Bart Ehrman contends that we cannot trust the Bible because we do not have the original autographs but only copies of copies of copies which are riddled with scribal errors or textual variants. Ehrman (Misquoting Jesus [Kindle] HarperCollins e-books. 2005) discusses how this issue plagued him in his Biblical studies at Moody, Wheaton, and Princeton:
I kept reverting to my basic question: how does it help us to say that the Bible is the inerrant word of God if in fact, we don’t have the words that God inerrantly inspired, but only the words copied by the scribes— sometimes correctly but sometimes (many times!) incorrectly? What good is it to say that the autographs (i.e., the originals) were inspired? We don’t have the originals! We have only error-ridden copies, and the vast majority of these are centuries removed from the originals and different from them, evidently, in thousands of ways (Kindle location 139).
Read moreBefore Ehrman went to seminary and began to doubt Scripture, Ehrman allowed suffering in his family to start turning him away from God. He (2009) relates one incident when his dad was dying of cancer in the hospital.
Read moreJesus authoritatively declared, “Thy Word is Truth (John 17:17)!” It is up to you to believe His claim that God’s Word is trustworthy or to reject as contradictory. Those who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture and those who reject the truthfulness of Scripture have the same evidence and yet come to opposite conclusions. The same is true with Christ as the Son of God. Those who receive Him and those who reject Him as Savior both have the same facts. One repudiates and one accepts. I will give one example of each: Bart Ehrman and Lee Strobel.
Read moreIn Scripture, names are very important. Solomon in Ecclesiastes 7:2 wrote that a good name is more valuable than great riches: “A good name is better than precious ointment.” The most expensive women’s perfume is Clive Christian. It is made in England and it cost $5,000.00 for 1.05 ounces. But if you order on-line you get free shipping. Solomon, who knew the exorbitant life, said, your reputation is your most valuable possession.
Read moreOn September 23 at 12:00 noon in 1857, Jeremiah Lanphier conducted his first prayer meeting in the Old Dutch North Church at Fulton and Williams Streets in New York City. The church was in decline and hired this businessman to visit and build up the church. He decided to hold a prayer meeting. Only six showed up, but it was decided to meet again during the lunch hour when businesses closed from 12-1:00 p.m. Twenty men came the next Wednesday and forty the following week. The group decided to meet daily.
Read moreThe prayer of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke makes for a good series. It will be noticed that Luke who stressed the humanity of Jesus only recorded that Jesus prayed on many of the occasions that the other Gospel writers mentioned. For example, Matthew recorded the transfiguration of Jesus in Matthew 17, but only Luke mentioned that Jesus was praying when he was transfigured (Lk 9:29).
Read more“There are still 25% of the world’s population who have never heard of Christ,” writes William Lane Craig, Bible Scholar and Apologist at Talbot School of Theology (Reasonable Faith. Doctrine of General Revelation Part 2: (http://www.reasonablefaith.org/defenders). Can these be saved if they never receive the Gospel of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ? Will they die in their sin if they never hear through no fault of their own? Is ignorance an excuse?
Read moreNatural Theology was the reaction of William Paley (1743-1805) to Enlightenment’s skeptical David Hume (1711-1776) who denied all revelation, the teleological argument, and miracles. William Paley wrote Natural Theology and famously defended the teleological argument or the Design/Designer argument with the illustration of the watch found in the desert. Not all theologians believe Natural theology is valid. Michael Horton represents this group: “Our natural experience of God is itself an interpretation, and as the interpretation of our fallen hearts, it is corrupt. As soon as we see a glimmering ember of divine truth we smother it, and this is why there can be no true natural theology, even though we are swimming in general revelation.”[1] This is the strong presuppositional view that many great theologian like Dr. John Whitcomb held to. I will argue that Scripture presents God using both evidentialist and presuppositional approach. For example, Paul in Acts 14 at Lystra first preached the gospel in 14:7 and then employed the teleological argument in 14:15-17.
Read moreA. J. Jacobs gave what is now a well-known TED talk on My Year of Living the Bible in December 2007. He turned that speech into a book entitled: The Year of Living Biblically: One Man's Humble Quest to Follow the Bible as Literally as Possible. This book was on the NYT bestseller’s list for three months.
A. J. Jacobs, who is an agnostic, did this experiment for one year. Here is the reason for his experiment: “I'm concerned about the rise of religious fundamentalism, and people who say they take the Bible literally, which is, according to some polls, as high as 45 or 50 percent of America. So, I decided, what if you really did take the Bible literally? I decided to take it to its logical conclusion and take everything in the Bible literally, without picking and choosing.”
Here is his first takeaway from one year of seeking to prove the Bible cannot be taken literally: “The first is, thou shalt not take the Bible literally. This became very, very clear, early on. Because if you do, then you end up acting like a crazy person and stoning adulterers.” God’s chosen people in the OT was the nation of Israel. When Jesus came and offered the kingdom and himself as king to the nation, Israel rejected him. In response, Jesus postponed the kingdom and set aside Israel temporarily. The church today is the people of God not the nation of Israel. While God commanded capital punishment for certain sins in the OT with the nation of Israel, God does not command the church to put to death its members for any sin. God takes sin just as seriously today as He did in the Old Testament. According to 1 Corinthians 5, the church does not stone adulterers in this age but rather the church disciplines them.
Read more1. Definition of Biblical Theology
D. A. Carson admits the difficulty of defining Biblical Theology because of the diversities of views of Biblical Theology: “To relate the nature and functions of systematic theology and biblical theology respectively proves distractingly difficult because various scholarly camps operate with highly divergent definitions of both disciplines and therefore also entertain assumptions and adopt methods that cannot be reconciled with those of other scholarly camps.”[2] Klink and Edwards discuss the Chicago School, Dallas School, and the Philadelphia School of Biblical theology. All three have different views of what constitutes Biblical Theology.
Read moreGregg Allison discusses two approaches to historical theology. There are two basic approaches commonly found in historical theology: synchronic and diachronic.
Read moreIn Scott M. Gibson’s and Matthew D. Kim’s Homiletics and Hermeneutics (Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition, 2018) Paul Scott Wilson presents his view of interpreting and preaching called the Law-Gospel view. Wilson’s one text, one theme, one doctrine, one need, one image, and one mission is just another way of saying what many homileticians describe as one preaching unit or the text (one text), one MPS (one theme), Argumentation (one doctrine), Interest Step in the Introduction (one need), Illustration (one image), and Application (one mission).
Read moreRoy Zuck in Basic Bible Interpretation noted that “In the Middle Ages words, phrases, and sentences in the bible had taken on multiple meanings, losing all sense of objectivity.”[1] All of the multiple meanings could not be correct. In chapter three, Zuck asked, “Whose view is valid?” All of the views are not valid.
Read moreSalvation history is a theological history of God saving fallen humanity that includes creation, fall, redemption, and consummation. The Redemptive-Historical Method converts that view of biblical theology into a method of interpretation, which requires each text be interpreted through the hermeneutic grid of creation, fall, redemption, and consummation.
Read moreThis is a review of Abraham Kuruvilla’s “Chisticonic View” in Hermeneutics and Homiletics: Four Views of Preaching. Kuruvilla brings some important corrections to the Christocentric view, but he agrees with the Christocentric on some points. This review will highlight these differences.
Read moreThis post is a review of “Redemptive-Historic View” by Bryan Chapell in Scott M. Gibson’s and Matthew D. Kim’s Homiletics and Hermeneutics: Four Views on Preaching Today.
I agree with Byran Chapell when he warns that the redemptive-historical view of forcing Christ into every text has “been abused, in ways that are now obvious to us, by ancient allegorism that sought to make Jesus ‘magically’ appear in every Bible passage through exegetical acrobatics that stretched logic, imagination, and credulity.”[1] This is a candid admission.
Read moreKenneth Langley’s Theocentric View of Preaching is found in Scott M. Gibson’s and Matthew D. Kim’s Homiletics and Hermeneutics: Four Views on Preaching Today. I agree with Bryan Chapell, Abraham Kuruvilla, and Paul Scott Wilson, who note that Langley makes many good points in his view. For example, Bryan Chapell states “The sound principles of biblical interpretation in Ken Langley’s work make it rich reading. For example, he begins with a statement that I would hope all believers would endorse: ‘Preaching should be God centered because God is God centered and wants us to be God centered in everything we do’ (81). That healthy summary of 1 Corinthians 10:31 should elicit a loud ‘Amen.’”[1]
Read moreI read a story about a Jewish man in Hungary who went to his rabbi and complained, “Life is unbearable. There are nine of us living in one room. What can I do?” The rabbi answered, “Take your goat into the room with you.” The man was incredulous, but the rabbi insisted, “Do as I say and come back in a week.” A week later the man returned looking more distraught than before. “We can’t stand it,” he told the rabbi. “The goat is filthy.” The rabbi said, “Go home and let the goat out, and come back in a week.” A week later the man returned, radiant, exclaiming, “Life is beautiful. We enjoy every minute of it now that there’s no goat--only the nine of us.”[1]
Read moreJoel Osteen famously said in a tweet, "It’s God’s will for you to live in prosperity instead of poverty.” God’s Word, however, teaches that it is not always God’s will for His people to experience prosperity. Jesus was born poor and he died poor (click to open). Surely, the servant is not greater than his master. God’s Word also teaches that sometimes poverty is God’s will for His people. The apostle Paul died in abject poverty in the cold and damp Mamertine Prison in Rome. He had to request Timothy to bring him warm clothing for the coming winter. The Prosperity Gospel teaches the opposite.
Read moreLast week, six-year-old Mason Stonehouse used his dad’s cell phone and the Grubhub app, to order over $1000.00 dollars of food. He ordered 5 plates of 20-piece jumbo shrimp, chicken sandwiches, chili cheese fries, over $400 of pepperoni pizza, ice cream, etc. After the home deliveries just kept coming, the dad, Keith Stonehouse, figured out what had happened. The dad had let his son use his cell phone to play games for thirty minutes before bedtime. Keith found his son hiding under the comforter on his bed. When his dad asked Mason why he did it, Mason replied, “I don’t know, I was hungry.” Well, Mason went to bed hungry that evening. Mason was not going to reap any of the benefits of his misdeeds. His parents also took the $115 in his piggy bank to help off the food debt. Obviously, Mason lost his cell phone privileges.
Parenting at times can be very challenging.
Read more