Bible Basics
A.
Definition
B.
Reliability of the documents
C.
Nature of Inspiration
D.
Ingredients of Inspiration
E.
Erroneous Views of Inspiration
A.
Definition
B.
Characteristics of canonical books
C.
Extent of the canon
1.
Apocrypha
2.
Pseudepigrapha
A.
Definitions
B.
Textual criticism
1.
Higher criticism
2.
Lower criticism
C.
Various translations throughout history
1.
Non-English translations
2.
Early English translations
3.
Modern English translations
D.
KJV Controversy
A.
Definition
B.
Spiritual qualifications for understanding the Bible
C.
Cautions in interpretation
D.
Principles of interpretation
A.
Bible study requisites
B.
Bible study benefits
C.
Bible study methods
D.
Bible study tools
E.
Bible study guides
I. Inspiration
A.
Definition
It is the Divine act in which the Holy Spirit guided the
human authors of the Bible so that their writings were kept without error and
so that what they wrote was exactly what God wanted included in His revelation.
B.
Reliability of the documents
1.
New Testament
|
There is more abundant and
accurate manuscript evidence for the New Testament than for any other ancient
book. COMPARISON OF ANCIENT TEXTS
|
|
Author
|
Date
Written
|
Earliest
Copy
|
# of
Copies
|
Accuracy
|
|
Caesar
|
1st Cent. B.C.
|
900
A.D.
|
10
|
NA
|
|
Livy
|
1st Cent. B.C.
|
NA
|
20
|
NA
|
|
Tacitus
|
c. 100 A.D.
|
1100
A.D.
|
20
|
NA
|
|
Thucydides
|
5th Cent. B.C.
|
900
A.D.
|
8
|
NA
|
|
Herodotus
|
5th Cent. B.C.
|
900
A.D.
|
8
|
NA
|
|
Demosthenes
|
4th Cent.
|
1100
A.D.
|
200
|
NA
|
|
Mahabharata
|
NA
|
NA
|
NA
|
90%
|
|
Homer
|
9th Cent. B.C.
|
NA
|
643
|
95%
|
|
N.T.
|
1st Cent. A.D.
|
2nd
Cent. A.D.
|
5,000+
|
99+%
|
*Table taken from Christian
Apologetics by Norman Geisler, p.
307.
2. Other Considerations
a)
The number of witnesses to N.T. events
b)
The nature of the N.T. eyewitnesses
c)
The sanity of the N.T. witnesses and writers
d)
Accuracy of the N.T. witnesses
e)
Archeological evidence
and secular support
C.
Nature of Inspiration
1.
Verbal
The very words of Scripture are
inspired, not just the thoughts or ideas.
God specifically chose the words that He wanted to communicate His
message.
2.
Infallible
The Bible is of such a quality that
it cannot mislead or be in error.
Technically, this word applies to the “soteriological” content of the
Bible. In recent years some have tried
to make a distinction between infallibility and inerrancy. They would posit that Jesus was infallible, but
not necessarily inerrant. By this, they
mean that He is correct on all issues that are fundamental to spiritual life,
but that He may have erred concerning scientific or historical issues.
3.
Inerrant
This is an expansion of
infallibility. The Bible is without
error in any portion or in any area.
Though it is not an atlas, it speaks correctly about geographical
locations. Though it is not a science
text, when it touches on science, it is correct. Though it is not primarily a history text, it is correct on all
historical matters that it addresses or alludes to.
4.
Authoritative
Since the Bible is the Word of God,
it has the authority to govern our lives.
5.
Plenary
This word means “full,
complete.” Every portion of Scripture
is inspired, not just some of the parts.
From Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21 the whole of Scripture is inspired.
D.
Erroneous Views of Inspiration
1.
The Bible CONTAINS the Word of God (Liberalism)
This view teaches that some, but
not the entire Bible is actually the Word of God. Basically, the words spoken by Jesus are considered to be the
Word of God as well as passages with phrases such as “Thus saith the
Lord.” The rest may or may not be
considered the Word of God depending upon the interpreter.
The problem with this view is that
it leaves it up to the individual to decide what parts are and are not the Word
of God. It allows for a cafeteria Bible
where each individual chooses what he or she likes and discards or ignores the
rest.
2.
The Bible BECOMES the Word of God when it speaks to you
(Neo-orthodoxy)
This view teaches that the Bible
does not really become the Word of God until it actually “speaks” to you. Then those portions that effect you are
considered the Word of God. The
emphasis is on the living nature of the text.
The problem with this view is
twofold. First, God’s Word is His Word
whether it speaks to us or not. Just
because we ignore it or do not hear its message does not make it any less His
Word. Second, it makes our “listening”
the condition upon which the Word becomes the Word. This means that different parts are God’s Word for different
people because each person is spoken to by a different portion of Scripture.
3.
The THOUGHTS, not the WORDS are inspired
Some hold to a very subjective view
of inspiration in which they posit that the thoughts are inspired, but not
necessarily the words. God gave the
thoughts to the writers, but the writers put those thoughts in their own words.
4.
The Bible is correct when it speaks to SPIRITUAL matters, but
not necessarily when it speaks to HISTORICAL or SCIENTIFIC matters
This is a way of accommodating
modern scientific theories (i.e. evolution) and other historical events that
some see in conflict with the Bible’s portrayal of those events.
There are a couple of problems with
this view. First, if you cannot trust
God to be right about issues that you can see or test, then how can you be sure
that you can trust Him to be right about issues that are spiritual in
nature? In order to trust Him in the
spiritual realm, I need to be able to trust Him in the natural realm where I
can test His claims.
Second, there is no conflict
between the correct scientific interpretation of nature and the
Scriptures. The bible is infallible and
therefore correct in all areas, including history, geography, and science.
II.
Canonicity
A.
Definition
The word “canon” comes from kanon meaning ruler, staff, or measuring
rod. It later gained the idea of
“standard,” or “norm.” In the church it
came to mean the rule of faith or authoritative Scripture.
B.
Description of canonical books
1.
Sacred
2.
“Defiled the hands”
3.
Authoritative
C.
Difference between Discovering the canon and choosing the
canon
|
Incorrect View
|
Correct View
|
|
The Church is the Determiner of the Canon
|
The Church is the Discoverer of the Canon
|
|
The Church is the Mother of the Canon
|
The Church is the Child of the Canon
|
|
The Church is the Magistrate of the Canon
|
The Church is the Minister of the Canon
|
|
The Church is the Regulator of the Canon
|
The Church is the Recognizer of the Canon
|
|
The Church is the Judge of the Canon
|
The Church is the Witness of the Canon
|
|
The Church is Master of the Canon
|
The Church is Servant of Canon
|
*chart
taken from A General Introduction of the
Bible by Geisler & Nix, p. 221.
D.
Characteristics of canonical books
1.
OT books had to be written by a prophet or someone with the
prophetic gift
2.
Writer needed to be confirmed by acts of God
3.
The message had to tell the truth about God
4.
It basically had to be accepted by the people of God
5.
It had to be genuine, not a forgery
6.
It had to have evidence of Divine authority
7.
Old Testament had Christ’s approval
8.
New Testament had Christ’s promise
a)
John 14:26
b)
John 16:13
9.
New Testament had to have apostolic approval
a)
Eph. 2:20
b)
He. 2:3-4
E.
Extent of the canon:
Closed or Open?
1.
Theologically it must be closed
a)
There are no more apostles (Acts 1:21)
b)
The gift of miracles as given in the early church has ceased
2.
Historically it must be closed
a)
We have no record of a gift of miracles to confirm any new
prophets or apostles
b)
Peter reminds us that God has given us all that is necessary
for our faith. If a book were left out,
then we would not have had all that is necessary. (2 Pet. 1:3)
F.
Non-canonical books
1.
Categories of books
a)
Homologoumena: books that are accepted by virtually everyone
b)
Antilegomena: books disputed by some
c)
Pseudepigrapha: books rejected by virtually everyone
d)
Apocrypha: “hidden,” books accepted by some as canonical or
semicanonical
2.
Homologoumena
a)
Most have 20 of the 27 NT books in this category
b)
They have been included in almost every list from the early
church to the present
3.
Antilegomena
a)
The books listed
(1)
Hebrews
(2)
James
(3)
2 John
(4)
3 John
(5)
2 Peter
(6)
Jude
(7)
Revelation
b)
The reasons being disputed
(1)
Hebrews
(a)
Hebrews was disputed because of the uncertainty surrounding
authorship
(b)
The eastern church considered it Pauline and accepted it
readily
(c)
Some were afraid to embrace it due to the fact that the
Montanists appealed to it for some of their heretical teachings
(2)
James
(a)
Luther doubted James
(b)
Some questioned its apparent contradiction with Paul’s
statements on salvation by faith
(3)
2 Peter
(a)
The genuineness of authorship was questioned
(4)
2 & 3 John
(a)
Their genuineness was questioned
(b)
Their limited circulation hindered their acceptance
(c)
Their personal flavor worked against them also
(5)
Jude
(a)
Questions of authenticity
(b)
It alludes to a pseudepigraphal book
(6)
Revelation
(a)
Its authenticity was challenged
(b)
Correct interpretation (or incorrect) made it difficult to be
accepted
c)
They were never considered anticanonical; they were given a
semicanonical status by some and treated like the apocrypha
4.
Pseudepigrapha
a)
By the ninth century there were some 280 of them
b)
Pseudepigraphal gospels
(1)
More than 50 of them
(2)
Gospel of Thomas
(a)
Fanciful stories of Christ’s childhood
(i)
Creating sparrows out of clay at age 5
(ii)
Cursed a lad to become like a tree
(b)
Written in the 2nd Century
(3)
Gospel of the Ebionites
(4)
Gospel of Peter
(5)
Gospel of the Hebrews
(6)
Gospel of the Egyptians
(7)
Gospel of Philip
(8)
Gospel of Judas
(9)
Gospel According to Matthias
c)
Pseudepigraphal Acts
(1)
The Acts of Andrew
(2)
The Acts of Thomas
(3)
The Acts of John
(4)
The Acts of Peter
d)
Epistles
e)
Apocalypses
f)
Value of the pseudepigrapha
(1)
Help in understanding the culture
(2)
Help in understanding some of the heretical teachings of the
early church
(3)
They help in distinguishing the genuine from the false in that
they show the tendencies of those who would fake apostolic writings
5.
Apocrypha?
a)
OT Apocrypha
(1)
Arguments for their acceptance
(a)
NT allusions to some of the books
(b)
NT writers’ usage of the Septuagint
(c)
Some of the earliest complete manuscripts contain the
Apocrypha
(d)
Early Christian art depicts events mentioned in the Apocrypha
(e)
Some early church Fathers accepted the apocrypha or at least
used it
(f)
The influence of St. Augustine
(g)
Council of Trent
(i)
Proclaimed them canonical in 1546
(ii)
They have been binding on the RCC since that time
(h)
Copies found among the Dead Sea community
(2)
Arguments against their acceptance
(a)
NT never cites an apocryphal book as inspired
(i)
NT does cite it just as it cites pagan poets
(ii)
Canonical OT books are quoted as inspired
(b)
The Jews rejected the Apocrypha as canonical
(c)
Jesus did not accept the Apocrypha
(d)
The center for the Jewish canon was in Jerusalem, not
Alexandria where the Septuagint was translated
(e)
No early church father accepted the Apocrypha before Augustine
accepted the Apocrypha
(f)
The Council of Trent upheld the Apocrypha mainly because the
Apocryphal books contained false teachings that would help them in their
debates with Luther (i.e. prayer for the dead).
(g)
The Dead Sea Scrolls contained many non-canonical books
(h)
The nature of the books themselves prove they are not
canonical
(i)
Do not have the stamp of Divine authority
(ii)
Are fanciful
(iii)
Contain historical errors
(iv)
Contains contradictions to other doctrine
(v)
Were not written by a prophet or someone with prophetic
authority
(vi)
Conspicuous absence of prophetic material
b)
NT Apocrypha
(1)
They enjoyed a temporary or local acceptance, but never a
church-wide acceptance
(2)
No major canon or church council ever accepted them
(3)
Value of the Apocrypha
(a)
They are of more value and of higher quality of the
Pseudepigrapha
(b)
Provide early documentation of canonical books
(c)
Contain much historical data that is helpful
(d)
They reveal the culture and practices of some of the church at
that time
III. Transmission of the Text
A.
Definitions
1.
Translation
2.
Version
3.
Revision
4.
Recension
5.
Paraphrase
6.
Textual Criticism
7.
Manuscript
8.
Preservation
9.
Masoretic Text
10.
Received Text
11.
Majority Text
12.
Eclectic text
13.
Alexandrian Texts
14.
Formal Equivalency
15.
Dynamic Equivalency
B.
Textual criticism
Criticism here is used in its original sense. It means to make a discerning judgment about
an issue. In our case, it refers to
making judgments about the Bible and the text of the Bible. There are two types of criticism as it
relates to the Bible¾higher
and lower. The two terms have nothing
to do with their importance.
1.
Higher criticism
Generally speaking, this type of “criticism” deals with the
genuineness of the text. In and of
itself, it is not harmful. However, it
is in the area of higher criticism that liberalism has flourished. Higher criticism deals with authorship,
dates, literary style and structure of the text. It is in these areas that liberals have questioned the genuineness
of the authorship of many of the books of the Bible. Liberals have used the erroneous theories of higher criticism to
undermine the veracity of Scripture.
2.
Lower criticism
Lower criticism deals with the text of the Bible. It compares the various manuscripts (over
10,000 of them). It is concerned with
the text itself, not necessarily who wrote it or what it says. A more subtle approach of attacking the
Scriptures is to cast doubt on the text behind the translation.
C.
Various translations throughout history
1.
Non-English translations
2.
Early English translations
3.
Modern English translations
D.
KJV Controversy
1.
Broad Divisions of the Various Positions on the Bible
a)
Liberal: The Bible is a man-made book
b)
Neo-orthodox: The Bible becomes the word of God
c)
Neo-Evangelical: The Bible is errant
d)
Evangelical: The Bible is inerrant in the original but the
preferred text is the Nestle-Aland/Westcott-Hort editions. Thus, translations using that are superior.
e)
Various Positions Held by Fundamentalists as Delineated in
Point 3 Below
(1)
When we get to that point, I realize that there are many who
would not consider some of the positions as fundamentalist. However, there are those who claim to be
fundamentalists who hold the views espoused in number 3 below.
(2)
The views of fundamentalists have been grouped according to
their position on the KJV. This is due
to the fact that most of the debate about Scripture among fundamentalists
revolves around the position one takes on the KJV.
2.
Five Camps of KJV as delineated by Waite
a)
Those who like the KJV best,
b)
Those who support the KJV textually,
c)
Those who are Received Text only,
d)
Those who believe the KJV is inspired and inerrant,
e)
Those who believe the KJV is advanced or new revelation.
3.
My division of the positions on the KJV
Note #1:
See point 1e above for the thoughts given there. Fundamentalism has its various “factions.” These groups can be delineated by their
varying views on the following issues: Personal separation (women’s clothing,
men’s hairstyles, movies, contemporary music, etc); ecclesiastical separation
(Secondary separation, tertiary separation, etc.); soul-winning methods (To
what lengths do you go to get a crowd?); and most recently, the KJV.
Note #2:
It is helpful to take the points below and put them on a continuum with point
a being at the far right and point j at the far
left. (I realize that this lettering is
backwards. However, for the sake of
explaining the various positions I found it easier to start the explanations at
the far right and move left.) Below this you can make a second continuum
showing the positions of liberals to evangelicals from point 1a-d
above with the conservative evangelical position being on the far right and the
liberal position on the far left. If you do this, you will notice that the
positions to the left of the fundamentalist continuum will overlap with the positions on the right side of the
evangelical continuum. This will then
provide you with a continuum from liberal to extreme KJV with everything in
between.
Note #3: As a general rule, people tend to separate
from those who do not hold the same position on the KJV as they do. Those on the right will usually separate
from those who are to the left of them because from their perspective, anything
to the left is a compromise on the Word of God. Also, most try to distance themselves from the Ruckmanism or at
least from Ruckman himself. Remember,
this is not a hard fast rule, just a generalization.
Note #4: Whenever I read someone on an issue, if
possible, I like to know where he or she stands on that issue. It gives me better feel for what they are
saying. So, for those of you who want
to know where I stand before going on, I am at position d & e below.
Note #5:
There are two issues involved in the debate.
The first is the textual issue:
Which text underlying the translation is best? This deals with arguments over the Received Text, Majority Text,
and the Eclectic Text. The second issue
is that of translation. What is the
best philosophical method of translation? Is it word for word, idea for idea,
thought for thought, grammatical equivalency, dynamic equivalency, thought
equivalency? Thus, it is possible to
hold to a correct view about translation philosophy and an incorrect view on
the text. It is also possible to be
correct on the text and wrong on the translation philosophy. In dealing with people, it helps to know
where they are on these two issues.
Note #6: Those who hold to positions b-e below will
argue that God preserved His Word in the Received Text. Any other position would leave us with some
doubt as to what is actually the preserved word of God. Those who hold to positions f - j hold that
the MANNER of God’s preservation is not spelled out in Scripture. In other words, God has left the MANNER of
preservation open to debate. They will
then argue for the belief that the MANNER God used to preserve His Word is
through the multitudes of manuscripts available rather than through the line
that gave us the Received Text.
a)
It is advanced or new revelation
This is the view of Peter Ruckman, often called
Ruckmanism. His view is that the KJV is
advanced revelation and that it replaces the Greek and Hebrew texts. This view confuses inspiration and
preservation. Ruckman himself is a
brilliant man with a photographic memory and great artistic ability. However, he is also very coarse and
mean-spirited in his language. Anyone
who disagrees with his position is literally of the devil out to undermine the
Word of God. He will call them all
kinds of names, rationalizing that He is doing God’s work by “outing” the
sissies who don’t believe in the pure Word of God. He is a twisted, yet brilliant man who is wrong in both his
position and his demeanor.
b)
It is inspired and inerrant along with the original text
This view holds that it is possible for there to be more
than one inspired text. Namely, that it
is possible to have an inspired text in Greek as well as in English or any
other language. This view states that
it is possible to have God’s Word INSPIRED and PRESERVED in several languages
at one time. This would mean that each
language would only have one official text and in the English it is the
KJV. Again, this view seems to confuse
inspiration and preservation. If God
preserves something, He preserves the original; He doesn’t make a new Word in a
different language.
c)
It is the ONLY English translation which is the Word of God
This view is similar to that above but it doesn’t go so far
as to say that the KJV is inspired, only that it is PRESERVED.
d)
It is inerrant, but could have changes such as replacing
“charity” with “love”
(1)
There are NO mistakes in the KJV
(2)
The KJV is a correct translation of the RT and is therefore
the inspired Word of God.
(3)
There are some words which could be changed without
affecting the inerrancy of the KJV
(4)
This is the view of David Cloud. He has a lot of helpful literature on the subject at his website http://wayoflife.org/~dcloud/
(5)
While it may be possible to make changes (realizing that you
are not changing an error but making the text clearer), it may not be
desirable to do so
(a)
Just because you could make a change does not mean you should
make a change
(b)
When you make an acceptable change, you open the door to
making UNACCEPTABLE changes
(c)
The same approach is to leave the text as it is and explain
obscure passages rather than change them to make them less obscure
e)
Received text only
(1)
The KJV is the best English translation of the received text,
but is inspired only as it correctly translates the Received text
(2)
Preservation is in the Received text, not necessarily in the
translated text
(3)
Inspiration is in the originals
(4)
The preserved text insures that we continue to have the Word
of God
(5)
Inspiration passed on to a translation is only as good as the
translation reflects what was written (i.e., the accuracy of the translation)
(6)
The Received Text is the correct text. It is the preserved Word of God. A translation of this text is the Word of
God if it accurately translates the received Text.
(7)
As an illustration, before the KJV was translated, God’s Word
was preserved somewhere, i.e. the Received Text. When the translators finished their work, PRESERVATION did not
jump from the RT to the KJV. The RT was
still the preserved word of God and the KJV was a correct translation of the
preserved Word.
(8)
This position allows for other translations as long as they are
accurate renditions of the RT.
f)
Majority text proponents
(1)
Often people who speak of the majority text actually mean the
received text and vice versa. There are
a few minor differences but many combine the two positions as being one
position
(2)
This view holds that God has preserved His Word in the
Majority Text rather than the Received Text or the Eclectic text.
g)
Those who think it is the best translation
(1)
Those in this camp do not argue over the text, holding that
the differences between the RT, MT, and ET are actually minor and do not damage
major doctrines
(2)
They do think that the KJV is still the best translation to
use based on its accuracy, beauty, and tradition
h)
Those who just like the it best, but may not agree that it is
the best translation or the only usable translation
(1)
These like the KJV best for its beauty and memorization
possibilities
(2)
They often do not want to change for the fear of the
consequences of change and that it may bring with it other undesirable changes
(3)
They use the KJV but think that other translations may
actually be better. For example, in
college and seminary I was taught to use the KJV but that my study Bible should
be the NASB because of its literalness in translation.
i)
Those who argue for the other Greek texts as possibly being
superior to the received text
(1)
People in this category have not made up their mind on the
text issue. In fact, they may not want
to make up their mind.
(2)
They think that any “accurate” translation, even if it may be
of an inferior text, is sufficient.
(3)
They hold that many of the translations on the market are
acceptable and do not make an issue of which ones are used
j)
Those who argue that other translations are superior to the
KJV
(1)
Some based on the belief that the other Greek texts are
superior
(a)
They prefer the “older” manuscripts
(b)
They prefer the modern critical method of ascertaining the
original text
(2)
Some based on the belief that other translation philosophies,
styles, etc. are superior
(a)
They prefer a thought for thought translation arguing that it
is impossible perfectly translate from one language to another
(b)
They put the emphasis on readability, not accuracy when it
comes to translation
(i)
Thus, the NIV is superior to the KJV because the modern
English in it is supposed to be easier to read than the KJV
(ii)
This ignores that fact that the KJV actually has a lower grade
on the Flesch-Kincaid scale than the NIV
(iii)
They feel the NIV’s translation philosophy is superior also to
the KJV
4.
Arguments for KJV and the Received Text
a)
We need a sure word of God for today.
(1)
The originals are no longer available
(2)
Logic dictates that God’s word must be preserved somewhere
(3)
Therefore, it must be in the KJV
b)
The KJV is time-tested for its influence and the number saved
under its influence
c)
English is the worldwide language for today as Greek was in NT
times
d)
Rejecting the received text in favor of an eclectic text has
led to theological error and compromise
e)
The doctrine of
biblical preservation requires that we reject the modern texts and versions
based on the eclectic text.
f)
The theological apostasy which has characterized modern
textual criticism requires that we reject the modern texts and versions.
5.
Textual and Translational Issue
a)
As stated above, there are two issues involved: Which Greek
text and which translation philosophy
b)
The KJV passes both tests because it is a correct translation
of the right text
E.
Common Modern Version Arguments
1.