Inspiration and the Bible

We have moments when we feel inspired to do something, such as write an article or music, design an application, or somesuch. This kind of inspiration is far different than what is meant when Christians say the Bible is inspired. In that case, it is θεόπνευστος
theopneustos, which essentially means God-breathed. There is more to it than this.

John Wycliffe reading his translation of the Bible to John of Gaunt, Ford Madox Brown, 1847

There are theological liberals and unbelievers who say that the Bible is inspired like other impressive human compositions, but is not all that special. They reject the inerrancy of Scripture, which leaves them in a world of hurt. After all, they cannot be consistent by rejecting creation, the Genesis Flood, miracles of Jesus, end-times prophecy, and other things — yet claiming that they trust in Christ for their eternal destiny! Atheists and other Bible-deniers seem to want to go to Hell, attempting to justify their suppression of truth by claiming that "the Bible is full of contradictions", but this pile of meadow muffins is easily shoveled away.

The different kind of inspiration between a Laura Ingalls Wilder or Riley B. King compared to the Bible is clear, but we still want to know what defines biblical inspiration. Some people think that God dictated it, as if he gave a whistle, told the author to sit down on yonder rock and write this stuff down. Not quite, since personalities and styles of various authors can be seen, but on occasion God did give a bit of dictation. There are other areas of consideration that may seem at first glance to threaten inerrancy and divine inspiration, but are actually items that need to be properly understood.

Most evangelical Christians would say the Bible is “inspired”. Yet if we scratch beneath the surface, most would be hard-pressed to explain, much less defend, the inspiration of Scripture. Many Christians only have a vague idea how we got from the original papyrus and parchment scrolls and letters to the leather-bound collection of documents we carry to church on Sundays.

Until relatively recently, this wasn’t a huge problem. But with the rise of Internet skepticism, anybody can copy a list of “100 Bible errors” and use it to assail their unsuspecting but well-meaning Christian ‘friends’. Thus, the average Christian needs to be more prepared to defend their faith. The good news is that the doctrine of inspiration is easy to explain, and with just a little effort you can confidently believe this important idea and easily defend it against the unsupported claims of unbelievers and skeptics when you are called to share your faith with them.

To read the rest, click on "The inspiration of Scripture comes in various forms".

Cannabis and the Christian

There are many discussions and points of view using words like cannabis, hemp, marijuana, and so forth. Unfortunately, there is a great deal of confusion, especially from those who want to legalize pot for recreation. Some Christians want to get high, others detest the idea.

I have struggled to learn the differences between hemp and marijuana. Some said that it's the same plant but the younger version is where the THC (the chemical that alters your state of consciousness) comes from, and the bigger ones become hemp. Not quite. Apparently versions of cannabis are virtually indistinguishable by sight, but hemp is legal in may places and does not require special growing conditions. It also has only a fraction of THC. This article seems reliable.

Unfortunately, pro-reefer folks seem to be like climate change cultists, anti-vaxxers, and evolutionists who ignore data that they dislike and cherry-pick information that seems to confirm their biases. There are also logic problems, such as saying, "You can drink alcohol and pot is better for you". Lousy comparison. For one thing, the doobie smoker is inhaling burning leaves and their carcinogens. Today's burning leaves are far more potent than hippies smoked at Woodstock, and the THC levels have been increasing over the years. Also, it is a controlled substance under US federal law; if your state legalized it, that's a mite confusing since the feds say, "Nuh-uh, you're breaking the law".

Someone may complain that smoking weed is not mentioned in the Bible, so we can go ahead. No, we must use biblical principles, as God's Word is our foundation in all areas of life — including our thinking. In a Bible-believing worldview, we need to remember that drug use is a component in sorcery and witchcraft. God does not condone misuse of alcohol, so getting high one way or another is against what God teaches.

This issue is very complicated and can get confusing, especially when you factor in the dubious value of using CBD for relaxation and to alleviate pain. Yes, God created cannabis, and hemp has been very beneficial for textiles as well as (possibly) hemp seeds and oil.

Now I would like to turn you over to Dr. Jerry Bergman's article for some interesting perspective. 

With the recent legalization of the recreational use of the mind-altering drug cannabis in many states, and the legalization of its medical use in most states, questions arise about the drug from a creation-worldview standpoint. The main psychoactive component of cannabis is tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). One major question is, why did God create drugs that are poisonous or that can cause harm? Poisonous substances include anything that can physically harm us if we inhale, swallow or touch it. They range from bee stings to cyanide poisoning.

I hope you will read the rest of "Why Did God Create Cannabis?"

Scriptural Truth can be Clearly Seen

As we have seen, major movements seldom happen at one specific moment in time. The Reformation is considered to have begun on October 31, 1517, but some of the groundwork was established years before by people like John Wycliffe and William Tyndale. (Aspects of the Reformation continued after Luther's time.) A major focus of the Reformation was the clarity of Scripture.

Credit: Freeimages / Jorge Avina

The expensive word for this is perspicuity. The Bible can be clearly understood regarding important doctrines even by us reg'lar folk, but it also contains a wealth of information to keep someone growing in faith and understanding for a lifetime. The Roman Catholic Church did not want the people to know what Scripture really said, and it fought to keep the Word of God out of the hands of the people. (For that matter, look at how cults tell people that the Bible can be understood only through their sources and people should not read it for themselves. Some even have their own spurious translations.) People who want to make it say that the earth is billions of years old are denying the perspicuity of the Bible. God made his Word available and understandable.

The Reformers, first and foremost, gave their lives for the supremacy of the Scriptures over the prevailing traditions of their day. Often this is referred to as Sola Scriptura (“the Scriptures alone”; see 2 Timothy 2:15, 3:16; Colossians 2:8). This doctrine was followed by Sola Fide, that is, “the just shall live by faith” (see Ephesians 2:8; Hebrews 10:38), and then by the supremacy of the common believer over an exclusive priesthood . . .

These doctrines work together. The average person’s ability to understand Scripture by faith alone is closely tied to perspicuity, and this doctrine continues its importance into our day. . . . 

Historic doctrinal statements of major Protestant denominations—Lutherans, Presbyterians, Reformed, Congregationalists, Baptists, and others—all echo the refrain that the Scripture is self-authenticating to the sincere, searching heart in matters pertaining to redemption and personal growth in godliness.

To read the entire article, click on "Truth Everyone Can See".

Christian Worship and Evolution

The natural response of those who believe in salvation through Jesus Christ aone is worship. It should not be necessary to consider who or what God is, we should know that God is our Creator and Redeemer. When people in the Bible were in the presence of the Almighty, they were overcome with a sense of their own unworthiness, reverence, and tremendous awe. They worshiped him.

Credit: Unsplash / Diana Simumpande

Indeed, ancient Christian creeds like the Apostolic and Nicene begin by affirming that God is our Creator. Unfortunately, too many professing Christians have chosen reject biblical authority. They ride the owlhoot trail and try to mix long ages and evolution with biblical Christianity. This contaminates true worship. It also demonstrates ignorance of the Bible's plain teachings as well as adding atheistic interpretations of modern science philosophies to their worship. How confused is that? God is not weak and did not need millions of years to cause life to evolve, nor did he let us be deceived by Scripture until atheists told us what really happened regarding origins.

Before I give an excerpt of the featured article, I want to share a couple of related videos. Neither one is short, but both are interesting and helpful. Ken Ham had a debate with a Reasons to Believe representative named Jeff Zweerink. Although I think Ham left some things out that could have been said, he did a good job. You can tell that Zweerink was uncomfortable and incoherent when justifying his compromises. To watch this video and read the article, click on "Watch Ken Ham Debate Jeff Zweerink of Reasons to Believe". The other video is by Dr. Albert Mohler as he addresses the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary on God's creation of male and female in his image. Although there are items specific for Southern Baptist doctrines, the message is important to the church as a whole. To hear this, click on "Male and Female Created He Them".

Now, about that problem with worship and evolution...

At Moody Bible Institute, I was taught the church’s mission could be organized into three basic functions: worship, evangelism, and the edification (building up) of believers. If a church undertook an activity that couldn’t reasonably be plugged into one of those functions, then that activity was a distraction from its mission. Have you ever considered the effect evolution has on our worship of God?

You can finish reading by clicking on "Evolutionism Poisons Christian Worship".

Reason and Faith

Something I emphasize that is very important is definitions, as regular readers of this site and especially Piltdown Superman have read. I have noticed an increase in the tactics of theological liberals, political leftists, climate change cultists, evolutionists, and atheists to make an assertion of a false definition and build illogical but passionate arguments from there. Here, we look at faith.

Credit: Pixabay / Orlando

"Didn't you date Faith's sister, Cowboy Bob?"

I did have a date that woman. I wanted to, though. Let's leave personal history aside and move on.

Atheists essentially proclaim themselves as harbingers of reason. When pressed to give logical arguments, they proceed to produce logical fallacies by the bushel. Atheists and evolutionists insist on conflating science with naturalism, then proclaiming that anything to do with God is not scientific. They also denigrate presuppositional apologetics where Christians have the Word of God as their ultimate starting point, but they are hardcore presuppositionalists themselves, proclaiming godless naturalism as their starting point. The same thing happens when discussing faith. Secularists do have faith, but they have redefined the word in a derogatory manner to distance themselves from it.

Charles Darwin exhibited a wishful thinking type of faith when he admitted that he did not have scientific evidence to support his views (such as the fossil record). Evolutionists frequently use a kind of "science of the gaps" faith to fill in the missing evidence: science will find what is needed someday. Believing in such things without evidence is not science, it is blind faith, pilgrim.

When accusing Christians and creationists of not using reason, they are misrepresenting our positions. Faith is ridiculed, but it is essentially a straw man because what they call faith has nothing to do with real faith.

Atheists often accuse Christians of believing things or having “faith” without evidence and like to remind them of the old adage: “faith is believing what you know is not true.” In the eyes of many atheists, “faith” has become a buzzword for putting your intellect out of gear and for believing something without any reason or evidence for it (i.e., blind faith). For example, atheist and scientist Sam Harris, author of The End of Faith, argues that faith is separate from reason and is the absence of evidence:

Faith is nothing more than the license that religious people give one another to believe such propositions when reasons fail. . . . When we find reliable ways to make human beings more loving, less fearful, and genuinely enraptured by the fact of our appearance in the cosmos, we will have no need for divisive religious myths.

On a more popular level this argument is used by the atheist activist Aron Ra, best known for his YouTube videos, who defines faith in a similar fashion to Harris:. . . 

. . .

A favorite proof-text by atheists (including Ra) to argue that Christians believe without evidence is the apostles Paul’s words: “For we walk by faith, not by sight” (2 Corinthians 5:7). However, Paul is not suggesting that Christians take a blind leap of faith.

. . . 

Although these atheists may have heard sincere Christians wrongly say things like, “oh, you just have to have faith” as if they didn’t need evidence for their belief, this is not supported by the meaning of the words faith or belief that is found in the New Testament.

To read the article in its entirety, click on "Are Atheists Right? Is Faith the Absence of Reason/Evidence?" 

Evidence and Asking Questions

In the area of Christian apologetics, we make reasoned defenses for the truth of the Bible and special creation. It is the nature of this work to have people ask questions (1 Peter 3:15). Skeptics often try to come up with loaded or trick questions, saying that they "lack belief" for the existence of God. Such a claim can be met.

Although it is presented as neutral, the unbeliever is making a claim with the "lack belief" statement. Someone who lacks belief is actually saying that the evidence does not exist for the existence of God, the truth of Scripture, creation science, and so forth. Similarly, that person may also be indicating that there is no evidence that he or she finds satisfying. Arguing to meet personal preferences is often pointless, as they have apparently already reached a decision to suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Rom. 1:18).

Many times, misotheists try to put us on the defensive, but we don't need to cower to their "wisdom". 
Evolution is often invoked to make atheism appear rational. Origins is not operational science, but is instead forensic science. This is important to discuss, but there are times the subject should be stowed back in the covered wagon for a spell.

For people who are serious about having a discussion, we can ask questions of them. No, we are not willing to use "neutral ground" or put God on trial. Nor are we going to indulge a "Prove to me that God exists, scientifically" demand because that not only shows unbelief, but it also reveals their lack of logic because it is the category error (an equivocation fallacy; God is not subject to physical analysis). We must not act like we are interrogators for a police unit. Keep it in balance by sanctifying God and engaging with the person.

Skeptics and unbelievers in the modern era almost always make the same claim about their unbelief: they say they would believe if there were only sufficient evidence for God’s existence. They claim to have examined all the supposed evidence out there and found it all unsatisfactory. There is one simple question that anyone can ask such skeptics, however, that very often stops them dead in their tracks:

To learn more, you can read the entire article by clicking on "A Detective’s Approach: Looking for evidence of God". A related post is "Asking Questions to Reveal Answers".

Creationists Giving Glory to God

We read in the Bible hear sermons, and read articles that mention the glory of God. It is actually a very involved concept, beyond just "making God look good". Other people and I want to glorify God in our lives and what we write. It is a fair question to wonder if biblical creation science glorifies God.

Credit: RGBStock / Archbob

A big part of God's people giving him glory is reflecting his attributes. We must not steal his glory by proclaiming falsehoods instead of the truth, such as compromising on deep time and evolution when his Word clearly shows us otherwise.

Recent creation glorifies God because it acknowledges His accuracy as a divine Author. By accuracy I mean telling it like it is. What kind of God would inspire His prophet Moses to record “For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day” if in fact nature made the heavens and the earth over billions of years? And if God failed to fact-check Genesis and Exodus, then what other mistakes might He have made elsewhere in His Word?

 To read the entire article, click on "Does Biblical Creation Help Us Glorify God?"