I still don’t have the right answers. But I can explain why it is that I’ve been struggling to find the right place because of where I’ve been. One of the things that I’ve become aware of recently is that fewer people than I thought hold to the idea of biblical infallibility and total authority. I was raised to believe in those things, and I assumed that anyone who teaches from the Scriptures also believe them.
What I’ve been taught (and believed) can be summed up by the following two questions and answers (taken from my NANC theology exam and already edited and considered correct):
1. The Bible is spoken of as “inspired.” What does this mean?
The Bible clearly states that “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tim 3:16). This means that God gave the authors of the original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts the words that He wanted written. In 2 Peter 1:21, the Bible tells us “the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” This is a testament to the fact that the Bible is not the word of man, but the Word of God. The literal translation of “inspiration” in 2 Timothy 3:16 is “God-breathed” or “divinely breathed.” The picture that is painted here is that the very inner being of God has come forth in the words of the Bible.
Authors of both the Old and New Testament testified that their words were not their own, but God’s. Isaiah 1:2 declares that “the Lord hath spoken.” Jeremiah 10:1-2 states, “Hear ye the word which the Lord speaketh unto you, O house of Israel: Thus saith the Lord…” The first chapters of Ezekiel, Hosea, Jonah, Micah, and Zechariah all proclaim that the word of the Lord was given. In the New Testament, Paul expressly states that the things he had written were “the commandments of the Lord” (1 Corinthians 14:37). In Ephesians 3:3-5, Paul declares that what he has written was revealed to him by the Lord.
Time and time again the Bible proves that it is truly inspired by God. It makes claim after claim that the words written are the words of God. By saying that the Bible is “inspired” by God means that the words are those of God, not man.
Inspiration is vital to the Biblical counselor. The counselee needs to understand that the Bible is the written Word of God, and thus completely sufficient for addressing the problems of man. When the counselee grasps this concept, he is one step closer to believing that the Bible is Truth, and one step closer to salvation.
2. What is the relationship between infallibility and authority?
The Scriptures are infallible—that is, they are incapable of containing an error. The Scriptures also have divine authority—they are the basis for everything in life. We know that the Bible is infallible because we know Who authored it. The Scriptures are directly from God (2 Tim. 3:16-17). We know from Titus 1:2 that God cannot tell a lie. As a result, He could not allow anything untrue to be in His Word. In truth, the Bible reflects the character of God.
The Bible itself claims divine authority in 1 Thess. 2:13, “For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.” Because the Bible cannot contain an error, these words speak of the divine authority of the Scriptures.
The Biblical counselor must understand that he can go to the Scriptures to counsel on any issue. There are root sins behind the majority (if not all) issues that would arise in a counseling session. To realize the authority of the Scriptures (in all matters) would immediately point the counselor in the direction he needs to go.
A friend of mine recently posted an article that responded to what was called “Bill Maher’s Absurd Take on Religion.” In it, the statement was made, “If Christianity really taught that God took out a pen, wrote a book for us, called it the Bible and dropped it from the clouds, I too would doubt. But Mr. Maher, Christianity doesn’t teach that.”
But…it does. At least in some places. I find it completely reasonable that Mr. Maher has an issue with Christianity because of that belief – because in more conservative fundamentalist churches that is exactly what is taught.
I’ve heard pastors say some of the most ignorant things from the pulpit and believed it because it came from a pastor.
Now’s the point where we all say yeah, but the pastor is just a man like everyone else and can be wrong (and probably is a lot of the time). But it doesn’t work like that in fundamentalist circles. The pastor is the man. Seriously. You know those bumper stickers that say, “The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it”? Well, in some cases that turns into “The pastor says it, I believe it, that settles it.”
Seems silly, doesn’t it? But it’s a very real part of fundamentalist Christianity.
I thought I had gotten rid of all of this baggage years ago – apparently I merely suppressed it.
So, explain your stance now. Do you believe that the Bible is fallible and incomplete? Do you believe there is some truth in it? No truth? Not trying to pry, just interested in your thoughts.
[Reply]
“The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it”? Well, in some cases that turns into “The pastor says it, I believe it, that settles it.”
This is not an indictment of pastors, it is an indictment of the people in his flock. Any pastor who is truly humble will tell you to go to the scriptures, find what the pastor is saying. If you agree great, if not… challenge them. Do it biblically, but do it and grow. The pastor and the learner will both grow in the prociess.
[Reply]
Carl -
It turns into both when the pastor knows it’s happening and turns a blind eye, or worse, encourages it.
[Reply]
The Bible we have is neither infallible or inerrant. Even hard-core fundies, when pressed, will admit that the claim of infallibility / inerrancy applies only to the original manuscripts.
And guess what? We don’t have the original manuscripts. Not one. So this little clause, which church leadership rarely mentions, gives those who push the doctrine of inerrancy an ‘out’ when they are pressed on some passage that seems incoherent, contrary to fact, offensive to our modern sensibilities or uncertain.
And there’s a lot of uncertainty in terms of what the original manuscripts would’ve meant, especially in the OT. Get an amplified version of the Bible, and you’ll see that many times the editors give multiple possible meanings for many verses, and often even remark, ‘the original meaning is uncertain.’
And yet, here in this country there is a strange attitude that this imperfect and uncertain collection of writings trumps every other sort of experience of God in prayer, worship, meditation, tradition and the gift of reason. Why did this happen? Mandy, you are very close to the truth on this point! It happened because the pioneers who built this country were so far from the traditional centers of Christendom that they couldn’t take the infrastructure, the hierarchy of the churches in Europe with them.
What they could take was the Bible. Much of the primitive Christianity that sprang up in the American South and (later) in the West came to emphasize their understanding of scripture (usually very literal, and without much scholarship) over every other aspect of Christianity. This not only played on their strengths, but became the basis for the authority of the local pastor,who could not appeal to Rome, Geneva or Canterbury for support.
And that’s how we ended up with this fundamentalist Christianity, which (if you look at it from a broad, historical point of view) is really not the mainstream. Frankly, I get the impression that you not only grew up with different assumptions where that’s concerned, but that those assumptions were actively encouraged—and why? Because, as you have intuited, it served the interests of the power structure in those churches, which all revolves around the pastor.
[Reply]
Fundamentalism at its worst (which I have never actually seen in the UK, and rarely in Cyprus) seems very sad. It’s such tunnel-vision. The Bible is a collection of books by many different authors. God-breathed? Of course. Just as God breathes on us and inspires us to worship him, or to create or love for his glory. Are the things we do infallible if God has inspired us? Of course not! Hopefully we’re on the right track, with the right motivation, but human beings make mistakes. The great thing is, God still loves us anyway.
Some of the books of the Bible are prophetic. In the Old Testament, when the prophets said, ‘Thus saith the Lord’ (etc), they were indeed words given directly by God to them. When John wrote the book of Revelation, that too was written down exactly as he was told to by the angel.
But not all books are prophetic, and most of the authors don’t claim to have been given words directly of God. The Gospel writers use a historic style, with the purpose of telling us about Jesus. They do a wonderful job, and they’re exciting, being written within living memory of Jesus’ life. I’m sure God reminded the writers of significant points that should be included, too. They are the heart of our message. But is every word infallible? Of course not. There are (as often quoted) various minor inconsistencies in the gospels. To me, that makes them all the MORE reliable – they are true human accounts of events, seen from different perspectives, recorded by different men. Had someone tried to invent the whole story, the accounts would have been a lot more consistent.
And Paul’s letters were authoritative, in that he was one of the apostles, but not infallible. He was only a man. He was writing to individual churches to sort out specific problems. Some are relevant still today, others aren’t. He didn’t say every one of his words was divinely inspired and should be recorded without change for all eternity – and although, of course, he was in a living relationship with God and inspired (in the usual sense of the word) in what he wrote, he sometimes actually makes the point that he is writing his (Paul’s) words, and not God’s.
Oh, and the Timothy verse so often mis-quoted, refers only to the Old Testament – obviously. The New Testament canon hadn’t been settled by the time it was written. And it’s an ambiguous statement in the Greek anyway, it could just as easily mean ‘All God-breathed writings are profitable….’ etc.
The Bible as a whole is not, technically, the ‘Word of God’. As written in the beginning of John’s Gospel, Jesus is the Word of God. Some of the Bible also contains words from God (eg the prophets), and of course many words from Jesus. It’s important, of course. It’s the primary record we have of Jesus’ life and works, and also a wonderful insight into the early church. Much of it is authoritative and should be taken as such. But there’s no way it was ever intended to be infallible. That was an idea invented in Reformation days.
[Reply]
oooooorrrrrrrr……
Its time to come to terms with the fact that we are responsible for our own actions and everything that happens to us that is not a result of those actions specifically falls into the “shit happens” category.
It seems weird to me that you are coming to terms with the idea that the bible is not really the inerrant word of god and then are looking for new found comfort in a more ‘interpretive’ Christianity.
Now I realize that there probably is nothing i can say or write here that would make you see atheism as a viable alternative, but I thought I’d share with you the warmth and comfort that knowing that my life here on this planet is transient and in the grand scheme, rather short. The best that I can do here is to live my life to the fullest and make my mark by being important in other peoples lives in a positive way. Actions and rules are not defined by a plethora of various interpretations of what god or jesus would want, but instead a general debate, whether in my head, with friends or in government, on what is best for me and those near my and also for the advancement of humanity.
If this could happen on a far larger basis, think of the possible and likely outcome. If critical thinking were the standard with the promotion of humanity being the guide we could be far more articulate and agree on real data.
would abortion really be the problem, or simply a truly undesirable outcome(much like orphaning kids) of the real problem, unwanted pregnancy. We could focus on reducing or eliminating the real problem and most everyone could agree on it.
Gay marriage, if the conversation doesnt invoke one interpretation of the bible or another, we could actually focus on: does it truly harm society? what is our data to support one contention or another?
War (which by the way, is another undesirable solution of a different problem, conflict), same thing, are we truly benefiting humanity or even our own country by going to war? Critical thinking would ask us to provide real data, and it would be demanded.
Every hot topic could be discussed with reality rather than what one group of people think that jesus would want as opposed to another.
Same in your personal life. No longer would you have to think “Does god want me to do this?” You think instead about the consequences to you or your friends and family, pros and cons. And its ok if you choose wrong, we learn by making mistakes and suffering the consequences.
As I said, I know there is nothing i can write to help you let go of your unquenchable desire for faith, most people have teh exact same desire (obviously i do not), it provides comfort. Being comfortable with atheism takes work, it takes a lot of reading, and it takes confidence. Its hard, but the result is freedom, not just for yourself, but for us as a species.
I wish you well on your journey.
[Reply]
Tech -
Thanks for the well wishes.
My desire is not for faith. My desire is for truth. I want to know what’s real. Obviously our perspectives are vastly different, because I know that God is real just as surely as you know that He isn’t.
I’m quite sure that there is a way to have faith in God and still utilize critical thinking the way you have outlined above. That’s not a popular opinion, and I’m aware of that. But popular doesn’t always mean right. I’m not looking to do what everyone else is doing. I’m not a lemming. I’m a girl who is searching for meaning. You find meaning without God; I don’t. That makes us different, but not enemies.
There is a way to have faith without being a “fundie.” There is a way to have faith while still thinking for yourself.
It’s a way that I know exists, but I haven’t yet figured out how to put into practice because of the bondage of my past. 20 years of habit is damn near impossible to break. But not entirely. And I will do it. It will just take time and effort.
[Reply]
And that my Dear Mandi, is what gives me such hope for you. You will find your way. Patience young Padawan.
Kisses
[Reply]
“There is a way to have faith without being a “fundie.” There is a way to have faith while still thinking for yourself.”
Yes, there is. I would say that it’s important that as you search things out while you are looking for truth in Scriptures/God/Jesus/Your Experiences…etc., that you first try to deal with what sometimes seems like anger towards your past. No matter what you have experienced, I am sure that there are bits and pieces that will prove valuable to you. It is a hard thing to learn to take the good from people, life, and Chrisitanity while rejecting the bad or negative aspects.
Truth can make strange bedfellows; sometimes you might just be on the fundie side, sometimes you might be on a more liberal side. It can be elegantly simple or maddeningly complicated.
As far as the Bible goes, I don’t think you’ll be able to approach it without conflict without spending more time reseaching it. I don’t mean from a preacher’s point of view, but from different scholarly views. You’ll will find some who will try to decimate it, other’s whose faith has been strengthened by their study. Read them..with objectivity….bearing in mind that either side can be overrun by assumptions.
[Reply]
Hmm… perhaps a little more color from my fingers would be appropriate.
There is not an atheist on the planet who will say “I know for a fact there is no god!”. I would go so far as to say, that there is not even one who would say that. It is never an outright rejection. Its only a statement of evidence, something like “there is no evidence that god exists”.
However, I will never understand how critical thinking and belief in god can go hand in hand (with respect to matters concerning god), the former requires only evidence and no faith and the latter requires only faith and no evidence. In your search for truth, you use your critical thinking skills, you used them when you realized that teaching that the bible is the inerrant word of god is simply bunk.
All a critical thinker requires is evidence, not even outright proof. Your search for truth leads you to look for evidence. you will probably find your evidence in a beautiful view, a sunrise, or childbirth, or good things happening to you (or even bad).
Unfortunately this is not evidence as they are all guided by our emotions in reaction to things and events.
So while I totally agree that you can critically think you way through life and how to deal with events and those around you while having faith in god, I dont think you can critically think about god, it would require real evidence, something so big that only an all powerful god could have done it. I would suggest a giant hand coming down and moving a mountain over by a foot or two (the hand should have a name on it so I know which god to pray to). This action would convert every single atheist on the planet (although some may suggest an very powerful alien species!).
The creation of the universe, the development of man, the complexity of nature, are also things that are explainable more and more each day. God is not a default theory, it is a theory that requires evidence on its own, just like every other theory.
I’m not looking to do what everyone else is doing. I’m not a lemming. I’m a girl who is searching for meaning. You find meaning without God; I don’t. That makes us different, but not enemies.
Of course you are not a lemming, you took the big bold step of realization that one can only admire. writing about it publicly and exposing yourself to potential attack is a further sign of strength that is quite admirable. I would never call you a lemming (although there are many).
All I am suggesting is that your search for meaning may be more fruitful if you question what is making choose to have faith in god at all, rather than trying to understand what your new relationship with him is. Having that answer, it seems to me, should provide the foundation for your new relationship with him (although there is that tiny chance that you may see things my way
)
[Reply]
another thought – have you read Philip Yancey’s books? They’re SO good. He was brought up fundie (racist fundie, actually! Even worse) but eventually found God’s love in a much more meaningful and wonderful way.
What’s so Amazing about Grace is the one people often recommend most, but I think any of his books are excellent!
[Reply]
My desire is not for faith. My desire is for truth. I want to know what’s real. Obviously our perspectives are vastly different, because I know that God is real just as surely as you know that He isn’t.
I must’ve asked this before, but… I’d be interested to know if there’s any particular reason why you feel so strongly that God exists.
I’ve been asking this question of a Christian friend of mine, and we’ve just about thrashed out what the root cause is in his case: he feels that weak evidence in sufficient quantities can take the place of strong evidence. I disagree, because that logic would “prove” stuff like homeopathy that is demonstrably dodgy. What’s interesting to me, though, is that this is a seriously low-level (in the computer sense) piece of epistemological machinery that’s behaving in a fashion I hadn’t expected.
I do have some trouble accepting your claim to know that God is real, and it occurs to me that the impasse might be of a similar sort: something basic, to do with how we judge truth and falsehood, rather than a discrepancy in the facts and arguments that we build on that foundation. Any thoughts?
[Reply]
Tech –
There is not an atheist on the planet who will say “I know for a fact there is no god!”. I would go so far as to say, that there is not even one who would say that.
Does Douglas Adams saying he is convinced there is no God count?
Lifewish –
I’ll be writing something soon about why I believe in God. I also suspect that you’re correct in your last statement.
[Reply]
not really…. he died and is not on the planet any more
actually I should rephrase, because its not like any of his atoms have left the planet (which by the way is my favorite conception of reincarnation). Perhaps, the person who was Adams is no longer on the planet.
but point taken, perhaps there are a couple who are willing to use lack of evidence as evidence. We all can’t be critical thinkers.
[Reply]
I imagine that Douglas Adams was convinced God doesn’t exist in the same way you’re (presumably) convinced that the tooth fairy doesn’t exist. It’s not absolutely impossible, but there’s no good reason to think it’s true. In the absence of such a reason, the only sensible stance is atoothfairyism.
So yeah, techskeptic is wrong, but only because there’s more than one definition of “fact” floating around.
Looking forward to your post on belief in God.
[Reply]
I would be interested in reading the rest of your NANC exam to see what you believe about all the issues. Would you Email it to me?
BBower@NEC.org
[Reply]
Amanda, I just want to say that I am also working on my NANC exam. I have completed Track 5 at our church counseling center and have just some editing to do and grammer work. Its been a totally awesome process that has stretched me in so many ways! God is doing some amazing things in our church with the counseling center and has been training some others to do God’s work there. I have been out to Faith Baptist in Lafayette a few times and will continue to attend Lord willing. My husband is also training to be NANC certified with me. Keep pressing on sister in Christ!~ Stacie ( from NY)
[Reply]
Pingback: God’s Infallibility and Authority « Simply Mandi Kaye
Good input Mandi. I’m completing my NANC theological essay and am looking to see the responses that others have placed online. So did you complete your phase 3 and are you still doing NANC counseling these days?
[Reply]