Should "Bible" = "Word of God"?

[03Cobra (Vance)]

@LM77

Still I wonder how many of that vocal minority of YECs would say that the near rabid insistence of a Millions of years-old earth by some EC turns people away from the gospel and does damage to the kingdom of God?

I think they would be quite wrong to say that.

[03Cobra (Vance)]

When Jesus said, “No one comes to the Father but by me,” I think we should recognize the possibility that the statement means Jesus is the judge who will determine who is a believer.

Evangelicals seem to think it means people must believe in their version of Jesus to be saved. I don’t see that in the quote.

[Dale (evolutionary providentialist)]

For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.

[LM77 (Liam Maguire)]

I think you’ve misunderstood me. I never said they were right, only that they might say it. In fact Ken Ham is probably the most vocal in saying almost exactly that.

[Randy]

I thought, as NT Wright wrote I think, that Jesus’ words here refer to the Kingdom of Heaven on earth. It would thus be hyperbolic, much as with many other of his parables and the Beatitudes. Thanks. I appreciate your discussion. There is much I can learn

[Relates (Roger A. Sawtelle)]

@LM77

Roger, please, please tell me you didn’t just accuse the majority of my congregants of not being fully saved and my fellow elders of being false teachers?

First of all I am not accusing anyone of anything. All I am trying to do is carry out charge Paul gave to Timothy:

2 Timothy 2:15 (NIV2011)

15 Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.

2 Timothy 4:2 (NIV2011)

2 Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction. .

Second, as Christians our primary allegiance is to God and not to humans. As much as I sympathize with your situation, you are not helping them or yourself by refusing to accept good theology based on an ad hominen argument.

Third, salvation is based on faith and not by theology. Not I nor anyone else can truly judge anyone’s faith, except my own. That is God’s job.

Fourth, on the other hand that faith is in the Word, Jesus Christ, and not the word, the Bible. Therefore I see it as my responsibility, my call to warn people to make sure their faith is in the Word, Jesus Christ.

Fifth, If one’s faith is built on the Word and not on the ward, then you should be open to discussion of YEC that is based on the Word if though it questions faith in the word. Our faith must be in Christ Jesus, the Alpha and Omega of our faith.

[LM77 (Liam Maguire)]

Thanks Roger, it was an innocent clarifying question. Doesn’t matter now anyway, I’m pretty sure I have my answer…

Btw, the NIV2011 doesn’t capitalise ”word” in 2 Tim 4:2:

For two reasons,

1. it makes no sense in context. Paul charges Timothy in the name of Jesus to preach the word of God which is later compared synonymously to ‘sound doctrine’ and ‘truth’ (v3 & 4).

2. It is anachronistic to read later Johannine logos = the Son Theology into Pauline Theology. Paul never used word to mean Jesus, it is a it’s a theme unique to John.

[Relates (Roger A. Sawtelle)]

@LM77

Btw, the NIV2011 doesn’t capitalise ”word” in 2 Tim 4:2:

NIV 1984 does capitalize Word, and that is the choice I made, esp since the underlying Greek word is logos. Also as has been pointed out, the Bible/word as an accepted book of NT scripture was not in existence at the time of the writing.

@LM77

Paul charges Timothy in the name of Jesus to preach the word of God which is later compared synonymously to ‘sound doctrine’ and ‘truth’ (v3 & 4).

Paul charges Paul in the Name of Jesus to preach Jesus Who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

@LM77

It is anachronistic to read later Johannine logos = the Son Theology into Pauline Theology. Paul never used word to mean Jesus, it is a it’s a theme unique to John.

One cannot say that Pauline theology and Johannine theology are antithetical. They are both true and therefore must be in harmony. 2 Timothy is the last or one of the last letters that Paul wrote anticipating his death. You cannot say that Paul might not have been influenced by Johannine teaching at this point in his life.

[LM77 (Liam Maguire)]

@Relates

NIV 1984 does capitalize Word, and that is the choice I made, esp since the underlying Greek word is logos.

Then I’d kindly ask you to quote from the correct version next time rather than taking editorial licence. Evidence is only as strong as it’s source.

@Relates

Paul charges Paul in the Name of Jesus to preach Jesus Who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

No he doesn’t. Context shows he doesn’t and context is king.

@Relates

One cannot say that Pauline theology and Johannine theology are antithetical.

Never said they were. Just that they had different themes.

@Relates

They are both true and therefore must be in harmony.

Never said they weren’t. Harmony of truth does not require homogenous use of language.

@Relates

You cannot say that Paul might not have been influenced by Johannine teaching at this point in his life.

And you cannot say he was. In fact, you are using the same argument YEC make all the time ‘you don’t know what happened, you weren’t there’. You are deploying an argument from silence.

I hate to sound rude, Roger, but for someone who goes out of their way to correct everyone else’s theology here on the forum, I’m surprised you don’t know this stuff.

[Dale (evolutionary providentialist)]

Along the same lines, however (or at least a severe warning to test ourselves, as Paul says):

Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

and

On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’

[Christy (Christy Hemphill)]

@Relates

NIV 1984 does capitalize Word, and that is the choice I made, esp since the underlying Greek word is logos. Also as has been pointed out, the Bible/word as an accepted book of NT scripture was not in existence at the time of the writing.

LM77:

I am looking at my NIV (1984) study Bible, and yes, Word is capitalized, but the note says “be ready in any situation to speak the needed word, whether of correction, rebuke, or of encouragement.” That clearly indicates the publishers were not intending to communicate that Word=Jesus in that verse. It is your own wrong assumption that every time Word is capitalized in English, it refers to Jesus. It doesn’t even in the NIV (1984).

[Relates (Roger A. Sawtelle)]

@Randy

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?

[Dale (evolutionary providentialist)]

In terms of 1 John we are, anyway.

[fmiddel]

@Christy

Yes, but I think you are really overestimating the confusion this causes.

Having spent my entire life “in church,” I’m not convinced that this is true.

@Christy

it means a ritual Jewish cleansing ceremony of repentance, not what it means to us today, an outward symbol of the inner reality of being united with Christ in death and raised to new life in him. Somehow we manage to use the word baptism to mean what it means in our Christian churches and baptism to mean what John was doing for Jews in the Jordan, and we figure things out just fine.

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?

[Christy (Christy Hemphill)]

@fmiddel

Having spent my entire life “in church,” I’m not convinced that this is true.

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.

@fmiddel

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?

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.

[03Cobra (Vance)]

@fmiddel

Having spent my entire life “in church,” I’m not convinced that this is true

After nearly 65 years in church, I agree.

[fmiddel]

@Christy

The confusion comes from what people are taught about what the label means. That’s how we form concepts.

I agree with that. But I believe the label is taught implicitly–through common usage without clarification.

[Christy (Christy Hemphill)]

@fmiddel

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.

[Relates (Roger A. Sawtelle)]

@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.

[LM77 (Liam Maguire)]

@Relates

My concern… is that some people think that they are Christians… because they believe in the Bible, which is the Book of God or even the word of God, but is not God.

Hi, Roger. Yes, I think that there are people in churches who believe that.