The Cult of Biblicism

While surfing YouTube lately I was struck by the number of Christians making the statement that “The Word of God is Jesus, not the Bible.” I don’t know of any named religious leaders or best-selling books advocating this view. It seems to be a spontaneous movement among laypeople.

One poster asks, “Is the Word of God on your shelf, or in your heart?” Another expatiates on “The Bibleonian Captivity of the church.” One country preacher says, “The Bible is the Mark of the Beast!” (which is his country-preacher way of saying that Biblicism is the foundation of the Babylonish world religious system). Another satirically praises the Bible as “The Fourth Hypostasis of the Holy Quaternity.”

The people making these statements are not liberals but believers in the divinity, sacrificial death and resurrection of Jesus, the new birth and the fullness of the Spirit. So many believers from so many different church traditions are revolting against Biblicism that I wonder if this is the first stirring of a new back-to-Jesus movement. I hope so.

The Reformers believed that Sola Scriptura (“only scripture”) would answer all questions, resolve all doctrinal disputes and provide a basis of unity for all believers.

Today there are over 32,000 warring denominations that hold this doctrine. Clearly, Sola Scriptura has not worked out the way it was supposed to. The doctrine of biblical inerrancy, which was supposed to set Truth on objective grounds and guard against “subjectivism” has instead led to the most arbitrary kind of subjectivism: we can believe whatever we want to believe, and make the Bible tell us we are right.

The reason is that the Bible, by its very nature, has no authority. It is a helpless book, totally at the mercy of its interpreters. Consider the endless debates about freewill vs. predestination, pre-trib vs. post-trib and eternal security vs. reprobation. People can make the Bible say whatever they want it to say, and the only method of interpretation we know is to hop-scotch thru the Bible stringing together proof-texts that support our pet doctrines.

We can even use inerrancy to prove that the Bible is false, if that’s what we want to believe. We are told that the Bible is the infallible, verbally inspired Word of God and that there are no errors in it. If there were a single error, that would prove it is not the Word of God, since God doesn’t make mistakes. If we don’t want to believe the Bible, then it is easy enough to list all the contradictions (Deut. 24:16 - Josh. 7:19-26; 2 Chron. 25:4 - Is. 14:21), discrepancies (Matt. 28:10,16 - Luke 24:49; Matt. 27:5 - Acts 1:18; Acts 9:7 - Acts 22:9), misattributions (Zech. 11:12-13 - Matt. 27:9) and apparent misinterpretations (Hosea 11:1 - Matt. 2:15; Zech. 9:9 - Matt. 21:1-7).

Inerrancy is one of the very few religious doctrines that can be proven wrong, but it remains the foundation of Industrial Religion.

The doctrine of inerrancy has destroyed the faith of millions by making the Bible the supreme authority of heaven and earth, and then basing its authority on a standard of journalistic perfection that it does not meet up to.

Why then do we cling so stubbornly to the creed of Biblicism? Because Biblicism is idolatry and idolatry is rooted deeply in human nature. The preacher waves the Bible and says, “This is the Word of God!” Because the Bible is an object that he can control, whereas the Living Word of God, Jesus, is a Subject who acts upon and controls us.

We all know that false teachers can put the Bible to evil use. If the Bible is the Word of God, then God has lost sovereignty over His own Word. Was Satan speaking the Word of God when he quoted Scripture to Jesus?

The Word of God is not a static deposit of truth that God has handed over to men and devils to do with as they please. The Word of God is an ongoing event: the event of God speaking to us.

May He speak to us today and deliver us from the Bibleonian Captivity!

The doctrine of inerrancy does not deny that the Bible, as we now have it, contains "errors" within it. It states that the original auotgraphs were inspired and entirely without error. Unfortunately, copyists errors have been introduced over the years. The scholarly discipline of textual criticism has allowed us to reconstruct the original manuscripts with a high degree of accuracy, and affirms the complete trustworthiness of the Scriptures.

You are correct in saying that the Bible itself is not the supreme authority. The Scriptures, in and of themselves, are just words on paper. The "authority" however, that they carry, is because the words that were written on those pages were inspired by men upon whom God breathed so as to help communicate and preserve the story of redemption from one generation to the next.

The authority of the believer to minister the story of redemption is manifold. It equally depends on the personal relationship of the believer to Christ, the ministry and gifts the Holy Spirit has given such a man, and a complete dependency upon the Scriptures.

While there may be a "cult of Biblicism" out there, that is, men and women who use the Scriptures as if it were nothing but dead letter, this danger does not come from leaning upon the word of God as being inspired, authortative, infalliable, and entirely without error. The real danger comes from thinking one can depart from it, whenever they so wish.

You guys are defending the Bible, as if that is what is under attack here. I am not assaulting the Bible; I am talking about what the Industrial Church has done to the Bible - the Paper Pope, the rod of authority by which the clergy rule over the flock, the psychological tyranny of dogmatism, etc.

It is not that "we can make an idol of the Bible" - we *have* made and idol out of the Bible and bibliolatry is a multi-billion dollar industry. Granted, it has lost market share to the Osteens and Warrens, but I don't represent them either...

wayneman wrote:
The Reformers believed that Sola Scriptura (“only scripture”) would answer all questions, resolve all doctrinal disputes and provide a basis of unity for all believers.

It’s just like Martin Luther had no idea when he wrote his books for the church that the peasants would take his ideas to the streets and kill 1000 lords and tear down the churches and drag out the nuns and bishops but they did!

And who KNEW that when Timothy wrote "ALL SCRIPTURE IS BREATHED OUT BY GOD and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God[b] may be complete, equipped for every good work," (2 Timothy 3:16-17) ... what man would do with it or how far they would take it to the extremes.

Love the article Wayneman!! You should write more, brother!

God bless you,
Lisa

Ok wayne, I will give you the benefit of the doubt here that you weren't challenging the actual authority and inspiration of Scriptures, though to me, it certainly looks like you were. I do agree with you in pointing out that there are men who pastor churches that are authoritarians in their spirit, and that they harshly and unjustly "rule" over the people given to their charge. Sometimes they use the Bible to this end, but at other times, they use other things such as their "vision" for the church.

But taking the Bible too seriously is NOT an issue in the western church today.

God bless you brother,
Lisa

Good point, Lysa. Luther was forced to write a tract "Against the Murdering Horde of Peasants." He should have also written one against the marauding horde of theologians.

Hi Wayneman,

Thanks for starting this thread. I understand what you are saying and agree. You are not assaulting the Bible, but rather the elevation of the written letter above the Living Word.

I am posting a quote from Robert D. Brinsmead's book on FREEDOM FROM BIBLICISM so as to help others understand what you are trying to communicate.

FREEDOM FROM BIBLICISM

Living under the bondage of the law rather than in the freedom of the Spirit can assume many forms.

In our time, living under the law may assume the form of biblicism. Many suppose that the evangelical faith stands or falls on the matter of biblical inerrancy ­ meaning that the very letter of Holy Scripture is without any error in everything it affirms, including theology, history, ethics, geography, biology and chronology.

The great danger of biblicism is that, instead of being used solely in the service of the gospel, the Bible becomes a book of rules about many other issues. Christians may become enslaved to the Bible just as the Jews became enslaved to the Torah ­ their Holy Scripture (John 10:34,35). Just as the Jews barricaded themselves behind the letter of the Torah to oppose Jesus, so we may easily barricade ourselves behind the letter of a supposedly inerrant Scripture to oppose the gospel's festival of freedom.

There can be a false faith in the bible. In the proper spiritual sense faith is an act of real worship which should be rendered solely to the Creator (John 9:35-38). Saving faith is not faith in the Bible (for even the Christ-denying Pharisees trusted in the Bible ­ John 5:39) but faith in Jesus (Rom. 3:22-26). While Catholics have been particularly susceptible to ecclesiology ­ the worship of the church ­ Protestants have been disposed toward bibliolatry ­ the worship of the Bible.

The purpose of all Scripture is to bear witness to Christ (John 5:39; 20:31). The Bible in itself is not the Word of God. The Word of God is a person (John 1:1). Neither does the Bible have life, power or light in itself any more than did the Jewish Torah. These attributes may be ascribed to the Bible only by virtue of its relationship to Him who is Word, Life, Power and Light. Life is not in the book, as the Pharisees supposed, but only in the Man of the book (John 5:39).

The Bible is therefore to be valued because of its testimony to Jesus Christ. The Bible is absolutely trustworthy and reliable for the purpose it was given. It is designed to make us "wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus" (2 Tim. 3:15), not wise on such subjects as science, history and geography ­ which it is our responsibility to learn through general revelation.

That which makes the Bible the Bible is the gospel. That which makes the Bible the Word of God is its witness to Christ. When the Spirit bears witness to our hearts of the truth of the Bible, this is an internal witness concerning the truth of the gospel. We need to be apprehended by the Spirit, who lives in the gospel, and then judge all things by that Spirit ­ even the letter of Scripture.

If we do not allow the Bible to be the Word of God ­ the bearer of the gospel ­ it might be better to follow Luther's advice to read some other book. For if the Bible is not used in the service of the gospel, it may either find people mad or make them mad.

We must stop using the Bible as though it were a potpourri of inerrant proof-texts by which we can bring people into bondage to our religious traditions. (For in practice the only inerrancy we ever defend is the inerrancy of our religious traditions and our way of reading the Bible.) We must no longer use the Bible as the Pharisees used the Torah when they gave it absolute and final status. Christian biblicism is no different from Jewish legalism. It is the old way of the letter, not the new way of the Spirit (Rom. 7:6).

Jesus and Paul declare that apart from the Spirit we cannot understand the truth (John 16:13; I Cor. 2:14). This means that unless we are caught up in the Spirit of the gospel, we cannot understand or use the Bible correctly. Apart from the gospel the Bible is letter (gramma), not Spirit (pneuma). "The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom" (II Cor. 3:6,17).

(Brinsmead, Robert D. "A Freedom from Biblicism" in The Christian Verdict, Essay 14, 1984. Fallbrook: Verdict Publications. Pgs. 9-14).

Pilgrim

I am not assaulting the Bible; I am talking about what the Industrial Church has done to the Bible - the Paper Pope, the rod of authority by which the clergy rule over the flock, the psychological tyranny of dogmatism, etc.

Will be back.....

Diane

I agree with Krispy. Most adults attending your average Evangelical church do not really care about the teachings of Scripture, and are theologically illiterate. Such findings are confirmed by George Barna's research time and time again. There is very little authoritarian Bible-thumping in most chruches. Not to say that there isn't some. But generally speaking, there isn't, because most ministers realize where people are at.

I honestly never thought I would see the day were the Holy Scriptures were degraded like they have been in this post; on SermonIndex.

WOW!

A scalpel is made for performing surgery but someone can take it and use it to cause great harm. The Scriptures in the hands of an unredeemed person can be just as damaging.

Jesus pointed to the Scriptures, Paul pointed to the Scriptures, Peter pointed to the Scriptures and John the Baptist pointed to the Scriptures…

Wayneman points people to a mystical Jesus that we have nothing to compare him to; if he is God or a demon.

If you think people can take the Word of God out of context and use it for their own personal benefit, what do you think will happen when we abandon the Holy Scriptures and everyone listed to “their personal interpretation of a mystical Jesus speaking to them”.

Please compare societies that have respect for the Bible and those who have never had the Bible.

You can have your mystical Jesus and I will have the real Jesus with His Holy Scriptures and His Holy Spirit.

I will pray for you wayneman. People need the Scriptures in the lives; don’t encourage people to abandon the Word of God!

Iceman,

At first it seems like Wayneman is committing horrible blasphemy, but read carefully what he is saying and you it might come clear to you. In fact, ask Wayneman questions for clarity sake rather than attack him. That is how discussions are suppose to take place.

He is not degrading the Scriptures. Jesus tried to point out to the Pharisees that the Scriptures pointed to Him. Jesus did not point to the scriptures as being God, He quoted the scriptures. Wayneman is not talking about a mystical Jesus (what does that mean?) or chucking the scriptures and going on personal interpretation. By the way, do you only receive God's revelation from the written words or do you hear His voice in your spirit as in John 10. Who or what are you saying is the Real Jesus? A book?

The Bible is not God and it is not Jesus Christ. It points to Jesus Christ. It is the revelation of God in print to man about God and His Son. The Pharisees worshipped the Torah and idolized it, so in your thinking they should have known God and been walking with Him, but Jesus told them they did not know Him and would not receive Him even though they searched the Scriptures and thought they had eternal life.

I don't see Wayneman encouraging people to abandon the Word of God. That is completely unfair to say.

What is the Bible? The Bible is a book. The word "Bible" is derived from the Greek word biblion which means "book," or more accurately "papyrus scroll" as this was the material used for writing in ancient times. The Bible is a book which is in one sense like every other book in the world, but in another sense is unlike any other book in the world. It is like other books in that it is black printing (sometimes red and other colors) on white paper, and it is a tangible, perishable object. It is unlike other books in that it represents and enscripturates the revelation of God, and IS THE ONLY BOOK IN THE WORLD WHERE YOU HAVE TO KNOW THE AUTHOR TO UNDERSTAND THE BOOK.

God never intended that we should worship the Book. That is bibliolatry, making the Bible into a physical idol. The reverence that many Christians attach to the book is dangerously close to idolatry of the Bible.

This is what the Pharisees did with the Torah playing their little Torah-trivia games with Jesus.

Christianity is not the religion of the Book. Christianity is Christ! Christianity is the dynamic, personal Spirit of God functioning in man. It is not the study of, memorization of, or adherence to the principles and propositions and precepts of a bound-book.

Wayneman is attempting to exalt Jesus Christ over the Bible. The Pharisees thought Jesus was exalting Himself over the Torah and did not like it. Now you are probably getting a pretty good idea about why they hated Jesus. He smashed their idolatry of the Torah basically implying or telling them that even thought they professed to love God's Word, they hated God. "The Love of God is not in you" is what Jesus told them.

Let's show brother Wayne some love and converse with him and try to understand what he is saying.

Pilgrim

The early Christians were not propogating a belief-system. They were not dispensers of theological information about God. They were not Book-bearers. They were bearers of the Living Word, the Life, the Person, the Power of Jesus, "who is the Spirit" (II Corinthians 3:18). (James Fowler).

There is a similar attitude out there that has been coined "Bible Deism". It is the position nearly all cessationists take. I think it is an extreme view to think that God would not speak rhema words into the hearts of his children today. Did not Christ say that "my sheep hear my voice". Or did that also end when the canon of scripture was complete. I am not saying that we are to believe every "God told me..." that we hear someone claims to have had. We must use discretion and discernment. It cannot contradict the written word. More on this subject can be found in an essay at:
http://www.gentlewisdom.org/60/bible-deists/

Here is an excerpt from the essay:
For some of you I may need to explain first that a deist is someone who believes that God made the universe but since then has stood back and let it get on on its own. They are perhaps the scoffers of whom Peter prophesied that they would say: “everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation” (2 Peter 3:4, TNIV). It should be clear to all that this is not at all the Christian perspective, although some deists outwardly conform to Christianity. Deism was well known in the 18th century (many of the founding fathers of the USA were deists), and it is still common today. Freemasonry is in fact fundamentally a deistic religion, although its incompatibility with Christianity is made clear only to those who get into it deeply. Deere notes that the 18th century deists worshipped human reason, and it seems to be true today at least that deists give a higher place to human reason than to divine revelation.

Some Christians today, although not quite deists, hold to what is in practice an almost deistic position, that since the days of Jesus and the apostles God has let the world get on on its own, and will intervene again only at the end of time. Some who hold this kind of position are theological liberals. But others are what Deere calls “Bible deists”. Deere describes them as follows (pp. 251-253) (emphasis in all of these quotes is as in the original):

The Bible deists of today worship the Bible. Bible deists have great difficulty separating Christ and the Bible. Unconsciously in their minds the Bible and Christ merge into one entity. Christ cannot speak or be known apart from the Bible. …Bible deists preach and teach the Bible rather than Christ. They do not understand how it is possible to preach the Bible without preaching Christ. Their highest goal is the impartation of biblical knowledge. …

The Bible deist talks a lot about the sufficiency of Scripture. For him [PK: what about her? - but then most Bible deists don't let women teach Scripture] the sufficiency of Scripture means that the Bible is the only way God speaks to us today. … Although the Bible deist loudly proclaims the sufficiency of Scripture, in reality, he is proclaiming the sufficiency of his own interpretation of the Scripture. Bible deists aren’t alone in this error. …

So it is extremely difficult for Bible deists to concede that they themselves might be presently holding an erronoeus interpretation. They refer to their opponents’ interpretations as “taken out of context,” or as a failure to apply consistent hermeneutical principles. Or, in some cases, where they have little respect for their opponents, they chalk up their opponents’ views to just plain sloppy thinking. …

The Bible deist is so confident in the sufficiency of his interpretation that it is difficult for him to be corrected by experience.

End of excerpt
I agree with the main thrust of the essay but not in every jot and tittle of it, so don't engage me in a debate about it as if I were the one who wrote it.

Hi Krispy,

I will let Wayneman speak from himself, but I would think that he has no problem with what you are saying. Do you understand what he and I and others are saying?

Now, the Pharisees thought that God would not contradict His word either, but they saw Jesus as contradicting it, right? They saw Jesus as having no regard for God's Word. This is the same accusation being leveled at Wayne. That is not what Jesus was saying or what Wayne is saying.

So, you see, we are saying that the Spirit is the interpreter of His own word and He is the one that gives it life (true meaning).

Just like the Pharisees with the Torah, Christians can say that they "love" God's Word and follow the Bible impeccably, but also just like the Pharisees they may not, as Jesus said, "Have the Love of God in their hearts".

We are not splitting hairs, here. Jesus was not splitting hairs. He was trying to point out something eternally important to the Pharisees and it would have really helped them if they were teachable.

Great talking with you,
Pilgrim

Great post Krispy.

Good additional thoughts TrueWitness and Approved.

Did the Torah have any authority in the hands of the Pharisees? Why not, it was God's Word?

Does the Bible have any authority in the hands of many of today's false teachers and preachers? No, but if some soul is listening they may be touched by a scripture that is mentioned because why? The Spirit of God brought life to the letter for them.

Php 1:15 Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will:
Php 1:16 The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds:
Php 1:17 But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel.
Php 1:18 What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.

Thanks,
Pilgrim

Krispy, Jesus can be trusted to speak to us.

If a man has the Spirit of Christ, will the Spirit of Christ lead him into sin?

I prefer the KJV, but have had to come to the place where I believe that the Spirit of God can be trusted over versions of the Bible where some changes have been made.

John 10:4 And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice.

Pilgrim

I don't doubt the Word of God - Jesus.

And I don't doubt the Bible.

I believe everything in the Bible. I don't believe Creation is a myth. I believe in Noah's Ark and the flood and that it took place, I believe David slew Goliath with a sling, etc, etc. There is not a thing in the Bible that I believe is superstition or a myth.

Where is anyone saying that the Bible is being doubted or the Word of God, Jesus is being doubted?

Pilgrim

pilgrim777, Krispy is right.

I would ask that you pray on it. Once we start to believe in ourselves over the Word, we have turned a scary corner.

His Word will NEVER go against His written Word. Ever.

So, Krispy, using your own words. With all these "plethura of versions" what is the Word of God in your opinion?

Who is casting doubt on the Bible except maybe translators.

No one here is. People are trying to make a distinction between worshipping the letter as the Pharisees did and worshipping the Living Word of God.

If we truly believe the written letter is the Living Word of God, Jesus Christ Himself, then why is the Church letting the Lord be marred by translators?

Do you see what you are saying?

Pilgrim

It's been stated repeatidly in this discussion that the Word contains errors, mistranslations, etc... thats doubt. If there are errors in the Bible then it draws the whole book into question. Thats the only conclusion we can come to when we apply "logic".

Can you answer some questions for clarity sake?

Do you dispute that there are errors and mistranslations in some of today's Bible versions?

Do you believe everyone should be reading the correct Bible version and then will know the correct Jesus? Which one is it?

Do you believe that some don't know the right Jesus because they aren't using the right translation?

Thanks,
Pilgrim

Listen... we dont worship the paper or ink. We dont use God's Word to our own advantage, or to rule over people, etc. We agree on that. That would be worshipping it (putting it above God).

But the Bible is God's revelation about Himself. It is the story of redemption. It is how God communicates with His people. It's how we learn about Him. He teaches us thru the Spirit, using His written and revealed Word.

Thats why unbelievers can not understand or comprehend it. They are missing the key ingredient: the Spirit.

Conversly, if someone is a believer they have the Spirit... but if they never open their Bible they also can not be taught.

But again, I state... the problem in the church today at large is NOT that people think too highly of the Bible! My goodness, who is foolish enough to entertain that idea? For several decades now "believers" have ignored the Bible and relied on emotionalism, feelings... and "the Spirit" to lead them and guide them... and we now have a train wreck in most churches in America.

Yes, we need the Spirit!! But we also need the very Words of God!

I'm not going to get drawn into another stupid debate about versions. Most people dont know what they are talking about when it comes to that issue, but it rarely stops anyone from voicing their opinions... and it leads to arguments... and then the thread gets locked... etc etc.

I don't disagree with a thing you say.

Except
.
.
.
This is not a stupid discussion.

And I don't see any reason why this thread would get locked. This thread is not about Bible versions. You are right, that is not something any of us want to get embroiled in.

Pilgrim

Sorry, you see that as bating, because I don't know what you believe then. Although, your latest post was very helpful so I think you would answer my 3 questions this way.

No
No
No

Was I right?

Smile bro,
Pilgrim

Krispy wrote:

Yes, we need the Spirit!! But we also need the very Words of God!

__________

I can and do say Amen to this. I agree completely.

God bless
mary

BTW, Krispy, this essay was inspired by your post about David Cloud the other day. I checked his website and found a perfect example of how biblical authority is no safeguard against subjectivism. Here you have a guy who thinks that Christianity is all about correct dogma, and that everyone who doesn't meekly submit to the Gospel According to David Cloud deserves to be verbally abused. No one else is allowed to be right. That is the psychology of fundamentalism.

It is hard to imagine a more radical subjectivism than what biblical fundamentalism has produced.

An outbreak of mystical Christianity could not possibly produce more doctrinal confusion than biblicism already has.

I understand your desire to have an objective criterion of doctrinal truth that all can agree upon, but we just don't have one.

So whether we are mystics or biblicists, we are stuck with subjectivity.

Well, well, Wayneman! The words, “The Bible is the Mark of the Beast!” near the beginning is enough to raise anybody’s dander – especially here, where we zealously protect the holy writ. One needs to take a few deep breaths before getting past those words - without the “high-alert” alarm staying stuck in the on position.
Here is my response. Let me know if it resonates with your thoughts:

So many believers from so many different church traditions are revolting against Biblicism that I wonder if this is the first stirring of a new back-to-Jesus movement. I hope so.

Clearly, Sola Scriptura has not worked out the way it was supposed to.

I’m convinced that the “cult of Biblicism” will continue to raise its ugly head in Christianity as long as the true church exists on earth. There will always be impostors. And no reformation will wipe it out for good. It never has.

The doctrine of biblical inerrancy, which was supposed to set Truth on objective grounds and guard against “subjectivism” has instead led to the most arbitrary kind of subjectivism: we can believe whatever we want to believe, and make the Bible tell us we are right.

The reason is that the Bible, by its very nature, has no authority. It is a helpless book, totally at the mercy of its interpreters.

We can even use inerrancy to prove that the Bible is false,

Inerrancy is one of the very few religious doctrines that can be proven wrong, but it remains the foundation of Industrial Religion.

The doctrine of inerrancy has destroyed the faith of millions by making the Bible the supreme authority of heaven and earth, and then basing its authority on a standard of journalistic perfection that it does not meet up to.

But maybe there must be a death before there can be a resurrection – even for the Bible. The death I speak of is the false image that reigns in the consciences of countless. It’s the image that God is a tyrant patriarchal dictator looking for ways to catch people in sins and to punish them mercilessly. That’s one of the fruits of the cult of Biblicism.

Why then do we cling so stubbornly to the creed of Biblicism? … Because the Bible is an object that he can control, whereas the Living Word of God, Jesus, is a Subject who acts upon and controls us.

The Word of God is not a static deposit of truth that God has handed over to men and devils to do with as they please. The Word of God is an ongoing event: the event of God speaking to us.

May He speak to us today and deliver us from the Bibleonian Captivity!

Amen!
Yet, I am mindful of the Babylonian captivity of ancient Israel, and even 70 AD. Such divine judgment on the people of God is the way to decimate this “cult of Biblicism”. As it was after the Babel tower dispersion: People were now vulnerable, needy – and in a position where their only hope is God’s redemption. Divine judgment is therefore an act of mercy on fallen humanity.

And it will also preserve the living Word.

Diane

So whether we are mystics or biblicists, we are stuck with subjectivity.

This is actually the argument of post-modernism.

Roadsign and Appolus,

Thank you for your contributions. I am so blessed.

Christocentric,
Pilgrim

Faith shatters all religion!

Can someone who says and has posted that Bible restricts the freedom in Jesus that believers have, quote me one such instance where the word has mislead them or church away from teachings of Holy Spirit?

If anyone feels that the scripture is a burden and turns them away from holiness of God then he or she has not understood the spirit of scripture and has not entered the new covenant at all, the law of liberty.

True statement Sree. Only traditions and commandments of men (which nullify the word) rob men of their freedom.

If the Bible will make you free, you will be free indeed.

Sorry, I mean, if the SON shall make you free, you shall be free indeed.

We all know how men have used the Bible to put people in bondage to them.

The Bible only restricts freedom in Jesus as it is manipulated by men. The letter kills but the Spirit gives life (and it gives the letter life).

Jesus did not say, after I go away, I will leave you a really cool book with cool dogmas, rules, ethics and morality and you will be able to follow me if you follow and understand everything in this book.

He did not say, "when I leave, I will make sure you have a book".

No, He said:

John 14:18 I will not leave you comfortless: I WILL COME TO YOU.

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

I thank God with all my heart for the Bible, but I really thank God for His Holy Spirit. Because the Bible can be taken from and even outlawed but no one can take the Holy Spirit from me. And I thank God for the Holy Spirit because He protects me from men who may try to bring me into their bondage by the way they use the Bible. I think we all see much of that abuse, today.

Pilgrim

We all know how men have used the Bible to put people in bondage to them.

The Word according to Jesus, or the Word according to Pilgrim777... Calling the Word bondage... FOOLISHNESS.

I choose the Lord. Your final authority is yourself.

Couldn't resist posting a brief reply here. Wayneman, with all due respect your OP was discouraging for me to read. It seems you promote a very low view of the Bible. Yet as others point out, all the prophets including our great Prophet Jesus Christ had a very high view of the holy Scriptures. You mentioned Satan quoting and misusing it, but you did not mention how Christ came right back and quoted it in proper context.

The bottom line is, there must be a proper balance when it comes to the Spirit and the Word. We cannot rightly divide and apply the Word without the Spirit. And we cannot fully know the Lord without the Word, whether read or heard.

God is very clear on how much He honors His Word(Ps.138:2). All throughout the Bible we see a very high honor placed on God's Word and we see that He honors those who honor it and take heed to it. Don't let the devil fool you. Just because he uses it for corruption doesn't mean you can't trust it.
That's exactly what he wants us to think. If we hold a low view of Scripture as believers we will be very weak spiritually.

Granted, I understand that some people can be very strong spiritually without having much access to the written Word for whatever reason or circumstance. God understands that. But if we have such access to it as we do we will be held accountable for how much we honor and take delight in it.

Hi Miccah,

Did you just twist my words?

Pilgrim said:

We all know how men have used the Bible to put people in bondage to them.

Miccah said:

The Word according to Jesus, or the Word according to Pilgrim777... Calling the Word bondage... FOOLISHNESS.

I choose the Lord. Your final authority is yourself.

Did I say "Men have used the Bible to put people in bondage" or did I call "the Word "bondage" as you accuse?

The quotes are up above. Why are you making this about me? Is it fair to say that to someone ("your final authority is yourself") when you have a disagreement?

Pilgrim

wayneman:

WOW! Where to begin?

First I think you are right in one respect. The written word, the Bible, and the living Word, Jesus, are not to be separated, nor can they be. Both are in total agreement.

There are many who have taken a totally intellectual approach to the Bible. This approach is carnal. Through their own carnal tradition they make the word of none effect. They heap doctrine upon doctrine all based on their own intellectual slant. Whole denominations are sometimes caught up in this. There is a form or a fashion for relationship often based on the strict adherence to a certain carnal interpretation but the quickening of the Holy Spirit is left out of the equation. I have become increasingly convinced that when someone speaks of having a proof text I can just about bet there is a fly in the soup of truth somewhere.

There are others who have exalted the subjective word of God be it through personal revelation, prophesying, dreams, visions, etc. above the written word of God, the Bible, which is to be our bedrock foundation. As a result great error and frankly flakiness results.

We cannot have the written word without the quickening of the Spirit and we need the written word as a foundation for the subjective. To go either direction from this combination of the two is to run into error.

The problem I see is that we are so quick to steer ourselves toward one ditch or another. The written word is inerrant. It is not a living document in that it is always developing and being amended. It is complete and there is no error in it. But it is to be interpreted and brought to life by its ultimate author.

It is hard for me to bring this out in words right now so let me use an example. I know that I am human and as such I have a mind that is prone to error. So I assume right up front that I do not always interpret scripture correctly. There is not a problem with the Bible but with me. However I am in communion with the Holy Spirit and pray about the word as I study it. I am also in relationship with other believers and we discuss the scripture. There are foundational doctrines that are so crystal clear and that I have lived out in my life that I know I have the basis of truth in these areas though some finer points might be off in my mind. There are other areas I am still praying about and studying that I may or may not ever settle on totally. But I do not question the veracity of scripture or the inerrency. I do not abandon the scripture for the sake of a "special revelation" even if it be from what appears to be an angel. However I also do not say that God does not speak by anything other than scripture. He does indeed speak to our hearts, through dreams, visions, prophesies, etc. I receive these things as long as they do not violate the written word, for that is my foundation.

Oh, I might also add this. Recall that in John 1 we find that Jesus has been the Word of God from the beginning. There is much scripture likening the written word to a seed. However isn't it interesting that when Mary received the spoken word of the Lord a seed was planted in her which when He was born was the very seed that was prophesied to Abraham.

Whoa, back up there pardner. There are a lot of things that Paul wrote about that is not found in the Old Testament, what he received came by revelation. We accept what he says by faith not knowing anything about him.

Approved: I think it would be interesting to you to study all of the times that Paul referenced the OT in his teachings. Yes he did receive revelation but that revelation was in total agreement with the teachings of the OT. The OT teaches the coming of the New Covenant and the accompanying righteousness by grace through faith.

Why are you making this about me?

I am making this about the Word, Jesus. You are in fact making it about you by implying that the Word is not the final authority on the issue, but that your revelation with the Lord is.

Is it fair to say that to someone ("your final authority is yourself") when you have a disagreement?

pilgrim777, you have shown here over and over that you do not take scripture for the truth that it is. In fact, I see you twist it to fit your theology.

Let me ask you something, should someone stay quite when another stands up and bastardizes the Word of the Lord?

If I am mistaken that you don't believe the Word is bondage, then I appologize. Yet, your own words in these postings this last few days have shown that you do in fact believe it is bondage.

You are right, Twayne.

The Spirit and the written Word always agree when handled by the Spirit.

The Spirit and the written Word do not agree when handled by carnality.

There are extremes to both positions.

Very good points.

Pilgrim

Miccah, if you would ask me specific questions about the Bible I will answer you.

Is the Bible the true Word of God, inerrant?

Are you talking about any Bible version or a specific one?

I have read this thread with some interest. I have been asking myself the same questions for some years, as I have had many friends who would say that the Bible is the only authority in their lives, and they study it much. But they have gotten off into some really strange and sometimes heretical doctrine. I have been in other situations where I have been told to do whatever my "spiritual leader" said and that he would be responsible for whatever I did since he was the one that told me to do it.

There are dangers on both sides. I read a book called The Shape of Sola Scriptura by Keith Mathison which was really helpful for me as I thought through the issue. I might not agree with every single thing he says, but overall it was a helpful way to think about the question of "Sola Scriptura". I wrote a short summary of it, which I have included below. I hope this is helpful to some of you.

The Shape of Sola Scriptura Review

I recently read the book, The Shape of Sola Scriptura by Keith Mathison. It looked like an interesting book, and I was not disappointed.

The basic premise of this book is that the term sola scriptura used by Luther, Calvin, and the other magisterial reformers has been hijacked by modern evangelicals. He states that because modern evangelicals have twisted this doctrine so badly, many have become disillusioned with Protestantism and are fleeing to the Catholic Church and the strong sense of authority.

Mathison argues that this is an extremely important issue. He takes an in-depth look at how the early church thought of the relationship between Scripture and the church and Scripture and tradition. Basically, he contends that the early church saw Scripture as the one authority, but believed that Scripture must be interpreted according to the regula fidei, or rule of faith. In other words, the dominant idea of Scripture and tradition was that only Scripture was the divinely inspired Word of God.

From the 4th century on, there are passages from various men which could be interpreted as appealing to tradition as a secondary source of revelation, but they are ambiguous at best, and most still seem to see Scripture as the one authority. William of Ockham in the 1300s is the first person to clearly state the idea of a two-source revelation. He believed that Scripture and unwritten tradition were two equal sources of revelation. His idea was rejected at the time, but came to be useful to the pope later, and has since become the official teaching of Catholicism. (This is ironic because at the time it was written against the pope who affirmed Scripture to be the final authority.)

Around the time of the reformation, this view was gaining popularity. Luther, Calvin, and the other reformers were fighting against this view of a two-source theory of revelation, which Mathison refers to as Tradition II. The reformers were arguing for a return to the theory held by the early church, which he calls Tradition I. Again, Tradition I would assert that Scripture is the only infallible and ultimate authority, but it would give weight to ecumenical councils, creeds, and the true teaching authority of the church.

The reformers used the term sola Scriptura to refer to this position. The anabaptists, or radical reformers, came to a position which Mathison refers to as Tradition 0. Their position was essentially that neither tradition, the historical teaching of the church, nor anything else had any bearing on issues. The only issue is, “What saith the Scriptures?” Mathison points out that this is dangerous, and points to some of the excesses and dangerous doctrines that it led to in the radical reformation (Anabaptists).

In the battle over Scripture and tradition, the Catholic church became increasingly convinced of the two-source theory of revelation. Indeed, it must have some such invention since so many of its doctrines are obviously against the Scripture. In later days, Mathison argues that Catholicism actually embraces something even more dangerous. It says that the Catholic Church itself and the pope when he speaks ex cathedra, are actually infallible. This means that whenever the Catholic church speaks to any doctrinal or practical matter authoritatively, by definition it cannot be wrong. Mathison calls this Tradition 3. It is the idea that whatever the Catholic Church says today is inherently true, and also, that it is what the Catholic church has always taught.

Mathison points out that America has been much influenced by the Anabaptist idea of Scriptural interpretation, as well as by the radical individualism of the Enlightenment. He makes the statement that American Christianity has been influenced much more by the rationalism of the Enlightenment than by Scripture or history. This is probably true.

Mathison then looks at the four different ideas of Tradition.

Tradition 0—Mathison asserts that this is the position of most evangelicals today. It is the position that says that all we need is the Bible. If we just look to Scripture and allow the Holy Spirit to guide us, we will find the truth. He points out the results of this; thousands of denominations claiming mutually exclusive things; heresies being propagated throughout evangelicalism, etc... Mathison argues that the problem with Tradition 0 is that ultimately it leads to autonomy. Whenever we speak of Scripture, we are necessarily speaking of someone's interpretation of Scripture. So if I say that the only authority in my life is the Word of God, what I am really saying is that the only authority in my life is myself and how I choose to interpret the Word of God. He states that this is dangerous. I believe he is correct. Each one of us is easily deceived by ourselves, and if the standard is simply what I think the Bible says, I may be led into grave error.

Tradition 2—This is the Catholic idea that there are 2 sources of revelation: Scripture and tradition. Mathison rightly points out that in practice, unwritten tradition always becomes corrupted. He further points out that the Catholic church can't even tell anyone which are the unwritten traditions from the apostles that we are supposed to obey. Furthermore, when you have an unwritten and a written authority, it is easy to use the supposedly unwritten tradition to interpret the written one. He points out that some of the things supposedly handed down from the apostles were never mentioned until the 1800s! It seems like if they were really handed down from the apostles, we could find some record of them before the 1800s. For instance, the Catholic church has recently declared things such as that Mary was born of a virgin, ascended to heaven, and always remained a virgin. Mathison points out that such a concept really invalidates the Word of God.

Tradition 3—Even more shocking than Tradition 2, Tradition 3 says the Catholic church is always right. The Scripture repeatedly warns us of false prophets, deceivers, etc... and exhorts us to test all things. The Catholic church invalidates this command by simply saying that it is always right. So there is absolutely no way to check and see if such an entity is off the narrow road, if the only authority she allows is herself. The job of Catholic theologians in many instances, is to read the present decisions made by the church back into Scripture or into history.

Mathison says the ultimate problem with all of these is that they lead to autonomy. The Protestant version leads to autonomy of the individual, while the Catholic and Orthodox version leads to autonomy of the church. In both instances, there is virtually no way to be held accountable. The fruit of this can be seen in both cases.

Mathison argues for Tradition I—The idea is that Scripture alone is the supreme authority, but that Scripture is interpreted by the church, and not just by the individual. Mathison acknowledges the difficulty is that there is not one visible true church today, but many branches of the church. He asserts that for the first 300 years or so of Christianity, this was not the case. The visible church had issues come up, and they would call a council to decide. He points out that even the apostles themselves did not deal with issues single-handedly, but would have councils about various important issues.

Ultimately, I get the sense that Mathison is simply putting out some boundaries. He is not able to say exactly what this should look like in every aspect. But he says strongly that it should not look like Catholic autonomy of the church or evangelical autonomy of the individual. He points to the Nicene Creed, the definition of Chalcedon, and the canon of Scripture as areas where we trust the judgment of the church. He cites proponents of tradition 0 saying that these councils are no more authoratative than the writings of an individual believer. Mathison strongly disagrees. He would say that where the church has ruled on such matters, they are no longer open questions. It is not acceptable to be debating whether Jesus was really God. That question has been settled by the church, as has the Trinity, the canon, etc...

The difficulty lies in that there were many councils that profess to be ecumenical councils. Some, such as the Council of Trent, were obviously heretical and said that anyone who believes the true Gospel is eternally damned. Mathison points to the corporate testimony of the Holy Spirit in the saints of God throughout history. He would say that the Nicene Creed, the definition of Chalcedon, and the NT canon are settled matters for the people of God throughout history, and thus we should accept their authority. He says that men are fallible and may err, but that does not mean they will always err. He acknowledges that sometimes the church may go astray, and that we are to know the Scriptures and be on guard against error. But he says that this is a serious thing.

One thing he states that is interesting is the idea that the invisible church is scattered throughout various branches of Christendom. He says these are not necessarily good churches or pure churches, but that they are churches, as evidenced by enough teaching of the Gospel for people to be converted, and the presence of believers in their midst. He says this is not God's will. And that it is a great scandal and tragedy that the church of Jesus Christ is split up into so many groups, etc... He prays for the day that there will be a unity based not on the false uniformity of Rome or the doctrinal indifference of liberals, but on the truth of Jesus Christ.

Overall, this book was interesting. I think it brought into focus some things that have been somewhat hazy for me before, but I'm not sure that it really changed how I see things. It seems to leave me in a pretty similar place to the one I was in. I was hoping he could recommend something to fix all my problems. No such luck. But it is a good reminder that the Lord has placed us in a body, and that we need each other, not just locally, but globally and throughout history, if we are to follow the Lord faithfully and be true ambassadors to a world that is perishing.

Pick your favorite Bible version...

Hi Robert79,

That was a very interesting article.

Overall, this book was interesting. I think it brought into focus some things that have been somewhat hazy for me before, but I'm not sure that it really changed how I see things. It seems to leave me in a pretty similar place to the one I was in. I was hoping he could recommend something to fix all my problems. No such luck. But it is a good reminder that the Lord has placed us in a body, and that we need each other, not just locally, but globally and throughout history, if we are to follow the Lord faithfully and be true ambassadors to a world that is perishing.

God has place us in a Body and He is the Head of the Church. He has not replaced Himself by a Pope in Rome or a Pope on paper. Just like when the Apostles came together and prayed and the Spirit of the Lord revealed the truth to them, we have to do the same thing. You are right, many things in the Bible are clearcut and are not arguable. But there are many decisions that take place in a Body where the clearcut direction is not always apparent in the Bible, so the brothers should all seek the Lord together to get the "mind of Christ".

Steven Kaung says that when brothers do not agree on something they should continue to seek the Lord until they all have the mind of Christ on the matter. No reason to make a decision just because the majority agree. He stressed the fact that the Spirit of God was able to bring complete unity amongst the brothers regarding an issue. God is not the Author of Confusion and is capable of speaking to His Body much like He did at the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15.

Thanks again for the article.

Pilgrim

Hi Pilgrim,

Thanks for the response. I appreciate it. Honestly, I was being somewhat facetious in saying that I hoped the book would solve all my problems. We always want a pill, a book, a formula, but it is only as I abide in Christ day by day that I can walk in the Spirit and be safeguarded from error. May the Lord continue to give us grace to know and love His Word, be led by His Spirit, and be submitted in His church.

Robert

Great word Robert and I am in complete agreement with every word you just typed.

Pilgrim

Is the Bible the true Word of God, inerrant?

How do you define “inerrant”? And how does your definition reconcile with the following argument:

If there were a single error, that would prove it is not the Word of God, since God doesn’t make mistakes. If we don’t want to believe the Bible, then it is easy enough to list all the contradictions … discrepancies …., misattributions …. and apparent misinterpretations …

Of course, this is not referring to translations, but to early manuscripts.

It is a challenge, isn’t it, to avoid using the word “inerrant” in a way that merely proves the position of the “other side”.

Diane

Diane.

It is an easy enough question. Either it is real, or it is not. I am not speaking about typos. I am talking about basics in the Bible, for example.

When Jesus says that before Abraham, I am. Is this truth? Is this up for interpretation? Or do we rely on what was written?

You see where this is going. Soon we start to pick and choose what we want to believe in. We start to agree and disagree with certain aspects of the Word, what ever does or does not fit a theology. Instead of believing what was written from the Lord.

Robert, great post! I find it helpful to see how modern evangelicals have hijacked the term sola scriptura. It also explains why a bible study with a group of evangelicals so easily gets overrun with individual interpretations and applications.

… the position of most evangelicals today … says that all we need is the Bible. If we just look to Scripture and allow the Holy Spirit to guide us, we will find the truth.

He points out the results of this; thousands of denominations claiming mutually exclusive things;

ultimately it leads to autonomy.

Whenever we speak of Scripture, we are necessarily speaking of someone's interpretation of Scripture.

So if I say that the only authority in my life is the Word of God, what I am really saying is that the only authority in my life is myself and how I choose to interpret the Word of God.

Each one of us is easily deceived by ourselves,

But to tell everyone to just follow the Spirit - well – that is even more susceptible to individualism!

The Protestant version leads to autonomy of the individual, while the Catholic and Orthodox version leads to autonomy of the church.

A thought: It’s amazing how “effectively” we have fueled the cause of our opponents. Oh - if we could stop defending our rightness long enough to LISTEN to them - we might discover our blind spots!

Diane

Amen Jesus-is-GOD!

Over the years I have seen this belittling of God's Word come from the emergent church movement and many in the house church movement, and there has been a meshing of the two movements. Much of their theology is similar to new age and heretical mysticism, very subjective.

Much that is involved in those movements is a reaction to all the corruption seen in many churches over the years. They are fed up with all the corruption, so they have invented their own theories about Christianity, much of which contradicts the clear teaching of the Bible.

Like the old saying goes, don't throw out the baby with the bath water. That's what many emergents and house churchers(not all) have done. They have thrown out sound doctrine along with the corruption they've seen.

that was a good read robert ,,it realy shows also the ignorance of some people who use the term solar scripture
and it shows how the reformers are being misrepersented by many

i use the word ignorance in abibilcal not spitfully way ,becasue i know iam ignorent in many things

the idea that all we have to do is pray and god will give me full understanding of scripture i need no elders or teachers as the bible states are given to the church for teaching and edafication ,,,and i can have the same revalation as the writers of the bible all i need is trhe holy spirit ,,is the reason why we have all these vairous strange and wide interpretation in the churches ,,,,and the brothers and sisters who hold this view ,,point the finger at others and say that solar scripture is the problem ,,,,,this in reality is like popery ,,esteaming men and there interpataion above the body of elders and even aboveor on the same level as the apostals

i believe this is defenitly pride in action ,,flesh ,,

that is not to say that many that do this are not partakers of the spirt of god

it seems that these brothers and sisters practice there own form of sola scripture ,what saith scripture

may god cause this shisim in the body it be heald
so that his name may not be blasphemed umong the gentiles because of this

to say we dont need the letters of paul and such as one of our brethern said here ,,is a total false notion

the bible doesnt teach that ,,,paull comanded that his letter be read to the the church at clossie,and that they also read the letter from laodicea,,verse 16 shows this ,,he spoke forth the athortative word from the lord in his letters ,,petter said ,that some people twist is letters wich are hard to understand just as they do THE REST of scripture ,,,,,,,peter saw the athority in the words that were writtern by his brother paul

paull had the athority givern by the holy spirit to record what was seen as holy scripture ,,,and it was recorded for the church to make wise unto salvation ,for reproving and corection ,,, just as THE REST of scriture is god brethed so is pauls writtings ,,,paul wrote to timothy reveling the true intention of the writtern word of god

it can not be said that we dont need this ,with out dening scripture ,,,,we shal not go passed what is writtern ,as it is writtern ,,,,,nor will we add or take away from the prophetic word of god ,with out being found in sin ,,that is cleary taught in scripture

lets us brothers and sisters thank god through his santifing spirit ,for these words he has givern us

and not be high minded ,but in fear and trembling
and pray that gods spirit will led us to full maturity
and let us believe in the gosple ,,the good news
and believe that we will press on towrds the mark of the high calling of jesus christ ,,,to the perfect man to the fullness of jesus christ ,,that we will no longer tossed to and frow ,and carried about by every wind of doctrine ,by the crafteness of man,,,,

but that let us know the neither hight not debth nor any other created thing will be able to seperat us from the love of god which is in jesus christ

//Over the years I have seen this belittling of God's Word come from the emergent church movement and many in the house church movement, and there has been a meshing of the two movements. Much of their theology is similar to new age and heretical mysticism, very subjective.//

But the main point here is that Sola Scriptura is no safeguard against subjectivism, because people make the Bible say whatever they want it to say. And ironically, biblicists do more violence to the Holy Scriptures than anyone else.

For example, there is an expository gimmick that I call the Sarcasm Shuffle. When guys like David Cloud and John MacArthur come across a scripture that flatly contradicts their doctrine, they insist that the writer is employing "sarcasm."

Isn't that a neat trick? Sarcasm: saying the opposite of what you mean. If a baseball player makes a bad throw, a heckler says, "Nice toss, dude!" And he is being sarcastic, you see.

So if you find a Bible verse that says the opposite of what you want it to say, simply assume that the writer is being sarcastic!

As another example, fundamentalists want the Bible to say that God withdrew the charismatic gifts of the Spirit at the end of the Apostolic Age, because they hate charismatics, so they mangle 1 Corinthians 13:8 and come up with an interpretation that no sane expositor would ever find in the text.

It is the Cult of Sola Scriptura that "belittles" the Word of God more than anyone else. As Spurgeon said, "The Bible suffers more from its exponents than its opponents."

Qoute:

"It is not that "we can make an idol of the Bible" - we *have* made and idol out of the Bible and bibliolatry is a multi-billion dollar industry. Granted, it has lost market share to the Osteens and Warrens, but I don't represent them either..."

This is the outcome of fundamentalism who over-emphasize fundamental doctrines to the neglect of heart felt experience of Christ.

On the other side you have evangelicals, who overemphasis experiential or subjective experience of Christ to the neglect of sound doctrine.

The first leads to shallow suffocating "orthodoxy" and the second one to subjectivsm,fanatism or mystism.

Balance is what we lack. We need to abide in Jesus and as well as his words remain in us. We need to be filled with the Spirit and at the same time let the word of Christ dwell richly in us.

We have created this false dichotomy of Word and Spirit, of mind and heart, of faith and good works, of justification and sanctification, of salvation and lordship, of grace and rewards, of conversion and discipleship.

It is the Cult of Sola Scriptura that "belittles" the Word of God more than anyone else.

As Spurgeon said, "The Bible suffers more from its exponents than its opponents."

Why is it that left-leaning authors begin their books by addressing the ruble and shamble produced by zealous exponents? Clearly, a wounded evangelical is dangerous. Anger and hurt is a powerful motivator. We can't deny that it has helped fuel the emergent movement.

Thank you Wayneman for drawing attention to the issue of “subjectivism”. Many years ago someone used the word: “EVANGELICAL EXISTENTIALISM” to refer to this subjective habit of Biblical interpretation. I forget who said that. Have you heard it before?

As I read through this thread, in light of our other discussions, I become more and more convinced of this:

We will be more effective in restoring Biblical reliability and authority if we conservative evangelicals acknowledge the error and sin on our part than if we aim merely to combat the error of our opponents. But as any physician knows, we need to get to the root. I think Robert's book review does just that through the one word: "Autonomy". It's that same "bite" that the pair took in the Garden of Eden: "I can be a self-autonomous God."

And this even stains our approach to scripture.

Diane

wayneman: After reading your last post I see much more clearly where you are coming from in your original post. I agree that there are many men who mishandle the written word. There are a variety of reasons for this. Some mishandle it because they have a prior commitment to a doctrinal stance that they have come to view with such reverence that they are unwilling to change their stance even if the Bible contradicts that stance. This causes them to put on glasses that are the color of their doctrine every time they read or study the word. The reasons for this are numerous and I know I cannot think of them all, but I have encountered a few. One is the fear of man. Success or standing in an organization that teaches that doctrine would be jeapordized if they were to change their teaching. Another is misplaced loyalty. They have for some reason become loyal to a man, a teaching, or an organization and that loyalty is so great that it overrides their commitment to the word. We might call this idolatry and I have seen times when it really was. I have seen people worship an organization and its teachings.

I am sure the emergent church is a deception from the enemy but it plays on the feelings of men and women who are tired of business as usual in the church world. But the problem is not with the word of God, it is with men. The word of God is inerrant. It is holy. The written word is the more sure word of prophecy to which we are to take heed that is spoken of in the Bible. The problem is not the word, the problem is us. And the "us" problem cannot be solved by an academic study of the word alone. The Holy Spirit doing a supernatural work in our hearts is the only thing that can solve the problem of our broken approach to the written word. That is part of what I mean when I say that it takes both the Spirit and the written word working together.

We have created this false dichotomy of Word and Spirit, of mind and heart, of faith and good works, of justification and sanctification, of salvation and lordship, of grace and rewards, of conversion and discipleship.

Balance is what we lack.

Would God’s people not get further ahead by paying more careful attention to what creates this momentum between sides, and what the others are concerned about. Maybe we’d see how we have helped create the need for others to push away. As long as we are hot on the trail defending OUR position – we aren’t really hearing the other, are we?

Meanwhile the log in our eye merely blinds us from seeing clearly the specks way over there.... way on the other side... Why they are so far away that we don't even see the speck! What if our Doctor looked in our eye from such a distance?

I thank my fellow posters here for attempting to expose our besetting “log”. Once we can see it, we are well on the way to seeing their "speck" more clearly - and restoring our gospel calling.

Diane

Roadsign, Twyane, Wayneman, Elected, and RobertW it is very encouraging to see that the Saints can work things out and more importantly figure things out if they are allowed to continue to. Just reading this thread this morning I can see that more and more are understanding what Wayneman was trying to say in his original OP. And I am learning more from all of you.

This is a pervasive problem that affects us all.

Balance is key.

Admitting that the problem is "us" as roadsign and twayneb declare is a big step in the right direction.

There are so many good quotes from everyone but I will just post one here that resonates with me.

I am sure the emergent church is a deception from the enemy but it plays on the feelings of men and women who are tired of business as usual in the church world. But the problem is not with the word of God, it is with men. The word of God is inerrant. It is holy. The written word is the more sure word of prophecy to which we are to take heed that is spoken of in the Bible. The problem is not the word, the problem is us. And the "us" problem cannot be solved by an academic study of the word alone. The Holy Spirit doing a supernatural work in our hearts is the only thing that can solve the problem of our broken approach to the written word. That is part of what I mean when I say that it takes both the Spirit and the written word working together.

I too have seen friends "migrate" to Catholicism and the Emergent Church because of any number of "excesses". But many of them fit into the category of subjectivism. In the end they are just trading one flavor of religion over another.

Jesus is Victor over all religion including the religion of self.

Pilgrim

I am so encouraged by this thread and the loving conduct of the brethren. I see the same problem in the House Churches. It is pervasive as Pilgrim said.

In the Book of Acts many things were said regarding "hearing the Spirit" that I wonder if they are ignored today as "charismatic". And then there are Scripture only people that ignore the Spirit. As roadsign and twayneb have said there must be a balance. Look how there is balance in just the Book of Acts. There is the emphasis on the Spirit and the Scriptures, not just the Scriptures.

How can we improve on the balance that the Holy Spirit shows us both in the written Word and the Voice of God in the Spirit, working together not apart and independent.

HERE ARE SCRIPTURES DEMONSTRATING BEING LED BY THE SPIRIT

Act 8:29 Then THE Spirit SAID unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.

Act 10:19 While Peter thought on the vision, THE Spirit SAID unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.

Act 11:12 And THE Spirit BADE ME go with them, nothing doubting. Moreover these six brethren accompanied me, and we entered into the man's house:

Act 11:28 And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and SIGNIFIED BY THE Spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.

Act 16:7 After they were come to Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia: BUT THE Spirit SUFFERED THEM NOT.

Act 21:4 And finding disciples, we tarried there seven days: who said to Paul THROUGH THE Spirit, that he should not go up to Jerusalem.

Act 23:9 And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees' part arose, and strove, saying, We find no evil in this man: but IF A SPIRIT OR ANGEL hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God.

NOW THE WORD

Act 6:4 But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the MINISTRY OF THE WORD.

Act 6:7 AND THE WORD OF God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.

Act 8:14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria HAD RECEIVED THE WORD OF God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Act 8:25 And they, when they had testified and preached the word of the Lord, returned to Jerusalem, and preached the gospel in many villages of the Samaritans.

Act 10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them WHICH HEARD THE WORD.

Act 11:16 THEN REMEMBERED I THE WORD of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.

It has been said that the problem is "US". That seems true. We either sacrifice the Word for the Spirit or the Spirit for the Word. Either extreme is unbalanced.

Brothers and Sisters, I think we all want the same thing.

God is so good!

Wayneman - THANK YOU for your post.

There are times when the Spirit goes contrary to the word -

Jacob and Rebecca lied to/deceived Isaac ..
If Esther had to stick to the 10 Commandments ...
God overriding His Sanitary Laws by asking the prophet to prepare his food with a fire from ...
The prophet asking the widdow her last flour and oil ...
The woman who had the issue of blood ...
Jesus touching the leper ....

But never contrary to the Spirit of the word.

There are times when the Spirit goes contrary to the word –

O dear, O dear, O dear! I am getting shaken up on this thread! This is absolute heresy!!!

..... or ….

….. or ….

….. . maybe it’s God’s very nature.

It occurs to me that God’s mercy is a contradiction in itself. After all, none of us deserve to have even one breath today. No! Every day, every moment is an act of divine mercy – a contradiction of God’s perfect justice.

God’s Spirit constantly contradicts his word, his law - in the most profound sense! He is still rending the curtain in half and opening his grace to undeserving humankind. His perfect love keeps flowing through the reeking trenches of enemy territory: wretched, rebellious, sinful humanity. Talk about contradiction!

And to think, God keeps on calling the most unlikely sinner into his service. He did it in bible days, and he does it today. Talk about contradiction!

To think - if we are his, we will stand in his very presence - for eternity. The sinner – in the presence of the Most Holy! Talk about contradiction!

This is the ultimate of paradoxes. And it leaves me breathless – just thinking about it.

No wonder grace is so threatening to the law-clinger. It’s not right! It can’t be right!

But never contrary to the Spirit of the word.

How can that be!

Does that not silence you?

Diane

Foolishness.

Amen, Miccah. God's ways are foolishness to man's "wisdom".

Many, many years ago I am convinced I heard God tell me I could believe His Word. It surprised me at the time, in my youth and inexperience I simply believed the Bible- why would He tell me that? Also, it was repetitive, and kept coming into my head.

Reading through this exhaustive conversation, I see once again how important that revelation has become.

As I mentioned in another thread, the Bible is my venue of conversation in the Spirit. I get insights and revelations that others may not get, and they get things I don't. But the Word is constant, and facilitates me teaching you, you teaching me.

The versions are obviously going to be nuanced differently by different translators, but I believe God has always been aware of that and would that it be translated into every language. English is only one!

That's why major themes are repeated and corroborated over time and from author to author.

I noticed not long ago in the book of Acts during one of Paul's speeches that he quoted Jesus saying "It is more blessed to give than to receive."

Wait a minute, Paul never heard Jesus say that. Which led me to this thought:

Do you suppose that the newly converted Paul, now knowing who Jesus was/is aggressively encouraged the other disciples who had heard the actual words to write them down, to produce finished manuscripts that then became our gospels?

"Peter! You were there! What exactly did He say?" "John, you made notes- could I see them? You have to organize and put this together for the rest of the brethren!" "Luke, what do you have there?"

The Word is the heart and soul of our life in Christ. I suggest if you have any doubts, go to God directly, get your own revelation of your relationship with the Bible.

That's why major themes are repeated and corroborated over time and from author to author.

A delightful post, Sidewalk!

Yes! The Bible is exceptionally tamper-resistant and idiot-proof. If you miss a point in one verse, you may see it in another..... or another..... or another. And if you miss the meaning in one particular word, you may see it in another word ... or simply through the stories themselves.

If you overlook a point in a parable you see it in a narrative. Or you will see it in the grand narrative of scripture. Even when Biblical terms lose their meaning through cultural usage and over-familiarity, the narratives are always there to restore the intended meaning.

The Bible is amazingly resilient – even in its thousands of translations.

Biblicism is not a problem with the Bible, but with the reader. It is the condition of myopia in which you see only one letter at a time, but the bigger picture is lost from view. The cure is eye surgery performed by the Great Physician.

The Word is the heart and soul of our life in Christ. I suggest if you have any doubts, go to God directly, get your own revelation of your relationship with the Bible.

Diane

Amen, Amen. Balance.

...And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 1 John 5:6b

He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; Rev 2:7

For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven. Psa 119:89

Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. Mat 24:35

Sidewalk and Roadsign,

I enjoyed both your posts!

sidewalk: I noticed not long ago in the book of Acts during one of Paul's speeches that he quoted Jesus saying "It is more blessed to give than to receive." Wait a minute, Paul never heard Jesus say that.

Roadsign: I really liked that myopia statement.

So much wisdom in both of these posts.

God bless you both,
Lisa