way out in left field by checking commentaries of reputable scholars you know you can trust.

NB:   Remember that no Scripture is of any private interpretation. The New Testament trumps the Old in case there is a question of authority:  For example, if something is repeated in the New Testament it is doubly important, and if ignored, not so (like the example of the Sabbath Day command not being repeated in the New Testament and therefore we are not under obligation to observe it).  Gross error often results from not recognizing the recipient and what the author meant to say.  Never, and I mean never, make deductions based on isolated texts! Never pit one text against another ("The sum [entirety] of your Word is truth" according to Ps. 119:160).

I would be remiss if I failed to mention that the first condition of interpreting Scripture is to know the Author!  The Word must not just be important to us, but take precedence.  God will not speak to you unless you are teachable: Possessing a willing spirit, an open mind, and a needy heart.  It is not the mental faculties that are as important as the condition of the person spiritually.  Above all, read with a purpose and pray for God's Spirit to do His job of illumination because we all have the anointing to teach us according to 1 John 2:27.

Remember, as Protestants, we believe in the right to dissent, disagree, and protest and we are not at the mercy of church dogma like Catholics are; however, we are exhorted to "rightly divide the Word of truth" in 2 Tim. 2:15.  The key to understanding Scripture is the one it is about--Jesus.  You should be able to see Him as the scarlet thread or common motif running throughout the Bible and on every page.   One caveat:  You will never know the truth if you think you have arrived and have nothing to learn or won't admit you could be wrong--the first step to learning is admitting ignorance!

In principle, one shouldn't rely too much on any one commentary or translation, or make your doctrines dependent upon them.  Learn comparative reading if you don't know the original languages. Commentaries are not inspired, though they can indeed br inspiring!  Johnny Cash said the Scriptures shed a lot of light on the commentaries!  Having a working knowledge of the original tongues or knowing ones way around using a lexicon and dictionary can be invaluable and give you an advantage.  It is vital to know what teachers you can trust and teach sound doctrine so you don't err from the truth or go off on a tangent.  In resolving a doctrinal dispute don't proof-text or trust some gifted teacher just because he says so--challenge them and learn to think independently.  As you grow in your reading you may become partial to one translation and this is all right, as long as you realize that God speaks through all of them and you don't become a student of one version. When you get Bible fatigue or have lost the pizzazz from reading one version too much (overexposure and over-familiarity), it may be helpful to try a new version and see what insights and "Aha!" moments God may give you as you encounter Him personally in the Word.

Interpreting the Bible has no special rules that you wouldn't apply to any book, but hermeneutics is a special problem for us since we live two thousand years after the fact and are of a foreign culture and language and might not know the historical backdrop they were immersed in--so there is a lot of work that may go into interpretation and we are not to think it is some mystical thing that we have a special connection to the Almighty to understand things by "experience" or existential encounter.  God may speak to us in an "Aha!" moment but we must be careful to make teachings and doctrines this way. The Bible doesn't "become Word of God" upon an "existential encounter," as Karl Barth believed, but it is the Word believed and experienced or not.   Many cults have started because believers felt God was speaking exclusively to them and they were enlightened.  The Gnostics taught that you had to have special secret knowledge that only they had and this was one of the first heresies that St. John the Elder refuted.

The conclusion of the matter is that I would be missing the mark if I failed to mention in passing how important it is to see the big picture, i.e., survey the entire Word of God (don't just casually peruse)  and be able to put everything into its perspective  in the light of the whole analogy of Scripture or the big picture, as it were: Psalms 119:160, NKJV, says, "The entirety [or sum] of Your word is truth...." The NIV says, "All your words are true...."

FINAL CAVEAT:  DON'T BASE SOME FAR-OUT OR FAR-FETCHED TRUTH BASED ON SOME ISOLATED PASSAGE!  ("NO SCRIPTURE IS OF ANY PRIVATE INTERPRETATION!")    

Soli Deo Gloria!
  

Why Study The Bible?

It has been well said that the Word was not written to increase our knowledge (note that I am referring to knowledge about the Bible, not knowing the Bible's message, nor knowing the Author and I am critiquing formal Bible education, not informal studies or self-study), but the purpose of the Bible is to change our lives.  I used to really like Bible trivia games because I was so good at it and seemed to have a knack for it because of my extensive studies and readings.  However, I soon realized that trivia is unimportant and a person can know a lot of it and not get the message of the Bible.  I believe that the teacher's goal is to get the student prepared to study on his own and not be dependent on him, but weaned, as it were.  You are said to retain up to thirty percent of what you study, five percent of what you hear, and about ten percent of what you read--the mind has to be very selective, or we would have a cognitive overload.  Repetition is the key and the brain retains best by reinforcement--that is why it's good to take notes during a sermon to highlight when God speaks to you.  If you seek the Lord, you will taste and see that the Lord is good:  The proof of the pudding is in the eating--I had the advantage of having experienced this as a youth and I have grown in my love for the Word.

Knowledge for its own sake is not right, but it is only a means to an end--we are not all striving to be scholars or winners at trivia contests (why?), but only to enjoy our Bible more and be equipped to rightly divide the Word of truth. Paul warns:  "He that thinks he knows something, doesn't know yet as he ought to know" in 1 Cor. 8:2.  It is not a matter of being talented at theology (which comes from exposure and a clear-thinking and trained mind, but what kind of attitude one brings to the Word ("O, how I love thy law.  It is my meditation all the day long, " according to Psalm 119:97).  We are not better Christians merely because of our knowledge. Bible knowledge is only a tool that one has to learn how to use and not abuse. Some believers know enough to be dangerous and a little knowledge is a dangerous thing!  I know of a Christian who wanted to take a seminary-like college course on the Bible so he could get a pastor-like handle on it; I believe he felt insecure in his knowledge, wisdom, and understanding (which come from God).  I asked him why he wanted to take the study and he really had no reason but to increase his knowledge.

I am very suspicious of Bible classes led by leaders who are not Spirit-filled or don't know the Lord--they know their way around the Bible and can discuss doctrinal issues that arise--they may even be intoxicated with the deeper truths, not even mastering the basics.  Don't ever forget that the goal is to know the Lord, not be informed--the Gnostics taught that we are saved by knowledge, even secret knowledge for the select, elite few.  Familiarity with Scripture or knowing your way around in it can be said of the devil, and we don't want to be impressed with someone for that reason. He uses it to his own advantage and schemes.  It is more vital to know the Author of Scripture than to be a scholar schooled to teach (sometimes that is all you can do with knowledge--teach it--especially if you cannot put it into practice (like lawyers who decide they want to teach law instead of practicing it, where the money is--like they say, if you can't do, teach!

"Knowledge puffs up," said Paul in 1 Cor. 8:1; however, it is love that builds up and we ought to practice that--I don't mean love in word only but in deed and in truth (cf. 1 John 3:18).  Man has a tendency to be arrogant and conceited in his knowledge and we have no right to think that we have an edge or have cornered the market.  We don't love knowledge per se, we love Christ and His Word!  If you take a Bible course, I'm saying, have a godly purpose for it, and not just to get a Bible education. If you have the gift of teaching you should take sufficient coursework, but what is paramount, is having the acquired skill to study the Bible on your own and know how God speaks to you particularly in His Word. Remember this, the disciple is not above his teacher and if you don't feel the teacher knows the Lord better than you, then you are in the wrong class--we don't go to one-up the teacher or show him up (regardless of Psalm 119:99, we don't pull rank on the prof or teacher!).

The premier goal of the Christian walk is to walk with Christ and know Him and have a growing relationship with Him.  If you know your gifts and where you belong, don't go on a guilt trip that you don't know as much as your brother--God blesses in manifold, multitudinous ways, and we are not to compare ourselves with others.  If knowledge per se was the key, then the best Christian would simply be the smartest one or the one who took the most courses.  We aren't looking for professional Christians but genuine ones.  God wants us to be authentic and sincere, not copycats emulating one another--we are to obey our leaders and imitate their faith though. Jesus said that eternal life is to know Him! We are to keep our eyes on Him and focused on the agenda and mission He assigned to us and commissioned us with--the Great Commission.

A Bible student can know all the answers and still not know the Lord very well--he may just be well-read!  We don't want to give the impression Christians are know-it-all's who like to quote Scripture to impress people.  There comes a time when a believer cuts the umbilical cord of his teacher and seeks the Lord till he finds Him. The search, according to R. C. Sproul, for Christ begins at salvation--don't assume all Christians have "found" the Lord.  One may say he knows the Bible, but the Christian who knows the Lord knows better, and his portion will not be taken away.

We remain as students of the Word our whole lives and never stop learning--when we are saved the Holy Spirit endows us with His illuminating and enlightening ministry to open the eyes of our hearts to the Word if we are teachable and receptive.  We must have a willing spirit, an open mind, and a needy heart for God to speak to us in the Word.  God looks at the motive:  True morality consists of a good motive and a good objective done in a wise manner!  A true believer who is somewhat biblically ignorant, but knows the Lord can get along with surprisingly little Bible knowledge, but the important trait he has is knowing the Author! I am not saying ignorance is bliss either because God puts no premium on ignorance. 

We study for Bible to be able to answer those who taunt us and to be equipped for every good work (i.e., "thoroughly furnished unto all good works," according to 2 Tim. 3:17.  It is the tool of our trade and we are given this gift which is better than if Jesus were here in person--we have the whole counsel and will of God!

We must realize that a Bible teacher, whose knowledge is a byproduct of his calling and, I hope, his love for the Word, is not always an ideal believer that we all emulate automatically (he may be someone's mentor though), but we are all unique creations in Christ who have different callings, ministries, missions, and gifts.  Many of us don't need to know more, but to apply more of what we do know!  The motive should not be to desire to know the answers or to show off, but because one loves the Word and senses that God is calling him to it, i.e., formal Bible education. You can be a great preacher without formal education if you are called to the ministry--look at C. H. Spurgeon, G. Campbell Morgan, H. A. Ironside, D. L. Moody, et al.

I must reemphasize and define knowledge in itself (and the attitude "just gimme the facts!" doesn't fly!); knowledge per se is no indicator of maturity or of a growing relationship with the Lord (there are seminary grads who don't adequately know the Lord)--if this was the case, I would rank among the most "spiritual" of Christians, because of my studies, blogging, and classes taught through the years.  I would never take a Bible course for its own sake, out of curiosity, to please others, to ingratiate myself,  nor because I think it's the thing to do.  A believer's knowledge about the Bible or about God is no gauge of his knowledge of the Bible, nor of God.  If there was a direct correlation between knowledge per se, that would make me a bona fide spiritual giant; but there's more to consider: In the final analysis, it is in obeying the Word that we find the power, not in knowing it (there is the danger of arrogance) and to whom much is given, much is required.  "PREPARE TO SHOW YOURSELF APPROVED..."  (CF. 2 TIM. 2:15).  Soli Deo Gloria!

Why I Believe the Bible

Did you know that there are twenty-six books in the world that claim to be Holy Scripture (the Brahman Vedas, the Buddhist Canon of Sacred Scripture, the Qur'an, the Bhagavad Gita (The Song of the Blessed One), the Pearl of Great Price,  the Book of Mormon, the Zoroastrian Zend-Avesta, et al. However, the Bible is the only one with predictive prophecy!  Remember, Deut. 18:18 says that the test of a true prophet is 100 percent accuracy or the death penalty!  "If they speak not according to this Word, they have no light in them" (Isa. 8:20).  Note that there is something very peculiar and unique about Jesus:  He doesn't quote the authorities but relies on His own authority and spoke like no man had ever done!   The Qur'an has one instance of a self-fulfilling prophecy when Mohammad predicts he'll return to Mecca!  Only God can predict the future and God (in Isaiah) challenges any other "god" to tell the future.  There are over 2,000 fulfilled prophecies in the Bible, not just a few lucky guesses.  Jesus Christ Himself fulfilled over 300!

Archaeology has repeatedly confirmed the OT tradition and many have set out to disprove the Bible and with over 25,000 sites recovered there still is no contradiction.  Like Jesus said, "The rocks cry out!"   Historically, the Bible has been verified, and even though secular historians are usually given more credibility than the Bible, they have yet to disprove anything in the Scriptures!  For example, Luke has been discovered to be one of the best historians of antiquity.

Also, science has failed to contradict the Bible, even though the French Academy of Science declared fify-one scientific facts that controverted the Bible in 1861, now not one of the so-called facts is believed--the Bible was right!.  There is no contradiction between the science and Scripture and where the Bible does make a scientific statement of fact, it is correct, even if ahead of its time.  The Bible is not a scientific textbook, said Galileo, but a book of salvation--however, where it does state a scientific statement it is correct and never proven wrong.

The Bible is self-attesting,  (over 3,000 times it says, "Thus says the LORD" or its equivalent) [no other sacred writing does this--they don't dare!]  Scripture is its own Supreme Court, its own interpreter, and commentator.   It is believed because it is believable unless you have the presupposition that miracles just don't happen! Ancient peoples didn't doubt the reality of miracles, just what they meant.  The writers are not inveterate or consummate liars, but credible witnesses--the credibility of a demon is not to be established and this only stands to reason!  The test of their veracity was they the Apostles went to their death without recanting--death was their test!  "For we did not follow cleverly devised myths or fables when we made known to you the Word of Truth but were eyewitnesses of His majesty"  (2 Pet. 1:16).   "Thus saith the LORD" or its equivalent) which means it assumes you believe it and doesn't appeal to some higher power or authority.  It proves and verifies itself.  If you appealed to science, for instance, science would have higher authority than God!

The Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit and is therefore inerrant and infallible in its original manuscripts.  None of these are extant--we rely on copies.   An interesting fact is that there are over 5,000 Greek manuscripts available to test the veracity of Scripture, while we only have ten good copies of Caesar's Gallic War or of the History of Herodotus.  There is no comparison, yet no one doubts the authenticity of these documents.  There is more proof for the resurrection of Christ than for any other fact in antiquity.  It is the most attested and variously supported fact if the era!  Doubting Jesus' historicity is unsound and yet scholars don't dare doubt the historicity of Caesar or Alexander the Great.

The Bible is like a caged lion--you don't have to defend it, it can take care of itself.  People who criticize it usually haven't read it!   The Bible can convict a person if he has an open mind and is willing to do God's will he shall know whether it is of God.  Jesus said, "If a man is willing to do His will, he shall know whether the doctrine is of God or whether I speak on my own authority" (John 7:17).

D.L. Moody said, "I know the Bible is inspired because it inspires me."  The works of Shakespeare can be entertaining and educating, but only the Bible can transform the soul. The proof of the pudding is in the eating:   "The Word of God is alive and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of joints and marrow, of soul and spirit, and it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart" Hebrews 4:12).  Soli Deo Gloria!

Where Is the Scholar?

Paul was asking about the people who think they know something when in reality they know nothing worth knowing.  Jesus despised the manner of the typical Pharisee who "knew" the Scripture (often memorizing the Torah) but didn't recognize their king amongst them.  The Word should open our eyes and be the way God communicates to us.   "You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life.  These are the Scriptures that testify about me" (John 5:39).

We need preachers who have more than just a second-hand knowledge of Christ and don't just quote the so-called authorities or experts like the Pharisees did--what has God revealed to them, not what do the great teachers say. What has God been showing them?  The point of the Holy Writ is to point to the person of Jesus and to aid us in finding our God.  Jesus rebuked them, "You know not the Scriptures, nor the power of God," (cf. Matt. 22:29).  Thus equating the two, but His interpreting of "knowing" the Scriptures was seeing Himself in them and the point is to lead them to Him.

Beware lest we get academic and study the Bible to know the "facts" or the trivia (distinguish between knowledge about the Bible and knowledge of the Bible)  and not the lessons, which are the real doctrines or teachings.  We should study to show ourselves "approved unto God," and that means a basic understanding and ability to interpret what is relevant to us as we apply it; mere knowledge for its own sake is vain and leads to being "puffed up" as Paul warns us in 1 Cor. 8:1 that "knowledge puffs up, but love edifies."  Knowledge of the Word is a means to an end, and not the end or goal per se.   True knowledge of God is vital:  "Therefore, My people go into exile, for lack of knowledge" (Isa. 5:13);  "My people perish for lack of knowledge" (Hosea 4:6).

We can take pride in how much we know and this serves no purpose.  Some of us (e.g., pastors, teachers, and evangelists) have more so-called knowledge as a byproduct, but, for the run-of-the-mill believer, knowing the Author is more important than knowing the Word, however vital that is.   "For the lips of a priest ought to preserve knowledge, and from his mouth, men should seek instruction--because of he a messenger of the LORD Almighty" (Mal. 2:7).   There is a need for theologians, for instance, but in a sense, all believers are theologians because they espouse and believe in certain doctrines; but they have a bad rap and many simply regard their knowledge in a matter-of-fact manner and don't apply what they know.

We are not to despise knowledge per se, because God has repeatedly rejected the priests who have turned against knowledge ("Because you have rejected knowledge, I have rejected you as my priests," says Hosea 4:6).  Proverbs says that the wise "store up knowledge" and "the lips of the wise spread knowledge" (Prov. 15:7).   "A discerning heart seeks knowledge, but a fool feeds on folly" (Prov. 15:24).   "It is not good to have zeal without knowledge" (Prov. 19:2).  "They have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge" (Rom. 10:1).   Therefore, we should not be against knowledge per se, but realize its place and a relative value; the real substance is in knowing Christ;  our relationship is with Christ, not the Word.

We develop a taste for the Word:  "O how I love thy Word, I meditate on it all day long."   "Thy words were found, and I did eat them, and they were the joy of my heart"  (Jer. 15:16).  Personally, I relate to Psalm 119:92 which says, "For if thy law had not been my delight, I would have perished in my affliction."  David says, "Taste and see that the Lord is good..."  (Psa. 34:8).

We learn to love the Word, and there is nothing wrong with being a person of the Book (as believers were once called),  as we seek God's guidance and counsel to us (God is able to speak any way He chooses, but He has promised to speak to us in His Word);   Note Deut. 32:47:  "They are not just idle words for you--they are your life."   We turn to the Word, not to any person for authority.  Sola Scriptura (the Word alone)  was the cry of the Reformation and they took away the authority of the priest, pontiff, or tradition to compete with the sole authority of the Word.  Soli Deo Gloria!

Are Translations Relevant?

I recently heard a guest preacher--and I admit a good one--say that the King James was the best translation (he has been preaching for 64 years--old school!) and that most of the other translations are not "worth reading." I took umbrage but I listened to his sermon patiently and forgave him for his slight indiscretion. This really got me to thinking, though. When I saw him after the sermon I asked in a civil manner if he could come up with any reason to fault the NIV, a Bible used in my church--no response. I told him I thought the best translation--if you have to pick one--was the ESV; he told me to "enjoy it!" I wouldn't put someone down for enjoying his version, believing it is the best translation, but to say others are not worth reading I don't understand.

I enjoy many translations.  Charles Swindoll says that if you only listen to one preacher you will lose objectivity; I think the same goes for reading just one translation. Subjective judgment based on feelings is not the real reason to be partial to a translation. It is easy to understand that a preacher from Wales would think this though: because you like "Englishisms," or archaic words that are in Elizabethan English doesn't mean it's the best translation even if it's the best English (which is 400 years old this year).

It's good to enjoy your Bible but that doesn't make it the best one. However, bear in mind that having an "Aha!" moment,  inspiration or illumination does not mean your reading the "right" translation; like when neo-orthodox Swiss theologian Karl Barth said the passage "becomes" the Word of God when we have an "existential experience" with it such as: getting goosebumps, chills down your spine, or a warm feeling such as a burning in the bosom like Mormons get from the Book of Mormon to authenticate it. Enjoy the Word of God period; no if's, and's or but's about it,  case closed!

I read several versions and have memorized most of my verses in the New King James Version. I think that you can get "Bible fatigue" by reading too much of one version because the freshness wears out and you may not get the fresh insights and a new take that you can get from an unfamiliar version that might make you think twice. This is especially true when I read my Luther translation into German. If your doctrines depend upon one translation, then you are in trouble; the only "inspired version" is the original (no longer extant) autographs in the Koine Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew.

We have a group of "King James only" people in our church that really said aloud "Amen" when the preacher said this. What about the people of France, and Germany? Do they have an "inspired version" too, or must they learn English? I read Martin Luther's translation from the original languages into Modern High German daily and I think his language is faultless, but even Luther made mistakes. I showed three obvious mistranslations to one of these King James adherents but they are adamant. This kind of stubborn thinking is divisive and counterproductive to a church.

The important thing is that people are reading God's Word--God protects His Word!; when I bought a Bible at Walmart for $5 and one of these adherents asked me what version it was saying, "Too bad, the King James is the "inspired version!" He went on about how it was "authorized" and the "first one." With all due respect, the King James Version was the favorite amongst evangelicals until 1978 when the New International Version replaced it, now there is a resurgence of what seems to be nostalgia and a throwback to the "good old days." Now, don't get me wrong! I think every well-read Christian should be familiar with the King James, especially since it has influenced our culture and language so much--many phrases of our language are right from the King James Version--it is English at its best!

Actually the Wycliffe translation ca. A.D. 1380 was the first in English ( though not modern English),  but Tyndale, a student of Luther, was the "Father of the English Bible,"[the New Testament published in 1525 in Germany because it was illegal in England and the Old in 1535 after Coverdale completed it, not knowing Hebrew--he used Luther's German Old Testament]. The Geneva Bible (first with verses and not to have Gothic letters, the one favored by the Puritans, as a household Bible and used by Shakespeare, d. 1616), the Great Bible, the official pulpit Bible dedicated to King Henry the VIII, whose eyes Tyndale prayed would be opened when he was burned at the stake, and the Bishops Bible, published 1568 for Queen Elizabeth I (revised for the King James and the "official" Bible of the time) preceded it, too. The official didn't mean popular, but it became popular later, and thus we have the King James which used Elizabethan English that had already been out of style just to sound "majestic." (Note that the King James Anglican translators were offended by the Calvinistic Geneva Bible.) Virtually all translations up to modern times have used Tyndale as the starting point directly or indirectly.

I think the NLT, the New Living Translation, popular for new believers, is nearly a paraphrase, but it is still technically a translation--and is an example of "dumbing down" the Bible. The NASB, New American Standard Bible, is the most literal, but difficult to understand figures of speech and idioms. The NIV is an easy read at a low-grade level and translates thought for thought instead of word for word, and it claims to follow the King James where it is accurate, which can be difficult to understand sometimes, such as idioms. It was the work of over one hundred scholars working from the best manuscripts and saw the need for a Bible in contemporary English. The NKJV or New King James Version tries to stay faithful to King James, except for the "Englishisms" and archaic words. Many people who loved the King James will accept this one readily. I recommend the ESV or English Standard Version which claims to be as literal as possible and this version doesn't do your thinking for you or "digest" it before you get to it. The CEV or Contemporary English Version is "user-friendly" for those seeking easy comprehensibility and speedy reading because it is written at the elementary-school reading level; it tries to be "lyrical and lucid" to the listener as well as the reader. I like to compare my Martin Luther translation to see how he translates something--it is very enlightening. The important thing is that you get a translation you can feel comfortable with--and don't judge people by their translations; for instance, the RSV of 1952 and 1971 or the Revised Standard Version, the first modern translation was largely a revision of the King James Version, was published by the National Council of Churches, which is dubious by evangelical standards.

If you want to be accurate and are debating doctrines you have to go to the original languages or trust some scholar of these languages, but when you do that you can be taken advantage of because you're vulnerable, and can be led astray if you're not a Berean who searches the Scriptures to see if it is so (cf. Acts 17:11).   [My brother tells me a good idea is to read the preface to see what kind of translation the publisher is trying to make and the disclaimers (such as not showing dynamic equivalence or mood word translations like Oh! or Ho! etc.) to note.] Some translations use functional (or thought-for-thought translation) equivalence that is what the author is trying to say in a way we can understand it and others use formal or word-for-word equivalence whereas the translation is more literal to what was written in the original. The goal is to get an experience that the original audience had when reading as a balance of the two--not so literal you can't understand it, and not so paraphrased it does your thinking for you.

A word to wise is sufficient: The King James and the New International Version (International Bible Society) rely on the Masoretic Text as published in the Biblia Hebraica (from a 12th-century copy), but the NIV also consults the Septuagint and Latin Vulgate for the Old Testament. The American Standard Version or ASV was a revision of the KJV in 1901. The New American Standard Bible or NASB (from the Lockman Foundation) relies on Nestle's Greek New Testament. The NIV relies on the Textus Receptus and the Majority Texts for the New Testament. Sometimes notes are given such as: other manuscripts read as follows, the best manuscripts read so and so, etc. Sometimes we can go by what the Church Fathers said or quoted, e.g., they never quoted the longer ending of Mark. The newer translations have the advantage of better manuscripts than they had available for the Authorized Version, e.g., the Dead Sea Scrolls were more than a thousand years older than the Masoretic Text. There are over 5,000 Greek manuscripts and thousands in other translations to compare and see if the veracity of the copyists can be trusted. There is no evidence of the corruption of the text.

Some people are impressed that because 54 translators were commissioned for the Authorized Version that it was the best; actually more translators were used for the NIV, which was international in scope, and the result wasn't affected by sectarian bias,--using many denominations of translators--and the team for the ESV was over 100 different scholars, but the Anglican translators of the King James were subject to bias and didn't like the popular Geneva Bible that was published in Switzerland.

There is a niche market for everyone;
as they say: "to each his own!" The issue is whether we go to the lowest common denominator or try to edify believers. Words are the building blocks of knowledge and to use simplistic language is counterproductive because it compromises doctrine. For instance, the English prof who is a baby believer would not feel handicapped with the KJV while the mature believer who is unsophisticated in reading should probably read the New Living Translation by Tyndale publishers, the NLT, which is trying to stay loyal to the legacy of the Living Bible. To mention a few specialty Bibles: the NET Bible or the New English Translation Bible (lots of interpreters, textual criticism and study notes available at NETBible.org on the internet), the Holman Christian Standard Bible or HCSB (very contemporary translated by 90 scholars representing 20 evangelical denominations under the aegis of the Southern Baptist Convention), The Message is a paraphrase full of very modern, contemporary idioms, the NCV or New Century Version is based on the ICB or International Children's Bible, the NRSV or New Revised Standard Version is for mainline and inter-confessional adults, the NAB or New American Bible is Catholic, the AMP, or the Amplified Bible (good for word study), and the J. B. Phillips, A Translation in Modern English (a classic).

Some translations just try to put it in contemporary English which changes every generation and needs constant updating (the NET re-translates every 5 years). It is good to make an informed decision though and not pick one just because it is a best-seller. One must strike a balance between being completely literal where it is a word for word or formal equivalence, and dynamic equivalence, that is thought for thought and optimal equivalence, which is a balance of both. There is a trade-off between readability and literal accuracy--nuances of meaning exist. A totally literal translation is not readable (try reading an interlinear Greek text), and a totally readable one is not literal--there must be a compromise. Idioms don't always translate and are misunderstood if translated literally, as anyone who has studied a foreign language will tell you--like jokes that lose something in the translation; some things are untranslatable.

[Paraphrases are translations too but take great liberties with the text, mixing in interpretation with "pseudo-translation."] I think The Message by Eugene Peterson is a valid paraphrase by a true believer, but it is limited as a paraphrase and should be reckoned as just that--you won't even recognize some of the verses. The TLB or The Living Bible by Dr. Kenneth Taylor was the New York Times No. 1 best-seller in 1972 and 1973, but that is also a paraphrase. They may aid in study or give insight, but don't use them for proof-texting.

As for me, I have several Bibles of different translations and don't rely on a certain one as gospel truth and error-free but get edified by them all. I think we should be tolerant of others who favor different translations than the ones we've grown accustomed to. I still know so many verses in the NKJV that when I'm reading another version I can compare the verses. The psalmist said, "O how I love your law!" I really don't know which translation I like the most because I'm too busy reading the various versions and all I know is that I love the Bible, regardless of the version it's the Word of God. [The New Testament writers were often quoting the Septuagint, a Greek translation.]

Soli Deo Gloria!
1 comments:

Randy Broberg said...

On target. One minor point is I think the "thought for thought" -- the so-called dynamic equivalence method is still a translation. A paraphrase departs even more from the original. Also, read any translation's forward to see what method it claims to use.

Science & The Bible Part 2

St. Augustine said that "deep within man there dwells the truth." However, the big lie of the West is that there is no absolute truth--truth with a capital T! If there is no truth, as Pilate thought, then there is no God by inference. The Bible is not a science textbook, but it has no scientific absurdities and where it does say something scientific, like the water cycle, it is accurate. The French Academy of Science in 1861 said that there were 51 "facts" in the Bible that were controverted by the scientific fact--today not one of those scientific facts is believed and so you see that science is a moving train, but the Bible stays the same. It is never outdated. Truth is always relevant.

Theologians like to say that "All truth is God's truth." All religions have an element of truth mixed in with the error. They have just enough truth to be dangerous and religion has just enough reality to vaccinate you from the real thing. Psychology has some truth and Psychiatry has part of the answer and a piece of the puzzle, but the Scripture is sufficient to solve our problems and Jesus not only has the answer but is the Answerer! Christianity is not true because it works, as Lee Strobel says, it works because it is true. TM works for some, but that doesn't mean mantras are good, we should meditate on the Word only.

We all have preconceived ideas that prevent us from being objective--in fact, total objectivity is impossible, except for God. Dr. S. Lewis Johnson, Jr.,l (professor of systematic theology at Dallas Theological Seminary) says that the scientific method cannot arrive at absolute truth. (Inference is flawed.) We are all prejudiced and that means "being down on what we're not up on." God gives enough light to see the truth if we can accept it and are looking for it, but he leaves it an open question and doesn't force truth on anyone, leaving enough darkness for people to reject the truth.

If truth could be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, then we would be forced to accept it. If God were proved, then He would be no greater than the mind that proved Him! One needs faith because the "supreme function of reason is to show man that some things are beyond reason." (Blaise Pascal) The proof of the pudding is in the eating, as they say. "Taste and see that the Lord is good..." (Ps. 34:8).   Soli Deo Gloria!

Science & The Bible...

You know that in the early twentieth-century modernism was the rule and society thought that science had all the answers. Evolution, a scientific tenet of FAITH has infiltrated philosophy and ethics, even justified itself by it. The so-called "survival of the fittest." Today we are in danger of lapsing into "scientism" where we see science as a faith or religion and the ultimate authority.

Some things are out of the REALM of science--like ethics and morality. Specifically, you cannot put God or religion in a test tube and say, "How interesting!" God is neither tangible, visible, nor audible to most of us and there are no laboratory conditions for God--"For without faith it is impossible to please Him" (Heb. 11:6).

The main reason people believe in evolution is that they don't want the consequences of believing in God and that would affect their sexual mores. There is absolutely no proof of it and it can't be proved, but they believe it nevertheless because the only alternative is unpalatable-- theism.

Science can tell us the "know-how" but not the "know-why." To existential and metaphysical questions we must turn to philosophy or religion. Jesus is the answer to the equation and he is also the "Answerer!" To know Christ is to know the truth. He did not just tell us the truth but became the embodiment of truth itself.

We must be careful not to personify science and make it an idol in our search for the truth; anything that comes between us and God is idolatry. We have nothing to fear from the truth. Truth does not go against reason but beyond it. 

St. Augustine said that "deep within man there dwells the truth." However, the big lie of the West is that there is no absolute truth--truth with a capital T! If there is no truth, as Pilate thought, then there is no God by inference. The Bible is not a science textbook, but it has no scientific absurdities and where it does say something scientific, like the water cycle, it is accurate. The French Academy of Science in 1861 said that there were 51 "facts" in the Bible that were controverted by the scientific fact--today not one of those scientific facts is believed and so you see that science is a moving train, but the Bible stays the same. It is never outdated. Truth is always relevant.

Theologians like to say that "All truth is God's truth." All religions have an element of truth mixed in with the error. They have just enough truth to be dangerous and religion has just enough reality to vaccinate you from the real thing. Psychology has some truth and Psychiatry has part of the answer and a piece of the puzzle, but the Scripture is sufficient to solve our problems and Jesus not only has the answer but is the Answerer! Christianity is not true because it works, as Lee Strobel says, it works because it is true. TM works for some, but that doesn't mean mantras are good, we should meditate on the Word only.

We all have preconceived ideas that prevent us from being objective--in fact, total objectivity is impossible, except for God. Dr. S. Lewis Johnson, Jr.,l (professor of systematic theology at Dallas Theological Seminary) says that the scientific method cannot arrive at absolute truth. (Inference is flawed.) We are all prejudiced and that means "being down on what we're not up on." God gives enough light to see the truth if we can accept it and are looking for it, but he leaves it an open question and doesn't force truth on anyone, leaving enough darkness for people to reject the truth.

If truth could be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, then we would be forced to accept it. If God were proved, then He would be no greater than the mind that proved Him! One needs faith because the "supreme function of reason is to show man that some things are beyond reason." (Blaise Pascal) The proof of the pudding is in the eating, as they say. "Taste and see that the Lord is good..." (Ps. 34:8). Soli Deo Gloria!

   Soli Deo Gloria!