This sounds like a sophisticated challenge…but its really not. My friend Brett Kunkle humorously shows why in this video. Sean McDowell and I also address it in our book Is God Just a Human Invention?–here is an excerpt.
Category Archives: Truth Matters
What is the nature and source of biblical authority?
There is a growing confusion over the nature and source of biblical authority. David K. Clark clarifies “the functional view of authority makes a grievous error to the degree that it collapses the critical distinction between the recognition of the Bible’s authority by the church and the Bible’s inherent possession of authority. For evangelical theology, a community’s act of recognizing a document as authoritative for its thought and life is essential, but this is not the reality, the power, or the force that gives a document its divine authority. That is, the church’s act of receiving the Bible as divine is not the ontological ground of the Bible’s being God’s Word. Rather, for evangelical theology, it is God’s act of inspiration that grounds the Bible’s status as God’s revelation. So this is the salient distinction: the ontological ground of the text’s authority is not the same as the epistemic acceptance of the text’s authority. For evangelical theology, the first idea, the ontological ground of authority, lies rooted in the objective reality of the triune God speaking through the Spirit’s inspiration. The second concept, the subjective recognition of the Bible as God’s Word by a believing community, is the appropriate human response to the authority of Scripture. These two ideas work together, and both are absolutely necessary. The objective authority of the Bible rooted in God’s inspiring action stands against allowing any contemporary agendas to gain control over the theology. The subjective recognition of the Bible as authoritative guards against a dead orthodoxy that pays lip service to divine truth even as it pursues other agendas.” From David K. Clark, To Know and Love God: Method for Theology, ed. John S. Feinberg, Foundations of Evangelical Theology (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2003), 65.
What is Inerrancy? by D.A. Carson (Video)
Because of God’s perfect character and the fact that He cannot lie, it follows that His revelation to us would be without error. Theologian David Dockery offers a good summary of this doctrine, “When all the facts are known, the Bible (in its original writings) properly interpreted in light of which culture and communication means had de- veloped by the time of its composition will be shown to be completely true (and therefore not false) in all that it affirms, to the degree of precision intended by the author, in all matters relating to God and his creation.”
And even though none of the original manuscripts exist today, biblical scholars have sufficiently demonstrated that the Bible has been accurately and reliably preserved for us. Therefore, the Bible you can buy today is essentially the Word of God. Indeed, “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16–17). Passages to explore: Psalm 19:1–4; Matthew 5:18; John 10:35; 17:17; Romans 1:18–25; 2:14–16; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; Titus 1:2; Hebrews 1:1–2; 6:18; 2 Peter 1:16–21.
Here is a helpful video by D.A. Carson:
Living well flows from thinking well
“Your intellectual life is important . . . for the simple reason that your very character, the kind of person you are and are becoming, is at stake. Careful oversight of our intellectual lives is imperative if we are to think well, and thinking well is an indispensable ingredient to living well.” – Jay Wood
Does Scientific Naturalism Provide Safe Quarter for Christian Theology?
“For if Darwinism is true, then religion and morality are nothing more than irrational, upper-story beliefs inhabiting the realm of value rather than fact. We are sometimes reassured that this is not a bad thing, because after all the subjectivity of the value realm renders it immune to rational scrutiny. The marketing pitch can be quite seductive: Scientific naturalists say they will acknowledge that there are certain moral and religious feelings that science cannot account for—if, in return, theology will agree not to intrude into realms investigated by science. In other words, if Christians would just relinquish all claims to objective truth, then they would be granted an arena where their beliefs are secure from criticism.” – Nancy Pearcey
That’s not a good deal at all and we should reject it—precisely because we are Christians who stand in a knowledge tradition. So I am with Peter on this one: “But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen” (2 Peter 3:18).