Inspiration
All posts tagged Inspiration
Pastor Robert J. Barnett pastored the Calvary Baptist Church in Michigan for many many years before his retirement. He held to the preservation of the Old Testament in the Masoretic Text and the New Testament in the Greek Traditional Text. These two God preserved texts were faithfully translated into the English in the King James Bible also known as the Authorized Bible.
Pastor Barnett’s book, The Word of God on Trial, was first published in 1981. It has had three more printings with the last being in 1990. I have put this book into a pdf and trust it will be a benefit and blessing to you. Psalm 119:105 NUN. Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.
‘The Trinitarian Bible Society held its first Text & Translation Conference at its headquarters in London, UK on 15 September 2022. In this message, the first of four lectures given at the conference, Mr Thackway discusses the doctrine of the Holy Scripture, considering its divinity, clarity, and sufficiency.’
‘What chapter or verse of the Bible says there will be 27 books of the New Testament? Of course, none. Where does it say what the 27 books will be? Again, of course, none. How then do we know what are the 27 books of the New Testament?
When we read the New Testament, we open about two-thirds of the way through the Bible to that title page that says “New Testament” on it. The churches that received scripture were not sent such a copy. The New Testament did not come to churches with a cover page, stating, “New Testament,” and behind it 27 books.
Churches acknowledged and copied inspired books. They treated them as though they were inspired. They passed them from church to church and read then in churches. Before copies wore out, they were copied again to preserve them for the future.
The scriptural doctrine of which I speak concerning canonicity proceeds from the Bible itself. Through the inward testimony of the Spirit, regenerate, immersed church members distinguish between words which man’s wisdom teaches and those of and from the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:13-25). God gave His inspired Words to the apostles or the inspired human authors according to the plan of the Lord Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit (John 14:26, 15:26, 17:8, 14; Gal 1:11-12). True believers led by the Spirit would know the things written were the words of God (1 Corinthians 14:37). The same Holy Spirit who had regenerated, indwelt, and filled them would testify to the words.
The testimony or witness of books of the New Testament arises from the promise of words. They knew Paul’s epistles were scripture like the Old Testament (2 Peter 3:16), but they were guided to inspired words. The epistles or books were an implication of received words. The Lord gave unto them “words” and they “received them” (John 17:8; cf. 12:48, Acts 2:41, 1 Thess 2:13).
Revelation 22:18-19 read:
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
The Apostle John testifies to a completed book of Revelation. He speaks of “the words of the prophecy of this book.” He confirms a settled, completed, perfect text of words. One could only add or take away words from a book with a settled text. His instruction assumes the precision of the text and continued knowledge of it. No one could obey this command without standardized words.
God’s people will know what His Words are and receive them. That is how they knew and know the twenty-seven books. God intervenes through His Spirit in His churches to receive His Words and, therefore, His Books. History confirms this teaching. The nature of God’s Word is that when God says He will do something, He does it. His sheep hear His voice and follow Him. They believe what He says. They have.
Through the history of the Lord’s churches, they believed the biblical doctrine of canonicity or the preservation of the text and books of the New Testament. Errors were made in copies, what are most often called variants today. God did not promise to preserve copies. Believers do not receive copies. They receive “words.” They identify words. True churches assume a settled text. They have.
The Lord’s churches now call the text, the words and books, received and passed down from one generation to the next by the work of the Holy Spirit, the received, traditional, ecclesiastical, or standardized text. By “traditional,” they mean it like Paul used it in 2 Thessalonians 2:15, “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.” It is an ecclesiastical text, because churches received it. Some today call this a “confessional bibliology,” because it reflects the historical belief of churches and so written down in confessions.
Scripture is scientific. If God says it, it is true and it is knowledge. It is the pure mother’s milk without variableness or shadow of turning (1 Peter 2:2, James 1:17). Everything God says is true and is the standard for truth (John 17:17). God repudiates rejection of what He said for so-called science or for experience. We have a more sure word of prophecy (2 Peter 1:19-21).
The Lord’s churches received the text still received by His churches before the invention of the printing press. With the invention of the printing press in 1440, they printed that text in the 16th century. They continued to receive it for centuries. These people translated from it into other languages. They preached sermons from it in churches and wrote commentaries and other books from it or based upon it. We have all of this record.
No one should add to or take away from the settled text of the New Testament. This contradicts the teaching of the New Testament about itself. No one should assume and then believe God’s Words were lost and in need of restoration. This violates scripture. This hurts the faith.
Professing believers today do not know the New Testament by science. They do not know it by probability. God’s people do not know it by rules of textual criticism. They do not know it by intelligibility. The people of God know it by the testimony of the Holy Spirit through history or through the preceding centuries through the Lord’s churches. They should reject any other teaching or way. These are heretical ways that distort or veer from the already received and established scriptural bibliology.https://kentbrandenburg.com/2022/06/22/how-do-we-know-what-the-new-testament-is/
‘One way to get a Nobel prize in something, you’ve got to break some new ground or discover something no one has ever seen. In the world, the making of a printing press or light bulb changes everything. People still try to invent a better mousetrap. It happens. The phone replaced the telegraph and now our mobile devices, the phone.
Everyone can learn something new from scripture. You might even change or tweak a doctrine you’ve always believed. On the whole, you don’t want to teach from the Bible what no one has ever heard before. The goal is the original intent and understanding of the Author.
From the left comes progressivism. The U. S. Constitution, just over two hundred years old, means something different than when it was written. Loosely constructed, it has a flexible interpretation into which new meanings arise. Hegelian dialectics say a new thesis comes from synthesis of antithesis and a former thesis. Everything can be improved.
Early after the inspiration and then propagation of the Bible, men found new things no one ever saw in scripture. Many of these “finds” started a new movement. People have their fathers, the father of this or that teaching, contradictory to the other, causing division and new factions and denominations. Some of these changes become quite significant, a majority supplanting the constituents of the original teaching.
At the time of the Reformation, it was as if the world first found sole fide and sole scriptura. Men often call justification the Reformation doctrine of justification. This opened a large, proverbial can of worms. Many could read their own Bible in their own language. Others now dug into their own copy of the original languages of scripture. Skepticism grew. “If we didn’t know this before, what else did they not tell us.” It became a time ripe for religious shysters and this practice hasn’t stopped since then.
Socinus
The Italian, Laelius Socinus, was born in 1525 into a distinguished family of lawyers. Early his attention turned from law to scripture research. He doubted the teachings of Roman Catholicism. Socinus moved in 1548 to Zurich to study Greek and Hebrew. He still questioned established doctrine and challenged the Reformers. Laelius wrote his own confession of faith, which introduced different, conflicting beliefs. They took hold of his nephew, Faustus Socinus, born in 1539.
Faustus rejected orthodox Roman Catholic doctrines. The Inquisition denounced him in 1559, so he fled to Zurich in 1562. There he acquired his uncle’s writings. His doubt of Catholicism turned anti-Trinitarian. The Reformation did not go far enough for Socinus. His first published work in 1562 on the prologue of John rejected the essential deity of Jesus Christ.
Socinus’s journeys ended in Poland, where he became leader of the Minor Reformed Church, the Polish Brethren. His writings in the form of the Racovian Catechism survived through the press of the Racovian Academy of Rakow, Poland. His beliefs took the name, Socinianism, now also a catch-all for any type of dissenting doctrine.
Socinianism held that Jesus did not exist until his physical conception. God adopted Him as Son at His conception and became Son of God when the Holy Spirit conceived Him in Mary, a Gnostic view called “adoptionism.” It rejected the doctrine of original sin.
Socianism denied the omniscience of God. It introduced the first well developed concept of “open theism,” which said that man couldn’t have free will under a traditional (and scriptural) understanding of omniscience.
Socinianism also taught the moral example theory of atonement, teaching that Jesus sacrificed himself to motivate people to repent and believe. His death gave men the ability to be saved by their own works, who weren’t sinners by nature anyway.
Unitarians
The work of Socinus lived on in the belief of early English Unitarians, Henry Hedworth and John Biddle. Socinian belief was helped along also by its position of conscientious objection, a practice of refusing to perform military service. This principle was very popular with many and made Socinianism much more attractive to potential adherents. The First Unitarian Church, which followed Socianism as passed down through its leaders in England, was started in 1774 on Essex Street in London, where British Unitarian headquarters are still today.
As the Puritans of colonial America apostatized through various means, Unitarianism, a modern iteration of Socinianism took hold in the Congregational Church in America. After 1820, Congregationalists took Unitarianism as their established doctrine. The doctrine of Christ diminished to Jesus a good man and perhaps a prophet of God and in a sense the Son of God, but not God Himself.
Spirit of Skepticism
I write as an example of the diversity in the history of Christian doctrine and why it takes place. When you read the beliefs of Socinians, you easily see them in modern liberal Christianity. They influence on religious cults that deny the deity of Jesus Christ.
A limited amount of skepticism wards away the acceptance of false doctrine. Better is a Berean attitude (Acts 17:11), searching the scripture to see if these things are so, and what Paul wrote in 1 Thessalonians 5:21, proving all things, holding fast to that which is good.
As I grew up among fundamentalists and independent Baptists, I witnessed regular desire to find something new in the Bible. Many sermons espoused interpretations I had never heard and didn’t see in the text. A preacher often said, “God gave it to me.” You should know God used the man because no one had seen such insights into scripture.
The same spirit of doctrinal novelty continues today in many evangelical churches. The same practice led Joseph Smith in his founding of Mormonism. Many cults arose in 19th century America under the same spirit of skepticism of established historical doctrines.
The Temptation of Novel Teaching
The temptation of novel teaching preys on anyone. Faustus Socinus accepted many orthodox doctrines of his day. He rejected Christ as fully God and fully human because it was contrary to sound reason (ratio sana). This steered Socinians toward Enlightenment thinking, where human reason took the highest role as arbiter of truth.
Warren Wiersbe wrote that H.A. Ironside, longtime pastor of Chicago’s Moody Church, said, “If it’s new, it’s not true, and if it’s true, it’s not new.” Elsewhere I read that Spurgeon first said that. I don’t know. Clever new interpretations, teachings, and takes on and from scripture corrupt and overturn scriptural, saving doctrines in the hearts of men. They condemn them through all eternity.’https://kentbrandenburg.com/2021/11/22/the-regular-history-of-clever-new-interpretations-teachings-or-takes-on-and-from-scripture-socinianism/
‘With the recent 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.’s death, many evangelical Christians have been celebrating his life. The Gospel Coalition hosted the MLK50: Gospel Reflections from the Mountaintop conference, lauding his life and work, and calling on the church to reflect on racial unity then and now.
Unorthodox Theology
Martin Luther King Jr’s theology was very liberal. In papers he wrote during his time at Crozer Theological Seminary he made his views clear. He said that the evidence for the Virgin Birth is “is too shallow to convince any objective thinker.” He stripped the doctrines of the divine sonship of Christ, the virgin birth and bodily resurrection of all literal meaning, saying, “we [could] argue with all degrees of logic that these doctrines are historically and [philosophically] untenable.” In another paper he wrote:
[A] supernatural plan of salvation, the Trinity, the substitutionary theory of the atonement, and the second coming of Christ are all quite prominent in fundamentalist thinking. Such are the views of the fundamentalist and they reveal that he is oppose[d] to theological adaption to social and cultural change. … Amid change all around he is willing to preserve certain ancient ideas even though they are contrary to science.
He did not believe these doctrines even though the Bible taught them. Instead he rejected them as superstition because they did not fit his notions of modern science. The doctrines he was rejecting are fundamental to Biblical Christianity.
After graduating from college, we do not see a radical change in King’s theology, or a repudiation of his former unorthodox views. Although he did not explicitly preach these liberal beliefs, his messages were still consistent with them. His message would fall under the banner of black liberation theology – he preached a form of Christianity that was reworked to apply to physical freedom of the slaves. The central theme of his Christianity was not Jesus Christ, the son of God coming to earth, it was the deliverance of the Israel from their slavery in Egypt. In his famous “mountaintop” speech, when he was listing the seminal events of history, he mentioned the Exodus, not Christ’s death and resurrection.
Liberation theology is a secularization of Christianity, using the Bible as a framework to speak to people’s longing for freedom. It is an abandonment of the message of the Bible. Instead of applying the full breath of scriptural to the hearers, it constructs a new theology to appeal to your worldly needs. This fits perfect with King’s denial of fundamental beliefs in the supernatural events scripture records. He didn’t need to believe them if he was just repurposing a few events from scripture to construct his own story of the world.
Immoral Life
There is substantial evidence that Martin Luther King Jr.’s private life and character was unworthy of a minister of the Gospel, or even of a Christian. The FBI monitored him for many years, wrongly and unconstitutionally using their surveillance powers to get damaging information to discredit him for political purposes. This monitoring included following him on his travels around the country and placing recording devices in his hotel rooms. The FBI claimed to have evidence, both anecdotal and on audio recording of King committing adulteries on many occasions. They even went to the point of sending him an anonymous letter threatening him with the release of this information and encouraging him to commit suicide. The FBI records on King will remain sealed until at least 2027.
We do not have to take the word of the FBI to believe that MLK was not a man who lived a righteous life. Dr. Ralph Abernathy, a close friend of King’s, admitted as much in his book, And the Walls Came Tumbling Down. He wrote that even the night before his assassination, King had committed adultery with multiple women. The consensus among historians is that Martin Luther King Jr. was repeatedly unfaithful to his wife.
It is right to commend and remember King for what he got right, including the equality of all nationalities and non violent protests against injustice. But we must not ignore his failings. As with any other historical figure, we must be honest about King, complementing and emulating what he did well, and condemning him where he was wrong. Christians must not forget, in their rush to crown him their hero, that he lived a wicked life and denied the very basics of orthodox Christianity. It is deceptive and wrong for evangelical Christians to claim King as a brother in Christ, when all the evidence suggests that he was not.’http://discerninghistory.com/2018/04/was-martin-luther-king-jr-a-christian/
“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” (2 Timothy 3:16)
‘Concerning Scripture, Christ taught that every “jot and tittle” (i.e., even portions of letters, not to mention words and phrases) was inspired and would last forever. In many portions of Scripture, the teaching rests on a seemingly rather insignificant component of a word or phrase.
For example, consider the phrase “yet once more” in Hebrews 12:26, quoting Haggai 2:6. We see in verse 27 that the argument requiring a coming judgment on all of creation hinges on it pointing back to a similar judgment in the past. Similarly, in Galatians 4:9, we see Paul couching his comments to the Galatian believers, who had returned to a legalistic system, in a question that turned on the active voice of a verb rather than passive. We have not only “known God” but “are known of God.” In John 8:58, a clever use of verb tense was made: “Before Abraham was, I am,” thereby asserting Christ’s deity. Note also in John 10:34-36 how Christ cleverly used the mood of a verb while quoting from Psalm 82:6 in order to defuse the charge of blasphemy leveled against Him. Paul’s argument in Galatians 3:16 (based on a quotation from Genesis 22:17-18) shows how even the singular or plural form of a word is equally inspired.
Consider Christ’s answer to the Sadducees, who denied personal resurrection, when He said, “Have ye not read…I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living” (Matthew 22:31-32). Christ is their God, not simply was. “And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine” (v. 33).
“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable.” Let us handle Scripture with the same care and love it with the same fervency as did Christ and the apostles.’https://www.icr.org/article/12554/?utm_source=phplist9236&utm_medium=email&utm_content=HTML&utm_campaign=January+24+-+Jots+and+Tittles
whatyareckon 