S1: Do you have questions about the authority of the Bible?
S1: Would you like to know about the inspiration of Scripture?
S1: Is there evidence supporting the idea that I can trust
S1: the Bible? Well, you have come to the right place
S1: because today is a very special edition of Open Line
S1: with Doctor Michael Radonich. This is Moody Radio's Bible study
S1: across America. I'm Michael Radonich, and I'm the professor of
S1: Jewish studies at Moody Bible Institute. And I'm coming to
S1: you from the studios at Moody Bible Institute in Chicago.
S1: Thanks so much for joining me today on this special
S1: edition of Open Line. Well, what's so special about today?
S1: People often write to me and call and post on
S1: Facebook and send Twitter questions about the inspiration and authority
S1: of the scriptures. They want to know how we got
S1: the Bible. And so I thought I'd get two experts
S1: here to help me today. They're going to join me
S1: and you around the radio kitchen table, and we'll do
S1: our best to answer those questions today. Remember, don't call
S1: in today. This is a special pre-recorded edition of Open Line,
S1: but you can write by going to Open Line radio.org.
S1: That's our website open Line radio.org. You'll see as you
S1: scroll down there's a link that says Ask Michael a
S1: question and you can fill out a question there. Or
S1: there's also links to Facebook and email if that's how
S1: you want to communicate. Courtney Young is our engineer today.
S1: And joining us in the studio is producer of Open Line,
S1: Tricia McMillan. So go get your Bible and a cup
S1: of coffee and let's talk about the scriptures. As they say,
S1: you can't tell the players without a program. So let
S1: me give you the players today. Joining me today is
S1: Doctor Jim Coakley. Jim is professor of Bible at Moody
S1: Bible Institute, and he's a contributor to the Moody Bible Commentary. Welcome, Jim.
S2: Great to be with you, Michael.
S1: Okay, now I'm going to try to I'm going to
S1: try if you don't identify yourself as we're talking, I'm
S1: going to identify you a little bit so people will
S1: know the difference. That'd be great. Especially when you say
S1: something wrong. I'm going to say, oh, that was Jim. No, no,
S1: I'm not going to do that. Uh, also joining me
S1: is Doctor Steve Sanchez. He's a contributor to the Moody
S1: Bible Commentary, and he is a fellow New Yorker and
S1: fan of the New York Yankees.
S3: That's right. Go, Yankees! Yeah.
S2: That's right. Being outnumbered here. This is Jim. I'm being outnumbered.
S1: Well, yeah. It was so nice. Uh, Steve is from Brooklyn.
S3: That's right.
S1: And people often ask me where I'm from. I say
S1: I'm from the Holy Land, Brooklyn, New York, and that's it.
S1: So that's that's where I'm from. And it's so good
S1: to have, as we say in Yiddish, a landsman, a
S1: fellow countryman from Brooklyn, right here with me. So, anyway,
S1: I want to get right to it. Trish has done
S1: some help for us. She has compiled questions that our
S1: listeners have sent in, and that's great. She's going to
S1: join in in a little bit. I didn't even say
S1: hello to Trish. Welcome, Trish. Thank you. Yeah. Trish is here. Trish.
S1: She's a regular voice on Open Line. You know her?
S1: She's pulled together the questions and but I want to
S1: just start with a little discussion and then Trish will
S1: jump in with some questions that people have sent in.
S1: When we talk about the Bible, we say it is
S1: God's inspired word. A lot of people say that Shakespeare
S1: is inspired. You know what? An inspired author. So what
S1: do we mean when we're talking about biblical inspiration?
S2: Well, I think the notion, I think many of us
S2: learned Doctor Charles Ryrie definition of inspiration. So that's a
S2: very common definition. It's God's superintendence of the human authors
S2: of Scripture, so that using their own individual personalities, they
S2: compose and recorded without air his revelation to man. In
S2: the words of the original autographs.
S1: That's great, that's great. I had to memorize that twice
S1: in my life.
S2: I remember I had to relook at that now because
S2: I have to review that. But it's a great definition.
S1: Let's start with the idea that God superintended human authors
S1: and then so that they would produce without error, God's word. Right?
S1: That's it. But they did it in their own personalities,
S1: their own styles. That's what it's talking about.
S3: That's right. If people have in their mind a dictation
S3: theory that God is saying words and someone is there
S3: like a scribe writing them down as they come. That's
S3: not what we're talking about when we suggest super intention.
S3: God's in control. They are his words, inasmuch as he's
S3: in control. But he's working through the people who are
S3: getting these words down onto papyrus.
S1: Or manuscripts.
S3: Or manuscripts or other kinds.
S2: Or clay tablets.
S3: Or clay tablets.
S2: Stone tablets.
S1: So let's go to the two key passages, I think,
S1: from the New Testament that deal with inspiration and superintendents.
S1: There's a good word for it. The first passage is
S1: second Timothy 316. And so you hear the pages turning.
S1: We're having our little Bible study here, and that's where
S1: it says that all Scripture is inspired. The word inspired
S1: God breathed the stars.
S2: Remember learning that in Greek class?
S1: Yeah. And I remember, uh, the most basic idea is
S1: that this Bible has been God breathed, the text of
S1: Scripture has been God breathed. And that's the thing I
S1: want to really distinguish. How is this different from, as
S1: I said before, Shakespeare?
S3: That's right. The issue is source. Yeah. The authority of
S3: the Word of God is bound up in the fact
S3: that he is the author of Scripture. When we look
S3: at Shakespeare, we read that and we say, oh, that's
S3: so inspiring to me. I want to be different. This
S3: is a wonderful piece of literature. We might have that
S3: reaction when we read the Word of God, but that's
S3: not where its authority comes from. He is the author.
S3: It's out of his mouth. It's literally God breathed and
S3: therefore it has authority.
S1: So it's a divine human book. That's right. God is
S1: the divine author. That's right of Scripture. And now when
S1: we talk about inspiration, what is inspired?
S2: Well, we talk about inspiration. We're not talking about the
S2: we're talking about God's Word doing it. And it's not
S2: necessarily the people. It's now kind of the words that
S2: come out through God's breathing breath into the into the.
S1: It's the text of Scripture.
S2: The text of Scripture.
S1: It's the Bible that's inspired. So often we think it's
S1: the writers that inspired, you know, the inspired author said, no,
S1: we have nothing in the Bible that says authors are inspired.
S1: We only say the inspired text of Scripture. So from
S1: Genesis to Revelation, what I think we have to be
S1: really clear about is that the text of Scripture is
S1: what is inspired. It is the very words of Scripture.
S1: It's what we call theologians have called verbal inspiration. It's
S1: inspiration down to the words Paul wrote.
S3: Other things that we don't have.
S1: If you find his grocery list, what are you gonna do?
S3: It's not inspired. Yeah. That's right. If it were, that
S3: would be suggesting that Paul has some authority on his own. Yeah,
S3: but he doesn't. Only the words of God through him
S3: onto this text.
S2: It is interesting that there are references to other writings
S2: that the apostles wrote, and yet we don't have their remaining.
S1: For there was another letter to the Corinthians. That's very clear. Right.
S1: But that was not accepted as the authoritative word of God,
S1: and it was never included in Scripture. And if we
S1: found it today, it'd be a nice thing to find.
S1: It wouldn't be part of the Bible.
S2: It wouldn't be part of the Bible. Exactly.
S1: Okay, so that's the what of inspiration? It is the
S1: text of Scripture. The how of inspiration is in the
S1: other key passage that we want to talk about. And
S1: that's second Peter 121 where it says, uh, that men
S1: were moved. I'm going to read this whole little section here,
S1: beginning with verse 20, and I'm going to ask you
S1: guys to kind of chime in here on what this means.
S1: First of all, you should know this. No prophecy of
S1: Scripture comes from one's own interpretation, because no prophecy ever
S1: came by the will of man. Instead, moved by the
S1: Holy Spirit, men spoke from God. So I just want
S1: to start with the phrase there that no one, no
S1: prophecy comes from one's own interpretation. What does he mean
S1: by that?
S2: That it's not coming from their own vocabulary, their own experiences.
S2: It's coming directly from God. So even though there the
S2: human agent that God uses to give us His word.
S2: We're still hearing it directly from God Himself through the
S2: Spirit of God. Well, he.
S1: Did use his own style, though, right? His own words.
S2: Right?
S3: So, and we see that as we read the text there.
S1: You can tell the difference. So when it says that
S1: no prophecy comes from one's own interpretation, it means that
S1: I can't say that I think it means I don't
S1: care what what the author meant.
S3: It's an authority question. Again, the issue is who's the
S3: source of this? And the source is the Holy Spirit.
S3: They're being carried along by God. The authority comes from them.
S3: It doesn't matter how important you are or how studied
S3: you are. The authority lies in the scriptures themselves because
S3: they're from God.
S1: And they didn't say, okay, I'm going to write the
S1: Bible now.
S3: I will decide to do that now. Yeah.
S1: When they wrote, it wasn't. Their will is what it
S1: goes on to say. Never came by the will of man.
S1: Isaiah didn't say, you know what, I'm just going to
S1: write a book of the Bible right now. He didn't
S1: do that. But when he wrote his book, that's what
S1: God made him do. Now he used his own words, right?
S1: He used his own style. And he even understood, I think,
S1: what he was writing. Don't you think.
S2: The notion of a good analogy is like the wind
S2: in the sails of a ship? Exactly. And so that's
S2: the way it's carried along. It's moving along. It's not
S2: the energized by the individual himself. The Spirit of God
S2: is providing that energy and that.
S1: That word moved by the Holy Spirit. The word moved
S1: is the word that was used of of the wind
S1: moving a sail. It always makes me think of the
S1: Princess Bride, you know, because in The Princess Bride, Inigo
S1: Montoya looks and he sees that ship catching up on them.
S1: And he says, is he using the same wind we're using?
S1: And it's the sails are different, but the wind is
S1: the same. And in the same way, the Holy Spirit
S1: moves men. But the the men are different. And so
S1: they use their own words. They use their own style.
S1: But it's the Holy Spirit inspiration or of the text
S1: of Scripture. What what this superintending does, and then the
S1: inspired text. It guarantees that what those authors wrote was true.
S3: And that's so important without that guarantee. This is a
S3: mixed bag. Yeah. How do we know? And what we'll
S3: tend to do in our sinful state is pick the
S3: parts we like and treat those authoritatively and the ones
S3: we don't like. Well, those belong to Jim. Those apply
S3: to him. Not to me.
S1: Yeah. Yeah.
S2: Well that's right. Like going back to second Timothy 316,
S2: because it says that he that the Bible is profitable,
S2: but it's also purposeful. It's intended to do things. And
S2: so it's not it's intended to perform something in us,
S2: to cause us to become more like his son, to.
S1: Transform us, to be men and women of God who
S1: are equipped to do his work. That's what it is. Uh,
S1: that is a great place for us to take a
S1: little break. Here. We come back. Trisha's got some questions
S1: that you have sent in, and we're going to take
S1: those as well. You're listening to Open Line with Michael
S1: Ray Dolnick and joining me today, Jim Coakley, Steve Sanchez
S1: of both of Moody Bible Institute, they are experts in
S1: what we're talking about inspiration, authority, Canonization, all the important
S1: things of how we got our Bible. And so we're
S1: going to get back to your questions, to them in
S1: just a moment. Stay with us.
UU: We'll be right back.
S1: Are you looking to deepen your grasp of Paul's powerful epistles,
S1: the Moody Bible commentary on Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians
S1: is your key to unlocking these treasured books with clear
S1: explanations and practical insights. This resource illuminates Paul's teachings on grace, unity, joy,
S1: and the supremacy of the Lord Jesus. Request your copy
S1: of this Moody Bible Commentary excerpt. When you give to
S1: open line, call (888) 644-7122 or visit Open Line radio.org. Welcome
S1: back to Open Line with me. Doctor Michael Ray Dolnick.
S1: My guest today are doctors Jim Coakley and Steve Sanchez,
S1: both Bible professors at Moody Bible Institute. We're talking about
S1: the scriptures, how we got the Bible, the authority of
S1: the Bible, the inspiration of the Bible. We're talking about
S1: all these important things. And we're going back to the
S1: questions that have been raised about inspiration. And and, Tricia,
S1: I'm going to turn this over to you because you've
S1: done a good job pulling this all together for us.
S4: Well, I just compiled what everyone sent. So this is
S4: great that we have a chance. We gave people the
S4: opportunity to send in specific questions on these topics, so
S4: they responded greatly. Um, the first question is, what evidence
S4: is there that the Bible is inspired?
S1: You know, that's I often get well, how do you
S1: you're holding this book that's old and it's you know why?
S1: Why this not the Quran, why this? And not some
S1: other sacred writing? What do you say?
S3: You know, for me, the power of fulfilled prophecy is
S3: an amazing sign that the words of this book don't
S3: find their source in man, but in God himself. I'm
S3: looking at one right now in Isaiah chapter 45. The
S3: fact that God mentions a man named Cyrus long before
S3: he shows up on the scene, and you have to
S3: ask yourself, who would know that? How would they know
S3: that someone can't prognosticate a couple hundred years the name
S3: of a person and his role in delivering God's people
S3: from exile? And so I look at fulfilled prophecy as
S3: a significant, significant pointer to the inspiration of Scripture.
S2: I think we also have to look at the subjective.
S2: I think we see lots of change lives as a
S2: result of what this word has done. And so I
S2: think even though that's that's again, kind of anecdotal, but
S2: still the numbers, the transformed millions that have changed lives
S2: as a result of this word, I think is a
S2: powerful testimony to the power of God's Word.
S1: What convinced me I always had this. I always accepted
S1: that the Bible was from God. Growing up, I just
S1: assumed it. Uh, not the New Testament, but my growing up.
S1: I believe the Hebrew Bible was given from God, but
S1: I really hadn't thought about it much. It wasn't. It
S1: was just assumed when I finally became a believer in Jesus.
S1: It was the predictions of the Messiah in the Hebrew
S1: Bible that convinced me. And it was just amazing to
S1: see that Micah 700 years beforehand in Micah five two
S1: says that that Jesus, the Messiah, would be born in Bethlehem.
S1: It's clear when you read the Bible, he's going to
S1: come from the line of David. It's clear when you
S1: look at these different prophecies about the Messiah that he
S1: would be rejected by his own people. Isaiah 53. So
S1: as I started studying these passages, it convinced me that
S1: Jesus is the Messiah. But now when I've heard people
S1: attack the true inspiration of the Bible, those same passages say, well,
S1: how could this be? This is a supernatural book. Yeah,
S1: those very same prophecies which convinced me to believe that
S1: Jesus is the Messiah, also confirmed to me that this
S1: is a supernatural book. And but there are things that
S1: the Bible talks about. You know, I often talk about accuracy,
S1: you know, and there are things that the Bible says
S1: besides prophecy, just historically accurate. You know, they didn't people
S1: didn't believe there was such a person as Sargon, right? Right.
S3: The Hittites, the Hittites. I spend my summers doing archeology.
S3: We find things and archaeologists down through the ages have
S3: found things that suggest the Bible is incredibly accurate. And
S3: we would expect that if God is its source.
S1: Yeah, that's so important that we we get that. So
S1: I think historical accuracy is one of the great things
S1: about the Bible. There are some things that have not
S1: yet been confirmed by archaeology.
S2: That's true. We're waiting for the Archaeologist's spade and for
S2: Steve to dig it up.
S1: He's going to dig it up. Exactly. You know.
S3: People are surprised. It wasn't until 1993 that we actually
S3: found textual evidence outside of the Bible for David. Yeah.
S3: And the Tel Dan inscription found in 1993, 1994. There's
S3: David's name right in the middle. That was pretty late. Yeah.
S3: Until then, we had the Bible. Yeah.
S1: And it was. And there's a lot of critics that say, oh,
S1: there never was a David. He was like King Arthur.
S5: That's right.
S3: Figment of Israel's historical imagination.
S5: Yeah. And then.
S3: We find this.
S1: Stone. Yeah. And it's found. I love going there. I'd
S1: say this is where it was found. And you can.
S1: You can see the Israel Museum.
S5: Yeah, there it is. There it is right there.
S2: I was just in the Oriental Institute in Chicago, and
S2: they have the Sennacherib prism, and it mentions Hezekiah by name.
S2: And I tell the students, I said, you know, from
S2: that point on, everyone agrees that Israel existed because Sennacherib
S2: gives attestation to Hezekiah. But why not go back further
S2: if it can be trusted at this point, where is
S2: it that you draw a line and say, we can't
S2: trust the Bible's historicity anymore? Yeah.
S1: So I think that between historical accuracy, biblical prophecy, and
S1: then also transformed lives, I think we can say, yes,
S1: this is a book that is unique, different and truly inspired.
S1: But people do have other questions. Yes.
S4: Fabiana and Beth's questions are very similar. They both wrote
S4: us on Facebook. Fabiana says, I learned that the scriptures alone,
S4: the breathed word of God, is the one that has
S4: the power and not exactly the explanations of his words.
S4: And then Beth says she was actually in a conversation
S4: with someone about second Timothy three verses 14 through 17,
S4: which we talked about just a little bit ago. We
S4: were talking about the absolute authority of the Bible versus
S4: the absolute authority of the Bible, plus the teachings that
S4: have been handed down by apostles or their disciples through
S4: word of mouth or written down by the church. Can
S4: you talk about these?
S1: Well, they are they're kind of distinctive questions along the
S1: same line. The first one is it's the Word of
S1: God that is powerful and not men's interpretations. It's so
S1: popular today to have study Bibles. I've contributed to a
S1: couple of study Bibles. Uh, we have the Moody Bible Commentary,
S1: which though it cites Scripture, it's not a study Bible,
S1: but and and I always tell people, get a Bible
S1: and I hold up my Bible. That is just a Bible.
S1: I use a study Bible as a resource when I'm
S1: in my study. But. And if I were traveling, for example,
S1: I might need, excuse me, a study Bible. You know,
S1: just if I wanted something to help me out, I
S1: was only going to have one book with me. That
S1: would be a good thing. But. But nevertheless, what is
S1: the the the word of God? Not the study notes,
S1: not the annotations. So wouldn't you agree that people should
S1: read the Bible?
S3: That's right. You read the text of Scripture and everything else.
S3: Are the commentary, the additions that helps that learned people
S3: have decided to include to help you understand what's in
S3: those pages. But if you compare one study Bible to another,
S3: they don't all agree. They don't agree in the notes,
S3: even though they might be using the exact same translation.
S2: And I would say to that, I think I want
S2: to push back a little bit, because even in the scriptures,
S2: people have to explain what the Word of God means.
S2: Philip had to explain to the Ethiopian eunuch what he
S2: was reading out of Isaiah 53. Nehemiah, when he's speaking
S2: to the exiles, has to give the sense of what
S2: he's reading from the Word of God. So we do
S2: need people to help us guide what the Word of
S2: God is saying. So we still need teachers.
S1: Oh, there's no question. But of course, I think that
S1: that what we're saying about a study Bible. And this
S1: is why I encourage people, because I think the study
S1: Bible people spend all their time in the notes, the
S1: notes instead of in the text, read the text in
S1: first John, it says that we have an anointing that
S1: we don't need anyone to teach us. Now, that doesn't
S1: mean that their God hasn't ordained teachers into the body
S1: of Christ that that will teach us, but it does
S1: mean that we should have the Holy Spirit sufficient so
S1: that when we look at a text, we're not going
S1: to be going off into zany land, into a strange
S1: world where where we can make it say anything we
S1: want it to say.
S3: Interpreting the Bible is difficult. Yeah. I mean, there are
S3: easy passages that anyone can understand and you get them
S3: pretty quickly. There are others that even scholars sit there
S3: and say, okay, there are three views here, and we're
S3: not actually sure which is the right view.
S1: I'm about 49% sure of this one.
S5: That's right.
S3: Yeah, 51% sure of.
S5: The other one. You know, I.
S1: Would like to say sometime when you get your study Bible,
S1: just get out a marker on the page and and
S1: mark the text area and say absolutely true there. And
S1: then on the on the annotations at the bottom say
S1: could be wrong, you know, but but probably right, but
S1: could be wrong. And that's what we want to emphasize,
S1: that it's the text of Scripture, not people's opinions that
S1: are right.
S2: We do want to emphasize that, but we also want
S2: to have value to the ones that God has used
S2: over the centuries to help us with background issues. Steve
S2: and I both teach life and Bible times. There's no
S2: way that you're going to get that information about a
S2: geography of a site, or the history of a person,
S2: unless you have that background information. So we do need
S2: that stuff. So it's not like just me and the
S2: Holy Spirit. And that's all I need to understand the scriptures.
S2: In fact.
S3: That's dangerous.
S2: That is rather dangerous.
S3: As we interpret outside of our theological context. Without that
S3: extra the bumpers on the side.
S5: If you will. Correct.
S1: It's a great time for you to mention this. We
S1: so agree that it's helpful to have explanations that all
S1: three of us participated in the Moody Bible Commentary. Amen,
S1: which I want to encourage people. You can go to
S1: our website, openline line radio.org, and you can scroll down
S1: and you will see a link to the Moody Bible Commentary.
S1: And you click on that and it gives you an
S1: opportunity to download two sample books. You can download Daniel
S1: and Romans and you can see what we're talking about,
S1: that it's very helpful to have a commentary to help
S1: guide you. But again, this is not the inspired, Moody
S1: Bible Commentary, it's the Moody Bible Commentary. It's pretty close.
S2: Though, don't you think?
S1: Oh yeah. Yeah, yeah, especially the ones I wrote.
S5: Yeah, I participated.
S3: In a Bible translation project and one of the translators
S3: told a funny story. He was teaching on this book
S3: in a Sunday school, and he gave his opinion, and
S3: someone in the class said, well, that's not what it
S3: says here in these notes. He said, well, I wrote
S3: those notes and I changed my.
S5: Mind and it was done.
S1: I like it when sometimes people call me and they say,
S1: what is such and such verse mean in Daniel? I said, well,
S1: let me look at the commentary and I'll tell you
S1: what I think it means, because I don't always remember
S1: what I think it means.
S4: So now you said the study notes may not. They
S4: don't hold as much authority. How about the cross-references? Where
S4: do those come from that are in my Bible that
S4: does not have the study notes.
S2: I'm always a little leery of cross-references, unless I know
S2: what the philosophy is of the person who's putting them there,
S2: because why are they putting those references there? Are they
S2: just doing a topical leapfrog from verse to verse to verse,
S2: that really have no connecting connective tissue between those verses,
S2: or are they really done a good study to show
S2: that this text is informing this other one?
S1: Yeah, I have found this. I found that there are many.
S1: I'm really big in what is called inner biblical interpretation,
S1: how the Bible reads itself. I think that what they
S1: used to call scripture interpreting Scripture and, and there are
S1: certain phrases and ideas that are frequently linked, and a
S1: lot of, of the cross-references do that. There are other
S1: times where they don't see what I see, and I'm
S1: that's why I'm writing them in the margins of my Bible,
S1: because that's a really important cross-reference. And other times I
S1: look at the cross-reference and I say those really shouldn't
S1: be connected.
S3: So again, it's the work of people trying to help
S3: one another interpret the Word of God. And they don't
S3: always get it right.
S5: Sometimes it's really helpful.
S1: Sometimes it's very helpful. So that's.
S4: Really good. Those are okay to use. Oh sure. If
S4: you're doing your study. Yeah, absolutely.
S5: But the key is to.
S3: Not use them slavishly. I mean, you have to use
S3: them with critical thinking and say, look, this one doesn't
S3: really fit. It must have fit to someone at one time,
S3: but I'm not seeing it. I'm not going to use
S3: that one.
S1: But they're really helpful, you know. Okay. I'm amazed, too,
S1: that people do that because it shows that they have
S1: a pretty holistic knowledge of the Bible. You know, there
S1: were there were actual cross reference Bibles before there were computers. So.
S5: Right.
S1: So that's pretty.
S2: Well the Masoretes, as you know, were doing some amazing
S2: stuff with.
S1: Those are the Jewish scribes of the Middle Ages.
S2: Yes. And how they were able to say, okay, this
S2: is the fifth time that this exact phrase was used
S2: in this Bible.
S5: And so we owe.
S3: Them a debt. We owe.
S5: Them.
S3: It's for them that we have good copies of the
S3: Old Testament.
S5: Yeah. The Hebrew.
S1: Bible. Exactly. I want to go to the second question.
S1: There is this idea that it's the church that is
S1: the authority that we have and not the Bible. So
S1: the church or the tradition can tell us what the
S1: authority with authority, what the Bible means, what how do
S1: we deal with that?
S3: I think the issue there is our church wants to
S3: help its people understand the Word of God. That's the
S3: bottom line. And when we look at the Word of God,
S3: people have different interpretations and that can be confusing. It's helpful.
S3: Sometimes people like to think an authority will tell me
S3: what to believe, and they rely on that. I'm not
S3: so sure that that's always helpful.
S1: No, it's that's why there was a reformation. That's right.
S1: Sola scriptura. It is not. The Bible is the authority
S1: we have. The Word of God is what is our
S1: authority instead? You know, as we said, teachers are great,
S1: but it's the word of God that's the authority. It's
S1: only Scripture, that's our authority. And though I appreciate very
S1: much what what churches have taught and doctrinal statements and
S1: churches and things like that. Ultimately, what we have to
S1: do is say it is the Bible. That's our authority.
S1: There was someone that was kind of telling me that
S1: I have to do something, according to tradition recently. And
S1: I said to my friend, I said, hey, have you
S1: heard of the Reformation? You know.
S5: It's where does authority.
S3: Lie? Yeah.
S5: That's right.
S1: It lies in the Word of God. And that's that's
S1: so crucial for us to remember. Well, this is very intriguing.
S1: We have lots more questions about the authority of Scripture
S1: and more questions about how we got the Bible. And
S1: so keep listening. My guest today, Jim Coakley. Steve Sanchez,
S1: this is a special edition. Trisha and I are here
S1: talking about your questions about the Bible, uh, particularly about
S1: the Bible and how God gave us his word. So
S1: stay with me. This is, uh, macadelic. And we'll be
S1: right back with more of our discussion. People frequently think
S1: of Christmas as a Christian holiday and Hanukkah as a
S1: Jewish celebration. But if we really understood Christmas, we see
S1: that it's deeply connected to the Jewish people. I mean,
S1: we even sing born as the King of Israel, now
S1: Chosen People Ministries, one of open lines underwriters and a
S1: ministry that brings the good news to Jewish people around
S1: the world, is offering Christmas through Jewish eyes. This free
S1: booklet will show just how Jewish Christmas really is. For
S1: your free copy of Christmas Through Jewish Eyes, just go
S1: to the Open Line website. Open Line radio.org. Scroll down.
S1: You'll see a link that says A free gift from
S1: Chosen People Ministries. Click on that. You'll be taken to
S1: a page where you can sign up for your own
S1: copy of Christmas Through Jewish Eyes. We're so glad that
S1: Febc partners with Open Line with Doctor Michael Ray Dolnick,
S1: bringing the Febc mailbag every week. Learn how Far East
S1: Broadcasting Company is taking Christ to the world at febc.
S1: Org on their weekly podcast. Until all have heard with
S1: Ed Cannon, you'll hear stories of lives changed by Messiah
S1: all across the globe. Again. You can hear the podcast
S1: when you visit febc. Dawg. That's Phoebe Dawg. Welcome back
S1: to Open Line with Doctor Michael Radonich. I'm the very
S1: same Michael Redlich. And this is a special pre-recorded edition
S1: of Open Line. So don't call in today. But you
S1: did send in questions. And I'm really grateful because so
S1: many people have questions about how we got the Bible,
S1: how to view the Bible, why we can trust the scriptures,
S1: how authoritative the scriptures are. So the Bible is our
S1: special topic on Open Line today dealing with all those issues.
S1: My guests are Doctor Steve Sanchez, professor of Bible at
S1: Moody Bible Institute, and Doctor Jim Coakley, a professor of
S1: Bible at Moody Bible Institute. He's also the author of
S1: 14 Fresh Ways to Enjoy the Bible, and both of
S1: them are contributors to the Moody Bible Commentary. Okay, Tricia,
S1: what's what's next on our agenda?
S4: Okay, let's move into an RNC, if we could. What
S4: do we mean when we talk about the Bible being inerrant?
S1: I want to jump in here sometimes people said that
S1: the Bible was authoritative, right? And then after a while,
S1: people said, yeah, it's authoritative, but it's not true. And
S1: so then in history, theologians came up with the term
S1: that the Bible is God's infallible word. And they said, yes,
S1: it's infallible about life and spiritual things.
S2: But not in history or in science or in other things.
S1: Yeah. And so then we came up with the word inerrancy,
S1: meaning the Bible is without error. But what are we
S1: talking about when we're talking about inerrancy?
S2: You just said without air, the idea that this is
S2: God's Word, and we can trust it for what it's
S2: trying to accomplish and say about whatever subject matter it
S2: talks about.
S3: I think that's important. If God is the source of Scripture,
S3: if the words are literally God breathed, then his characteristics
S3: are going to cover that word as well. God does
S3: not speak error. Therefore his word is not going to
S3: have any error regardless of what it speaks on, because
S3: he's its source. The doctrine is rooted in the source
S3: of the Word of God.
S1: So I know, like the Moody Bible Institute doctrinal statement
S1: essentially says, If I'm going from memory here, it says
S1: that the Bible is without error in everything that it
S1: affirms or teaches is.
S5: That's right. Whatever it touches.
S2: Whatever it touches.
S1: Okay. So there are. So we had people call here
S1: and there, they're flat earthers because there's four corners of
S1: the earth. What do you say?
S3: Listen, we understand that text must be interpreted. If I
S3: say a million people came to my house last night
S3: because I threw a dinner party. Nobody charges me with lying.
S3: They understand that I'm using a specific kind of illustration.
S3: It's a genre, if you will. And we must afford
S3: the Bible the same way. It doesn't intend to be
S3: taken literally at that point, and so we ought not
S3: interpret it literally when it doesn't intend that.
S5: So when.
S1: It says the sun came up, it's not saying.
S5: It's.
S3: Phenomenological language. We understand that.
S1: You know, every meteorologist will tell us what time, you know,
S1: we see the meteorological reports. They'll say something like, sun
S1: up at 615 in the morning. No one thinks he
S1: thinks it's a flat earth.
S5: That's right.
S1: That's the way people talk. It's called figures of speech, right?
S1: If I tell you it's raining cats and dogs, you
S1: know you're not going to go get a pet out there. It's.
S1: You're just going to stay inside.
S2: But there is a challenge. How do we know when
S2: there is a figure of speech as compared to something
S2: very literal? If I say, hey, Michael, I'll be back
S2: in a minute. Now, that sounds very specific because there's
S2: a unit of time, but, you know, it's a short while.
S2: So we have these questions, okay, three days and three nights,
S2: you know, these kind of passages in the Bible, is
S2: it kind of figurative or is it actual literal. And
S2: these are challenging things for us to deal with when
S2: we come to Bible interpretation.
S1: They're interpretive issues. They're interpretive issues, but they're not saying
S1: that there's errors in the Bible. That's correct. And it's
S1: that hyper literal approach that makes people think that there
S1: are errors. And of course, there are other issues that
S1: we'll talk about as well. But there are people who say, well,
S1: what passages should we interpret that way? Of course, with
S1: the creation narrative and and things like that. And so
S1: but the point that we're making is that everything that
S1: the Bible affirms and teaches, we say is true. And
S1: there may be people, for example, about the creation narrative
S1: who say something different than I believe. And I'm not
S1: even going to say right now, but I'm going to
S1: say as long as they believe that that narrative teaches
S1: that God created the world, they may interpret it differently.
S1: But nevertheless, God is the creator. He made man, humanity,
S1: and so forth.
S3: It's a matter of interpretation in some cases.
S4: Yeah, yeah. So are you saying that the Bible I'm
S4: holding in my hand is inerrant, or is there are
S4: the words in my actual English Bible in Aaron? That's a.
S3: Fantastic question. And both the Moody Bible Institute's doctrinal statement,
S3: which the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy agrees with roots, inspiration,
S3: and inerrancy in the original manuscript. The original autographs we
S3: call them, which are not in our possession. Which raises
S3: another great question how can we trust our translations? And
S3: through the science of text criticism, deep study, we understand
S3: that the copies we have today are accurate reproductions of
S3: those originals, and that's very important.
S1: Yeah, it's when we're talking about the Bible being inerrant,
S1: it's inherent in the original autographs. And to be precise,
S1: when Isaiah wrote Isaiah that that was the that one copy,
S1: he said, well, I don't have that, Steve. What am
S1: I going to do? Well, here's the thing. I used
S1: this just the other day. Someone was asking me about
S1: this at a at a meeting I was at, and
S1: I said, if I got 20 birthday cards and they
S1: each said happy birthday, but in 20 of the 20 cards,
S1: 15 of them spelled birthday wrong.
S3: We still know what it said.
S1: It's still because I have all these. I know what
S1: this is. I know what kind of card it is.
S1: And even though I can tell a misspelling, I know
S1: that by doing textual criticism, I know what was intended.
S1: Maybe a better example would even be photocopies, where it
S1: keeps smearing right? And age as it ages, and it
S1: gets a little bit more unclear, but you have enough
S1: of them that you can say, ah, I know what
S1: the original.
S3: Occasionally people will use the illustration of the telephone game
S3: as a way to criticize the process by which we
S3: have the text. That's can be nothing further than the
S3: truth there. The telephone game is not accurate. When students
S3: young people play that game, their intention is to deceive
S3: one another. We're talking about people who cared about the
S3: Word of God, who wanted to preserve it for later generations,
S3: and they were careful. Did they get it perfectly right?
S3: Not every time. We can often tell where they didn't
S3: get it quite right, but they cared to preserve the
S3: Word of God for the future. That's important. That means
S3: they were not trying to deceive us. Good.
S4: Could you define textual criticism? You. You have used this
S4: term a couple of times.
S1: Textual criticism is the study of the ancient biblical text.
S1: It could be the study of any text. That's right.
S1: You can do textual criticism of Shakespeare or.
S5: Other Quran or Quran or.
S1: The Septuagint, which is a translation of the Bible. Uh,
S1: but you can what you're doing is you're studying all
S1: the available evidence to determine what the original text actually said.
S1: And textual criticism, I would say we're about 99% sure
S1: 99 and 4,400% sure of what the original text of
S1: the Bible said. There may be some things where we say,
S1: maybe it could be this reading or that reading, but
S1: we're pretty sure it's one of those readings. So we
S1: do have a clear understanding of what the original text is.
S1: And so that's why I think people who say the
S1: fact that they, they can find Transmission or text critical errors.
S1: And that's why they don't believe in an agency. They're
S1: actually not looking at the evidence as it ought to be.
S3: And in fact, no major doctrine of the Christian faith
S3: is altered or changed at all by the end of the.
S5: By a variant reading.
S3: Supposed variants.
S5: That's right. That's it.
S1: You know, someone actually wrote a question about text criticism.
S1: I noticed it. It's question 11 here.
S4: Okay. Ernie wrote us in Washington, uh, listens to us
S4: on the website, and he wants to know about the
S4: interpretation of the terms in Matthew 1924. Camilla or Camilla's. Um,
S4: in light of some who claim that one term was
S4: changed to soften the rigor of the statement. What is
S4: your perspective specifically? Was there a change in the term
S4: linguistically to make a specific point for those who may
S4: have spoken Greek or Aramaic? Okay, so.
S1: Camilla's I mean, Camilla means camel and it was the
S1: largest animal in the world of, of Israel in the
S1: first century. Uh, and and so what it what the
S1: verse says is the Lord Jesus says it's harder for
S1: a rich man to enter the kingdom of God than
S1: it is for a camel to enter through the eye
S1: of a needle. Some people have gone into all sorts
S1: of weird ideas about that, about there being a small gate. Right? Uh,
S1: called the eye of the needle. No, I think Jesus
S1: was being kind of funny.
S5: Yeah.
S1: Uh, big animal, very small. Uh, entry opening and.
S5: Not going to happen. Yeah.
S1: And it's hard. It was. It's very tough. Money can
S1: often grab our hearts and keep us from God. And
S1: that's his point now, later on, later manuscripts, some, just
S1: a few. They changed the word to Camelon, which actually
S1: is a large rope, right.
S2: Like a fishing line of some of some heft.
S1: Yeah, some heft. Exactly. Uh, and it's because they were
S1: trying to these these copyists were trying to fix what
S1: Jesus had to say because they said, oh, Jesus wouldn't
S1: make a joke. You know, he.
S2: Hung out with fishermen, so he would have used that domain.
S5: Yeah.
S3: Rather than needles and thread. This is a big one.
S1: And so they change a couple of letters, but it's
S1: so clear that that's the change that textual criticism says.
S5: Now we know.
S1: We know that it was a camel entering the eye
S1: of a needle. And and by the way, someone asked
S1: me just a few weeks ago about did Jesus have
S1: a sense of humor? And I mentioned Elton Trueblood's book
S1: The Humor of Christ. But I also mentioned this passage.
S5: Yeah.
S1: Uh, in Matthew 19, because that was a funny thing
S1: to say.
S2: Biblical authors are very good. Even Jesus, with punning and
S2: playing off of words and word plays. And that's biblical humor.
S1: Yeah. And so, uh, so no, I don't think that
S1: this is a problem verse. It is just it is
S1: a perfect example of how textual criticism is a very
S1: helpful thing we know, and how clearly we know what
S1: the original words were, rather than a saying that something
S1: got lost in translation or transmission or anything like that. So, uh,
S1: there's another question here about inerrancy, Trish, don't you think.
S4: There are lots of questions? Um.
S1: You know what? Let's get to those questions when we
S1: come back. Uh, because we want to get a whole
S1: bunch of them together. You're listening to a very special
S1: edition of Open Line. It's all about how we can
S1: trust the Bible. And I am having a great time
S1: with Steve Sanchez and Jim Coakley and Trish McMillan. We're
S1: going to be right back with more of the questions
S1: you sent in right here. This is Michael Ray Dolnick
S1: on Open Line. Stay with us. Ministry isn't a solo effort.
S1: You know my voice. But if you could see inside
S1: our studio, you'd see a team behind the scenes putting
S1: open line on the air. Look a little further, and
S1: you'd see into the homes of listeners like you who
S1: give monthly to make this ministry possible. And when you
S1: join our team of Kitchen Table Partners, I'll send you
S1: a Bible study moment email every other week with tips
S1: and encouragement. Become a kitchen table partner today by calling
S1: (888) 644-7122 or go to Open Line radio.org. Welcome back to
S1: Open Line I'm Michael Radonich. Trish McMillan is here. She's
S1: a producer of Open Line. And our guest today is
S1: Jim Coakley. He is professor of Bible at Moody Bible
S1: Institute Steve Sanchez who is professor of Bible, also the
S1: chairman of biblical theological studies at Moody Bible Institute. And
S1: we're discussing the authority of Scripture and why we can
S1: trust the Bible. And we were just talking about inerrancy,
S1: saying that the Bible is true in all that it affirms.
S1: We didn't give a verse that supports that. And I
S1: want to say John 1717, the Lord Jesus says in
S1: his prayer for his disciples, he asked his father to
S1: sanctify them in the truth. And then he says, Your
S1: word is truth.
S2: Yeah, I can still go back to the King James Version.
S2: Thy word is truth. That's the way I memorized it first.
S2: And so that's that. That's a very important verse.
S1: And so what we have to say is what you're
S1: saying is that in the original autographs of Scripture, this
S1: was true. It's without error in everything that it affirms.
S1: It's not saying that there are no figures of speech
S1: or summaries or things like that which are precision.
S5: Yeah.
S1: But rather it is just saying it is true. And
S1: someone wrote in with a question Trish mentioned. Go ahead. Yes.
S4: John wrote us on Facebook and said if you believe
S4: the verbal inspiration of the scriptures, how do you resolve
S4: the differences? And he gives a specific example of what
S4: God said at Jesus baptism. Um, the Matthew 317 says,
S4: this is my son. This is my beloved son. In
S4: Mark and Luke both say, you are my beloved son.
S4: Why did the spirit inspire inspired the writers to use
S4: different words and not write what was actually said. Granted,
S4: it doesn't change the meaning, but then it would be
S4: meaning the meaning that is inspired and not the words.
S4: Could this be a copyist error?
S1: I love it. Well, it could be a copyist error.
S1: Could very well be. I love it that he says
S1: it does not change the meaning. I think that that
S1: is such a crucial point that he makes. And. And
S1: so the thing I want to say about we have
S1: the synoptic Gospels, the Matthew, Mark and Luke, who are
S1: very similar. And then there are places where John does
S1: overlap a little bit with those three, but those three
S1: and there are issues with first, second Samuel, first second
S1: Kings and first second Chronicles which cover the same material.
S1: We do not have a stenographer at the baptism of
S1: Jesus sitting there. And the gospel writers were not stenographers.
S1: They're not sitting there taking dictation like you do in
S1: a court.
S4: Or recording it on their phone. Yeah, we could do now.
S5: They're not.
S1: Doing that. But what they're doing is they are trying
S1: to communicate the truth of God and they are inspired.
S1: So I think it's wrong to try and force a
S1: word for word comparison. One professor I had would say,
S1: maybe God said both could be.
S2: But I think we also have to realize that these
S2: are books. So the biblical author has an agenda or
S2: a theme or a concept that they're trying to promote.
S2: So when I see a change like this, I always
S2: rally around it because it helps me to look at, okay,
S2: what may be perspective does Matthew have that maybe is
S2: a little different than Luke? And again, not competitive but
S2: complementary to what they're trying to say. In this case.
S2: Matthew is quoting from Hosea chapter 11 earlier in chapter two.
S2: So this is my son. And so there might be,
S2: you know, some echoes of that, that still rattling around.
S2: So when he uses then goes to the baptismal scene,
S2: that's why that's there, these things happen. And one of
S2: the big ones that a lot of people struggle with
S2: is the order of the temptations, where you have Jesus
S2: after he goes through this baptismal scene, is in the wilderness,
S2: and he's tempted three times by the devil, and the
S2: order between Matthew and Luke is different. It starts out
S2: turning stones to bread, and then it goes to whether
S2: it's jump from the pinnacle of the Temple in Jerusalem
S2: or bow down, and I'll give you all the kingdoms
S2: of the earth. Why, look at that. Luke ends with
S2: jump off the pinnacle of the Temple in Jerusalem. Why
S2: does he end there? Well, he has a geographical kind
S2: of axis that he works for with his gospel. He
S2: gets Jesus to Jerusalem and then even Luke. Then the
S2: next book that he writes, acts, starts in Jerusalem and
S2: goes to the uttermost parts of the world. So there's
S2: something about geography that helps orient. Luke's telling of the
S2: story of Jesus. Why does Matthew end with Bowden? I'll
S2: give you all the kingdoms of the earth is because
S2: Matthew is trying to portray Jesus as king, and so
S2: he's going to emphasize that theme. So we're not trying
S2: to compete. Now, I hate the question. Well, who's right?
S2: Who's wrong? Yeah, no, that's a wrong question. It's like, okay,
S2: what are they trying to do? Because they're each trying
S2: to give a portrait of Jesus.
S1: I absolutely agree that this issue may reflect different purposes
S1: in the Gospels. In fact, it seems to me that
S1: Mark and Luke are recording what was spoken directly to Jesus.
S1: They they have a direct quote from Psalm two seven.
S1: You are my son. So in those two gospels, the
S1: message is, this is what was spoken directly to the
S1: Lord Jesus. On the other hand, Matthew seems to be
S1: reflecting the perspective of John the Baptist and the crowd.
S1: It was God's message to them saying, this is the
S1: Son of God that was promised in Psalm two seven.
S1: You need to recognize him. It's as if Matthew is
S1: saying to his Jewish readers, you need to identify that
S1: this is the one who was promised. So Matthew included
S1: what John the Baptist heard. The other two gospels gave
S1: what was spoken directly to Jesus. The slight difference just
S1: had to do with the message they wanted to communicate.
S3: You know, one of the things you guys are drawing
S3: out is that this doctrine is more complicated than most
S3: people realize. Yeah. If you have in your mind that
S3: secretary taking dictation. Yeah. It's more sophisticated than that. It's
S3: not out of reach, I think, for people to understand,
S3: but it's going to take a little more work than
S3: an overly simplistic understanding.
S2: But I actually think it actually helps us in Bible study,
S2: because then we get to see what the biblical author
S2: is trying to make a point about.
S1: What's he emphasizing?
S2: What's he emphasizing? And so this really helps us I
S2: love these kind of things because.
S5: Every book is different.
S2: Every book is.
S3: Different. Every author has a different purpose as they tell
S3: the story.
S5: It's one of the reasons.
S1: Why I always say that we need to interpret the
S1: text of the Bible, not the events behind it. What
S1: people are asking when they want to say what was said,
S1: you're my son or this is my son. They're trying
S1: to get back to the event. But what we're trying
S1: to say is, what does this text mean? Right. And
S1: that's why I want to read what Matthew says. I
S1: want to read what Mark says. What Mark. Luke says
S1: that the real emphasis here is a divinely inspired interpretation
S1: of the event. And that's what Matthew gives us, and
S1: that's what Mark gives.
S3: That applies to every book of the Bible that you study,
S3: to be fair. You're going to read Romans, study Romans.
S3: Don't bring all the theology from every book. And necessarily
S3: every time you have a question, focus on the argument
S3: of the author in that book.
S2: I think it also is your presuppositions about the text.
S2: If you kind of come predisposed that the Bible is
S2: authoritative in God's Word, you're going to give it the
S2: benefit of the doubt when it comes to these kind
S2: of issues. But if you're looking for loopholes, you're looking
S2: for things to kind of say, well, I'm not going
S2: to have to follow this word because of these little
S2: minor issues. That's a whole different perspective.
S1: Too often we're looking for excuses not to believe them,
S1: because if we can just throw the book out, then
S1: we can do what we want. And who wants to
S1: do that? It will. It will ruin our lives. But
S1: yet that's what people are looking for. I think you're right.
S1: Our presupposition has to be that this is God's authoritative word.
S1: It's his inspired word. It's his word without error. And
S1: I just love it that the writer who sent that
S1: in and says, well, the meaning doesn't change.
S5: He knew already.
S1: Okay, then you got your answer right there. But it's
S1: the emphasis that we're looking at. Well, this has gone
S1: by so quick. I'm so glad we have another hour
S1: because there's so many more questions we need to talk about.
S1: Questions about how we got the Bible and why we
S1: can trust the text. And what about translations and all
S1: those things we're still going to talk about. So don't
S1: go away. Stick around for the second hour of Open
S1: Line on most of these stations if you'd like. Check
S1: out our web page during the break. Open Line radio.org.
S1: You'll find our links to past programs there. Facebook, whatever
S1: you're looking for. You can also find our current resource
S1: on how to become a kitchen table partner. Thanks to
S1: Steve Sanchez, Jim Coakley, Trish McMillan, they'll all be back
S1: with me next hour. Open line with Doctor Michael Radonich
S1: is a production of Moody Radio, a ministry of Moody
S1: Bible Institute.