The Bible is the Word of God. Ok, but how do you know that?

[Cormack]

True. But how do you know that what Christians consider Sacred Scripture is truly from God while the Koran is not from God?

(Above is dialectical; not a sincere question)

Logically, dialectically and for the sake of thinking through the “question” the books are just too different, they can’t even justify themselves in the same way. At the very least the Bible makes a coherent case for itself by forming complete sentences, something the Quran can’t always boast of.

The Quran lacks both context and chronology, so without a wider group of divinely inspired reading material nobody knows (1) what they’re reading about in the Quran or (2) when the events in the Quran happened. Even on a basic level we’re more justified believing in the God given origins of the Bible.

On a bigger picture level, the Bible contains eyewitness testimony. Paul was an educated man and wrote his own letters, or at least dictated them (we know that from word occurrences and word phrase ordering,) they were letters that contain an eyewitness report of Christ commissioning him. Eyewitness testimony. I’m not sure that something being eyewitness attested makes it divine, actually I’m certain it doesn’t get us that far, but if we are hedging our bets it’s safer to put money on the guy who’s seen God rather than the guys who play telephone and haven’t formed complete sentences.

The Quran needs traditions to give simple context and chronology to the books stories. By using the wider context we find that in order to believe the Quran is Gods word we need to accept 5th hand testimony (at best.) There is no first hand testimony in Islam.

The Quran is Allahs word about tables in heaven (1st) spoken to Gabriel (2nd) who spoke it to Mohammed (3rd hand supposedly illiterate Mohammed) who couldn’t write it down but rather told it to his companions (4th hand) who shared the info down a chain of narrators (????? hand) who told it to an author of tradition that compiled those things (5th hand.)

That’s ^^^ even ignoring the fact that there were two recensions of the Quran by different men after Islam’s favourite “prophet” died. Paul’s eyewitness testimony alone crushes that. I’d trust Paul’s letters, Luke’s gospel and the book of Acts long before anything Islamic.

On topic: The Bibles God given origins are trustworthy because of date oriented prophecy that came to pass, the historic method that vindicates its narrative, and by immediate experience when we claim the promises in the Bible and discover that they are true.

 

[Cormack]

The Koran was only written in 6 A.D. The Torah (OT)

Very very minor correction, it was closer to 700AD. It’s a long way from Christ’s earthly ministry, written by another people group outside of the Jews, in an alien culture divorced from what Jesus did, hundreds of miles away from where the events took place. Quran is all hearsay and fables.

 

[DebbieJ]

Very very minor correction, it was closer to 700AD.

Correct. I was missing zeros. lol

It’s a long way from Christ’s earthly ministry, written by another people group outside of the Jews, in an alien culture divorced from what Jesus did, hundreds of miles away from where the events took place. Quran is all hearsay and fables.

There were a lot of Gnostic texts circulating around those times -- the gospel of Mary, the acts of Thomas, the secret gospel of Mark, the apocalypse of Adam, and etc. I believe the Quran is just one of the many.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Logically, dialectically and for the sake of thinking through the “question” the books are just too different, they can’t even justify themselves in the same way. At the very least the Bible makes a coherent case for itself by forming complete sentences, something the Quran can’t always boast of.

The Quran lacks both context and chronology, so without a wider group of divinely inspired reading material nobody knows (1) what they’re reading about in the Quran or (2) when the events in the Quran happened. Even on a basic level we’re more justified believing in the God given origins of the Bible.

...

Okay. So I shall start by saying that my question was meant to be a bit... not sarcastic but not completely serious either. But wow, you wrote a rather insightful and well-developed analysis, I must say. I'm clipping most of it out here but only for brevity. Everybody should read your post. Very good job.

On topic: The Bibles God given origins are trustworthy because of date oriented prophecy that came to pass, the historic method that vindicates its narrative, and by immediate experience when we claim the promises in the Bible and discover that they are true.

Where I was planning to take my point is that a certain level of non-scriptural authority is necessary in order to determine what Sacred Scripture is.

Specifically, the various councils which occurred relatively early in the Church's history are how we have come to recognize the scriptural canon today.

 

[BryanJohnMaloney]

I never said that it did.
The Spirit inspired those words to be written - in some cases they were God's own words.

The "Word of God", expressed in such fashion, means "Divine Logos".

 

[BryanJohnMaloney]

I am entirely with you on this. There are many reasons I am convinced that the Bible is the Word of God.

The "Word of God" is God, fully God, completely God, God in all aspects.

 

[BryanJohnMaloney]

For me it is not just one thing, but many that show me the word of God is true. The history surrounding the bible, miracles in my own life, God's word being proved true.

The bible tells us:

Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

This tells us that God WILL make His word known to us. It is how we respond that determines what we end up believing, and living out.

God already made His Word known to us. Christ is the Word of God. Nothing else is the Word of God.

 

[Cormack]

Everybody should read your post. Very good job.

Aw mate, God love you. Thanks.

Okay. So I shall start by saying that my question was meant to be a bit... not sarcastic but not completely serious either.

That came through loud and clear. Still I wanted to play with the question, the challenge, and hopefully everyone finds my response useful as a Christian defence of Gods word over against counterfeit scripture. Not all claims to divine origins are created equal.

Half way through I started to wonder if my defence is truly an argument for the divine origins of the Bible, or just an argument for the fact that we should believe the things recorded in the Bible. The questions are different but interlinked (for which I could casually confuse them without catching myself doing that.)

Still, if the Bible didn’t raise to the level of being truthful, being believable, we could never push on to the divinely inspired question.

a certain level of non-scriptural authority is necessary in order to determine what Sacred Scripture is.

Canonicity? Well, I’m sympathetic to that idea. I may agree. Still, playing devils advocate, Christ has a saying in Luke, Luke 11:51 “from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the sanctuary.” I’ve read that the deaths mentioned are of characters named in the first and last books of the Jewish canon. If that’s correct Jesus would be rubber stamping the OT canon for us, depending on how seriously the reader took Lukes gospel as an accurate record of the words of Jesus.

EDIT: Peter also describes Paul’s writings as “scripture” (2 Peter 3:16.) Which would confirm lots of the NT. Again our view on that would depend on how we feel about 2 Peter, causing a little circularity to the entire thing (which I’m told is bad.) Having some feedback on those two arguments would be interesting.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I accept the Scriptures as God's written word because this is how the Church has received and confessed the Scriptures down through the ages.

Where I'm going to disagree with the OP is with the OP's presumption that Rome somehow can lay exclusive claim of being the holy Catholic Church instituted by Christ our Lord.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[FutureAndAHope]

God already made His Word known to us. Christ is the Word of God. Nothing else is the Word of God.

Hi,

Not sure what you mean? Christ is the word of God, yes. But Christ is only revealed through the pages of the bible. Through that revealed word, we can experience, connection to God, which brings His miraculous power, and peace, into our lives.

 

[Cormack]

God already made His Word known to us. Christ is the Word of God. Nothing else is the Word of God.

Hi,

Not sure what you mean? Christ is the word of God, yes. But Christ is only revealed through the pages of the bible. Through that revealed word, we can experience, connection to God, which brings His miraculous power, and peace, into our lives.

Can’t we circumvent the entire debate by saying Christ is the Word (personification by “word” used as a proper noun) while the Bible is the word of God.

If we believe that God commissioned the writings of scripture by the power of revelation and special order, guiding the entire process, that would make the Bible Gods “word.”

1. the Bible can be Gods “word” in the sense that it contains the verbatim words of God.

2. the Bible can be Gods “word” because the text was superintended by God from on high. Guided in its composition. So that would make the Bible Gods word in the possessive sense, He’s the author, it’s His book.

3. Jesus can be seen as the Word of God in a special one of a kind way.

I haven’t read your entire exchange, so my bad if I’m covering old ground.

 

[BryanJohnMaloney]

Can’t we circumvent the entire debate by saying Christ is the Word (personification by “word” used as a proper noun) while the Bible is the word of God.

If we believe that God commissioned the writings of scripture by the power of revelation and special order, guiding the entire process, that would make the Bible Gods “word.”

1. the Bible can be Gods “word” in the sense that it contains the verbatim words of God.

2. the Bible can be Gods “word” because the text was superintended by God from on high. Guided in its composition. So that would make the Bible Gods word in the possessive sense, He’s the author, it’s His book.

3. Jesus can be seen as the Word of God in a special one of a kind way.

I haven’t read your entire exchange, so my bad if I’m covering old ground.

That's just it, an enormous number of people insist that the Bible is the "Word of God", but Jesus is merely the "Word of God made flesh"--but ultimately they are BOTH the same "Word of God". That's blasphemous and idolatrous. The Bible is words from God and words about God. It is not God, itself. The Word of God, the Divine Logos, is God. Thus, much like Christ said that for a man to look upon a woman lustfully is to commit adultery in his heart, to say that the Bible is the "word of God" in any context is to say that books are God--on ones heart.

 

[BryanJohnMaloney]

Hi,

Not sure what you mean? Christ is the word of God, yes. But Christ is only revealed through the pages of the bible. Through that revealed word, we can experience, connection to God, which brings His miraculous power, and peace, into our lives.

Is the Bible God, yes or no? If you go into a bookstore, is God, FULLY GOD, sitting on those shelves? If someone burns a Bible, is someone burning God? The Word of God IS GOD! The Divine Logos is God.

 

[Strong in Him]

That's just it, an enormous number of people insist that the Bible is the "Word of God", but Jesus is merely the "Word of God made flesh"--but ultimately they are BOTH the same "Word of God". That's blasphemous and idolatrous.

It is not blasphemous to say that the Bible is the word of God.
It may be more correct to say that it contains God's words and points to THE Word. But if we were debating with non Christians and used the phrase "God says in his word", I don't think God would condemn us.

 

[Cormack]

That's just it, an enormous number of people insist that the Bible is the "Word of God", but Jesus is merely the "Word of God made flesh"--but ultimately they are BOTH the same "Word of God". That's blasphemous and idolatrous. The Bible is words from God and words about God. It is not God, itself.

Who are some prominent teachers in Christian entertainment or in preaching ministry who explicitly teach that the Bible is God?

to say that the Bible is the "word of God" in any context is to say that books are God--on ones heart.

“In any context”? Well, in the context that a person is saying: “the Bible is Gods word,” if by that they mean to say it in the possessive sense, simply meaning to say that God is the superintendent and author of scripture, that’s not the same as saying that “the Bible is God.” I can picture many different contexts in which the meaning behind word of God needn’t be idolatry.

 

[Marumorose]

All Christians believe that the book they hold in their hands and that has the word 'Bible' printed on it is the Word of God, inspired and infallibly true. But not all Christians believe this for the same reason. Furthermore, not all Christians have the same Bible. Some have more books than others, some have shorter books, some even have different words added that change the meaning of what is written. Which begs the question, how do you know that your Bible is the Word of God? How would you explain this to a non-believer?

Some may try and avoid the question by answering "because the Bible says it is God's Word." Sure, but so does the Koran, or the book of Mormons. Why then do we not accept them as the Word of God as well?

Some may say "because I feel it is God's Word." That's nice, but if you think the Christian faith is reasonable, then there must be a rationale behind it.

The Bible itself admonishes us to "always be ready to give a reason for the hope that is in you" (1 Peter 3:15). Can you give a good reason why you believe the Bible is the Word of God?

Firstly lets understand why we read the bible. We read the bible to gain wisdom about who God is and to be righteous. But most importantly, we read it because it is the food for the soul.
Matthew 4:4 Jesus Christ says "It is written, that man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
After reading the bible, you will have the feeling of hope, peace or joy inside you, just like when you have been to church. If you go to church and still feel the same way you did before you went, then there something very wrong with you.
We know that it is the word of God because of how it makes us feel physically, mentally and spiritually.


https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/243100.html