This Issue...

• A Drastic Change in Evolutionary Thinking — Jon Gary Williams p.9
• Standing For The Truth Makes Enemies — Garland Robinson p.10
• Will the Earth Endure? — Bill Boyd p.11
• Dangers Of Modern Translations #8 (Review) — Randy Kea p.12
• The Bible: Reliable, Trustworthy, Accurate — Johnny Trail p.13
• What Should we Do? How Should we Live? — Jerry Joseph p.15
• Mail Bag — p.16

        From the beginning of Charles Darwin’s theory, promoters of evolution claimed that over multiplied millions of years, life on earth slowly evolved through small, intermediate stages — that over eons of time and through billions of tiny transitions, the complex forms we see today are a result of this slow change. Early on, evolutionists offered various arguments in defense of the theory, one of the first of which was to consider the earth’s fossil record. Evolutionists claimed the fossil record as proof, under the assumption that if direct evidence for evolution were to be found anywhere, the fossil record would certainly be the place to locate that evidence and confirm the theory.
        Of a certainty, the fossil record does contain literally billions of animal specimens. But the question is, what does the fossil record actually tell us? For more than one hundred years evolutionists appealed to the fossils to support their theory — guessing, labeling, comparing, arranging and rearranging in an attempt to make the fossils conform to an evolutionary view. Through the years informed creationists have pointed out that the fossil record does not support evolution, that no traces of intermediate fossils have been unearthed and that every animal and plant in the geologic record can be identified and classified in the groups to which they belong. The evolutionists’ response? A common retort was that there are simply “missing links” in the “chain” of evolution — an absurd idea, for, as was clearly established, there is more missing than links; the entire chain is missing from the fossil record!

        Inevitably, awareness of the lack of any fossil evidence had to, at some point, emerge within the evolutionary camp; sooner or later there had to be a negative reaction to using this as support for evolution! A candid appraisal of the fossils finally came to light in the works of several prominent evolutionists, one of which was the renowned paleontologist George Gaylord Simpson. As early as 1944 Simpson declared: “...continuous transitional sequences are not merely rare, but are virtually absent... their absence is so nearly universal that it cannot, offhand, be imputed entirely to chance, and does require some attempt at special explanation, as has been felt by most paleontologists.” (Tempo and Mode in Evolution, New York: Columbia University Press, 1944, p.105)
        As Simpson acknowledged, the lack of intermediate fossils cannot be attributed to imperfection in the geologic record (i.e. missing links). But if small, transitional steps did not exist, where would evolutionists turn for evidence? What was Simpson’s explanation? Twelve years later he stated, “It is thus possible to claim that such transitions are not recorded because they did not exist, that the changes were not by transition but by sudden leaps in evolution. There is much diversity of opinion about just how such leaps are supposed to happen.” (The Meaning of Evolution, New York: Mentor, 1956, pp. 102, 103) So, Simpson’s special explanation was that evolutionary changes came about abruptly by “sudden leaps.”
        While Simpson felt his explanation was a solution to the problem, mainstream evolutionists continued to hold fast to the gradual, Darwinian concept. In fact, he was scoffed at by his evolutionary peers and labeled with holding a “sudden leap” theory. After all, his new view struck at the heart of the old Darwinian philosophy which had been accepted for more than a century.
        Also, in the 1950s geneticist Richard Goldschmidt made the same claim. He said the fossils provided no evidence that life evolved slowly, but that it occurred rapidly with sudden changes between major biological groupings. Goldschmidt was also ridiculed and labeled with holding what was coined, “the hopeful monster” theory. Through the years this imaginary view of evolution eventually came to be the accepted norm.

        By the 1970s and 1980s a major shift was taking place within the ranks of prominent Darwinists. Slowly but surely they were recognizing that Simpson and Goldschmidt were correct all along and they began to affirm the absence of transitional fossils in the geologic record. What creationists had been saying for years, evolutionists were now accepting as fact. In 1976 geologist Derek Ager, president of the British Geological Association, wrote: “The point emerges that if we examine the fossil record in detail, whether at the level of orders or of species, we find, over and over again, not gradual evolution, but the sudden explosion of one group at the expense of another.” (Presidential Address, British Geological Association, Vol. 87, No. 2, 1976, p.133)
        In 1977 renowned Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould wrote, “All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms; transitions between major groups are characteristically abrupt.” (“The Return of Hopeful Monsters,” Natural History, Vol. LXXXVI, June-July, 1970). So, a consensus and a new claim was developing. In the mind of evolutionists, the fossils were showing that evolution could not have happened slowly but rather could have only happened rapidly during relatively short periods of time. Dr. Henry Morris, formerly of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and head of the Institute for Creation Research, in exposing the flaws of this new theory, said: “The amazing aspect of this emerging consensus is that it is not based on any direct scientific evidence, but only on lack of evidence! Since there are no intermediate forms, the reasoning goes, evolution must occur rapidly.” (Institute for Creation Research, Impact Series, No. 77, p.1)
        What were evolutionists to do? Could they acknowledge that evolution was a false theory? Of course not, such an idea was out of the question because it would bring them dangerously close to acknowledging the existence of a God they had denied. Their denial of God motivated them to protect the evolutionary theory at all cost and thus adopt their only remaining alternative: rapid “explosive” transitions. So, the notion of evolution occurring by sudden leaps, as proposed by Simpson and Goldschmidt, was now to become the accepted view.

        How could such a far-flung idea for evolution be made believable? Three distinguished evolutionists, Stephen Jay Gould, Derek Ager and Niles Eldredge of the American Museum of Natural History, took the lead with a proposed solution. What was their alternative explanation regarding this rapid type of evolution? They called it punctuated equilibrium, which has now become the standard persuasion among leading evolutionists.
        What does punctuated equilibrium mean? As used here, “equilibrium” means an ongoing, unchanging state, while “punctuated” means an abrupt ending to that state. Presumably then, all biological forms of life remain unchanged over eons, but at periodic times sudden, drastic biological “leaps” occur, out of which entirely new forms of life emerge. As Derek Ager described it, these leaps were sudden “explosions” occasionally taking place along the trail of evolution.
        In attempting to comprehend and rationalize this new concept of evolution, an obvious question emerges: how could abrupt leaps between radically different biological groups occur in the first place? By what logic could new and distinct life forms spontaneously emerge? On the surface, this view appears even more difficult to accept than the old Darwinian perception of evolution. However, there is yet another very important question: Where is the direct, tangible evidence supporting this theory? The fact is, there is none! As Dr. Henry Morris pointed out, this theory is not based on evidence, but rather on a lack of evidence. When evolutionists who adhere to the punctuated equilibrium concept are asked to show scientific proof for the theory, they are compelled to admit there is none. Actually, this theory is nothing more than an idea — a concept — a belief! And though they realize this view is not supported by even their interpretation of the fossil record, they still claim the theory to be valid. Why? Because to them evolution itself is a fact.
        Let it be noted that many evolutionists still follow the original theory of slow transitions with no sudden changes. They cannot accept the idea that Darwin’s original premise could be wrong, although Darwin himself based his entire theory on the idea that the fossils would eventually prove him to be right.

        What a dramatic shift in thinking this is for evolutionists, calling for the scrapping of what was supposedly the foundation of their theory — that the fossils would confirm the idea of evolution. On the other hand, to Christians this shows that evolutionists have no claim on the fossil record for the promotion of their cause. Rather, the fossil record continues to display evidence of fully formed animals, such as is observed today and such as was intended in the mind of the Creator. Indeed, there is a force (a law) which keeps the seed within its bounds — a force which existed from the beginning when God placed barriers between plants and animals in the form of “kinds” (Gen. 1:11, 12, 21, 24, 25). Obviously, these barriers are still at work in the organic world and will continue until the earth is no more.
        (For additional information on the subject of evolution see brother Williams, website: www.jongarywilliams.com)

 


Table of Contents

        When we choose to become children of God and live by God’s direction (the New Testament), we can’t expect to be friends with everybody. Though we certainly would desire to be, the fact is, those of the world won’t allow it. That’s not our choice — it’s theirs.
        The world has never had a greater friend than Jesus the Christ. His mission was to be a friend to all. His own words were that the “Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost” (Luke 19:10). John said of him, “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). The Savior of the whole world said, “The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly” (John 10:10). But, concerning the world he said, “And ye (the world, sinners) will not come to me, that ye might have life” (John 5:40). “He came unto his own, and his own received him not” (John 1:11).
        Though many received the Lord Jesus as their friend, far many more did not. Though the common people received him gladly (Mark 12:37), the rest did not. He told his disciples (John 15:17-25), “These things I command you, that ye love one another. If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world ... the world hateth you. ... The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also. ... He that hateth me hateth my Father also. ... But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause.”
        Every faithful Christian would love to get along and be friends with everybody. But “everybody” won’t have it. The masses are in love with the world — the things of this world/life, not the things that are eternal. The Lord’s word from Heaven is, “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever” (1 John 2:15-17).
        Loving the Truth and Standing for the Truth, by its very nature, makes you “at odds” with the world. That was true concerning Jesus and it’s true concerning those who follow him. Standing for the Truth will make enemies. People don’t want the deeds of their life exposed. They don’t want to be told their conduct is wrong, sinful, immoral, shameful, ungodly. They want to put those things far from their mind. They are full of themselves and don’t want to be told what to do. They’ve bought into the lie of the devil that man’s existence is the product of evolution and there is no consequence for their behavior. Others simply don’t care. Would to God we could say something or do something to wake them up and get them to think about their soul and that one day they will stand before the judge of all the earth to answer for their deeds!
        It’s frightening to watch people live as they do and know where they’re heading and there’s not a thing we can do to prevent it from happening. We’re standing helpless watching them wreck their lives. Ours is to do exactly what Jesus tells us to do and what he did — warn them of the error of their way! There’s nothing more we can do. It’s up to them to heed the warning. The principle of Ezekiel 3:17-21 is just as true today as it’s always been. God tells Ezekiel to speak to the people and “...give them warning from me. When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul. Again, When a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumblingblock before him, he shall die: because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Nevertheless if thou warn the righteous man, that the righteous sin not, and he doth not sin, he shall surely live, because he is warned; also thou hast delivered thy soul” (Ezek. 3:18-21).
        The power to change lives and save souls is not in me or you, it’s in the Gospel. Paul wrote, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek” (Rom. 1:16). The power to save is in the teaching of the Gospel, not programs or gimmicks. God gives us the Bible to tell us what to do and how to live. We can’t improve upon that.
        Jeremiah preached the Word and Pashur, “chief governor of the house of the Lord,” hated his preaching and beat him and put him in stocks (Jer. 20:2). Later, princes in Israel called for Jeremiah to be put to death and put him in a dungeon (cistern, pit, well) where he sunk down in the “mire” (mud). A eunuch from Ethiopia heard about him being left to die there and asked the king if he could rescue him before he starved to death. He was pulled up out of the well and continued to preach (Jer. 38). Though doing the Lord’s will, his was a life of persecution.
        Stephen preached the Word and was killed because of it. His words were strong but true. “Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers. ... When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth. ... Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord, And cast him out of the city, and stoned him...” (Acts 7:51-52,54,57-59). Upon his death and the persecution that arose as a result of it, brethren were scattered, but they kept preaching the word (Acts 11:19).
        Paul was persecuted every place he went. “Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one. Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the deep; In journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; In weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness” (2 Cor. 11:24-27).
        Jesus suffered for all humanity. “But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man” (Heb. 2:9). “Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the common hall, and gathered unto him the whole band of soldiers. And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet robe. And when they had platted a crown of thorns, they put it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand: and they bowed the knee before him, and mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews! And they spit upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head. And after that they had mocked him, they took the robe off from him, and put his own raiment on him, and led him away to crucify him. ...And they crucified him. ... And sitting down they watched him there” (Matt. 27:27-31, 35-36).
        We all must remain stedfast to the Lord and not give up. It’s not an easy way but it’s the right way. Our concern cannot be “what will men think or do,” but “what will the Lord think and do.” Remember, we answer to him, not the world. “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth [his] sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: ... Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. ... And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal” (Matt. 25:31-33, 41,46).
               
               
               


Table of Contents

        The Gospel Broadcasting Network (GBN) recently aired a live discussion of the “Heaven on Earth” doctrine. During the program, someone texted the moderator a quote from Psalm 104:5. I do not remember the translation used, but in the King James Version this passage reads, “Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.” In the context of the program, the quote was to counter the affirmation that the earth would one day be destroyed.
        Before discussing this particular use of this verse, we would do well to consider the beauty of the entire psalm. Psalm 104 is one of the many beautiful psalms that sing to us of the glory of God as displayed in his creation. It roughly follows the creation account in Genesis 1. It is good to read these together. Here we have the God (Gen. 1:1-2; Psalm 104:1), the light (Gen. 1:3-5; Psalm 104:2a), the heavens, the waters, the dry land, and in the psalm, the hydrologic cycle (Gen. 1:6-10; Psalm 104:2b-13), the grass and trees for the beast (Gen. 1:11-13; Psalm 104:14-18), the moon for the night and the sun for the day (Gen. 1:14-19; Psalm 104:19-23), the beast of the sea and of the land (Gen. 1:20-25; Psalm 104:24-32). The creation story ends with man (Gen. 1:26-31), and the psalm ends with man rejoicing in what God has done (Psalm 104:33-35).
        The Hebrew word translated “for ever” in Psalm 104:5 does not itself mean “eternal.” Even when it can be translated emphatically, “for ever and ever,” as it can in this passage, it does not necessarily mean “eternal.” The English word, “forever,” does not always mean “eternal” either. We say the prairie goes on “forever,” but we know it is bound by mountains, deserts, seas, and woodlands. We say “forever” because it extends beyond the horizon and the end is not in view. “For ever and ever” would mean beyond the horizon and then some, but the mountains are still out there. That is what these Hebrew words mean. A servant was to serve his master forever (Exodus 21:6), but not into eternity. The old Sabbath was to be kept forever (Exodus 31:16), but that law is no longer binding. The Aaronic priesthood was forever (Exodus 40:15), but it ended. God was to dwell in Solomon’s temple forever (1 Kings 18:13), but he is not there now, and that temple itself has been long gone. Jonah was in the belly of the fish forever (Jonah 2:6), but three days and three nights would have been long enough for any of us.
        The reader of the psalms should remember that this is poetry. Elements of contrast and exaggeration are common to Hebrew poetry. Ecclesiastes 1:4 says, “the earth abideth for ever” in an exaggerated poetic contrast to the generations that come and pass away. Psalms 104:5 says that the foundations of the earth “should not be removed for ever” in contrast to the winds that precede (Psalm 104:3-4) and waters that follow (Psalm 104:6-13). There is another contrast in Psalm 102:25-27: “Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: and the heavens are the work of thy hands. They shall perish, but thou shalt endure: yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment; as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be changed: But thou art the same, and thy years shall have no end” (see also Heb. 1:10-12). The poet could not have been more clear, the foundations of the earth perish, but God has no end. If the earth, like God, is eternal, then there would be nothing here to contrast at all.
        The enduring but temporal nature of the earth is evident in Peter’s Second Epistle. The careful reader will note the difference in the “earth” and the “world” in 2 Peter 3:5-7. The “world” was the culture of evil made by man. The “world” man made was on the “earth” God made. The “world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished,” but the “earth standing out of the water and in the water” remained. “The heavens and the earth, which now are,” are the same heavens and earth that were of old. At the time of the flood, God did not make a new heaven and a new earth; we are still living on the old one. “The world that then was... perished,” and so also “the heavens and earth which now are” shall perish. They are “kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men... the heavens shall pass away... the elements shall be dissolved... the earth and all the works that are therein shall be burned up” (2 Peter 3:7,10).
        There is much ado about the textual variant in ancient manuscripts of 2 Peter 3:10 that leaves the modern texts with a word that is sometimes translated “laid bare,” instead of the word that is translated “burned up,” as though that makes all the difference. Either way, in this context, the heavens and the earth perish. “Laid bare” may not be the best translation of the textual variant anyway. Others suggest it should be translated, “discovered,” but whether it is “laid bare” or “discovered,” it does not mean the earth will not be “burned up,” for the terms are not mutually exclusive. The heaven and earth are still “reserved unto fire” (2 Peter 3:7), and, “the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat” (2 Peter 3:12). If that were to happen to me, someone might say I was “laid bare,” but I would feel like I was “burned up!” Evidently, an ancient copyist either thought “discovered” meant “burned up,” or that “burned up” meant “discovered,” and we may never know which way the switch was made, but we do not need to know, they perish ether way, and that is the point.
        Neither of the textual variants tells us that this earth will be renewed to become our eternal home. Peter says, “We look for a new heaven and a new earth” (2 Peter 3:13). There is a Greek word for “new” that means “new in time,” but that is not the word used in this passage; this is a word that means “new in kind.” The heaven and the earth which now are will “perish” (Psalm 102:26), like the world that then was (2 Peter 3:6), but we look for a “new kind” of heaven and a “new kind” of earth (2 Peter 3:13). There is another Greek word that means “renew,” but that is not the word used in this passage either.
                wmhboyd@aol.com
                647 Finger Bluff Road
                Morrison, TN 37357


Table of Contents

        In this article instead of reviewing a particular modern speech version, I want to: 1) clarify again my KJV position; 2) answer a few (not all) objections and criticisms I have received and 3) emphasize again the unsurpassed linguistic scholarship of the King James translators.
        First, let me clarify again my position about the KJV. If the readers of Seek The Old Paths would read all of my articles written in this series (beginning in Jan/2018) they would see clearly that I do not advocate a “KJV onlyism” position as some have concluded. Here are some excerpts from my 2018 articles in STOP (archived at seektheoldpaths.com/stop2018.htm): “I am not affirming the KJV is an absolutely perfect translation (1/18),” “I am not affirming that the KJV translators were perfect or inspired men (1/18),” “I am not saying it is a sin to own or ever read and check what other translations say (1/18),” “The King James Version is superior to all other English translations (5/18),” “There are no inspired translators (6/18),” “The King James Bible is trustworthy, reliable, and accurate...the superior English translation...it is the best English yet today...” (6/18). I have received emails, letters, and phone calls highly commending my articles for which I am thankful, but I have also received communications which falsely accuse me of holding a “KJV only” position. I believe the above excerpts will answer my critics on this point.
        Secondly, in various emails we’ve received, some have made numerous unwarranted attacks on the King James Version. It is beyond the scope of this series to address each one that has been noted. However, I would like to consider a few and respond to the charges. I would like to point out here that before someone levels an accusation against the KJV translators they should consider the credentials of the men they are criticizing and make sure they’ve done their homework. There is no other version that has the scholarship behind it as does the KJV.

1. Supposed error in Matthew 27:44 — “Cast the same in his teeth.” The idiom “cast in teeth” means “to revile.” It is not a translation error to use an English idiom that uses a word referring to an anatomical part (teeth).
2. Supposed error in Matthew 23:24. The KJV reads, “strain at a gnat.” The NKJV reads, “strain out a gnat.” “Strain at” is found in previous translations to the KJV and was regarded as accurate and reliable. Technically, there is no preposition “out” in the Greek text. Neither is there a preposition “at” in the original. The Greek is literally “straining the gnat.” So either preposition could be used to convey the sense of the sentence, i.e. the extremism of the religious leaders of the day.
3. Supposed error in Romans 6:2. The KJV has “God forbid.” The NKJV has “certainly not.” Critics of the KJV charge that the word “God” is not in the Greek text. It is true that the Greek text literally says, “Become not.” Weighty scholarship has repeatedly pointed out that the verb in the optive mood expresses a strong negative wish in the strongest terms, even invoking “a prayer.” The idiom of Hebrew origin (not English) is first seen in 1 Samuel 24:6, “the Lord forbid.” Even the extremely verbally literal ASV (American Standard Version) renders this verse in Romans 6:2 as “God forbid.” This idiom brings the point into English in the strongest terms possible, which the original conveys.

        These sophomoric criticisms are characteristic of the numerous “supposed” errors leveled against the KJV that have been sent to me throughout this series. These petty charges are not in the same category as the egregious and doctrinal errors found in modern-speech translations. Yes, archaisms and obsolete words need to be updated and defined, but an archaic word is not error — it’s simply old. Where have the days gone when we did not whine about not knowing the meaning of a word, but rather sought out its meaning in serious study!?
        Further, in the face of these unsubstantiated criticisms by those who don’t have the qualifications to be making such attacks, let us give ear to what actual eminent scholars say about the reliability, beauty and accuracy of the King James Version:

1. “The conscientious task is to take the actual word of the original and transplant it unchanged” (Richard Trench) ...and that is exactly what occurred with the KJV.
2. “The merits of the King James Version in point of fidelity to the original are universally acknowledged...no other version ancient or modern surpasses it...it conveys the mind of the Spirit with great exactness.” (Talbot W. Chambers)
3. “That it is the imperative duty of translators, with solemn warning, to give the Bible unadulterated form...and absolutely astonishing to find how large extent this grand old version (KJV) must be confessed to be still the most adequate and accurate translation.” (William Henry Green)
4. “There is no reason to doubt the qualifications of the KJV translators...in the nature of all differences, the KJV stands the test.” (George E. Day)
5. “When our Shakespeare was packing up for Stratford, there came out another priceless thing: a correct translation of the Bible, of importance unspeakable.” (Carlyle)

        These above assessments and praises come from those qualified to make such an evaluation, unlike some of the prating critics today.
                1515 N 30th Ave.
                Humboldt, TN 38343
               


Table of Contents

Suffice it to say that the Bible is the most trustworthy and reliable document from all antiquity. No other writing from ancient times has withstood the same sort of scrutiny the Bible has endured.

        I typically do not listen in on conversations. To be honest, it is rather hard not to hear someone who is speaking loudly in a restaurant at a table adjacent to yours. If I am completely honest, I must admit that my ears perk up when any person starts talking about God, religion or the Bible. That having been said, I just recently overheard a conversation at a restaurant that piqued my interest.
        From our vantage point, it appeared that two college-aged individuals were on a date. A man and a woman sat at a table next to ours and started discussing religion and the Bible. I should say that he did most of the talking, and she just listened. As my ears were verbally abused by the various obscenities littered throughout his monologue, one comment came through clearly. He said, “People who take the Bible literally are like individuals who play video games and then go out shooting people.” I am not sure that I had ever heard anything so absurd in my whole life.
        The implication is obvious. People who believe the Bible is the literal word of God are likened unto mentally deranged killers. I do wonder if this view predominates our postmodern world? Suffice it to say that the Bible is the most trustworthy and reliable document from all antiquity. No other writing from ancient times has withstood the same sort of scrutiny the Bible has endured.
        There is plenty of evidence to demonstrate that the Bible is a historically accurate document and is to be taken literally in regards to the creation, the flood, and the miracles that were performed. Granted, some of the language is figurative in nature, but the message of God is to be taken as literally correct in its representation of historical events and the working of God in the lives of His people.
        The very words of the Bible are inspired. Second Timothy 3:16 says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” The Greek term for “scripture” is graphe. It can be defined as “holy Writ...scripture.” The Greek word for “inspiration” is theopneustos. It is defined as “divinely breathed” in or “given by inspiration of God.” This passage teaches that the Bible is “divinely breathed,” down to the very words that were written by those inspired of the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:21).
        Jesus believed this too. Notice what He says in Matthew 5:17-19. “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”
        The word “jot” comes from the Greek term iota. It is “of Hebrew origin (the tenth letter of the Hebrew alphabet); iota, the name of the eighth letter of the Greek alphabet, put (figuratively) for a very small part of anything: jot.” The word “tittle” comes from the Greek term keraia and is, “(specifically) the apex of a Hebrew letter (figuratively the least particle).” This same idea is found in our Savior’s quote from Luke 16:17 “And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.”
        Jesus, the Word incarnate, believed in and used scripture throughout His ministry. The preceding paragraphs demonstrate that He believed in their accuracy down to the smallest of Hebrew characters used in writing. He uttered the phrases, “have you not read” (Matt. 21:42), “scriptures must be fulfilled” (Matt. 26:54), and “scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35) to underscore the message He was proclaiming. He believed the word of God is a trustworthy, reliable document for referencing the will of God. If the Son of Man believed the Bible accurately represented God’s revelation to man, and quoted from it liberally, we should trust God’s Holy Writ also.
        As I listened to their conversation progress, he said, “The Bible means different things to different people, and it is open to everyone’s interpretation.” I beg to differ with this comment. Honest people studying God’s word can arrive at objective, revealed truths. Jesus said, “...If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:31-32). The simple fact is that God’s will has been revealed through His “word,” and we can know the truth (John 17:17).
        At this juncture, I would like to offer a theory that I have postulated about inspiration, the Bible, and the Son of God. Why would God allow His Son to suffer an agonizing death at Calvary and impart to lost humankind a document (the Bible) that cannot be understood or trusted for the salvation of lost souls? It is nonsensical to think that God would go to such great lengths to redeem lost humanity and provide no accurate means of arriving at His will for the salvation of our souls (cf. Heb. 5:9). This would make God sadistic and unreasonable in expecting anything from human beings regarding their soul’s salvation. This is an ‘a priori’ argument, but I truly believe it has validity.
        A multitude of wrong opinions and ideas exist about the accuracy and truthfulness of God’s word. When the philosophies of men are included regarding how one arrives at truth, one is left with very little substance that can be trusted or built upon in ascertaining the will of God. Satan wants humankind to doubt God’s word (Gen. 3:1), because without it we are left defenseless. Christians should dig deeper and seek to arrive at a greater understanding of God’s inspired word.
                245 Ivy Bend Circle
                Clarksville, TN 37043
               


Table of Contents