What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Is every word in the Christian Bible, Old and New Testaments, inspired by God?

T

tessiewebb

Member
Some claim this is true and it is difficult, for me, to go against this particular doctrinal claim. But in order to clarify in my own mind if the doctrine is actually true, I'm asking the question. I'm basing the question on a couple of things. One is that some of what was said to Jesus in the Gospels is clearly not inspired by God.

For instance, in a confrontation with the Jews of the day, they said he had a demon. Their words were not inspired by God, were they? But the words are recorded in the Bible as what we call Scripture.

Our definition of Scripture requires that it be written words inspired by God. One verse says "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost. ". It was only later that their words were 'written'. So was it Scripture when it was spoken by those men or not?

Another thing that bothers me is that is it not contradictory for Peter to have said, "And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?" when another Scripture states clearly that Jesus' as the Lamb of God was "to take away the sins of the world"? Is that 'scarcely saved'?

I'm not attempting to discredit the Bible. I am asking whether our definition of Scripture is not slightly askew.
 
When we say that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant word of God, it really isn't to mean that every single thing recorded is inspired by God...

But, it does mean that the Holy Spirit moved the writers to record everything accurately and honestly. When people lied, the Holy Spirit inspired the writers to record the lies, thereby exposing them. When we read that some Jews called Jesus a demon, we know that this indeed happened... it was a historical event that really did take place. The words recorded, true or not, were the words said at the time.

A good text to study is 1 Corinthians 7. We know Paul was an inspired writer and we know that the letter to the Corinthians was inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Because of it's inspiration, I can rely upon that this letter has come to us, 2000 years later, with its message intact. I don't worry that things got lost in translation, that meanings are skewed and the message is unreliable. But, this isn't to say that everything recorded is God's own opinion about things.

In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul writes:

7 Now concerning the things about which you wrote, it is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2 But because of immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband. 3 The husband must fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6But this I say by way of concession, not of command. 7 Yet I wish that all men were even as I myself am. However, each man has his own gift from God, one in this manner, and another in that.
8 But I say to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I. 9 But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
10 But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband 11 (but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not divorce his wife.
12 But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he must not divorce her. 13 And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, she must not send her husband away.

We can see in this passage that Paul goes back and forth giving his own opinions and then stating a direct message from God. All of this is reliable, but only some of it is to be taken as binding for all Christians at all times. Paul was counseling people on the brink of tribulation..."the present troubles". Most of the this text is Paul's opinion... Opinion of a man inspired by God, but nonetheless his opinion for a generation who was very soon going to be going through tribulation. Where he speaks for God, he is sure to point out that he is doing so.

In this passage it is very clear when the writer is writing personal opinion rather than recording prophetic utterances. The same thing occurs with other writers in other books, but it might not be quite as clear. Generally we can tell just by following dialogue, but it can get muddled... especially since the Church has a bad habit of lifting things from context and running with them, because they sound good. I'm thinking of how many use Revelations 3:20 "Behold, I stand at the door and knock..." as if it were Jesus standing at the door of one's heart... when that's not what the text is about at all.
 
tessiewebb said:
Some claim this is true and it is difficult, for me, to go against this particular doctrinal claim. But in order to clarify in my own mind if the doctrine is actually true, I'm asking the question. I'm basing the question on a couple of things. One is that some of what was said to Jesus in the Gospels is clearly not inspired by God.

For instance, in a confrontation with the Jews of the day, they said he had a demon. Their words were not inspired by God, were they? But the words are recorded in the Bible as what we call Scripture.

Our definition of Scripture requires that it be written words inspired by God. One verse says "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost. ". It was only later that their words were 'written'. So was it Scripture when it was spoken by those men or not?

Another thing that bothers me is that is it not contradictory for Peter to have said, "And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?" when another Scripture states clearly that Jesus' as the Lamb of God was "to take away the sins of the world"? Is that 'scarcely saved'?

I'm not attempting to discredit the Bible. I am asking whether our definition of Scripture is not slightly askew.
Click to expand...
I don't intend this to be rude, but I think that there are some things that we just have to use our adult reasoning. What I mean is that the Bible is the Word of God and that He used man to pen His Word for us to read, study, and grow from. Every word is His Word.

At the same time you have to realize something can be a truth and a lie. You're going "WHAT?!"

Example:

4+5=78

This isn't true, but if you were to say "And Pard said, '4+5=78'" then you'd be truthful because that IS what I said, but you are in no way ENDORSING that fact. In the same way God says clearly what the enemies of Christ said about Him, but God isn't saying this is truthful, only that it is true that they said such things.

Does that make sense? Maybe I can be clearer, I do not know! But the point is that it's important to know the lies used against Jesus, because He is in you and you may one day face those same lies, but when you do face them you can be comforted in knowing that it is the same that was said to the Christ Jesus! It's there for comfort, knowledge, understanding, and preparation.
 
Far preferable to read and learn from and acknowledge Scripture as being from God, rather than sit, deciding to try to decide what we like and therefore 'approve' of.

John 17.17; the Lord Jesus said: 'Sanctify them through Thy truth; Thy word is truth'.
 
farouk said:
Far preferable to read and learn from and acknowledge Scripture as being from God, rather than sit, deciding to try to decide what we like and therefore 'approve' of.

John 17.17; the Lord Jesus said: 'Sanctify them through Thy truth; Thy word is truth'.
Click to expand...

Yes! And Lewis does a splendid job at explaining this in the beginning of his book "Mere Christianity"
 
farouk said:
Far preferable to read and learn from and acknowledge Scripture as being from God, rather than sit, deciding to try to decide what we like and therefore 'approve' of.

John 17.17; the Lord Jesus said: 'Sanctify them through Thy truth; Thy word is truth'.
Click to expand...

I agree!!!

Speaking of my own "real life" experience (you know, all this posting on forums is what... not real life?) I've found that everyone I know personally, without exception, who doesn't take the Bible as being wholly inspired and inerrant, uses this to provide "wiggle room" for things they don't want to bring under obedience to God. A big part of this is those who want to not consider homosexuality sinful. Another big part of it are those who want to have sexual relations outside of marriage. They all say that the original texts were inspired, but things got lost in translation, or were for that culture at that time...

...and it's so interesting that the things "lost" in translation or are considered "culturally relevant" are the very things that make it OK for them to do what they want, rather than live lives characterized by "If you love Me, you will obey My commandments".
 
Pard said:
I don't intend this to be rude, but I think that there are some things that we just have to use our adult reasoning. What I mean is that the Bible is the Word of God and that He used man to pen His Word for us to read, study, and grow from. Every word is His Word.

At the same time you have to realize something can be a truth and a lie. You're going "WHAT?!"

Example:

4+5=78

This isn't true, but if you were to say "And Pard said, '4+5=78'" then you'd be truthful because that IS what I said, but you are in no way ENDORSING that fact. In the same way God says clearly what the enemies of Christ said about Him, but God isn't saying this is truthful, only that it is true that they said such things.

Does that make sense? Maybe I can be clearer, I do not know! But the point is that it's important to know the lies used against Jesus, because He is in you and you may one day face those same lies, but when you do face them you can be comforted in knowing that it is the same that was said to the Christ Jesus! It's there for comfort, knowledge, understanding, and preparation.
Click to expand...

Fantastic, guy. I love this:thumbsup
 
I think we can easily separate the words of one spoken in the bible from the Word of God

Things the pharisee's said reported in the bible, were not GOD's words but the were important to his words

Suffice to say everything is in there for a reason and by the will of God
 
tessiewebb said:
Some claim this is true and it is difficult, for me, to go against this particular doctrinal claim. But in order to clarify in my own mind if the doctrine is actually true, I'm asking the question. I'm basing the question on a couple of things. One is that some of what was said to Jesus in the Gospels is clearly not inspired by God.

For instance, in a confrontation with the Jews of the day, they said he had a demon. Their words were not inspired by God, were they? But the words are recorded in the Bible as what we call Scripture.

Our definition of Scripture requires that it be written words inspired by God. One verse says "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost. ". It was only later that their words were 'written'. So was it Scripture when it was spoken by those men or not?

Another thing that bothers me is that is it not contradictory for Peter to have said, "And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?" when another Scripture states clearly that Jesus' as the Lamb of God was "to take away the sins of the world"? Is that 'scarcely saved'?

I'm not attempting to discredit the Bible. I am asking whether our definition of Scripture is not slightly askew.
Click to expand...

It is good that you are attentive to the biblical texts.

Were the words of Jesus 'inspired' when he called Gentiles 'dogs'?

Were Jesus words 'inspired' when he told the wannabe follower that only the 'dead bury the dead'?

Where the words of Jesus inspired when he turned his back on his family and said 'here are my brothers and sisters'?

These are difficult questions and there are no easy answers despite many Christians who try to 'harmonize' the apparent contradiction Jesus' words contain.

The difficulty rest with us in our limited human capacity to understand God. Very often we try to make God fit into our box - the problem being that God does not exactly conform to our idea of how God should go about the business of being God.

How, then, can the scriptures be the 'word of God'?

It is best to realize that we are dealing with words that are constrained by human meaning which are then used to try to explain that which is not human - difficult to say the least. This is the reason why there is so many metaphors, so many symbols and signs replete throughout the texts. Words are only 'approximations' - they are 'like' something - they are not that something.

So when Jesus says 'I pray not for this world' (John 17:9) does Jesus mean that 'this world' is not worth praying for - that God's Creation is not worth the effort of prayer? Hardly.

What Jesus refers to as 'this world' is the carnal nature of humanity - it is an example on the use in metaphor.

This then raises the question of how does one known when Jesus is using metaphor or symbol and is not being literal? It is a matter of study, meditation and analyzing - it is hard work just to nut through these matters and unfortunately most Christians don't like the hard work involved.

I accept that I have probably not answered your question.
 
Frankly, I don't think we can use the word "inspired" when it comes to what Jesus says... as He is God Himself, anything Jesus would say would, by definition, be "God breathed".

That's not to say that Jesus didn't use metaphors, parables, and illustrations in His teachings. Absolutely, He did!

This then raises the question of how does one known when Jesus is using metaphor or symbol and is not being literal? It is a matter of study, meditation and analyzing - it is hard work just to nut through these matters and unfortunately most Christians don't like the hard work involved.
Click to expand...

And this I'm in complete agreement with you. Bad things can happen when people take what Jesus meant as metaphor or simile and make it literal. I remember being on the phone for hours with a woman who hadn't seen her son, daughter-in-law and grandchildren for over a year because of Luke 14:26.

It really does require some effort on the part of Christians to read God's word... often... daily... and study it well in order to more fully understand what is truly at the heart of the message.
 
handy said:
I remember being on the phone for hours with a woman who hadn't seen her son, daughter-in-law and grandchildren for over a year because of Luke 14:26.
Click to expand...
The woman needs some biblical spanking.:toofunny.

I think you are a disciplinarian...what are you waiting for. This is scary. :lol
 
Luke 14:26

“If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple.
 
Yep, that's the verse. Her son became involved with a cult called "a true church"... and was taught that anyone that didn't belong to their church... and only their church... was a false Christian and needed to be avoided. Since, according to their leader, a dude by the name of Darwin Fish, anyone not in their church wasn't a real Christian, and according to him, Jesus meant it literally when He said that this guy needed to hate, actually hate his mom and dad, he moved away and refused to ever allow them to see him or the kids again..

I felt really bad for her.
 
handy said:
I agree!!!

Speaking of my own "real life" experience (you know, all this posting on forums is what... not real life?) I've found that everyone I know personally, without exception, who doesn't take the Bible as being wholly inspired and inerrant, uses this to provide "wiggle room" for things they don't want to bring under obedience to God. A big part of this is those who want to not consider homosexuality sinful. Another big part of it are those who want to have sexual relations outside of marriage. They all say that the original texts were inspired, but things got lost in translation, or were for that culture at that time...

...and it's so interesting that the things "lost" in translation or are considered "culturally relevant" are the very things that make it OK for them to do what they want, rather than live lives characterized by "If you love Me, you will obey My commandments".
Click to expand...

hahah, so true!
 
It occurred to me in reading the posts of this thread that this part of the original was not addressed in any:

tessiewebb said:
...is it not contradictory for Peter to have said, "And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?" when another Scripture states clearly that Jesus as the Lamb of God was "to take away the sins of the world"? Is that 'scarcely saved'?
Click to expand...

Interesting.
 
handy said:
Frankly, I don't think we can use the word "inspired" when it comes to what Jesus says... as He is God Himself, anything Jesus would say would, by definition, be "God breathed".

That's not to say that Jesus didn't use metaphors, parables, and illustrations in His teachings. Absolutely, He did!
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand this. Metaphors, parables and illustrations are God breathed but don't really mean what they appear to say? Or is it that their real meanings are only understood by the truly learned who have diligently studied them and are the approved who "rightly divide the Word"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top