Tag Archives: Shepherds Conference 2015

Shepherds Conference 2015, Sinclair Ferguson, “The Holy Spirit and Inerrancy”

07 Saturday Mar 2015

Posted by in Bibliology, Christology, John, Pneumatology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Sinclair Ferguson
The Holy Spirit & Inerrancy

John 14:15–17 (ESV)

15 “If you love me, you will keep my commandments. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, 17 even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.

(The Spirit who had dwelt in and on Jesus would come to the believers at Pentecost. There is no other Spirit who indwells the believer.)

John 14:15–31 (ESV)

15 “If you love me, you will keep my commandments. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, 17 even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.
18 “I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. 19 Yet a little while and the world will see me no more, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. 20 In that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you. 21 Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.” 22 Judas (not Iscariot) said to him, “Lord, how is it that you will manifest yourself to us, and not to the world?” 23 Jesus answered him, “If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. 24 Whoever does not love me does not keep my words. And the word that you hear is not mine but the Father’s who sent me.
25 “These things I have spoken to you while I am still with you. 26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you. 27 Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid. 28 You heard me say to you, ‘I am going away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I. 29 And now I have told you before it takes place, so that when it does take place you may believe. 30 I will no longer talk much with you, for the ruler of this world is coming. He has no claim on me, 31 but I do as the Father has commanded me, so that the world may know that I love the Father. Rise, let us go from here.

 

John 15:26–27 (ESV)

26 “But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me. 27 And you also will bear witness, because you have been with me from the beginning.

John 16:12–15 (ESV)

12 “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. 14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. 15 All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.

John 17:8 (ESV)

8 For I have given them the words that you gave me, and they have received them and have come to know in truth that I came from you; and they have believed that you sent me.

John 20:30–31 (ESV)

30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

The Scriptures Come to Us as a Gift of the Holy Trinity:

When our fathers spoke about the Trinity, they noted two basic truths of the Trinity’s communication to human beings & creation. When God does something all three persons of the Trinity are operative: such as in incarnation, the sending of the Spirit. The external works of the Trinity are indivisible.

Doctrine of the Appropriations: Each person of the Trinity engages in work in a unique way. Only the Son died; only the Father can be praised for sending him.

[[opera ad extra (Lat., works to the outside) Also, notae externae. Activities and effects by which the Trinity is manifested outwardly. They include creation, preservation, and government of the universe as a function of the Father; redemption as a function of the Son; and inspiration, regeneration, and sanctification as a function of the Holy Spirit.
opera ad intra (Lat., works to the inside) Also, notae internae. Immanent and intransitive activities of the Trinity or actions which the three persons of the Trinity exercise toward one another, such as the eternal generation of the Son and the Procession of the Holy Spirit. — Nelson’s Dictionary]]
The same principles apply to the creation of the Scripture.

The Appointment of the Apostles:

These men were called to be eyewitnesses to the acts of Jesus. They in particular received the Holy Spirit to become the prophets, the spokesmen of Jesus for the New Age: New Age, new prophets (the apostles).

Three Aspects of How Jesus Sends the Spirit to the Apostles; particularly in relations to their writing Scriptures.

First: The sending of the Spirit to the Apostles is for the purpose to give the Word to the Church. John 13 through the end is sometimes called the book of glory (as opposed to the book of signs). Calvin: the other gospels show us Christ’s body; John shows us Christ’s soul.

Judas has gone out into the night; Jesus can now bare his soul to those whom he will not lose.

Jesus tells the Apostles that he is sending the Spirit so that they can give the word of truth to the church. The Son will ask the Father to send the Spirit.

As Peter alludes in his sermon, Pentecost is the evidence of a hidden event of God: What they see is the Son asking the Father, who gives the nations to the Son, sending the Spirit.

When the Spirit comes he will take what the Father has given to the Son.

This passage in John shows not merely salvation but also bibliology.

Stage One: Jesus is giving them the Spirit to empower them to be his spokesmen. The Spirit will come to empower the apostles to his disciples.

Notice the Amen statement: 13:16 & 20,
John 13:20 (ESV)

20 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever receives the one I send receives me, and whoever receives me receives the one who sent me.”

This is the pattern of a prophet: When Moses speaks, it is God who speaks. When Aaron speaks, it is Moses spokes.

Sheliam: (sending) was as the man himself.

This is seen in the story of those [the man] who went to Jesus for the Centurion’s servant. A man who spoke as sent for another spoke as the man himself — thus, that man himself spoke. Analogy: power of attorney.

The Apostles have the power of attorney (so to speak).

That is why we are not embarrassed at
John 20:23 (ESV)

23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld.”

We see this in how Jesus relates to the Father: Jesus is sent as the representative of the Father. The Spirit is another parakelet, of the same sort as Jesus.

Stage Two: The Spirit comes to the apostles to give the New Testament to the Church.

John 14:26,

But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.

16:13, while he the Spirit not speak on his own authority? He is God. The pattern of sending.

16:12

“I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.
Jesus is going to speak to the apostles later through the Spirit.

Jesus is not speaking to us or about us at this time, because we were not there.

The Spirit is going to come and he is going to breathe out Scripture through you (not me).

There is an economic unity with the Spirit and the Son as to Scripture.

There are many things you still need to learn. My Spirit will be to you as I have been to you.

Stage Three: The Spirit comes as the Spirit of Truth: which guarantees the truthfulness, the inerrancy of what he gives to the Church.

Jesus repeatedly refers to the Spirit of Truth.

The Spirit of Truth who the world cannot know, receive.

The Spirit will bear witness about me.

As the Spirit of Truth he will lead the apostles into all truth.

Jesus sends the apostles into the world with the words.

The possibility that the Spirit lied to the apostles is the same possibility as the Father lying to the Son or the Son lying to the apostles.

Jesus affirms the inerrancy of the OT. He then sends his apostles to show that the OT prophecy was fulfilled in him. How could we possibly think that Jesus would send them to write an errant Scripture.

Think of the fact the Spirit killed those who lied to him (Acts 5): could he have possibly lied to the Church through the apostles. The Holy Spirit has no bad breath, my brothers.

Stage Four: It is this work of the Spirit that Jesus’ prayer in John 17 makes effectual in the apostles and in the world.

17:8, I am praying for them — the ones the Father has given to them.

What is it: I have given them the words
18: as you sent me into the world, with your words, so I have sent them into the world with my words.

And then asks for those who will believe in Jesus through the apostles’ words.

Stage Five: John understands that his Gospel is answer to Jesus’ prayer.

These things are written : gegrapthi, the language which is used of Scripture: the Gospel is calling itself Scripture.

Jesus gives the Spirit & the Word. These things are written that you may believe through this Word.

The idea that the apostles were ignorant of the fact that they were giving Scripture to the NT is utterly indefensible on the basis of the what NT says of itself.

What a moment it must have been for John as he was writing the Gospel: he is writing that Jesus’ prayer was answered through John’s Gospel.

Father to Son words, Son sends the Spirit to the apostles, who themselves the words started from the Father: he is writing and seeing Jesus’ prayer answered. What John as given to the Church is the word of Truth — which is as reliable as any word the Father has spoken to the Son.

The Scripture’s very existence is to depend upon a theology of inerrancy.

it is not just the integrity of the Scriptures is at stake; rather the very integrity of the relationships within the Trinity. The Father does not lie to the Son.The Son does not lie to the Spirit. The Spirit does not lie to the apostles. This knowledge underscores the authority of the apostles’ writing.

That is why Paul says that we can “take note of that person”. How does have that arrogance: it is not Paul’s authority but rather the Father’s, Son’s Spirit’s.

Application:

One’s conviction that the Scripture is God-breathed and utterly without error comes through in the way in which one preaches.

It transforms those who gaze through the unveiled words, the inerrant word.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating thereof.

[His mother on why they could not have sugar on their porridge but rather had salt: Because that’s the way the English eat it.]

Inerrancy matters because it honors the Spirit who glorifies the Son who glorifies the Father.

Shepherds Conference 2015, Ian Muarry, “Attacks on the Word of God” (The New Apologetic)

07 Saturday Mar 2015

Posted by in Bibliology, Church History

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , ,

Ian Murray
Attacks on the Word of God

Attacks follows rest.

In February 1954, a student at Durham University: I was having a first hand experience of an attack on the word of God. A Critical History of Free Thought in Reference to the Christian Religion: a Bampton lecture, 1862. It was before the open onslaught of the word of God in English. It was 700 pages of summaries of attacks on the Word of God. What I learned was that attacks on the Word of God are as old as fallen man.

To understand those attacks is to understand history.

Why was Israel so attacked? They have been given revelation from Heaven. He hath not dealt well with any other nation. What advantage has the Jew? To them was given the Word of God. The apostolic age: what was the cause of the persecution? For the word of God (Rev.). Paul, we are delivered unto death for Jesus’ sake. Why? Because of the Word of God. Rev: those who were slain for the Word of God.

The Reformation: William Tyndale burnt to death because he translated the Word of God into the English language. Twenty years later, John Rodgers, had translated Scripture and put on trial, before bishop Gardener. Any example of the Roman church acting contrary to the Scripture: 1 Cor. 14: the Word of God was not given to them in their own language. Bishop returns: You can prove nothing by Scripture; it needs a living exposition. The Church must determine what is to believed; the Scripture is dead.

Rather: all men of any sort must obey the Word of God. In 1554 Rodgers was put to death.

etc.

Voltaire’s goal was to attack Scripture. Paine: the rights of man, I have gone through the Bible as a man does go through the wood with an ax in his hand.

More devastating and long lasting than the earlier attacks is the present attack. It did not arise in the form of an attack; it arose in the form of being for the Bible and for Christianity.

During the 19th Century there was much advance: the onward evolutionary advance of mankind. This idea comes to biblical studies and the various higher critical attacks. The Christians responded with, this is mere unbelief.

In the 1880’s: we shouldn’t be too dismayed in the advances of scholarship. The best way to defend Christianity is to fall back on the real substance of the Scriptures. Don’t worry about the incidentals. Let’s us be sure to defend the kernel of Christianity. It was called the “New Apologetic.”

The powerhouse here was in the Free Church of Scotland. The Free Church was born out of an evangelical revival. It was a great missionary church. 1843. The New Apologetic found its home here.

William Roberston-Smith: student at Edinb and in Germany. At the age of 23 was made professor at the Universityy of Aberdeen. denied angels & demons Suspended. Followed by Marcus Dodds. published a sermon in 1877 on inspiration and revelation. We should hang onto the central truth. There are somethings we don’t need to defend. A theory of inspiration has made the Bible an offense to honest men … dishonors God. It is a heresy. Tried and not condemned. George Adam Smith took over Robertson-Smith’s chair.

Why were they permitted in and kept? They came in as absolutely orthodox. They came forward in the name of the Gospel. Secondly, they were able young men. The opposition they encountered was from the older (traditionalist). They understood the “modern mind”.

The heart of their persuasiveness: we are going to bring the people and the churches closer to Christ. We are all travelers and we need signposts; the Bible is a signpost. We not only have signposts, we have Christ-himself. We don’t need a book to stand in the way.

It is amazing the evangelical men who went down before this thinking. William Fullerton who wrote a biography of Spurgeon.

In 1925 Glover became president of the Baptist Union, denied atonement and inspiration. Fullerton said of Glover’s election that Glover was a prophet sent among us.

Error is a very persuasive thing.

Don’t think we will not be tricked. If the Holy Spirit not keep we will all be carried away.

What was the fatal mistake? Let’s keep the heart of the matter, and not be concerned with secondary thing. The Bible is infallible — but not all the Bible is infallible — it is only the heart, the kernel which we are going to defend. But which part is the kernel? Until this time, the only question was What does the Word of God say? Now it was, What is the heart of the Word.

So the Flood, Daniel, Job are incidental. But Jesus authenticated all these things.

So what do we say of the testimony of Jesus Christ? He affirmed these things. Well then what part of Jesus’ testimony receive. So we come to, We don’t accept everything from Christ. My words will not pass away: well only some of the words. To believe all that Moses and the prophets said, “Some of the words.”

So then we must come to the historic Christ; then we will know what Jesus said.

This leads to Strauss: we don’t know the historical Jesus.

Marcus Dodds said, I am willing to give up Scriptures as long as I kept Christ.

Princeton Univ professor: which Christ? Which historical reconstruction.

Marcus Dodds as an old man, 1907: in a private letter to a friend. The Churches won’t know themselves 50 years hence. It is to be hoped that some little rag of faith will left when all is done.

The New Apologetic had brought the faith down to a rag of faith.

Dr. Moody-Stuart: the Word of the Lord is pure. And out of this trial, it will come forth in all its brightness as silver out of the fire. But in the meantime, our children may lose the treasure we were to bequeath them. It may be [many years before they recover]

Horatius Bonar: the extent of the mischief no one can calculate: a church without a faith .. a world without faith. What is to be their future … when faith goes all things go; when unbelief comes in, all things follow.

Ian Murray went to a church preached by George Adam-Smith. Now it is a splendid building with the doors shut on the Lord’s Day. They have taken away the word of the Lord (Jeremiah) oh that my head were fountain of tears.

The Evil One came and this is the result. The disaster hit Britain then spread world-wide. That Free Church of Scotland was a great missionary church. When this unbelief came, it killed the roots of missionary endeavor.

In 1920’s an attempt was made to halt unbelief on the field. In 1922 an appeal was made to the Church Board that no missionary should be sent out who did not commit themselves to the full trustworthiness of the Scripture.

Madchen in 1932 appealed to the missions board of the denomination not to send out missionaries who are not committed to the authority of Scripture. Madchen documented the work in China were they had approved material which denied the resurrection. A book which had a young girl say of the OT, that was before God was a Christian.

Madchen then formed another missionary agency within the Church. He was commanded to disband his other missionary society: they defrocked him.

The Chinese were saying don’t send us any missionaries who are fundamentalist, send us those with this modern knowledge.

The opponents would say that this controversy of verbal inspiration: the traditionalist and new apologetic.

That is false. It was not doctrine of verbal inspiration: they didn’t like what the Bible said. The real objections on the content of the revelation & inspiration — it was not doctrine per se.

The natural man does not want such a revelation: it condemns his sin.

At the heart of this attack was hatred of the Gospel itself.

They were really asking, How can we make the Bible acceptablee to the world at large. Let us cut out everything which humbles man. In the end, there was no real knowledge left.

** These men who introduced these falsehoods, were they planning on doing what they actually did: ruin churches, ruin missionary societies. No.

They were actually being deluded by the god of this world; they were being led by someone whom they did not actually believe existed.

MLJ: One of the main troubles with Church is that we do not believe in the devil’s existence.

Two marks of the Devil’s Work:
First, the Devil always wants us to idolize man.
This is easy to do. The poison of pride. What is the cause of apostasy? Pride. Pride praises men. These were very able men and their friends told them that.

“A good faithful minister doesn’t want to be applauded.”

Second, the devil works by the evasive, devious: he doesn’t come in his own dress.

Conclusion

It is a very serious mistake when we do not divide between those who bow to the Scripture and those who do not. Hold the line, clearly. The only distinction I recognize (MLJ) those who submit to the word of God and those who do not.

Second, we are dealing with the supernatural; therefore, we must respond with supernatural power. We need power from Heaven. The sons of Sceva think they will try their hands at this, and they are thrashed by the devil. Jesus we know, and Paul we know, but who are you? We must have spiritual power: we must be prayerful, humble men.

Third, it my encouragement to see you young men. Don’t be distracted, don’t be drawn onto secondary things. We will give ourselves to prayer and the ministry of the Word.

Wesley, I am a creature of a day …. I want to know one thing, the way to heaven ….Give me that book, at any price give me that book … let me be the man of one book.

Shepherds Conference 2015: Derek Thomas on 2 Peter 1:16-21

06 Friday Mar 2015

Posted by in Bibliology

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

Derek Thomas
2 Peter 1:16–21 (ESV)

16 For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” 18 we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. 19 And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, 20 knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. 21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

John Wesley said, If there is one error in the Bible, there may as well be a thousand. If there is one falsehood, it did not come from the God of truth.

I believe that. I was 18; math, physics major
At 18, my best friend sent me a copy of Stott, Basic Christianity. Within a few days I was on my knees asking God to save me. The text in that book that came to me like a hammer: Come to me all ye who are weary and heavy laden and I will give you rest.

I was at RTS when Lindsell came out. It was a required text.

What is the Bible. 750,000 words in Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, poetry, letters, sermons, treaties, travel narratives, Gospel, apocalyptic, songs, prayers, inventories, et cetera. All of it God’s breathed-out Word, the breath of God.

All Scripture is God breathed out; it is the breath that you can see. When God breathes out what do you get? Scripture.

Peter is writing out in the midst of false teachers of immoral lives

Three Things:

What does Peter say the Bible is?

God’s Word written through human instrumentality.
Men spoke from God.
Men from various backgrounds, different style, different
Paul always right about everything. Can you imagine going up to Paul asking him whether he has an opinion about something and he says, “I don’t know.”
Examples of all the differences of styles and structures throughout the Scripture.

Revelation is not flat. It is progressive and developmental. Even within a single man. Compare Paul in Galatians and 2 Timothy. He has not changed any theology but he writes differently.

Compare 1 & 2 Peter.
Men wrote the Bible. You can see them and hear them, their personalities and backgrounds.

But you can’t apply to err is human.

How is the Bible Written Through Human Instrumentality
No prophecy comes from one’s own interpretation. It does not come from someone making it up. Even if we limit this to specific interpretations, he is making the point that it is part of Scripture. These prophecies are true because they are Scripture.

No prophecy was ever produced: source. In v. 17 the source of the voice was heavenly.

Men spoke as they were carried along; like the ship in Acts 27 was driven along by the wind. The motion of the ship has everything to do with the wind.

Somehow the men’s personalities are seen and yet they were carried along so that they would write what God intends for them to write. When Scripture speaks, God speaks.

Issue: Is this dictation? No & yes. At times there was dictation: the ten commandments, the 7 letters in Revelation. Sometimes wrote with astonishing informality. Hebrews 2, It is has been testified somewhere.

How can God superintend men to bring about inerrant Scripture? By a doctrine of providence. It is as God accomplishes his will with human beings in any other category of life.

“Denials of inerrancy are eruptions of pride in rebellion to the sovereignty of God in the life of a human being.”

Human instrumentality through the Sovereign intention of God throughout all its production. The Bible is as God intends it to be.

To What Extent Can we Be Certain that the Bible is God’s Word Written?

Men spoke from God: that’s the Bible’s view of itself.
Peter is first of all speaking of the OT. But you turn to 2 Peter 3 and Paul’s writing is hard to understand. [I don’t understand what Paul is talking about with women’s head coverings]. Paul is on the level of Scripture. Peter is already recognizes the authority of Paul’s writing.

Today we are facing the contention of human language to convey divine truth. Post modernism’s attack on words; words are unable to contain divine truth. But Peter says the language contains divine truth.

God speaks. We are in the image of God. We have the innate capacity to understand the truth. We may suppress it, but it gets through.

Why do I believe the Bible to be the Word of God? Jesus. When Jesus speaks, God speaks. He is divine & human; there is only one “he”. When Jesus speaks the Second Person of the Trinity speaks.

The Bible is God’s Word in men’s mouths.
Everything to which it speaks, however incidental is true.

Notice how the NT picks up on incidentals of the OT are picked up. Constant small details are recounted and used.

Matt 22/Mark 12 authorship of Psalm 110 as David. The superscription is the basis of the argument.

Those who argue
The Bible is divine spirated and exactly as God intends it to be — and contains all sorts of human (intended) errors.
Peter, Men wrote as they were carried along by the Spirit. The relationship between the divine & human authorship is not symmetrical — just as it in all of God’s Providence:
Think of how great the Mount of Transfiguration. You think the way to be sure is an experience, a vision; Paul in 2 Corinthians 12. But Peter says, You have all the certainty you need right here in the Holy Scriptures.

to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place

What happens after night? Dawn. The day star rising, the Second Coming.

What have you got to help you through all of life’s difficulties? The Bible, to which you will do well to pay attention.

I have such a propensity in my hear to accommodate my sins. Heresy brings in immorality; immortality brings heresy. Are you tempted in your exposition to take the softer line because you conscience condemns you and your heart condemns you? You will do well to pay attention to Holy Scripture. It’s all you’ve got; and it’s all you need.

Our charge is believe that every word is fire.

Shepherds Conference 2015: Q & A Thursday 3:00 pm John MacArthur Albert Mohler, Mark Dever, Kevin DeYoung, Ligon Duncan

06 Friday Mar 2015

Posted by in Bibliology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

 

Q. John MacArthur: Evangelicals declared inerrancy settled in 1978, what happened?

These men were talking about inerrancy after the writing of the book, Five Views on Inerrancy. The climate had allowed that book to exist. There are many men who have started churches without adequate theological training, and they would not be able to deal with this problem. For many others, seeker, pragmatic, inerrancy didn’t really matter

Continue reading →

Shepherds Conference Q & A on Inerrancy (with Tim Challies)

04 Wednesday Mar 2015

Posted by in Apologetics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Q & A Session on Inerrancy (1:30)


What are some ways in which one who is well-meaning can misrepresent inerrancy?

Dictation theory

Flatten out scripture in such a way that one misinterprets or misapplies Scripture

Thinking of the Bible as a technical handbook say on scientific things. Inerrancy means that something is true albeit not “technical”

Recognizing genres of Scripture: don’t press hyperbole or round numbers. Inerrancy does not demand a particular degree of precision. I drove 20 miles is not untrue because I drove 21 miles.


What about variations in quotations of Jesus in the Gospels?

Possibilities: 

Perhaps two occasions

Perhaps two different statements

Distinguish between direct & indirect discourse.


Inerrancy: what we affirm is that the gospel writer has accurately portrayed Jesus’ words to the degree intended.


E.g., Quotations of Deut. 6:4-5 in the Gospel: each of the quotations is slightly different however each is accurate as to what was said.


We don’t have the autographs, so how can we know what the text is?

Look at the debates between Ehrman and Wallace or Ehrman and White.

The science of textual criticism. By means of this we can come to a very high degree of confidence as to the original. We have more confidence in the text of Scripture than any other ancient document

Jesus did not have the OT autographs, yet he was not shaken in his confidence in the errancy of the OT. 


Are we going to approach the Bible with confidence or suspicion: general discussion of one’s confidence and how it grew and changed.


Trueman: Scripture’s testimony itself, seeing how Scripture transforms people. I would not want to reduce my confidence to any particular factor. This does not mean that everything in Scripture is easy to believe. But there are times when it is hard to trust God [e.g., Job, Psalm 88]


Busenitz: proof, evidence is only enough to win an argument, not to create belief.


When we know someone who has read Ehrman, how do respond? 

Just because evidence does not create faith we can respond with evidence to reject certain arguments. In a pastoral confidence we will need to address such things for those who see their faith disturbed. 


Response, good book, The Heresy of Orthodoxy


Recognize that there are presuppositions on both sides of the table. Those who reject Scripture is not based solely upon “evidence”. Showing what lies beneath the surface. When we see a problem we see something to resolve, they see something which proves it is false.


Ultimately our faith is not in inerrancy. The worst thing we can do in a debate is leave without the Gospel


What is the strongest argument against inerrancy?

Technical arguments on texts & manuscripts where I don’t have expertise. In some circumstances the right answer is to refer the question to someone with expertise.


The genealogies and chronology in Chronicles and Kings, sometimes don’t know the resolution. There are issues that one can’t explain right now. 


Inerrancy is a negative term

Inerrancy is immediately on the defensive.

Is there a better term?


Infallibility would be better but it has been defined so broadly that does not capture all that we want to say. The word has been hijacked. Infallible actually means incapable of error. Now it merely means inerrant in certain areas.


“True” works. Trustworthy. 


Well-versed inerrancy (Van Hoozer), because even inerrancy is becoming ambiguous.


We must not reduce our doctrine of Scripture to mere inerrancy. Some of the concern of negativity comes from a too small doctrine of Scripture. Inerrancy may not be the biggest problem for a Christian in the pew. 


How did infallibility become hijacked.

The Scriptures are powerful & effective to those things that Scripture it was powerful & effective for. [Remember the inerrant power of Scripture.] Infallibility emphasized one point [power] and lost another.


Circular argument Inerrancy based upon the Bible claiming to be inerrant.

Sproul’s argument was quite good. 

We can’t get away completely from circularity. There are some things which we must presuppose to even consider the matter. 

Yet while their is some element of circularity it is not purely circular, there are other aspects of support. 

Every worldview must appeal to some authority. Christians appeal to a trinitarian authority, the revelation of God in Scripture & Christ. 


Depends upon the one asking: 

If Christians, I intend to state that the Bible is true and thus I appeal to the Bible as God’s revealed will. If I appeal to something else, then I implicitly set that as a higher authority. 

If unbelievers, their argument is usually just an excuse so I go to the Gospel


Can I deny inerrancy & be a Christian?

How does this doctrine rank?

One can be saved without ever hearing the Bible (strictly speaking)

Yet to not believe God’s Words puts one in the place of Genesis 3.

When I come across someone who is beginning to doubt inerrancy, I typically ask about their marriage or other potential area of besetting sin and seeking to justify sin.

Immorality leads to heresy.

Sometimes a presenting symptom is not the problem.


Six Day Creation

Must you hold to six day if one holds to inerrancy. 

These are not necessarily tied together. We must be careful not to tag my version of some view as the substance of inerrancy.

Warfield was not a six day creationist & was The inerrantist. 

This is an area where Christians may disagree. 

But when it comes to historical Adam, a rejection here would be a denial of inerrancy. 

Genesis 1 & 2 has been a long standing question, Genesis 3 is different. Old earth is not rejecting a truth claim of the Bible; it is an interpretative issue. 


Inerrancy is not used in the Bible. Why didn’t God give a clear definition of inerrancy?

This book is God’s Word. God cannot lie. God’s Word is truth.

The Bible is filled with ideas for which we have coined terms. 

Sometimes people hold the substance of the position as the same while the name differs. Sometimes the word “inerrancy” is used in a very different way than others would.

There are commonly caricatures of theology from which one runs away. Make sure we understand properly before we have an opinion.


Books on the Bible

One general, one scholarly


Packard: Fundamentalism and the Word of God

Warfield: Authority and Inspiration; Krueger, Canon Revisited; Thy Word is Still Truth


Geisler: Inerrancy

Michael Krueger


Five Views of Inerrancy [Mohler’s chapter]

Shepherds Conference 2015, Session 6

04 Wednesday Mar 2015

Posted by in Apologetics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Nunez, Session 5:

The Great Commission &  Its Relationship to Inerrancy:

He checked with experts in the area of missions and inerrancy, but he could not find any existing resource with which to begin.

Prayer: We are never more in need of grace than when we are in the pulpit.

Text:

16 Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them.

17 And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted.

18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

Matthew 28:16-20

Observations: 

The end of Matthew’s gospel, but the beginning of Jesus’ global work.

All authority in heaven & earth;

And, I am with you always.

v. 18: the highest Christology of the NT

He gave them an authority which could not fail because he supported it on the basis of his name.

It is hard to imagine that such a commission could be transmitted by a fallible word. If parts of the Bible are in error, then any part, including the Gospel, could be in error. How could we proclaim? E.g., 1 Corinthians 15:

1 Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand,

2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you-unless you believed in vain.

3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures,

1 Corinthians 15:1-3

Four Parts

Go therefor

To the ends of the world

Teaching them to observe

All that I have taught

Go Therefor

Jesus’ commanded his first evangelists on the basis of his increased authority. That authority was invested in his word.

Those sent need confidence in both the Sender and the Message. Any doubt as to either Sender of Message would call the procedure into doubt.

Could you imagine God sending out men with a corrupted message?

They were able to bring this message, because they had an absolute confidence in the power and trustworthiness of the message. Any question here would call into question the Name of God.

Any corruption, any question would call into question: the Sender, the Message [Word] and the Name of God.

If a missionary has some question about the message, they will easily retreat when confronted with a cultural challenge. 

Example: If Genesis 1 & 2 only provided a mythologized version of creation, then how can one contradict the mythological understanding of another? How can I say your creation story is in error if my story is in error?

If those who are being sent to proclaim the Gospel cannot be sure of the message, can they go passionately? Would they give their life for an error?  

By what moral authority could the missionary challenge the local culture? The Great Commission would become the Impossible Mission.

Many don’t really believe that the Gospel is sufficient and so rely upon gimmicks. The seeker church was a powerful example of this. The church growth movement moved out beyond the States.  

Peter Wagner was at the center of the church growth movement. He teaches at Fuller, which gave up inerrancy in 1971. Is it a surprise that those who questioned the Scripture would start rely upon other factors, like social science & psychology & marketing (rather than evangelism).

Unfortunately, the wrong was (often) built. 

Modernity invaded the church. Modernity questions the Scripture.

The harvest is plentiful, the workers are few. Therefore — what strategy? — pray. 

The disciples were instructed to wait & pray for power from above.

Jerusalem was soon filled with the story. Samaria was filled with joy; Ephesus was filled with conflict. All of this was done without modern strategy.

To the ends of the world

Some say that inerrancy is an American conflict: the clash between fundamentalism & modernism. We are told that we don’t need inerrancy outside the States. 

However, to say such a thing is to ignore church history & the current world.

Inerrancy is about truth: that is important anywhere. Truth & the Great Commission is universal.

We should rather ask, How is it important? Why is it important? in the local context. The circumstances may relate to the current in a different manner in different times & places; but truth is still relevant.

The relationship between inerrancy, inspiration, sufficiency, canon.

In the Global South the attack does not come from modernism, but rather from extra-biblical “revelation” — which attacks sufficiency & canon. An errant Bible opens the door to extra-biblical revelation & correction. In the North America, critics correct the Bible through “research”; in the South through “revelation”. 

How does one stand before a new “revelation” when the Bible is errant and the canon is not closed.  Both the North & the South have those who have reason to reject inerrancy to “correct” the Bible. 

In the South, we were taught that we could improve evangelism not with social science (as in the North) but through “power encounters” with resident demons. But Christ taught teach them to obey; Paul preach the Gospel — not rebuke demons. 

At the center of both Church Growth & Spiritual Warfare movement was Peter Wagner (Fuller). 

Once we give up inerrancy we chip away at sufficiency & authority — therefore we need to go social science or “spiritual warfare”.  The spiritual warfare language was not even used in this way until the 1990’s. Sarcastic: apparently the church was unable to really do its work before 1990’s. The Gospel was insufficient.

“Power Evangelism”: there are those who are training in signs & wonders to make a reception of the Gospel. No matter where one stands on such things, it is clear that such things are “gifts” and not something which can be learned in a seminar. 

When we begin to question the content of the message, we will begin to question the intent of the message.

We do not preach over the Bible, we preach from under it.

Make Disciples

This is the summary the Great Commission. This is the imperative, the other verbs are subordinate participles. 

The command is not to seek profession but rather a submission to the Lordship of Christ. 

Christ gives two assurances: 

All authority has been given to me

I will be with you always. 

E.g., Sermon on the Mt. 

Not one iota … will pass away until all has been fulfilled. 

We can count on the integrity of the word to the end. 

John: 10:34-35, the Scriptures cannot be broken. 

The pastor can anchor his word, he can work. But if there is a doubt, he could easily doubt the  promise of the Great Commission. 

As soon as one is saved we want to know the end. What do we tell new converts if we are unsure. 

How could the Thessalonians become so quickly established:

7 so that you became an example to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia.

8 For not only has the word of the Lord sounded forth from you in Macedonia and Achaia, but your faith in God has gone forth everywhere, so that we need not say anything.

9 For they themselves report concerning us the kind of reception we had among you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God,

10 and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.

1 Thessalonians 1:7-10

 And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers. 1 Thessalonians 2:13

The the Word is presented will determine the type [repeated, quality] of disciples we see.

What do we say, It is sometimes reliable? Or that the reliability depends upon integrity of the reader? Do we trust the Word of God of the authority of the critics? Think of what type of disciples we will see.

Teach them to observe all that I have commanded you

Obedience: We make disciples by teaching them to obey all. The obedience extends to “every last thing Jesus said.” Why such an absolute command? God-breathed Scripture. Inerrancy is about truth and the character of God.

Once you accept the possibility of midrash, myth, error, the Great Commission comes under doubt.

Inerrancy is necessary to protect the Gospel. Inerrancy is not directly part of the Gospel (union and communion), but it is necessary to proclaim the Gospel (obey all that I have commanded you). If he gives us a faulty word, we have faulty theology. A text with errors cannot require such comprehensive obedience. 

Many heresies are born on the mission field. Often this is because there is a loss of confidence in the Scripture, which came from a loss of confidence in the truthfulness of Scripture. E.g., liberation theology in Latin America. 

1 I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom:

2 preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching.

3 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions,

4 and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.

5 As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.

2 Timothy 4:1-5

Notice the connection between work of an evangelist & preach the word. This is how the work is done.

Let us not compromise at this time of ambivalence.  

[Take courage] We have his promise & his Name.

Shepherds Conference 2015, Session 4

04 Wednesday Mar 2015

Posted by in Bibliology, Church History

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Stephen Nicols

1 Thess. 2:9 et seq

And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers. 1 Thessalonians 2:13

“How Did We Get Here”

How did we get here talking about inerrancy? We already got here with the Chicago Statement in 1978.

Paul was not merely a relational pastor, he gave them words.
In John 17, Jesus tells the Father that he has accomplished his mission:
For I have given them the words that you gave me, and they have received them and have come to know in truth that I came from you; and they have believed that you sent me. John 17:8

How is this given now? First by apostles, now by pastor-teacher.

Paul: received, ἐδέξασθε

There was no end to the words of men in the 1st Century. Paul, we are not peddlers of the word.

Continue reading →

Shepherds Conference 2015, Session 2

04 Wednesday Mar 2015

Posted by in 2 Timothy, Preaching

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Alister Begg

All of you out their are thinking: Oh, I wish I were him … so that I could follow MacArthur and proceed Sproul.

2 Timothy 4:1 et seq.

Title is borrowed from Spurgeon’s sermon, “Christ and his co-workers.” The lion out of his cage. Let the lion and see who will dare approach him.

“Let the Lion Out”

The absolute priority of preaching. For what Timothy believes about the Scriptures will become apparent in his preaching.

Paul is not telling Timothy something new about the Scripture. Rather, Paul was reminding Timothy of a truth that he dare not forget.

The Scriptures are inspired, reliable, sufficient.

Paul writes that he was deserted and they will/may desert you. There was nothing from a human perspective that would give one to know that the church would survive to the second generation.

Timothy was working a context of confusion: moral and doctrinal, what to do and what to believe.

His charge
His challenge
Display of character

Continue reading →

Shepherds Conference 2015, Session 1

04 Wednesday Mar 2015

Posted by in Apologetics, Bibliology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Rough notes session 1, John MacArthur:

John MacArthur

Why are we having a summit on inerrancy?

I remember the meeting which gave rise to the Chicago Statement in 1978 (at which I was present). Led by Jim Boice. R.C. Sproul said of Boice’s death, it was God’s judgment on America.

On the return flight, I sat next to Robert Schuler. Schuler said, “I know who you are. God love’s you and I’m trying.” I was reading his book The New Reformation (open on my lap) and writing a review at that exact time. Schuler said, “I believe the Bible and make those words mean anything I want them to mean.”

It’s time to raise the standard of inerrancy of God at this time. Four reasons:

Continue reading →