1 John 4:19-21 (NIV2011)
19 We love because He first loved us.
20 Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, Whom they have not seen. {Emphasis added.)
21 And He has given us this command: Anyone who loves God must also love their brother and sister.
@Dale, are we thinking along the same lines?
In terms of 1 John we are, anyway.
Having spent my entire life “in church,” I’m not convinced that this is true.
Isn’t there a difference between what John was doing and what Paul meant by the word? Because if not, then our understanding and practice needs to change…doesn’t it?
The confusion comes from what people are taught about what the label means. That’s how we form concepts. The word is just a trigger for a bunch of associations we get from our experience with its use in our communities. The label itself does carry with it a concept about what the Bible is or what it does. Clearly different denominations are teaching different things about what Word of God means and how the Bible relates to references to the word of God in the Bible. That is where the confusion comes from, not from the fact that the term can be used different ways in different contexts. Words having semantic ranges is normal and not inherently confusing to native speakers.
Yes there is a difference. That’s the point. Biblical terms can mean more than one thing depending on context and we do just fine.
After nearly 65 years in church, I agree.
I agree with that. But I believe the label is taught implicitly–through common usage without clarification.
And I agree that people hear a misleading common usage of the phrase Word of God in many churches, where it is attached to claims that about what the Bible is and does that go well beyond what the church and the Bible itself have traditionally been interpreted to mean by affirming that special revelation is God’s word to us. I just don’t think the solution is ditching the label entirely. Without a lot of institutional power and control of media, you can’t effectively change how people use language. And just changing the label would not change people’s wrong ideas; other words would just become their preferred label for their mistaken concepts.
@Dale, I have no problem with the Christian’s Confidence.
My concern, (and it need not be shared by everyone, but I wish someone from your “side” would agree that it is or at least could be a valid concern) is that some people think that they are Christians not because they believe in Jesus Christ, Who the Bible says is the Word of God, but because they believe in the Bible, which is the Book of God or even the word of God, but is not God. It is my observation after talking to YEC Christians that this is a real issue.
Hi, Roger. Yes, I think that there are people in churches who believe that.
Even from the outside that has often seemed to be the case from my perspective. And I’ve heard many here share that same concern, though more often referred to as biblicism.
The New Testament is full of severe warnings to test yourself against scripture to see if you really are one of Father’s children. C.H. Spurgeon calls any in the church who is not a believer, but claims to be, a ‘mere professor’ – my term is ‘believist’. There were those even in the early church.
AMEN, Sister. The best way to overcome poor theology is with good theology and we need to begin where we are at BioLogos, particularly when BioLogos has the Word/Jesus in its name. The message is Jesus Christ is the Word, not the Bible is not the Word. The message should be the same as the John 1 that the universe was created by God the Father through the Logos, rather than in 6 days de novo.
Jesus Himself said that neither He or the Father rested on the sixth day. They continue to create the universe to this day. John 5:18 Version:1.0 John 5:17-18 (NIV2011)
17 In his defense Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.”
18 For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.
I apologize for using Johannine theology. The capitalization of Father is in the NIV text.
As it deserves to be, if for no other reason than to make a distinction from his apparent earthly father. And it is referring to God, after all.
Nothin wrong with that. John’s gospel is my favourite of the four, and I adore 1 John. If I gave them impression his theology was off-limits earlier in this thread then I sincerely and humbly apologise. Without reopening old wounds, what I took issue with was reading John’s use of a word into Paul’s use of a word. Again, sorry if I didn’t make that clear Roger. Go in peace, brother, to live and quote from John! 
Agreed. We don’t need to pit Jesus against the Bible to do that.
You could be right about that.
Of course, but those of us who understand islam know that the word of God has a different meaning. in Christianity we believe scripture is the inspired word of God. other religions believe the text is dictated by their god. It is different,.
No, many of us who are Christians do not believe the Bible is the “Word of God.”
It is composed of writings, words of men and possibly women, that were written by men and women inspired by God to write.
The scriptures, in general, claim to be the writings of humans.
And by “many of us,” Vance mostly means himself. He was not very successful in showing that aversion to the term “Word of God” is all that widespread.
I think ditching the label “the Word of God” for the Bible is a good first step in diminishing the negative effects of Biblidolaty.
As long as we are reenforcing error with our words, we are setting people up for failure.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.