425 Sermon Illustrations on Bible

1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1

Bible Versions – Pros & Cons

Putting the Scriptures into the English language so we can understand them.

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. We believe the Bible to be the complete Word of God; that the sixty-six Books, as originally written, comprising the Old and New Testaments were verbally inspired by the Spirit of God and were entirely free from error; that the Bible is the final authority in all matters of faith and practice and the true basis of Christian union

B. But, most of us do not read the Bible in its original languages – which involves not simply knowing the corresponding word, but also understanding the grammar, syntax and idiom of both the other language and our own – - can we trust in the translation we have?

2 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2

Difficulties in Translation

Translating a message from one language to another is inherently difficult: thought patterns differ.

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. a language is not merely words, grammar, syntax, and idiom

B. it is also a reflection of the culture of a people and the way they think

3 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 3

Difficulties in Translation

A. We are limited by having to use words …

1. Words in any language have breadth & depth

a. For most of us, ‘horse’ is a sufficient description

b. But breeders or old time farmers would speak about

1) Roans, bays, geldings, …

2) Thoroughbred, quarter-horse, Percheron, …

c. In Arabic there are many dozens of words for horse

2. Words carry with them ‘nuances’ or flavours

a. The Hebrew ‘Goyim’ (nations) has emotional content

b. The Hebrew ‘Hesedh’ encompasses mercy, love, loving-kindness, grace …much wider than English

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. by breadth, I mean the scope of meaning that they cover

1. for nouns, what objects they include

2. for verbs, what actions the describe

B.the nuances or flavours of a word convey understanding that go beyond the actual meaning of the word

4 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 4

Difficulties in Translation

A. Words with a technical meaning

1. Make plan of tabernacle difficult to understand

2. Words take on special, religious meaning

3. Words for clothing, implements, weaponry

B. Words imported

1. ‘Souvenir’ is ‘un memento’ in Quebec

2. O.T. words from Egypt, Persia, Syria-Babylon took on special meanings to the Jews

3. N.T. words taken from Hebrew (a little easier!)

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. technical meanings are difficult, because they are foreign not only to our language but also to our time and experience; they reflect their time and place

B. imported words are difficult, because they are doubly foreign, with subtle changes as they become part of the language

1. tete-a-tete is la converation in Quebec; filet mignon is bifteck, boudoir is chambre a coucher …the English usage has differing connotations than it originally meant in French.

2. these comparisons taken from ‘Laughing with Lautens’, page 158, The Ryerson Press, Toronto, 1964

5 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 5

Difficulties in Translation

A. Cultural differences

1. Attitudes towards body functions

a. Post-Victorian differs from Elizabethan

b. Today differs from 50 years ago

c. Greek and Hebrew much more matter of fact on this

2. Related to this are ‘anthropomorphisms’

a. References to God using human terminology: God’s arm, His eye, His hand, His ear, His mouth, etc.

b. Shows intrinsic limitations of human languages

B. Relationships in Trinity; eg., John 5:30

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. the attitude about body functions reflects what we consider to be vulgarities

1. so, there are parts of KJV not suited for public reading

2. how do you translate these satisfactorily?

B. Anthropomorphisms

1. cultural background of reader may understand these in a literal sense

2. getting ahead of ourselves, the LXX translators of the Pentateuch sometimes took pains to avoid the anthropomorphisms found in the Hebrew

C. John 5:30:“I can of mine own self do nothing “ (AV) ; “By myself I can do nothing” (NIV); “I can do nothing on My own initiative.” (NAS); “But I do nothing without consulting the Father.” (NLT)

6 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 6

Difficulties in Translation

A. Geographical

1. ‘Negev’ is ‘south’ in Hebrew, but also refers to the area of southern Palestine; so in LXX (which was translated in Egypt) it is rendered ‘east’!

2. Ezekiel 27:18

a. ‘Syria’ – AV (KJV), ASV, NKJV

b. ‘Aram’ – JPS, NAS, NIV, NLT

3. Use of ‘Israel’ for whole nation or just 10 tribes

4. Use of Zion interchangeably with Jerusalem

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. so the Negev took on a specific name, depending upon the situation of the translator

B. Syria is a current current country in a similar location to ancient Aram, the boundaries differ (from even time of AV); the people however differ

C. Israel is often used of the whole nation in the later prophets; only the context determines in each case

D. these differ in some O. T. books, but are interchangeable in others; some translations ignore the distinction everywhere

7 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 7

Role of Interpretation

Translators by their very nature also interpret; this introduces another difference in the result.

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. even where there are many translators involved in a version, in fact each may only be involved in one small Bible section or book, and only two or three working on that same portion.

B. most of the editorial work is not so much concerned with reviewing details but overall style and readability

8 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 8

Role of Interpretation

A. Some rules for good interpretation

1. Check the literal meaning of the text

2. Check the context and its relation to the text

3. See if the text is poetical or allegorical in form

4. Use the Bible to interpret Bible as the NT the OT and the interpretations provided in the parables

5. Recognize that some truths are hidden from us

6. Use the obvious meaning: apply to John 9:3 … were this man and his parents sinless?

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. literal is concerned with the meaning of the words; context (which includes grammatical and syntactical structure) is used to determine the proper meaning of a word within its breadth

B. poetical form enable conclusions to be drawn concerning meaning; eg., Semitic parallelism

C. parables, allegory, and the same tell us we are dealing with figures of speech; that the meaning trans the literal. Example, “9 And Jehoash king of Israel sent to Amaziah king of Judah, saying, “The thorn bush which was in Lebanon sent to the cedar which was in Lebanon, saying, ‘Give your daughter to my son in marriage.’ But there passed by a wild beast that was in Lebanon, and trampled the thorn bush. 10 “You have indeed defeated Edom, and your heart has become proud. Enjoy your glory and stay at home; for why should you provoke trouble so that you, even you, should fall, and Judah with you?”” (2 Kings 14:9- 10 NAS)

D. Hidden truths: God’s words to Daniel (12:4), John (Rev 10:4)

E. “Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.” (John 9:3 AV); the preceding question, ‘who did sin, this man or his parents?’ gives the meaning of the statement; the NAS and NLT apply this interpretation

9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 9

Role of Interpretation

A. Some bad interpretative methodology

1. Applying a theological or prophetical position to the passage so that it agrees

2. In the extreme, changing the meaning of a word depending on to whom it is spoken, etc.

3. Treating as general promises (or curses) that are specific or conditional in nature

B. Use care in lifting a text as absolute truth; yet Jesus did this in John 10:34-35

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. “34 Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? 35 “If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken),” (John 10:34-35 NAS); references Psalm 82:6. The statement depends on the fact that Elohim, plural, is both a title for God and a word for rulers or judges. Jesus’ argument is Yahweh can call men ‘Elohim’, then he can claim to be the ‘Son of Elohim’ without blaspheming. Remember this conversation was in Hebrew or the very similar Aramaic. A text can be used as absolute truth, but must be consistent with the total context of Scripture.

10 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 10

Interpretation in Translation

It is mpossible to avoid interpretation in translation; this is true of Bible translation.

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. interpretation: we need it to have a translation

B. so, you cannot avoid using a commentary!

C. what is important is how objective it is

11 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 11

Interpretation in Translation

A. No quotation marks in Hebrew or Greek

1. Red letter editions of the Bible

2. New translations of the Bible

3. Interpret when they mark out a speech

4. John 3:10b-21 is usually marked as all being spoken by Jesus but could be only 3:10b-14

5. Danger: gives two-level view of inspiration, Christ’s words more important than Holy Spirit’s

B. Capitalization of He, Thee, &c purely English

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. the character of the words in John 3:15-21 suggests strongly that Jesus spoke them to Nicodemus; but given the stated purpose of John’s book, there is nothing to prevent their being a commentary by John on the message given to Nicodemus.

12 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 12

Interpretation in Translation

A. Ezekiel 2:3

1. NAS: I am sending you to the sons of Israel, to a rebellious people who have rebelled against Me

2. JPS: I send thee to the children of Israel, to rebellious nations, that have rebelled against Me

B. Ezekiel 3:12

1. NAS: Then the Spirit lifted me up, and I heard a great rumbling sound behind me …

2. JPS: Then a spirit lifted me up, and I heard behind me the voice of a great rushing …

3. Thus avoiding admission of the Trinity

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. the word for people is ‘Goyim’ a term Jews are loathe to apply to themselves; it is plural on account of the two kingdoms involved; so the Jewish Publication Society makes a subtle change in the translation.

B. the JPS never capitalizes ‘Spirit’ even when it is clearly a manifestation of Yahweh God; to do so would admit a Diunity which would then permit admission of the Trinity. On the other hand, the NAS adds ‘the’ which is not in the Hebrew.

13 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 13

Interpretation in Translation

A. Ezekiel 8:12

1. AV: … hast thou seen what the ancients of the house of Israel do in the dark, every man in the chambers of his imagery? …

2. NAS: … do you see what the elders of the house of Israel are committing in the dark, each man in the room of his carved images? …

B. Ezekiel 14:3

1. NAS: …these men have set up their idols in their hearts

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. The NAS and most modern versions tend to explain ‘chambers of his imagery’ as a room of his idols; my Hebrew professor held that the meaning of the phrase was ‘in the hidden place of his imaginations’ which agrees better with Ezekiel 14:3-4. So while interpretation can be helpful, it can also result in a loss of meaning.

14 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 14

Interpretation in Translation

A. Ezekiel 21:10 (talking about the sword coming against Judah)

1. JPS: … against the rod of My son

2. AV: … it contemneth the rod of my son

3. NIV: … the sceptre of my son Judah

4. NKJV: … It despises the scepter of My Son

B. Ezekiel 28:3 (no question marks in Hebrew)

1. AV, JPS: Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel…

2. NIV: Are you wiser than Daniel? …

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. because of the similarity of language, the NKJV incorrectly capitalizes ‘Son’ as is revealed by the context. The NIV supplies ‘Judah’ a correct interpretation but unnecessary.

B. Massoretic accents can indicate questions (not so, here) but usually indicated by Hebrew particles; this is talking about the prince of Tyre. The NIV frames it as a question (possibly to agree with the description of Daniel’s great wisdom); but this is unnecessary, and may even be misleading, given that ultimate personage behind the prince of Tyre seems to be Satan.

15 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 15

The Different Translations

What differentiates the various translations and which one of them ‘is the best?’

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. the first of these questions is comparatively simple

B. the second is more difficult and depends on you and your purpose

16 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 16

The Different Translations

A. Underlying philosophic intent

1. Attempt to reproduce on a word by word basis

2. Attempt to produce the meaning of the original

B. Perceived audience for translation

1. Level of English literacy and beauty

2. Level of ease of reading and understandability

C. Work of individual or a committee

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. here are three different facets that will influence the final result of any translation

17 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 17

The Different Translations

A. Attitude toward the manuscript evidences

1. AV (KJV) and NKJV – use of textus receptus which is just one limb of ‘tree of manuscripts’

2. Others recognize the work of Christian scholars in seeking the best manuscript possible

B. Attitude toward inspiration

1. RSV, NEB, Jerusalem Bible: reflect liberal point of view, the Bible simply as another human book

2. Most others: the Bible God’s inspired Scriptures

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. here are things we should know about a translation before we start

B. there are attitudes which we do not always recognize

1. the AV reflects a Roman / Anglo Catholic position

2. the bishops narrowly voted down the translating of the Greek word Baptizo and its cognates by its literal meaning ‘to immerse’ because it would have disturbed too much the established practices

18 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 18

The Different Translations

A. Slide is from ‘A User’s Guide to Bible Translations’ By David Dewey, InterVarsity Press. Source, www.urbana.org/u2006.bible.cfm

B. ESV – English Standard Version

C. NJB – New Jerusalem Bible?

D. ICB – International Children’s Bible?

E. CBV – Contemporary Bible Version

19 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 19

The Different Translations

A. To varying extents, every Bible translation is also a commentary & interpretation

B. It is good to use one version for devotional reading so that it becomes memorized

C. The literal versions are better for word and doctrinal studies; the NAS is quite good

D. Versions at the paraphrase end of the scale are helpful in understanding difficult places; the NLT is quite good for this purpose

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. If you are comfortable with the language of the KJV, then it may also be easiest for you to memorize; many new versions are not

B. Individual translations such as J. B. Philips, Weymouth, the Message, can be very perceptive in some place in conveying not just the intent and meaning of a passage but also the emotion and ‘tone of voice’

20 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 20

Notes and Study Bibles

What about the use of the notes and marginal references in the Bible and of ‘study’ Bibles?

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. some final questions and comments

21 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 21

Notes and Study Bibles

A. In the 1611 AV, the associated translators’ notes were about three times the volume of the Bible itself. Older Bibles contain some of these which show alternate meanings and parallel verses of Scripture

B. The base editions of the ERB (1885) and the NASB also contains such notes

C. To ignore these notes is to ignore part of the translators’ work

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. in some cases, the parallel verses of scripture are either

(1) the same incident or message in a different Bible book, or,

(2) verses using the same phrase in the original (which helps in doing word studies)

B. some Bible helps, such as the ‘Amplified Version’ merely list alternative meanings for words without taking into account the structure, grammar, syntax and idiom of a specific passage; as such they can be misleading.

22 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 22

Notes and Study Bibles

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. This slide is the first two verses of the Psalms from the NASB first edition

1. the summary title of the Psalm is NOT a translators’ note; you should read a passage and formulate your own chapter title and outline

2. the note numbered 1 gives an alternate rendering for ‘path’ of ‘way’

3. the verse references give verse with similar phrases (which MAY have influenced the translators’ in their rendering)

23 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 23

Notes and Study Bibles

A. But, NOT ALL notes in Bibles are like these

1. Many reflect the opinion and bias of a particular view of theology, reflecting one position on Christology, Salvation, Eschatology and so on

2. Scofield’s notes, for example, reflect one view of the dispensational approach to Scripture which is currently popular in many circles

3. The Companion Bible reflects a far more radical view of dispensational interpretation

4. The NIV study Bible reflects an evangelical view

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. Usually such notes contain a specific interpretive bias

1. I used a Scofield Bible for years and have found number places where I disagree

2. The Companion Bible should be avoided; it borders on, if not crosses over into, heresy, in places

B. There are quite a number of versions of Study Bibles based on the NIV of widely differing value. In general, they are useful for historical, geographical, time-line and similar help.

24 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 24

Notes and Study Bibles

A. The Bible market is lucrative!

1. Christians are willing to spend good money for the latest version

2. Packaging of Bibles under various covers is profitable … for the publisher

B. The lesson?

1. Choose fundamentally sound translations

2. Do not keep switching … get to know well what your Bible says (and the weakness of any notes that it may contain) and then live the truth!

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. some one has to pay all these translators, commentators, and so on

B. so they keep churning out materials

C. but the fundamental truths of Scripture are here before us, with the Holy Spirit to instruct – so don’t get caught up in the Bible of the Month plan!

25 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 25

Trouble shooting. Three organ technicians were driving to Disneyland. After four hours of driving, they saw a sign that said “Disneyland Left,” so they turned around and went home.

I spent my entire career with the wonderful Allen Organ Co., first as a service tech, then as service manager. Very early in that career I learned a valuable truism, which is — in order to understand and solve any problem, NEVER work with more than one unknown or variable at one time. That was not only valuable advice when trouble shooting organ problems, but it is true in solving any problem.

I offer this concept only as a suggestion. If enjoying the reading and study of God’s Word is an “iffy” thing for you, maybe it’s because you are trying to understand it by dealing with two variables at once –

1) what is God really trying to teach me, and

2) How is the particular language of my translation expressing what God is trying to teach me?

When I was little and my Mother said “Quit hitting your brother,” I didn’t need an interpreter, because she spoke to me plainly in my language. Apply that same concept to understanding what God wants you to know in His Word. You eliminate one variable if you can read it in your language.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 (nlt), “All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It straightens us out and teaches us to do what is right. It is God’s way of preparing us in every way, fully equipped for every good thing God wants us to do.” Pretty plain and clear, isn’t it? That’s my point.

Read: Matthew 24:37-39

The Lord provided a great fish to swallow Jonah, and Jonah was inside the fish three days and three nights. –Jonah 1:17

I’m sure you know what happened 165 years ago this month. No? Okay, let me jog your memory. In 1835, Hans Christian Andersen published his first book of fairy tales.

When I was growing up, Hans and I were quite close. He, along with the Brothers Grimm, kept me entertained late into the night. Their tales of love, greed, sadness, selfishness, and even death captivated me as I read them over and over. Maybe you’ve read them too: The Ugly Duckling, The Little Mermaid, Thumbelina, The Emperor’s New Clothes.

Many people believe that the Bible is just a collection of fairy tales too. A boy slaying a giant. A man who was swallowed by a big fish for 3 days. A man who was dead came back to life. Sick people who were healed instantaneously. One basket of food that fed thousands of people.

Even some Christians believe parts of the Bible but say that events like Noah building an ark or Jonah and the whale are obviously just nice “stories.”

I don’t think so. Know why? Because Jesus talked about these events in the New Testament. When He explained how He would come to earth again, He said this: “As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man” (Matthew 24:37-39).

In 2 Peter 3:3-7, Peter spoke of the flood when he talked about the last days. And in Matthew 12:40, Jesus compared Jonah’s experience inside the big fish to the experience He Himself was about to go through.

Once upon a time, God gave us His Word to prepare us for this life and for the next. It’s the most important Book we’ll ever read. It’s not filled with fairy tales, but with the truth.

And someday, God promises, if we accept Jesus as our Lord and Savior, we will go to heaven … and live happily for ever after … with Him. –CK

REFLECTION

• What do I believe about the stories I read in the Bible? How can I tell the difference between an actual event of history recorded in the Bible and a parable?

• How did Jesus use Jonah’s experience inside the big fish to explain what was going to happen to Him? (Matthew 12:40).

God wrote the first story.

We often hear today that Christians must make the Word of God relevant to their culture. During my first full-time pastorate, I learned a difficult lesson that challenges such an idea. Because of prior training in finance and economics, my assumption was that it was the essential actions of the pastor and the people that determined how successful the church would be.

More specifically, I assumed that man was the effective agent rather than the instrument in the health and growth of the church. I knew better than that in my formal doctrine but not in my lived doctrine. With this assumption of human power in heart, I set off to grow that first church through man-generated evangelistic fervor and organizational manipulation. In the process I learned a lesson in the relevance of God’s Word.

Now, mind you, God honored that activity and that active spirit; however, He did so not because of my man-centered assumption but in spite of it. What I discovered, experientially and scripturally, was that all my efforts to make God’s Word relevant to the people failed week after week. However, when I reached the end of my own efforts and relied only upon the Word of God, the church thrived. I may not be the sharpest tack on the board, but the repetition of 1) failure through my efforts, followed by 2) success through focus on preaching the Word alone, demonstrated a pattern.

When I began to cry out to God as to why there was so much heartache with my own efforts on His behalf but marvelous and often unexpected results from focusing on preaching His Word, He opened my eyes to the relevance of His Word. Indeed, the Bible declares the utter relevance and power of the Word, even as it teaches the temporal and weak nature of human action.

Is the proclaimer of the Word a necessary agent in God’s redemptive plan? Absolutely! Is it the teacher of the Word who makes the Bible relevant to contemporary culture? Absolutely not! A review of Scripture’s witness to the relevance of the Word may be helpful here.

THE OLD TESTAMENT WITNESS

The Hebrew uses of “Dabar” and related terms for “word” are important in Old Testament theology. The book of Genesis begins with a Trinitarian work: in verse 1, God creates; in verse 2, the Spirit of God forms that creation; and in verse 3, the Word of God speaks creation into existence. Thence onward, the Word of God is considered in dynamic terms.

Repeatedly, the Word of the Lord was said to come upon the prophets and compel them to speak. The Word of God “came” to Jeremiah bringing joy and delight (Jeremiah 15:16), except when the people rebelled against the Word and persecuted the prophet. Yet, when the prophet tried to remain silent, the Word would literally consume his inner self like a fire in his bones (Jeremiah 20:9). The prophet was an instrument that the Word employed in order to proclaim God’s will and ways to humanity.

According to Isaiah, the Word of the Lord is eternal while man is temporal and quickly passes away (Isaiah 40:6-8). Moreover, the eternal Word comes down from the Father in heaven in the same manner that rain or snow falls. And just as the rain brings forth the harvest, “so shall My Word be that goes forth from My mouth.” The Word comes from the Father and does not return to Him without accomplishing what God sent the Word to do (Isaiah 55:10-11). The Word of God is presented as actively accomplishing the Father’s will.

WHY IS THE WORD OF GOD POWERFUL?

The Word of God, as we know, was not only spoken through the prophets; the prophets also recorded the Word of God in writing. They did this because they were inspired by the Holy Spirit to do so (2 Peter 1:21). God inspired the written Word so that, even today, people might hear Him and be redeemed, instructed, and perfected by God (2 Timothy 3:15-17). This is why many theologians speak of the Word of God as being both the Word intoned or spoken and the Word inscribed or written. The Word of God, whether written or spoken, speaks actively to people.

A third way to speak of the Word of God -- next to the Word intoned and the Word inscribed -- is as the Word incarnate. The eternal Word, participating in the very nature of God, came to this earth and assumed to Himself our humanity, thus participating also in the very nature of Man.

The Word of God is therefore powerful because the Word of God is first and foremost the Second Person of the Trinity. Moreover, the Word of God is known clearly today through the written Word of God, which is the inspired and inerrant Bible. Finally, the Word of God is clearly proclaimed when believers speak the Bible to others. God the Word speaks powerfully through the proclamation of the book that His Spirit inspired.

THE NEW TESTAMENT WITNESS

In the New Testament, the Greek words for “word” are “Logos” and “Rhema.” According to the Gospel of John, the Word is both “God” and “with God.” This is true in the very beginning or from eternity (John 1:1). Moreover, in the person of Jesus Christ, the Word “became flesh” (John 1:14). Thus, in all three ways of speaking of the Word -- spoken, written, and enfleshed -- there is a definite active meaning. There is no hint whatsoever that the Word of God lacks power or relevance; God acts in His Word.

The relevant nature of the Word of God becomes absolutely clear in Hebrews 4, where we are told that the Word is “zon” (“living”) and “energa” (“active”). This energetic Word is neither passive nor impotent. Like a Machairan, a double-edged surgical knife, in the hand of the Great Physician, God approaches the human person and pierces down into the deepest part of his or her being.

God’s Word penetrates and probes into the inseparable aspects of the human soul and spirit, delivering divine judgment upon what He finds there. For the Word is “a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart” and nobody can hide from Him (Hebrews 4:12-13). In this passage, the Word is not seen as a static object that man dissects; rather, the Word is the subject that reads and dissects man!

The activity of the Word in Hebrews 4 is to judge man, while the activity of the Word in Romans 10 is to present salvation to man. Drawing upon a number of Old Testament texts, the Apostle Paul presented the Word as coming from God through the preacher to the human ear. But the Word does not stop there, for the Word engages a person by coming “near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (Romans 10:8).

And there, when the Word is believed it is by reason of its proximity to the heart. The Word is also confessed, having come into the proximity of the mouth (Romans 10:9-10). Thus, the Word that has been called out by God in turn empowers human faith, enabling a person to call back to God (Romans 10:13). The truth that faith comes through hearing is supplemented by the truth that hearing itself is an activity empowered by the Word of God as the effective agent (Romans 10:17).

Yet, God has also ordained that the churches and their preachers are the chosen instruments of God in the proclamation of the Word. The churches send the preachers as they are led by God’s Spirit (cf. Acts 13:2-4); the preacher preaches the Word; the listener hears the Word; the believer believes the Word and calls back to God in faith, and is thus saved.

The temporal ordering of Romans 10:13-15 is significant in this regard: sending — preaching — hearing — believing — calling. Through every step in the communication and reception of salvation, the Word of God is active. The Word by His Spirit provides the power of salvation; the preacher is instrumentally used to deliver the Word; and the believer receives the Word then in turn calls back to God.

THE RELEVANCE OF THE WORD OF GOD

The Word of God is energetic, being active in judgment and salvation. This Word is theological -- He is God Himself. This Word is scriptural -- the Bible is God’s written revelation. And this Word is proclamatory -- the speech of God is on the lips of His gospel preachers. Because God is a living and active God, His Word is also living and active.

The active relevance of the Word is a reminder that His human instruments are both blessed and humbled. It is the greatest blessing to be the instrument by which God saves a human being -- “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace” (Romans 10:15). It is the greatest humbling to recognize that the initiating and effective agent alone is God Himself speaking in His Word.

We may add nothing to the Word of God to make the Word relevant. We may only speak the Word in the ears of the people of the world. When we speak from the Bible, the Word opens ears and hearts to God’s truth. The Word reveals to the listener what is truly relevant: that God is sovereign, that man is sinful, that judgment is at hand, and that the cross of Jesus Christ is man’s only hope.

Ever since I learned this lesson from Scripture and witnessed the life-transforming power of God’s Word, I have found that there is no greater joy than being a preacher of the Word. Let us be instruments of the Word of God -- let us read it constantly for our minds and lives; speak it consistently to our families; bear witness of the Word boldly to lost souls everywhere; and, preach the Word faithfully and expositionally to His churches. When we do so, we shall rediscover that the Word alone provides relevance.

For the glory of God alone in the power of the Spirit alone, let us preach the Word alone.

________

Malcolm Yarnell is associate professor of systematic theology and director of the Center for Theological Research at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas.

Zondervan recently commissioned an independent market survey of 1,000 representative U.S. adults. The survey found that most adults trust that the Bible got “its facts straight” more than newspapers or even history books. But two-thirds find a supermarket tabloid easier reading. The survey also found:

The hardest part of the Bible “to read and understand” is the creation account in Genesis.

Adults most often say the Bible’s great value is in teaching children right and wrong, with David and Goliath the most memorable story and the Good Samaritan the best for moral instruction.

Eighty percent agree that Bible language can be “confusing,” and welcome modern translation. Most say that different parts of the Bible speak to different people and needs and thus approve of specialty Bible materials.

Had he used a hammer, one could perhaps say that its sound would reverberate across Europe and, eventually, across the globe.

But it’s not fully certain that Martin Luther carried a hammer when, on Oct. 31, 1517, he approached the Castle Church in the small university town of Wittenberg, Germany, where he served as both priest and professor. Luther may have used paste, according to Reformation scholar Andrew Pettegree at the University of St. Andrews, when he posted a set of 95 Theses for public debate on the church door, which served at the time as a community-wide bulletin board.

Earlier that fall, Luther had introduced 97 different -- though related -- theses to faculty members at the university, and he was met then with some lively discussion from interested scholars and, no doubt, yawns from others.

But not so with his 95 Theses of Oct. 31. Soon, these declarations from Luther’s pen would go to print not only in Latin, the professional language of churchmen and academics, but also in the languages of the common folk -- with sometimes revolutionary results.

These pungent theses criticized abuses of church power -- especially the pope’s attempt to raise funds for renovating St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome by guaranteeing salvation to all who would simply donate to the building project. “As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, the soul from purgatory springs,” Johann Tetzel, a famed seller of the pope’s salvific guarantees (called “indulgences”), preached as he made his rounds throughout Germany.

In the 95 Theses, Luther decried such cheapening of God’s grace, which distorted and watered down the message of salvation merely to collect cash. Instead, he insisted that the Christian life should be filled with repentance and that the “true treasure of the church is the most holy gospel of the glory and grace of God.”

“Christians,” he wrote in his final two theses, “should be exhorted to be diligent in following Christ, their head, through penalties, death and hell; and thus be confident of entering into heaven through many tribulations rather than through the false security of peace.”

Whether Luther fastened his message to the Wittenberg church door in 1517 with nails or glue, his message has stuck with us for centuries.

In fact, Christians across the globe will celebrate the 500th anniversary of the Reformation that Luther started next year [2017] on Oct. 31. But, perhaps for many Christians, the question remains, “Why?” What is this Reformation? Why does it matter for people living in the 21st century? And, most importantly, what did God have to do with it?

Of course, no one can sufficiently answer these questions without delving into the complexities of history, searching out the story of the Reformation for oneself.

As Baptist church historian A.H. Newman wrote more than a century ago, any attempt to describe the workings of God during the Reformation defies simple explanation. “And here we must remember,” Newman writes, “that the cause of God on Earth progresses not in straight lines like a railroad train across yonder prairie, but like yonder tossing ship on yonder surging ocean.”

Likewise, any serious investigation into the lives and doctrines of the Reformers -- men like Martin Luther, Martin Bucer, Huldrych Zwingli or John Calvin -- should at least cure Baptists of “blind hero-worship.” After all, as Newman writes, these very same Reformers who proclaimed Christian liberty “would not have hesitated to urge our extermination by fire, sword, or water, if we had been their contemporaries” -- simply because we deny infant baptism and teach that water baptism should not precede a profession of faith.

Here we must remember that God often works through us in spite of ourselves. Newman reminds us that, “owing to the perversity of men,” God’s cause does not make “clear and constant progress,” although it indeed progresses. “Sometimes it seems to lose ground; but, after all, the apparent loss is transmuted by divine alchemy into means of future gain.” And this should be an encouragement for us, as we maneuver the difficulties of our own age.

Luther himself, who tended to see human efforts not only as vain but also often as a joke, recognized that God alone could advance His cause. For this reason, he once quipped that he had done nothing at all to make the Reformation succeed.

“I simply taught, preached, and wrote God’s Word; otherwise I did nothing,” Luther said, as reported by Timothy George in “Theology of the Reformers.” “And then, while I slept, or drank Wittenberg beer with my Philip [Melanchthon] and my [Nicolaus von] Amsdorf, the Word so greatly weakened the papacy that never a prince or emperor did such damage to it. I did nothing. The Word did it all.”

And, perhaps, this is ultimately why we should celebrate Luther and the rest of the Reformers, for they trusted Scripture to make an impact in their age. Despite numerous obstacles, they endeavored to publish it widely both in print and proclamation. And, without nails or glue, God’s Word has continued to stick with us for centuries, resounding across the globe. Such was the core truth of the 16th-century Reformation, and such should be the crux of all our endeavors: “The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever” (Isaiah 40:8).

In September 2011 a group of atheists in California ripped pages out of Bibles. They call themselves Backyard Skeptics. The pages they ripped out contain what the group calls immorality, such as some of the sex rules in the Old Testament.

Not many people are paying attention. Only one regional newspaper mentioned it. Of course, if they had ripped Korans instead of Bibles, everyone would have covered it. But it was only Bibles they desecrated.

One positive thing you can say about their action is that it is unambiguous. They are doing it deliberately and they have stated their reasons. You know exactly where they stand with God.

Much of life is not nearly so clear-cut. Our compromises and sins are often ambiguous. We are a mixture of defiance and innocence.

God knows what we are made of. He takes account of our weaknesses. He is just but also gracious. God wants us to be cleansed and saved. But if we persist in rebellion, we have made our choice.

________

Adapted from “Atheist group to rip Bible pages in Huntington Beach Saturday,” by Jaimee Lynn Fletcher, The Orange County Register, , September 15, 2011.

====================

“Hypocrisy? Atheist group set to rip pages from Bible”

Kelly Boggs, Baptist Press, September 16, 2011

A California organization has announced plans to gather at a Huntington Beach, Calif., pier Sept. 17 for the expressed purpose of ripping out pages of a religion’s centuries-old sacred text. It is very unlikely that you are aware of this event.

A search on Google News revealed that only one newspaper nationwide gave any attention to the event. The Orange County Register ran a modest story Sept. 15 on the planned desecration.

If the organization were Christian and ripping pages from the Quran or destroying the book “Heather Has Two Mommies,” it likely would have garnered media attention from sea to shining sea, with the Christians portrayed as insensitive bigots or intolerant censors.

Yet the group in question is not Christian, but instead an atheist group -- and it is tearing pages from the Bible. Members of Backyard Skeptics, described by the Orange County Register as “a grassroots atheist group,” will gather “to rip out pages with specific passages of the Bible that they say portray immoral biblical law.”

I regard the atheist group’s attack on the Bible the same way I view fringe Christian organizations that pull similar stunts. It is nothing more than a crass and pathetic attempt to gain publicity. As such, it really should be ignored.

However, if you compare the news coverage this has garnered with the media attention given Christian groups that have held similar events, the terms hypocrisy and double-standard immediately come to mind.

When the pastor of the 30-member Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Fla., announced plans to burn the Quran on Sept. 11, 2010, a media firestorm erupted. Pundits bloviated about the event. Prominent government officials weighed in and asked pastor Terry Jones to relent.President Obama even commented on the situation. The day before the planned burning of the Quran, CNN quoted the president as saying that the idea “we would burn the sacred texts of someone else’s religion is contrary to what this country stands for.”

A tiny Christian church announces plans to burn the Quran and it is trumpeted from coast to coast. However, an atheist group announces it is going to rip pages out of a Bible and the silence is deafening.

To be fair, when Pastor Jones did in fact burn the Quran on March 20 of this year, the government and some in the media attempted to downplay the event. However, the desecration was not completely overlooked, unlike the atheist attack on the Bible which is being completely ignored.

Consider how the media reacts to the tiny Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kan. Almost any time a handful of its members -- and that is all the miniscule membership can muster -- protests anything, the group will garner much media attention.

Although Westboro is nothing more than a disturbed fringe group, the media continue to cover its putrid protests. And every time the church makes headlines, government spokesmen, news personalities and Christian leaders all condemn Westboro’s antics as hateful and inappropriate.

On one hand, I applaud the media for ignoring the atheist publicity stunt. I don’t know how many members the group boasts or how many will show up for the Bible ripping -- probably not very many. On the other hand, in light of how the media has treated similar events by Christian groups, I find the lack of coverage of the atheists’ attack on the Bible hypocritical. The double-standard is glaring.

It is likely you are just now learning about the California atheist group’s plan to rip the Bible on Sept. 17. It remains to be seen if there will be any media attention after the fact, but likely there will be very little. In the eyes of too many in the media, it is perfectly OK to rip Christians and their sacred text.

The major festivals of the Christian year often prompt major cover stories in the nation’s weekly news magazines. Time, Newsweek, and US News & World Report all regularly feature major articles timed for Christmas and Easter. The days of these cover articles may soon be over, however, since US News & World Report is no longer publishing a print edition, and Newsweek’s final print edition will be dated December 31, 2012.

In years past, these cover articles had featured the work of reporters who interviewed a range of scholars and authorities from several theological perspectives. More recently, both Time and Newsweek have instead featured essays written by a single author.

Timed for this Christmas, Newsweek just released a cover essay by Bart D. Ehrman, who is well-known for his belief that the New Testament is largely historical fiction. “Who is Jesus?” is the question on the cover. “The Myths of Jesus” is the headline on the essay itself. Newsweek’s agenda is clear, and it has chosen to feature a cover article denying the historical basis of Christmas as one of its last print editions.

Ehrman begins, predictably, by reviewing the controversy concerning the so-called “Gospel of Jesus’ Wife” that emerged earlier this year when Professor Karen King of Harvard University claimed a tiny papyrus fragment to be a monumental discovery. Even as she insisted that the fragment did not prove in any sense that Jesus had a wife, she fueled the confusion in carefully-staged media appearances in which she referred to the fragment as “The Gospel of Jesus’ Wife.”

A professor at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Ehrman’s academic specialization is in the history of the New Testament and its times. As such, he dismissed the papyrus fragment as either irrelevant or a hoax. He writes, “As it turns out, most experts on early Christianity have come to think the fragment is a hoax, a forgery produced in recent years by an amateur who, unlike King and scholars of her stature, was not well versed in the niceties of Coptic grammar and so was unable to cover up the traces of his own deceit.”

A close look at that statement reveals a strong critique of Professor King who, according to Ehrman’s logic, should have been able to detect problems with a papyrus fragment probably manufactured by an amateur.

Ehrman cites that controversy, however, in order to make the point that there were hundreds of “proto-gospels” about Jesus floating about in the first few centuries of the Christian church, and that much of what modern people think they know about Christmas is actually not to be found in the New Testament.

He rightly states:

“As Christians around the world now prepare to celebrate Jesus’ birth, it is worth considering that much of the ‘common knowledge’ about the babe in Bethlehem cannot be found in any scriptural authority, but is either a modern myth or based on Gospel accounts from outside the sacred bounds of Christian Scripture.”

Of course, that is profoundly true. The New Testament tells us that Jesus was born in unusual circumstances and placed in a manger because “there was no room in the inn.” There is no innkeeper in the New Testament, however. There is no record of the number of the magi, no reference to December 25 as the date of Christ’s birth, and no mention of barnyard animals, much less a little drummer boy.

Beyond these rather familiar issues, Ehrman also points to a host of claims about Jesus, Mary, Joseph, and the larger Christmas story that amount to “legends and fabrications” that are rightly recognized as implausible and untrue.

Ehrman then turns to press his case on the New Testament itself. After reviewing a number of traditions and non-biblical accounts he asks, “Are the stories about Jesus’ birth that are in the New Testament any less unbelievable?”

He then says that the answer to that question “depends on whom you ask.” To leave no doubt, Ehrman answers the question directly in his essay. The New Testament writings “are not historically reliable descriptions of what really happened when Jesus was born,” he asserts.

Ehrman juxtaposes those who are “interested in affirming the narratives of Scripture” and those who are more interested in “knowing what actually happened in the past.”

He then explains:

“And there is indeed a very wide swath of scholars — Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, agnostic, and others — who have a very different view of the accounts of Jesus’ birth in the New Testament and who realize that there are problems with the traditional stories as they are recounted for us in Matthew and Luke, the only two Gospels that contain infancy narratives. However valuable these writings may be for theological reflection on the meaning and importance of Jesus — and why should anyone deny that they are tremendously valuable for that? — they are not the sorts of historical sources that we might hope for if we are seriously engaged in trying to reconstruct the events of history.”

In other words, Ehrman argues that Matthew and Luke simply can’t be trusted to convey historical truth. He points to what he insists are inconsistencies and erroneous historical claims, arguing that though some attempt to explain these questions in an attempt to affirm the veracity of the gospels, it is better just to abandon them altogether if you are “seriously engaged in trying to reconstruct the events of history.”

Just as a practical matter, a reading of Bart Ehrman’s many books, along with similar efforts, reveals that those who claim to abandon the New Testament in order to “reconstruct the events of history” find themselves coming back to the New Testament again and again. The reason for this is simple — there are no comparable sources.

Ehrman reveals his real agenda in the sentence that follows his denial of the historical truthfulness of the New Testament. He asserts, “For some Christian believers that is a problem; for others, it is a liberation, as it frees the believer from having to base faith on the uncertainties provided by the imperfect historical record and the fallible historians who study it.”

In Ehrman’s view, liberation comes in freeing the believer from a faith based in the claims of the New Testament, or in any historical record, for that matter.

The interesting point about Ehrman’s proposed path of liberation for Christian believers is the fact that Ehrman is himself no longer a believer. He was once a conservative evangelical, but now describes himself as an agnostic who has left the church.

Like many others, Ehrman tries to argue that the New Testament is still useful for “theological reflection on the meaning and importance of Jesus.” He asks, “And why should anyone deny that they are tremendously valuable for that?.”

But the New Testament does not present itself merely for the purpose of theological reflection. It makes unvarnished historical claims and direct statements of fact. Ehrman attempts to sideswipe this truth, stating that the New Testament contains writings identified as “gospels” rather than “histories.” But the word “history” in that sense is a fairly modern invention. The gospels do contain interpretation and theological elaboration, but all four gospels, including Matthew and Luke, contain explicit and pervasive historical material — the bedrock historical claims of Christianity itself.

Christianity stands or falls on the truth concerning Jesus, and thus it also stands or falls on the authority and truthfulness of the Bible. What you believe about historical truth defines what you believe about Jesus Christ. Without the revealed truths of the New Testament, there is no Christianity, just superstitions and fantasies about Jesus.

Interestingly, Bart Ehrman does believe that Jesus existed. In a recent book he debunks those who dismiss all claims about Christ as mere myth. He believes Jesus to have been a Jewish apocalyptic prophet, but not God incarnate in human flesh.

The cover article in the magazine, timed for maximum publicity at Christmas, was a premeditated act. Securing Bart Ehrman to write the essay set the course, and the cover art is intended to sell the magazine.

So, in the waning days of Newsweek as a print magazine, the editors decided to take on the New Testament. Readers should note carefully that it is Newsweek, and not the New Testament, that is going out of print.

________

Bart D. Ehrman, “What Do We Really Know About Jesus?,” Newsweek, Monday, December 17, 2012. http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/12/09/what-do-we-really-know-about-jesus.html

R. Albert Mohler, Jr., “The Gospel of Jesus’ Wife? When Sensationalism Masquerades as Scholarship,” Thursday, September 20, 2012. http://www.albertmohler.com/2012/09/20/the-gospel-of-jesuss-wife-when-sensationalism-masquerades-as-scholarship/

Dr. John McIntyre was for many years the professor of nuclear physics at Texas A&M University. He converted to Christianity in a home Bible class when he was a graduate student at Stanford.

John said that the thing which impressed him about the Christian faith was the fact that the Bible was the same kind of a cohesive system as nature. He meant that the more you examine the Bible, the more complex it appears, and the deeper and more unfathomable are its thoughts.

It is the same with nature. It appears rather simple on the surface, but, when you examine it, it becomes more and more complex until it staggers the mind with its complexity.

When John McIntyre found the Bible to be the same kind of thing, perfectly in harmony with the revelation of nature, he was powerfully impressed. This made him listen to the Christian claims.

Sermon #5101

Rev. Ray C. Stedman, "Who Am I, Lord?", October 12, 1969. Kerux Sermon #5101

==================

Another article on McIntyre’s accomplishments and faith:

SEARCH: Scientists Who Serve God. American Scientific Affiliation, 1991.

==================

Material from McIntyre’s obituary:

Maddy and Jack McIntyre moved to Stanford University where, as a Research Assistant, he contributed to a project that later won a Nobel prize. While in Stanford, they adopted John, their only son, from Sweden. After Stanford, the family moved to New Haven, Connecticut where Jack taught at Yale, first as an Assistant Professor and then as an Associate Professor.

In 1963, the next move brought Jack to Texas A&M where he served as a full professor and director of the high energy particle accelerator at the Cyclotron Institute. Even though folks in the Ivy League were skeptical of Jack’s move to the “wild west,” it turned out to be a great move and where they lived independently into their late 80’s. The last few years were spent in Austin with family.

Jack branched from high energy particle physics to developing several tools for nuclear medicine in his desire to use physics to directly help people. In 1975, Jack was named Professor Emeritus for his longstanding contributions from his research.

Jack and Maddy were devout Chrisitians and were founding members of Westminster Prebyterian Church in Bryan. Jack always had a fascination about the world around him and firmly believed that he did not have to suspend intellect to have faith in God.

Obituary for John (Jack) Armin McIntyre

June 2, 1920 – March 23, 2013

A little girl, being asked by a priest to attend religious instruction, refused saying it was against her father’s wishes. The priest said she should obey him, not her father. “Oh sir, we are taught in the Bible, ‘Honor thy father and thy mother.’”

“You have no business to read the Bible,” said the priest.

“But, sir, our Savior said, ‘Search the Scriptures.’”

“That was said to Jews, and not to children. You don’t understand it,” said the priest in reply.

“But Paul said to Timothy, ‘From a child thou hast known the holy scriptures.’”

Said the priest, “Timothy was being trained to be a bishop and he was taught by the church authorities.”

“No, sir,” said the child, “he was taught by his mother and his grandmother.”

The priest turned away, saying she “knew enough of the Bible to poison a parish.”

________

Sunday School Times

"Our danger is to water down God’s word to suit ourselves. God never fits His word to suit me; He fits me to suit His word."

-- Oswald Chambers

"Florida man used bible to attack a deputy because ‘God told him to,’ cops say,"

by Madeleine Marr, Miami Herald, October 02, 2020.

A burglary call turned chaotic when a suspect used an unusual weapon, according to the Marion County Sheriff’s Office.

According to a police report, deputies responding to a burglary call outside a Summerfield home in Central Florida made contact with a suspect later identified as Robert Hoskins, who confronted officers in an “aggressive manner.”

The Florida man, wearing only underwear, began yelling, “I commend you!” while wielding a Bible.

Hoskins began ranting and citing more Bible verses, then threw the holy book at a deputy, hitting the officer in the face. The 39-year-old was then tased, handcuffed and taken into custody.

When asked why he broke into the home, Hoskins told authorities “Because God told me to,” the police report says.

________

Holwick: The Bible makes a good weapon and many use it just like Mr. Hoskins did - they use it to tear down their friends, condemn those they disagree with, and make simplistic arguments about complicated social issues. Even Satan tried to use the Bible to unseat Jesus at his temptation in the wilderness.

The proper use of the Bible is to build people up. The Apostle Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 10:4, "The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world." He also wrote in Romans 15:2, "Each of us should please his neighbor for his good, to build him up."

Use the Bible in an honorable way that honors the God you serve.