The Belief That God Exercised Authority Over Human Authorship

“One who claims to be a skeptic of one set of beliefs is actually a true believer in another set of beliefs” (17). The concept of having faith in a higher power or a set religious belief is meaningless to some Christians. Many people view religion, and Christianity in particular, as unsupported and unaccommodating. Christianity is not only more reasonable than all other belief systems, but it is also more logical than unbelief itself according to authors Norman Geisler and Frank Turek. Geisler and Turek guide the readers through some of the traditional, more well-known arguments for the existence of God our creator. They move into an investigation of the source of morality and how reliable the New Testament is in regard to the accounts of Jesus.

allows the upbringing of new ideas, but at the same time, it constitutes that the Bible is still an

However, the notion that God is the creator of everything and is making us suffer for our sins has changed drastically throughout the centuries. As a result of the development of science, naturalism, modern upbringing, and multiculturalism, the importance of religion has declined and our world is becoming more secular. In the Old Testament, the Bible is a sacred book and everyone respects and trusts its content. However, with the rise of science, the accuracy of the Bible has been questioned by scientific findings.

Hello Lanee, thank you for your post. You made some great arguments with scripture defending why you believe the Bible is both inspired and without error. I am curious which of the four arguments that the Bible is inerrant, do believe to be the strongest and the weakest. Something I have noticed in my life when ministering to individuals who do not believe. Simply quoting scripture is not sufficient to sway them to the understanding of Christ. I have discovered that leading by example and giving personal testimony as to what Jesus has done in my life is far more effective. Salvation is an interpersonal matter, Therefore that is why I believe that Jesus commonly used miracles and parables to invoke deep self-thinking within individuals. I feel we should model Christ's example, in this manner. Thanks for the wonderful read great essay.

As an academic discipline, theology should share mutual and erudite goals with other academic disciplines: whereas theology strives for historical accuracy, conceptual consistency, interpretive clarity and systematic uniformity, yet it is much more a hope than a science. Also problematic, there is an eternal perspective, a paradigm that we cannot understand. Theology is theory, there are no proofs, the only proof I have is in my heart, and I call that the Spirit of truth (faith). Still, I am conscience that I bring my own set of prejudices, and hopes to this matter. I have good reason to mistrust many of my conclusions. The systematic method of theology looks at many issues wherein much diversity exists, diversity of historical thought, methods, and approaches. Within all this diversity, there are constants. In examining the methods of theology, we must recognize both the diversity and the constancy. One constant is Scripture. Yet, the meaning of Scripture is divers and restricted to interpretation. I think Biblical authority at its best, most earnestly means one does not affirm it as truth without struggling to understand its meaning. I ascribe to a certain authority of scripture, and trust in a divine nature within it. For me, this means addressing questions like: What is the context and the point of this passage? What is it calling me to do? What does this say about the nature of

The Bible is the only source of faith; it contains the plenary inspiration of God; its reading is invested with a quasi-sacramental character.

When arguing the reliability of Scripture, there two key factors that stand out from the rest. The cosmological argument explains that the world had to start somewhere based on cause and effect (Lewis Sperry Chafer) and the empirical evidence of the fulfillment of prophecy (p. 4) timeline the Septuagint and Dead Sea scrolls provide, there should be little doubt in validity of the authentic writings in the Bible.

The unity of biblical text and empirical evidence are two credible arguments supporting the reliability of scripture. First, the unity of the Bible is a solid argument. Many people study the Bible for strictly historical purposes. For example, Mark Strauss says, “They’re (cynics) looking at these documents as just historical documents” (A.C.E Video). However, even cynics will find that the subject of Jesus Christ and the redemption of mankind are consistent themes within its pages. This is remarkable, especially since most of the writings were drafted generations apart, not to mention the authors had various lifestyles, which indicates a supernatural derivation of scripture. Pink in Divine Inspiration explains, “The Bible was penned on two

How are we to approach Scripture? Are we to come without any preconceived ideas or notions? Or are we to approach Scripture with all tradition and experience? The truth is, everyone reads the Bible from a perspective; meaning everyone comes with preconceived ideas of what the Bible means—what they think it means. People cannot help but read their lives into the Scriptures. However, because the Bible is divinely inspired, God is able to overcome those ideas so that his truth is clearly seen. Therefore, is one approach to reading, interpreting and understanding the bible better than another? Can certain approaches to the Bible affect the Bible’s authority? Absolutely. Ultimately the Bible is the story of God, not the story of people. Therefore, what God (and Jesus) does and says, is of utmost important and everyone else in the Bible is a minor character that certainly brings understanding, but not the main point. Therefore, two examples come into view in their approach to Scripture; Phyllis Trible, a feminist theologian and N. T. Wright, an English New Testament scholar. In as much as they differ in their approach to Biblical authority and interpretation, they reveal the challenges of giving the Bible the authority it is due. Specifically, Trible approaches the Bible by focusing on all the unjust treatment of women; whereas, Wright focuses on what is missing from Scripture and the churches need to fill in the gaps. In each example, there are clearly strengths, that give the

It is widely accepted by both believers and atheists that humans have a moral obligation to do good and avoid evil. These moral obligations are objective facts and are based on duties that arise from the way things are and not from desires of a person. The moral obligation is viewed differently by both atheists and believers (Jeff, 2013). Since atheists do not believe in the existence of God and believe that the universe came into form through chance, the question always presented to them is on what grounds are the moral obligations developed? On the other hand, the religious view sees that moral obligation is grounded in the Creator, and it is further rooted in the fact that humans were created with a purpose. The religious view is more compatible than that of atheists. It is more acceptable to state that moral conscience is God?s voice within the soul as moral values exist in a person?s mind and will. The idea of moral principles somehow floating on their own apart from any person sounds impossible. The compatibility of moral obligation to the creator of the universe is easily acceptable than that of materialism and belief in objective values (Peter & Ronald, 1994). Therefore, the moral argument provides evidence for the existence of God as it states that the moral obligation of human can not originate from a random collision of particles but rather from the creator of the

n the story of “Job” from the Oxford University Press Jewish Study Bible, there is a clear construction of authority in the relationship between God and humans. This story in the Bible is different from others in how it shows the relationship between God and humans. The story shows God’s authority as being based on fear and faith rather than being established in a covenant between humans and God, as shown in “Genesis.” From this construction of authority, it can be inferred that there is a limitation to human knowledge, and that only God is all-knowing.

The first moral system I choose to analyze this situation with is the divine command theory. The divine command theory is the theory that relies heavily on religion and might even be one of the oldest documented moral systems out there. The morality relies on if it was commanded by the divine. It’s a relatively easy system to follow because if you need to figure out what to do, all you need to do is check the rule book or the teachings of the divine to find your answer. In the divine command theory, when referring to Christianity, it is said that humans should dominate nature. They think of nature as below them, which includes animals, plants, and other natural resources. This value is demonstrated a lot in the U.S. because most of the population is considered to be religious.

In approaching scripture as a completely divine and human work, there is opportunity to understand how this is demonstrated through scripture. One now seek to reconcile the discrepancies instead of overlook them or let scripture prove itself. As Porter explains the main approaches, “The two articles by Blomberg and Grudem are, I believe, fairly typical approaches to the major issues raised regarding the authority of the Bible. One is the attempt to answer all the issues raised by such a position by refuting attempts to find errors within the Bible (without the original documents) and the other is to marshal all of the Bible’s own comments regarding itself, in effect to make the Bible a self-authenticating document. Neither has proved to be successful, virtually by the proponents’ own admissions”. This assumes that discrepancy in scripture is only being worked out from a specific and modern context. It is only from the view of the interpreter. This shows the importance of viewing biblical narrative not only from the modern-day context, but also from the historical one.

What is the Bible and why is it authoritative? The what and the why each give rise to the other. Historical criticism revealed that the formation of the Bible took place over many years and even centuries. The following is a gross oversimplification: Oral traditions and pieces of parchment were passed from generation to generation, and the gradual collection and arrangement, editing, and revising of these different parts eventually formed individual books. Books that held essential truths and stories and histories became more central and popular to the communities that espoused them. These books were thought of as authoritative because the communities through the years affirmed their value, truth, and centrality for their faith, and as a result the books shaped the lifestyles of the communities. It could be said that the communities strived to be obedient to the expectations, the calling, the personal sacrifice, and identity formation held within the books. Such books were compiled into canon, but the important note is that communities affirmed the authority of the books through the processes of

Brueggemann states, “The Torah occupies the primary place of authority, significance, and influence in the mediation of Yahweh’s purpose, presence, and power to Israel.” Through this quote it is seen how important the Torah is to us, it holds the laws that we are to follow as God’s people. The Ten Commandments are something that is taught to everyone that attends Sunday school, these are a list of things that God gave to Moses that we should not do in order to fully follow God in our lives. I think that these laws being contained in the Old Testament along with other provisions that God provides for His people shows that the Old Testament is authoritative. I think that the Old Testament should be considered authoritative also because everything that is written down was fully from God and inspired by God. The Old Testament contains the things that God wanted to fully communicate to His people so that they would see His character and learn what He wanted from them, this fact makes the Old Testament authoritative for Christians. This also shows why the Old Testament should be consulted when formulating beliefs because we see the nature of God and the love that He has for His people throughout the Old Testament. This is seen through how many times God relents on His people when they should have been punished for their