Under what circumstances is the Scripture the 'Word of God'

[Carl Emerson]

You wrote, "All too often on CF we see a battle of Scripture and this should never be so - clearly the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is not motivating the contest, players are simply holding fast to traditional theology by human loyalty, while laying claim to 'God's Word'."

Scripture is God's written word. "Every scripture is inspired by God and useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness" 2 Timothy 3:16

It is not valid to say that the Holy Spirit is not motivating the contest, players are simply holding fast to traditional theology by human loyalty, while laying claim to 'God's Word'. What is your basis for saying this, beyond your personal opinion? Which is more reasonable to accept: the Bible -- the written Word of God -- or one's personal, unqualified opinion?

There are certain topics like the Sabbath, that perpetually arise, and we see often heated debate on a regular basis.

Contestants have entrenched views and have honed their cut and paste skills. They roll out scripture after scripture but seem incapable of actually processing the content in a rational manner. Points are scored by presenting scripture after scripture and the poor reader either switches off or believes that a large section of the audience is hell bound for not accepting 'God's Word'

Personally I don't see that the Holy Spirit is motivating this circus.

How true was the prediction that we would have many teachers but few fathers of the faith.

The Bereans must have learned to hear His living Word when searching out what was truth and what was not.

This is the skill we all need to learn.

 

[rturner76]

The Bereans must have learned to hear His

living Word when searching out what was truth and what was not

Pastor,

How can one tell the difference between the inspired by the Holy Spirit interpretation of scripture and our own logic's interpretation of the scripture?

 

[Carl Emerson]

Pastor,

How can one tell the difference between the inspired by the Holy Spirit interpretation of scripture and our own logic's interpretation of the scripture?

First off I am not a Pastor and never have been - just a largely unknown 'Joe Blow'

Personally I think it takes years of daily walking in conversational relationship with Him, reading Scripture, sending the questions 'upstairs', developing a deep understanding of God's Love. We know from James 3 that the 'Wisdom from Above' is among other things 'reasonable' but intellect alone falls short.

Years ago I had a vision in which I saw a vast throng of believers all making their way in the same direction. It was a beautiful sight - amazing singing from angels overhead - a glorious company surging forward together. On the sidelines stood 'leaders' encouraging and 'saying this is the way' - and I knew they didn't themselves know the way. And I wondered where we were all headed so I looked in the distance to see what was the destination. Sure enough - in the distance I could see we were all walking towards the Cross.

Paul knew this in reference to dying daily.

This principle should underpin all we do including our intellectual pursuits.

Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding - in all your ways acknowledge Him and He will make your paths straight...

 

[topher694]

Pastor,

How can one tell the difference between the inspired by the Holy Spirit interpretation of scripture and our own logic's interpretation of the scripture?

By developing our relationship with Him before we start trying to tackle the difficult interpretations. The key question you need to ask when considering an interpration of scripture is: "does this line up with what I know about my Father"? And that can't be done without building relationship first.

 

[rturner76]

First off I am not a Pastor and never have been - just a largely unknown 'Joe Blow'

Personally I think it takes years of daily walking in conversational relationship with Him, reading Scripture, sending the questions 'upstairs', developing a deep understanding of God's Love. We know from James 3 that the 'Wisdom from Above' is among other things 'reasonable' but intellect alone falls short.

Years ago I had a vision in which I saw a vast throng of believers all making their way in the same direction. It was a beautiful sight - amazing singing from angels overhead - a glorious company surging forward together. On the sidelines stood 'leaders' encouraging and 'saying this is the way' - and I knew they didn't themselves know the way. And I wondered where we were all headed so I looked in the distance to see what was the destination. Sure enough - in the distance I could see we were all walking towards the Cross.

Paul knew this in reference to dying daily.

This principle should underpin all we do including our intellectual pursuits.

Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding - in all your ways acknowledge Him and He will make your paths straight...

Oh, sorry, for some reason I thought you lead a group but there are so many people here, I get it mixed up.

So it seems we should approach scripture prayerfully, asking for guidance and letting the words speak for themselves. I find I learn much more when I read a whole chapter rather than taking the verses individually. Who was the author speaking to etc? How do I apply these words to my walk? I believe those are things to be mindful of in study. Where do we turn for proper instruction on interpretation?

It's so different now because you can type a question or verse into google and get all kinds of things coming back like for and against this or that.

 

[Carl Emerson]

In reading Scripture we are invited to commune with Him.

This exercise should not primarily be 'academic' but rather an exercise in which we prayerfully seek His Wisdom and invite His examination of our being.

Contemplative prayerful reading over an extended period (years) will yield changes to us and how we view Him.

Over time we build up a store of revelationary knowledge building from the central fact of God's Love and Holiness.

This is the reverse of what most seminaries offer - consuming what others have digested - He even says that He hates the prophets who steal one another's words yet we do this all the time.

He wants us to go to Him (the source) rich or poor, clever or slow, He will meet with us and reveal what we need to know.

If we are in healthy fellowship, with a genuine Shepherd, we will also be led in this way to feed on the Scriptures - the right food at the right time - and this will hasten the process.

 

[LightLoveHope]

Hi there,

This is a sensitive topic but one that needs to be raised.

It is a strong tradition to refer to the Bible as the 'Word of God'.

Some folks on CF tend to even use Scripture as a weapon - the 'Sword of the Spirit'

You may have experienced this - raise an issue for serious consideration and the response is a barrage of Scripture - often not really addressing the issue.

It is like the Words are presented as magic...

Can I suggest this is not what the 'Word of God' is all about.

Consider the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness - Satans weapon of choice was Scripture.

Was the 'Word of God' being manifest when Satan quoted Scripture?

Absolutely not.

In fact Jesus is the 'Word of God' and Satan presumed to tempt and hopefully deceive Truth Himself with quotes from Scripture !!!

So when is the Scripture 'God's Word' ???

When the quotations are being presented under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

All too often on CF we see a battle of Scripture and this should never be so - clearly the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is not motivating the contest, players are simply holding fast to traditional theology by human loyalty, while laying claim to 'God's Word'.

The sad fact is that God's Word - Jesus is not being understood.

Jesus is sustaining all of creation as the Word of God.

Jesus is indwelling true believers and He is not silent.

The Word of God is vastly more magnificent than we could ask or think, He is supreme, we owe Him our all.

He is much more widely active than just enabling us to understand and present Scripture fruitfully. Yet some believe the Scripture is His only opportunity to be heard.

Bow down to the Living Word - Jesus

Reflect on the enormity of His power and splendour.

He wants to bring alive the words written in His special book.

Then to you it will truely be, in that moment, the Word of God.

God is the Word.
Words created the universe and life.

We are the living word dwelling in our hearts. Words define our lives and our interactions.
They express and encompass who we are and what we want to do.

Words are a mixture of meaning, emotion and facts or information. The interplay is so subtle it can be difficult to prize apart. I am beginning to realise our words probably define us and are core to everything we do and interact with.

Jesus talked about fruit, grapes and figs or thorns and thistles.
Good trees give grapes and figs.

I have met folk where to have interaction with them is a bloodied affair.
So how scripture is used can be both good and also destructive.
Finding the right pitch and meaning using scripture is certainly comes with spiritual maturity, and it is here most people I have heard fail in badly. Something maybe true but not helpful.

God bless you

 

[Nux]

Hello guys! I'm sorry, but... what do you all mean by 'scriptures' here? The 'translations' we've got are neither translations, in the pure sence of that word, nor the Word of God. They pervert and darken the actual Word of God (as it was spoken by God through the prophets, Jesus and apostles) so cunningly and in so many ways that rather should be called 'poison' or something like this. And the 'çhurches', at least those that are close to me, don't even try to bring the light... If somebody don't use interlinear and don't take significant efforts to check those 'translations' and what is 'taught' in 'churches' against it, he got no Word of God and know nothing at all.

 

[Carl Emerson]

You raise a valid point...

However I learnt that even when going back to the Greek or Hebrew the truth was no more evident without the Holy Spirit bringing the Truth alive...

 

[hedrick]

This question goes back to the Reformation. Actually I’m sure it appears earlier, but that’s the context I’m aware of.

The Reformers thought the Church had gone off the rails. They wanted to use Scripture to verify their understanding. They tended to refer to it as the Word of God, though there was also an understanding that words on the page weren’t enough, and it truly became the Word when properly preached.

Biblically the Word of God means communication from God. You can reasonably argue that until it’s heard and understood as that, it’s just words.

But the problem is that people think they hear quite different things. Indeed that became the basis for one common Catholic rebuttal: How can it be authoritative if everyone has their own understanding? For them it doesn’t become real communication from God without the Holy Spirit guiding our understanding, and the Holy Spirit works though the Church.

In response there was an attempt to develop a “literal” approach to the Bible that was so mechanical that everyone would have to agree on what was meant. But looking back on it from a critical point of view, it appears that there was a strong unacknowledged element of tradition to the supposedly literal understanding, and in fact it never resulted in just one interpretation..

There doesn’t seem any easy answer. I have a PhD in artificial intelligence. In early work on language understanding, it became apparent that understanding what someone wrote didn’t just involve grammar and word definitions. Communication is hard. You have to have a certain understanding of what the speaker is trying to do, and actively interpret the words in that context. Otherwise it’s hopeless. If you’re hostile to the speaker’s intent, it’s easy to come up with an interpretation that’s quite different from what was intended. In the context of Scripture, that could easily mean that without some guidance by the Holy Spirit, it doesn’t actually communicate.

Yet there’s a real danger of idiosyncratic interpretation. We’ve seen this all too much. Hence even the Reformers ended up wanting to control individual, supposedly Spirit-inspired reading, by giving the community the primary role in interpretation. In modern exegesis (and really, this also started at the Reformation, particularly with Calvin), we also give a role to scholarship, since it can often clarify what the author would likely have meant based on the historical context and our knowledge of the author’s position.

I don’t think there’s any way out of a certain tension between inspiration of the individual by the Spirit, and interpretation by a Christian community with the aid of historical and Biblical scholarship. Unfortunately there’s more than one such community, though there’s not an infinite number of them.

 

[Carl Emerson]

This question goes back to the Reformation. Actually I’m sure it appears earlier, but that’s the context I’m aware of.

The Reformers thought the Church had gone off the rails. They wanted to use Scripture to verify their understanding. They tended to refer to it as the Word of God, though there was also an understanding that words on the page weren’t enough, and it truly became the Word when properly preached.

Biblically the Word of God means communication from God. You can reasonably argue that until it’s heard and understood as that, it’s just words.

But the problem is that people think they hear quite different things. Indeed that became the basis for one common Catholic rebuttal: How can it be authoritative if everyone has their own understanding? For them it doesn’t become real communication from God without the Holy Spirit guiding our understanding, and the Holy Spirit works though the Church.

In response there was an attempt to develop a “literal” approach to the Bible that was so mechanical that everyone would have to agree on what was meant. But looking back on it from a critical point of view, it appears that there was a strong unacknowledged element of tradition to the supposedly literal understanding, and in fact it never resulted in just one interpretation..

There doesn’t seem any easy answer. I have a PhD in artificial intelligence. In early work on language understanding, it became apparent that understanding what someone wrote didn’t just involve grammar and word definitions. Communication is hard. You have to have a certain understanding of what the speaker is trying to do, and actively interpret the words in that context. Otherwise it’s hopeless. If you’re hostile to the speaker’s intent, it’s easy to come up with an interpretation that’s quite different from what was intended. In the context of Scripture, that could easily mean that without some guidance by the Holy Spirit, it doesn’t actually communicate.

Yet there’s a real danger of idiosyncratic interpretation. We’ve seen this all too much. Hence even the Reformers ended up wanting to control individual, supposedly Spirit-inspired reading, by giving the community the primary role in interpretation. In modern exegesis (and really, this also started at the Reformation, particularly with Calvin), we also give a role to scholarship, since it can often clarify what the author would likely have meant based on the historical context and our knowledge of the author’s position.

I don’t think there’s any way out of a certain tension between inspiration of the individual by the Spirit, and interpretation by a Christian community with the aid of historical and Biblical scholarship. Unfortunately there’s more than one such community, though there’s not an infinite number of them.

This is a very helpful summary thanks.

I think matters come into focus better when one considers just the essential fundamentals of the faith - simply put these are well understood by the common man (with His help)
For this reason I don't think authority of interpretation was ever meant to be in the hands of the intellectual elite.
He rightly said you will have very many teachers and very few fathers.
Fathers communicate the Love of God with an embrace.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

WHEN IS SCRIPTURE GOD'S WORD? - ALWAYS IN THOSE WHO BELIEVE THEM

The scriptures are the Word of God because they are inspired through His Spirit and given to us for our admonition from God. The scriptures are holy and God breathed (2 Timothy 3:15-16). However the scriptures only truly become God's living Word in us as we are born again through faith to walk in His Spirit *Galatians 5:16 by believing and following what what God's Word says *John 3:3-7; 1 John 3:6-9; Galatians 5:16; Romans 8:1-4; Romans 3:31. It is these very scriptures (Gods' Words) that lead us to Christ that we might be forgiven though faith. This faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God. *Romans 10:17. Without faith it is impossible to please God *Hebrews 11:6 because whatsoever is not of faith is sin *Romans 14:23 which is why Jesus says "He that believes on the Son has everlasting life: and he that believes not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God stays on him." - John 3:36.

THE RULE OF FAITH AND PRACTICE IS ALWAYS SCRIPTURE "ALONE" 2

May God bless you all as you seek Him through His Word

 

[Clare73]

Hi there,

This is a sensitive topic but one that needs to be raised.

It is a strong tradition to refer to the Bible as the 'Word of God'.

Some folks on CF tend to even use Scripture as a weapon - the 'Sword of the Spirit'

You may have experienced this - raise an issue for serious consideration and the response is a barrage of Scripture - often not really addressing the issue.

It is like the Words are presented as magic...

Can I suggest this is not what the 'Word of God' is all about.

Consider the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness - Satans weapon of choice was Scripture.

Was the 'Word of God' being manifest when Satan quoted Scripture?

Absolutely not.

In fact Jesus is the 'Word of God' and Satan presumed to tempt and hopefully deceive Truth Himself with quotes from Scripture !!!

So when is the Scripture 'God's Word' ???

Scripture is always the Word of God, whether the Word of God is being manifest in its use or not.

There is no such thing as "Scripture is the Word of God only when. . ."

Separating Scripture, with no divine authority to do so, into "Word of God" and "not Word of God" is a dangerously slippery slope to an eventual complete denial of Scripture as the Word of God written.

When the quotations are being presented under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

All too often on CF we see a battle of Scripture and this should never be so - clearly the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is not motivating the contest, players are simply holding fast to traditional theology by human loyalty, while laying claim to 'God's Word'.

The sad fact is that God's Word - Jesus is not being understood.

Jesus is sustaining all of creation as the Word of God.

Jesus is indwelling true believers and He is not silent.

The Word of God is vastly more magnificent than we could ask or think, He is supreme, we owe Him our all.

He is much more widely active than just enabling us to understand and present Scripture fruitfully. Yet some believe the Scripture is His only opportunity to be heard.

Bow down to the Living Word - Jesus

Reflect on the enormity of His power and splendour.

He wants to bring alive the words written in His special book.

Then to you

it will truely be, in that moment, the Word of God.

Scripture is always God's breathed word (2 Timothy 3:16). Whether it is correctly understood, correctly used, or misused and abused doesn't change what it is, it changes only what it is being used for.
On what authority do we seek to change that God-given truth. . .man's abuse of it?
I don't think so. . .let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Scripture is always the Word of God, whether the Word of God is being manifest in its use or not.

There is no such thing as "Scripture is the Word of God only when. . ."

Separating Scripture, with no divine authority to do so, into "Word of God" and "not Word of God" is a dangerously slippery slope to an eventual complete denial of Scripture as the Word of God written.

Scripture is always God's breathed word (2 Timothy 3:16). Whether it is correctly understood, correctly used, or misused and abused doesn't change what it is, it changes only what it is being used for.
On what authority do we seek to change that God-given truth. . .man's abuse of it?
I don't think so. . .let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Thanks for your response.

Can I ask a couple of questions please.

John 1 reads...
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of mankind. 5 And the Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not grasp it....
14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us; and we saw His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Do these verses mean that Jesus, God's Word, existed before the Scripture was written ?

Was Satan inspired by God when he quoted Scripture in tempting Jesus?

Is the Scripture alone sufficient to understand God's Truth or do we need the Holy Spirit to teach us?

No one is arguing that the Scripture is not inspired Words from God. The problem is that Jesus alone is the Word of God and He must not be confused with the record we have of some of His inspired Words.

 

[Confused-by-christianity]

So when is the Scripture 'God's Word' ???

Mate - I don't know.

I'm still working it out - I bet I never know until after I die.
I read the Bible because I think it does me good.
To me, it's actually pretty vague a lot of the time. My guess is that it's speaking to another part of me - a spiritual part.

@hedrick posts help a lot.

What if God's Word to us was actually Jesus himself. His teaching, which lay in the Bible but only in part, with a bit of misunderstanding from the author as well???
(I suppose I think this is what is happening??)
I'm not worried if this is the case because I think, sooner or later, Jesus's teaching will prevail above all misunderstanding.

 

[Clare73]

Thanks for your response.

Can I ask a couple of questions please.

John 1 reads...
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of mankind. 5 And the Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not grasp it....
14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us; and we saw His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Do these verses mean that Jesus, God's Word, existed before the Scripture was written ?

Was Satan inspired by God when he quoted Scripture in tempting Jesus?

Is the Scripture alone sufficient to understand God's Truth or do we need the Holy Spirit to teach us?

No one is arguing that the Scripture is not inspired Words from God. The problem is that Jesus alone is the Word of God and He must not be confused with the record

The problem is. . .that is not Biblical.

Did Jesus not call Scripture "the word of God" in Mark 7:13; John 5:37-39?
Does the NT not call Scripture "the word of God" in Hebrews 4:12; Ephesians 6:17; 1 Timothy 1:4-5 (God's promise of food, Psalms 145:15-16).

And in Matthew 19:4-6, in reference to the creation account, Jesus refers to the words composed by Moses as "the Creator said," showing that all Scripture, not just the words God actually spoke, is the "word of God."

the record we have of some of His inspired Words.

This, too, is not Biblical.

The Biblical view is the view of Jesus: "All Scripture is God-breathed," (2 Timothy 3:16), not just the words of Jesus and God.

So. . .the "word of God" in Mark 7:13, John 5:37-39, Hebrews 4:12, Ephesians 6:17, and 1 Timothy 1:4-5 refers to Scripture, not to Jesus, and is NT usage for Scripture, which is why NT Christians correctly do the same.

In the NT we have the:

Word of God Incarnate (John 1:14)
Word of God spoken (Luke 5:1)
Word of God written (Mark 7:13, John 5:37-39; Hebrews 4:12).

 

[hedrick]

The problem is. . .that is not Biblical.

Did Jesus not call Scripture "the word of God" in Mark 7:13; John 5:37-39?
Does the NT not call Scripture "the word of God" in Hebrews 4:12; Ephesians 6:17; 1 Timothy 1:4-5 (God's promise of food, Psalms 145:15-16).

And in Matthew 19:4-6, in reference to the creation account, Jesus refers to the words composed by Moses as "the Creator said," showing that all Scripture, not just the words God actually spoke, is the "word of God."

This, too, is not Biblical.

The Biblical view is the view of Jesus: "All Scripture is God-breathed," (2 Timothy 3:16), not just the words of Jesus and God.

So. . .the "word of God" in Mark 7:13, John 5:37-39, Hebrews 4:12, Ephesians 6:17, and 1 Timothy 1:4-5 refers to Scripture, not to Jesus, and is NT usage for Scripture, which is why NT Christians correctly do the same.

In the NT we have the:

Word of God Incarnate (John 1:14)
Word of God spoken (Luke 5:1)
Word of God written (Mark 7:13, John 5:37-39; Hebrews 4:12).

Right. The term "Word of God" is used in many different ways:
* Luke 3:2 uses it for John's preaching, probably modeled after the OT prophets, who proclaimed the word of God
* Luke 5:1 uses it for Jesus' preaching
* Act 4:31 uses it for preaching of Christians
* Act 6:7 uses it in a way that I think is a general reference to news about Jesus

The general meaning seems to be communication from God, whether direct or indirect. For that reason I don't think we can limit it to Christ, nor to Scripture. And indeed Scripture itself presents God's message in various ways, from the prophets, who claim to be speaking God's message pretty directly, to wisdom literature such as Proverbs and Ecclesiastes, to love poetry like Song of Songs.

2 Tim 3:16 uses a general term for inspired. Translating it "God-breathed" is like translating goodbye as God be with ye. It's an overliteral reading of the roots from which the word is formed.

 

[Clare73]

Right. The term "Word of God" is used in many different ways:
* Luke 3:2 uses it for John's preaching, probably modeled after the OT prophets, who proclaimed the word of God
* Luke 5:1 uses it for Jesus' preaching
* Act 4:31 uses it for preaching of Christians
* Act 6:7 uses it in a way that I think is a general reference to news about Jesus

Thanks. . .all that in addition to all Scripture being the "Word of God."

The general meaning seems to be communication from God, whether direct or indirect. For that reason I don't think we can limit it to Christ, nor to Scripture. And indeed Scripture itself presents God's message in various ways, from the prophets, who claim to be speaking God's message pretty directly, to wisdom literature such as Proverbs and Ecclesiastes, to love poetry like Song of Songs.

Agreed. . .however, the issue here was whether all Scripture is the word of God, which the NT shows that it is.

2 Tim 3:16 uses a general term for inspired. Translating it "God-breathed" is like translating goodbye as God be with ye. It's an over literal reading of the roots from which the word is formed.

I dunno'.

The Greek theo-pneustos is pretty plain to me. . .if Paul closed one of his letters with "God be with ye (you)," and Jerome translated it into the Latin vernacular, "Good-bye," 16 centuries later the correct reading of the verse would still be "God be with you."

Theopnuestos, "God-breathed", says "expired by God" rather than "inspired by God."

 

[Carl Emerson]

I said...

No one is arguing that the Scripture is not inspired Words from God. The problem is that Jesus alone is the Word of God and He must not be confused with the record we have of some of His inspired Words.

The problem is. . .that is not Biblical.

Just saying a statement is 'not biblical' really doesn't address the issues I raise at all.

Are you saying that Jesus is not the Word.

Are you saying that the Scripture is not inspired words from God?

Are you saying that the Scripture records everything Jesus said?

Please explain what is "not biblical" about my statement.

I can support all of these points from Scripture.

I am inviting discussion...

 

[Clare73]

I said...

No one is arguing that the Scripture is not inspired Words from God. The problem is that Jesus alone is the Word of God and He must not be confused with the record we have of some of His inspired Words.
Just saying a statement is 'not biblical' really doesn't address the issues I raise at all.

Are you saying that Jesus is not the Word.
Are you saying that the Scripture is not inspired words from God?
Are you saying that the Scripture records everything Jesus said?
Please explain what is "not biblical" about my statement.
I can support all of these points from Scripture.
I am inviting discussion...

Okay. . .I guess the place to start is to address my previous points (regarding your non-Biblical statements):

1) The Word of God is not Jesus alone. There is the
Word of God Incarnate,
Word of God spoken,
Word of God written.

The Word of God Incarnate is Jesus alone.

2) All Scripture is God-breathed; i.e., the Word of God, and not just the words of Jesus and God alone.
.