THE VERACITY OF THE BIBLE
By NYC Wanderer
(Kevin Eng) - originally posted to Flickr as Gutenberg Bible, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=9914015
The
Bible “isn’t the Word of God…inerrant or infallible.”[i]
When speaking of the veracity of some thing, what we are endeavouring to show is that that
thing conforms with, or is committed to, those things which are considered to be true.
Therefore, the purpose of this article is to show that all of that which the scripture declares
to be true, is actually true in all it asserts regarding life, faith, and practice. The
International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI) convened an assembly of more than 300
theologians and ministers in the fall of 1978 who authored what became recognized as The
Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy. Of the 19 articles penned, Article III states, in
part, “we affirm the written word in its entirety is revelation given by God.”[i] Added to
that, Article XII states, in part, “that Scripture in its entirety is inerrant, being free from al
l falsehood, fraud, or deceit.”[ii] (Italics added)
On February 19th of 2021 “The Blaze” posted an article by Dave Urbanski regarding a
statement by Pastor Josh Scott of GracePointe Church in Nashville Tennessee who had
made the statement that the Bible “isn’t the Word of God…inerrant or infallible”. As a
qualifier, he argued that only parts of the Bible can be considered God’s Word. In essence
he contends that only parts of the Bible are inspired. As a result, pastor Scott ascribed to a
view referred to as, limited inspiration. Those associated with this belief argue that the
scriptures are only inspired, in areas of religious dogma and anything outside of that, like
historical accounts, matters of fact, et cetera that fall outside the realm of doctrine or
precept are subject to debate. But the conclusion follows logically from the premises. 1. the
Bible is the Word of God, 2. God cannot err, 3. therefore, the Bible cannot err. Two verses
contradict this belief, 2 Timothy 3:16 states that, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and
profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness…” and
2 Peter 1:21, “For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from
God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit”. (Italics added).[iii]
πᾶσα (all) γραφὴ (scripture) θεόπνευστος (inspired
by God).[iv]
For our purposes, I am only going to focus on the first part of 2 Timothy 3:16. In the
Greek, the adjective πᾶσα (pasa) translates as “all” or “every.” Adjectives typically serve as
a modifiers of a noun to denote a quality of the thing named, to indicate its quantity or
extent, in this instance the noun γραφὴ (graphē) which translates as “writing” or “scripture.”
Here the adjective “all” has to do with quantity. In contrast to the adjective “some” which
is defined as that which is unknown, undetermined, or unspecified number
of some thing.
The Old Testament had already been received as authenticated scripture, but Paul would
have also been referring to some New Testament writings which had also been received as
scripture. Paul wrote, “For the Scripture says, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads
out the grain,’ and, ‘the laborer deserves his wages.’” (1 Tim. 5:18, italics added). Paul
understood the first reference (Deut. 25:4) from the O.T. as scripture, along with his quote
of Luke’s gospel (Lk. 10:7), from the N.T. in the second reference, also as scripture.
Likewise, Peter had credited Paul’s writings as scripture. Speaking of Paul, Peter writes,
“There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable
twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.” (2 Peter 3:16, italics added).
So, Peter had accepted Paul’s writings as scripture along with the “other scriptures” which
comprise the O.T.
Returning to our exegete of 2 Timothy 3:16, the verb είναι (einai) translated “is”
functions as a present infinitive meaning to be, or to exist. The adjective θεόπνευστος
(theopneustos) translates literally as “God[‘s] Spirit.” The phrase, “breathed out by” does
not appear in the original Greek. Its insertion in the English transliteration has a functional
purpose, for reasons of clarity. Its intercalation in the English is based on Paul’s word for
God, which conjoins two Greek words, the noun θεός (God) and the adjective πνευστος
(pneustos) which is derived from the Greek πνίγω (pneō) meaning, “to breathe hard.” This
Greek word of Paul’s is used nowhere else in scripture. Paul created the word to emphasize
its divine origin, a corollary of which would be the authority and inspiration of scripture. I
wonder if Pastor Scott would argue that, where Paul states that “All Scripture is given by
inspiration of God” (NKJV), “this verse itself is not the word of God and therefore it is not
inspired”. Or that, “the verse is in error at that point”.
In summary then, this verse states that the sum total of “all” scripture, or all that was
received as inspired “scripture”, including the Old Testament in addition to Peter and Paul’s
“writings” at a minimum, were breathed out, or spoken by God.
ἀλλὰ (but) ὑπὸ (by) πνεύματος (spirit) ἁγίου (holy) φερόμενοι (to carry, bring) ἐλάλησαν
(to speak)
ἀπὸ (from) θεοῦ (God) ἄνθρωποι (man).[v]
Again, for our purposes I am only going to focus on the second part of 2 Peter 1:21. The
co-ordinating conjunction ἀλλὰ (alla) translates as “but” and functions as a connective term
meaning notwithstanding or nevertheless, contrasting the declarative phrase of 21a with
21b. The preposition ὑπὸ (hypo) translated as “by” functions as a qualifier of the noun
which follows. It answers to the question of how. What the how is in reference to, will be
determined as we continue our study. The noun πνεύματος (pneumatos) translated as
“spirit” is derived from the root word πνεῦμα (pneuma) meaning a current of air, a variant
of πνέω (pneō) meaning, to breathe hard, as previously noted. The noun “spirit’ is never
categorized as an impersonal force. The adjective ἁγίου (hagiou) translated as “holy”
functions as a modifier of the noun which precedes it. This Greek word possesses a
singular genitive case ending which indicates possession denoting this spirit is holy and is
an attribute of His nature. The verb φερόμενοι (pheromenoi) meaning, “to bring or carry”
is a present tense, passive verb. Active verbs indicate that the subject is the one performing
the act, passive verbs indicate the subject is the one being acted upon. So, what is the
subject in this verse? The noun ἄνθρωποι (anthropoi) translated “man” has the case ending,
οι which is nominative plural. Words that have the nominative case endings indicate the
subject, therefore, anthropoi “man” is the subject of the verb pheromenoi “to bring” ὑπὸ
“by” means of the ἁγίου
“holy” πνεύματος “spirit”. The
subject “Man” is also plural in the Greek.
In summary then, contrary to the declarative phrase of 21a that no prophecy of scripture
had man for its origin but originated with God by the spirit who is holy by his very nature
and moved upon these men in such a fashion so as to bare them up or carry them along as
they
penned the scriptures that God delivered to them.
Furthermore, many of the church fathers espoused the inspiration and inerrancy of
scripture. Clement of Rome had stated that, “the Scriptures… are the true utterances of the
Holy Spirit.”[vi] Justin Martyr added that those, “who spoke by the Divine Spirit…both
saw and announced the truth to men, neither reverencing nor fearing any man, not
influenced by a desire for glory, by speaking those things alone which they saw and which
they heard, being filled with the Holy Spirit.”[vii] Also that, “the holy Spirit of prophecy
taught us this, telling us by Moses that God spoke thus”[viii] and that, “Moses… wrote in
the Hebrew character by the divine inspiration.”[ix] Origen also stated that, “the Scriptures
themselves are divine, i.e., were inspired by the Spirit of God.”[x] In addition Irenaeus
declared that, “the Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken by the Word of God
and His Spirit”[xi] Thomas Aquinas, quoting Augustine, stated that, “the authority of the
canonical Scripture” is “an incontrovertible proof” and that "only those books of Scripture
which are called canonical have I learned to hold in such honor as to believe their authors
have not erred in any way in writing them.”[xii] Aquinas himself had stated, “A true
prophet is always inspired by the Spirit of truth, in Whom there is no falsehood.”[xiii]
Finally, the scriptures themselves attest to their own inspiration and inerrancy. The
International Council on Biblical Inerrancy article XV states, “We affirm that the doctrine
of inerrancy is grounded in the teaching of the Bible about inspiration.”[xiv] A further
statement issued by the ICBI declared that, “Holy Scripture, being God’s own word, written
by men prepared and superintended by his spirit, is of infallible divine authority in all
matters upon which it touches: it is to believed, as God’s instruction, in all that it affirms;
obeyed, as God’s command, in all that it requires; embraced, as God’s pledge, in all that it
promises.”[xv]
(Italics added)
Regarding inspiration/inerrancy of the Old Testament Moses recorded, “I will raise up for
them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth,
and he shall speak to them all that I command him.” (Deut. 18:18) The scribe Baruch,
recorded the prophecy of Jeremiah stating, “Then the Lord put out his hand and touched my
mouth. And the Lord said to me, ’Behold, I have put my words in your mouth.’” (Jer. 1:9)
David testified that, “The Spirit of the Lord speaks by me; his word is on my tongue.” (2
Sam. 23:2) and that, “The words of the Lord are pure…” (Ps. 12:6), “The law of the Lord is
perfect”, (Ps. 19:7), to the words of Agur, “Every word of God proves true” (Prov. 30:5).
The Lord, referring to the prophet Isaiah said, “my words… I have put in your mouth” (Isa.
59:21, 51:16; Deut. 4:10) and the writer of the book of Zechariah records that, “the words
that the Lord of hosts had sent by his Spirit through the former prophets.” (Zech. 7:12; Neh.
9:30), (Italics
added).
With respect to the New Testament, and apart from the two passages previously cited (2
Timothy 3:16, 2 Peter 1:21), Jesus queried, “How is it then that David, in the Spirit, calls
him Lord” (Matthew 22:43), “through the mouth of our father David, your servant, said by
the Holy Spirit” (Acts 4:25). Paul declared, “And we impart this in words not taught by
human wisdom but taught by the Spirit” (1 Cor. 2:13), and again “If anyone thinks that he is
a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a
command of the Lord” (14:37). Regarding the gospel that Paul was preaching he declared
that “I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a
revelation of Jesus Christ” (Galatians 1:12). The writer of Hebrews stated that it is
“impossible for God to lie” (6:18). Jesus also declared that “Scripture cannot be broken”
(John 10:35).
What about textual variants? Perhaps this is what Pastor Scott is thinking about when he
claims that the scriptures are not infallible or inerrant. For this part, I am only going to
address the largest area of variants. Simply because we find variants in MSS (manuscripts),
does not indicate the scriptures are in error. The Greek New Testament contains an
estimated 138,000 words, all total, there are between 300,000 to 400,000 variants. A textual
variant is any place among the manuscripts of the New Testament where there is not
uniformity of wording.[xvi] That number sounds rather significant, but there is no cause
for concern if you understand what those variants consist of.
Quality of Variants
Among New Testament Manuscripts
1=spelling errors
2=variants that do not affect
translation
3=meaningful, but not viable variants
4=meaningful and viable variants[1]
As you can see in the chart, the vast number of variants are nothing more than spelling
errors, so, if the quantity of variants number 400,000, then nearly 275,000 - 300,000 of
them are spelling errors. As an example, the name for John is spelled in Greek two different
ways, either Iōannēs or Iōanēs. The same person is in view either way; the only difference
is whether the name has two n’s or one. One of the most common textual variants involves
what is called a movable nu. The Greek letter nu (n) can occur at the end of certain words
when they precede a word that starts with a vowel. This is similar to the two forms of the
indefinite article in English: a or an. But whether the nu appears in these words or not, there
is absolutely no difference in meaning. It is so insignificant that most textual critics simply
ignore the variants involving a movable nu when transcribing the words of a manuscript. It
affects nothing.[xvii] Furthermore, if a word is spelled incorrectly, and the same word
occurs some 5,000 times, it is counted as 5,000 variants, not one. The most significant type
of variant include variants which are both meaningful and viable, “meaningful” in the sense
that the variant changes the meaning of the text to some degree. “Viable” in the sense that
the variants are plausible as differing from the original. However, only about one percent of
the total exist as this type of variant and none of the variants adversely affect any accepted
doctrine.
In conclusion, if the Bible is not inspired, then it cannot be from God and contradicts 2
Timothy 3:16 that “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God” (NKJV). If the scriptures
are inspired of God, then they cannot be in error, if they are in error, then God is in error,
and that
is simply not possible.
[1] J.
Ed Komoszewski, M. James Sawyer, and Daniel B. Wallace, Reinventing Jesus:
How Contemporary Skeptics Miss the Real Jesus and Mislead Popular Culture
(Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2006), 63.
[i] Norman
L. Geisler and William C. Roach, Defending Inerrancy: Affirming the Accuracy
of Scripture for a New Generation (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing
Group, 2011), 27.
[ii] Ibid.,
29.
[iii] Unless
otherwise noted, all Biblical references are in the English Standard Version,
with Strong’s Numbers (Wheaton IL: Crossway, 2008).
[iv] Michael
W. Holmes, The Greek New Testament: SBL Edition (Lexham Press; Society
of Biblical Literature, 2011–2013), 2 Ti 3:16.
[v] Ibid.,
2 Pe 1:21.
[vi] Clement
of Rome, “The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians,” in The Apostolic
Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, ed. Alexander Roberts, James
Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, vol. 1, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY:
Christian Literature Company, 1885), 17.
[vii] Justin
Martyr, “Dialogue of Justin with Trypho, a Jew,” in The Apostolic Fathers with
Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A.
Cleveland Coxe, vol. 1, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian
Literature Company, 1885), 198.
[viii]
Justin Martyr, “The First Apology of Justin,” in The Apostolic Fathers with
Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A.
Cleveland Coxe, vol. 1, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian
Literature Company, 1885), 177.
[ix] Justin
Martyr, “Justin’s Hortatory Address to the Greeks,” in The Apostolic Fathers
with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A.
Cleveland Coxe, trans. M. Dods, vol. 1, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY:
Christian Literature Company, 1885), 278–288.
[x] Origen,
“De Principiis,” in Fathers of the Third Century: Tertullian, Part Fourth;
Minucius Felix; Commodian; Origen, Parts First and Second, ed. Alexander
Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, trans. Frederick Crombie, vol.
4, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885),
349.
[xi] Irenaeus
of Lyons, “Irenæus against Heresies,” in The Apostolic Fathers with Justin
Martyr and Irenaeus, ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland
Coxe, vol. 1, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature
Company, 1885), 399.
[xii] Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologica
(Complete & Unabridged) (p. 5). Coyote Canyon Press. Kindle Edition.
[xiii]
Ibid., 556.
[xiv] Norman
L. Geisler and William C. Roach, Defending Inerrancy: Affirming the Accuracy
of Scripture for a New Generation (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing
Group, 2011), 283.
[xv]
Ibid.
[xvi] J.
Ed Komoszewski, M. James Sawyer, and Daniel B. Wallace, Reinventing Jesus:
How Contemporary Skeptics Miss the Real Jesus and Mislead Popular Culture
(Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2006), 54.
[xvii]
Ibid., 56.
Comments
Post a Comment