The "word of God"

Anyone know when this term and idea came about? The authors of the bible write about miracles, histories, visions, prophecies, etc but I'm not aware of any that claim to be inerrant or the inspired word of God. Seems like at least some of them would have claimed it if they thought and wanted others to know that they were writing on behalf of the creator of the universe. Seems an important detail an author would include right?

To put it another way, why do people claim the bible to be the word of God when the bible itself doesn't even make that claim?

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08045a.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02543a.htm

atlashunter said:

Anyone know when this term and idea came about? The authors of the bible write about miracles, histories, visions, prophecies, etc but I'm not aware of any that claim to be inerrant or the inspired word of God.

Click to expand...

You've never read this before?

2 Timothy 3:16

All scripture is given by inspiration of God ...

centerpin fan said:

You've never read this before?

2 Timothy 3:16

All scripture is given by inspiration of God ...

Click to expand...

Nope, hadn't seen that one before. I went and read the full passage. I could see two different understandings of that verse. One would be essentially that scripture is a means of conveying a verbatim message from God, ie the word of God. Another slightly different interpretation would be God gave a man some information to pass on and the scripture is that mans understanding of the information given in his words and in his fallible human way. Does that make sense? Word for word dictation with no distortion from going through the human mind the words of God. Or words "inspired" by God but still being conveyed by the best effort of the messenger. Assuming the former meaning, my question is then how does one identify what qualifies as scripture? Are there extra-biblical scriptures? Would all divinely inspired writing be scripture or is scripture a subset of all divinely inspired writing and if so how would someone make the distinction?

People are "inspired" by many different things. The thought of a god could inspire someone to write down a story in the way they think it would have been written by their god, or to please their god or just use the "inspired" wording to hook the readers. Because they are inspired does not mean that god whispered each word into their ear and they wrote it down. People see a TV commercial for a weight loss machine and are inspired to work out....

centerpin fan said:

You've never read this before?

2 Timothy 3:16

All scripture is given by inspiration of God ...

Click to expand...

All scripture was voted on by man as to what and what order it will make the bible and THEN was said to have been inspired by god. The similar writings written at the same time that told different outcomes than what the bible organizers wanted to say oddly didn't make it in. Man chose what was God inspired.

atlashunter said:

I could see two different understandings of that verse.

Click to expand...

How do you think the Christians and the Jews interpreted this passage (and similar passages in the OT)?

Obviously, God used men to record His words, but the people recognized that they were His words. Look at this passage from 2 Kings 23:

1 Then the king called together all the elders of Judah and Jerusalem. 2 He went up to the temple of the LORD with the people of Judah, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the priests and the prophets—all the people from the least to the greatest. He read in their hearing all the words of the Book of the Covenant, which had been found in the temple of the LORD. 3 The king stood by the pillar and renewed the covenant in the presence of the LORD—to follow the LORD and keep his commands, statutes and decrees with all his heart and all his soul, thus confirming the words of the covenant written in this book. Then all the people pledged themselves to the covenant.

Or just read Psalm 119 to see what David thought about scripture. In particular, look at verses 138, 152, and 160.

bullethead said:

People are "inspired" by many different things. The thought of a god could inspire someone to write down a story in the way they think it would have been written by their god, or to please their god or just use the "inspired" wording to hook the readers. Because they are inspired does not mean that god whispered each word into their ear and they wrote it down. People see a TV commercial for a weight loss machine and are inspired to work out....

Click to expand...

That's a separate issue. I was just answering atlashunter's question about where this "word of god" concept came from.

bullethead said:

All scripture was voted on by man as to what and what order it will make the bible ...

Click to expand...

Again, this is a separate issue, and it's just not true.

atlashunter said:

... my question is then how does one identify what qualifies as scripture?

Click to expand...

I don't think the Hebrews had a problem distinguishing what was scripture. It was the writings of Moses and the prophets. For the early church, it was the writings of the apostles or their associates (like Luke, for example.)

centerpin fan said:

Again, this is a separate issue, and it's just not true.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, news to me...

from:http://www.gotquestions.org/canon-of-Scripture.html

"Most questions about which books belong in the Bible dealt with writings from the time of Christ and forward. The early church had some very specific criteria in order for books to be considered as part of the New Testament. These included: Was the book written by someone who was an eyewitness of Jesus Christ? Did the book pass the “truth test”? (i.e., did it concur with other, already agreed-upon Scripture?). The New Testament books they accepted back then have endured the test of time and Christian orthodoxy has embraced these, with little challenge, for centuries."

centerpin fan said:

I don't think the Hebrews had a problem distinguishing what was scripture. It was the writings of Moses and the prophets. For the early church, it was the writings of the apostles or their associates (like Luke, for example.)

Click to expand...

Once the New Testament surfaced the OT was thought of as outdated Mosaic Law. Which is what I would have done if I started a "new" religion, tell all that will follow that the "old" stuff no longer applies. And there you have the difference between what the Christians and Jews believe.

This:

bullethead said:

"Most questions about which books belong in the Bible dealt with writings from the time of Christ and forward. The early church had some very specific criteria in order for books to be considered as part of the New Testament. These included: Was the book written by someone who was an eyewitness of Jesus Christ? Did the book pass the “truth test”? (i.e., did it concur with other, already agreed-upon Scripture?). The New Testament books they accepted back then have endured the test of time and Christian orthodoxy has embraced these, with little challenge, for centuries."

Click to expand...

... is not the same as this:

bullethead said:

All scripture was voted on by man ....

Click to expand...

Your statement in post # 7 is incorrect, but I have no problem with the link you posted.

centerpin fan said:

I don't think the Hebrews had a problem distinguishing what was scripture. It was the writings of Moses and the prophets. For the early church, it was the writings of the apostles or their associates (like Luke, for example.)

Click to expand...

Yet you think Jews have a problem identifying the books of the New Testament as scripture. How can that be? If they could get it wrong on the NT then how is it not possible that they got it wrong with the OT and how is it not possible that you got it wrong on the book of Mormon? Or that the gnostics had it right on some points that have since been rejected? The muslims think that Mohammed was given scripture from God and that this was the final word. But you reject those scriptures. If there were an all powerful being with such a hugely important message to convey to humanity do you think they would do it in such a messy and confusing way?

From here; http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/bible/bernstein_who_gave_nt.htm

"Sometimes it is easy to overlook the obvious. Take, for instance, the New Testament. Even though every Christian really knows better, it is easy to forget that the New Testament was not written as one continuous book. Rather, it is a collection of twenty-seven shorter writings which were penned by a variety of authors at differing times and geographical locations and compiled much later. Nowhere in the New Testament do we find a list of what books belong in the New Testament. The “canon” of Scripture is, of course, not “scriptural.”

This brings up anther important question which may not be so obvious. Who, then, decided which books should be included in the New Testament canon and which ones left out?

As a Jewish convert to Christianity via evangelical Protestantism, I once refused to acknowledge that the Church had anything to do with compiling the New Testament. I wanted to believe God chose and collected these books without human involvement. The books, I assumed, somehow validated themselves beyond all reasonable doubt, and early Christians merely recognized their obvious scriptural status.

Though there is some degree of truth in this position, it is by itself naive and unbalanced. The history of early Christianity clearly reveals that God used His Church, composed of flesh-and-blood Christians, as active participants in the process of selecting and establishing the New Testament canon, just as He used real people—with feelings, emotions, unique backgrounds and perspectives—to write the twenty-seven separate books."

bullethead said:

Once the New Testament surfaced the OT was thought of as outdated Mosaic Law.

Click to expand...

Then why was the Septuagint the "bible" of the early church? Paul and others like Apollos preached from the OT to prove that Jesus was the Messiah. The NT is the fulfillment of the OT.

This:

bullethead said:

http://www.gotquestions.org/council-of-Nicea.html

Click to expand...

... is not this:

bullethead said:

All scripture was voted on by man ...

Click to expand...

From the article:

Once the Nicea Council meeting was underway Constantine demanded that the 300 bishops make a decision by majority vote defining who Jesus Christ is

Nicea had nothing to do with the canon of Scripture. It was about Arianism which had to do with the identity of Jesus.

atlashunter said:

Yet you think Jews have a problem identifying the books of the New Testament as scripture.

Click to expand...

No, I think the Jews don't believe Jesus is the Messiah foretold in their scriptures.