The doctrine of trinity, although being a subject of dispute between different Christian confessions can be considered as one of the main pillars of Christianity. The establishment of the doctrine of trinity and its support is largely related to two major events in Christian history, the Arian heresy and the formulation of the Nicene Creed. In that regard, this paper analyzes the Nicene Creed, explaining the relation between the affirmation of Trinity in the Creed and the roots of the Arian heresy.
The adoption of the Nicene Creed and the Arian heresy are two related events, in which the latter led to the occurrence of the first. The Arian heresy was the view of Arius, a priest from Egypt, that only Father is truly eternal God, and that Christ was a created God, and thus, did not exist eternally, as “there was when he was not” (Ludwig 156). Such opinion was a threat to Christianity at the time.
In response to such heresy, a council was convened to establish a solution to the problem, stating that Jesus is “true God of true God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the father”. It can be seen that the difference between the affirmation of Trinity in the Nicene Creed and its refutation in the heresy in that Arius’ view put an emphasis on the timeline of creation, rather than questioning the divine nature of Jesus.
Following the aforementioned, the Nicene Creed states that Jesus was incarnated by the Holy Ghost, made man, and that the Holy Ghost proceeds “from the father and the son”. Thus, the Creed did not refute the claim that there was a time when only the Father was present, where the superiority of Father can be seen in the aforementioned excerpts, although he is “true God from true God”. Thus, it can be stated that the Trinity opposed in the heresy differs from the Trinity affirmed in the Nicene Creed.
Defending the Trinity it can be stated that the Bible already indicated a support of the doctrine. Analyzing the first verse of John, the verses state that at the beginning of things, “the word already was, the word dwelt with god, and what god was, the word was”.
Thus, it is understandable that the word and the God are in unity, where the passage “what god was, the word was”, indicates their equality and similar nature. The line stating that the word “was with god at the beginning”, indicate their existence at the same time, with no time where one of them was absent.
Following the verses, it can be seen that the word represented Jesus, as “the word became flesh; he came to dwell among us… full of grace and truth”. Finally, the identification by name can be seen when John testifies that “while the Law was given through Moses, grace and truth came through Jesus Christ”.
Thus, it can be seen that the Bible all along contained an explanation of the relation between the Father and the Son as a confirmation of the Trinity doctrine. In that regard, it can be seen that the support contained in the Bible, unlike the Nicene Creed, not only answers the claim of the creation of Jesus, but also the existence of the Father and the Son at the same time eternally.
Works Cited
Ludwig, Theodore M. The Sacred Paths of the West. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Education, 2006. Print.
“Should the Concepts of Inerrancy and Infallibility in the Bible be utilized as Sufficient Justifications of the Legitimacy of Religious Positions on Social Issues?”
Introduction
It is quite interesting to note that studies such as those by Sherkat (2011) have indicated that an increasingly large amount of religious sermons, statements of faith, and a wide assortment of other such text related to the affirmation of the Catholic faith in God have increasingly utilized the inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible as a method of legitimizing their claims to faith and justifying their views.1
This is not to say that such ideas are without merit, given the supposedly divine origins of the Bible, however, scholars such as Beale (2011) have stated that utilizing the Bible as the justification for one’s faith and views is in itself highly flawed2.
Beale (2011) explains this by stating that even if the Bible is inerrant and infallible the fact remains that faith should be an internal development based on a continuing relationship with God which is supported by the scripture within the Bible, not the other way round wherein scripture is utilized as a means of legitimizing faith.
Other scholars such as Smith (2012) question the concepts of inerrancy and infallibility attributed to the Bible given the archaic nature of several scriptures and their general inapplicability to modern day situations3.
What you have to understand is that in order to explain the origin of the Bible, the terms inerrancy and infallibility are often utilized interchangeably due to their ability to point out that Bible is far different to any other book that has been written thus far given its historical and religious significance as the word of God.
Yet, it must be questioned whether such terms should be considered interchangeable given their markedly different meaning and utilization by both the church and religious scholars.
First and foremost the term infallible, when utilized in the context of holy scripture such as the Bible, can be defined as transcending concepts related to sin, spiritual or material flaws as well as the deceptions of its writers and the method by which it was communicated to others (i.e. through print, digital text, etc.).
In laymen’s terms this means that when the Bible, through the Holy Spirit, describes various aspects related to the good news of Christ such as the vision, purpose and character of God in relation to his design for humanity, is in effect doing so through a transcendental effect that goes straight to the character of the Bible and its message of salvation.
Inerrant, on the other hand, when defined once more within the context of the Bible, relates to the scriptures within the Bible always being right when carrying out their intended purpose of showing who God is, his vision and purpose for humanity and stating the good news of salvation through Christ4.
It is based on this that despite the obvious chronological disparity between the present day and the time in which the bible was written, the content of the scriptures should not be disregarded as if they were a mistake, rather they should be considered as fully applicable guides to current believers regarding the true and righteous path that God had meant for us to follow5.
Despite such obvious deviations in meaning and content, inerrancy and infallibility still continue to be used interchangeable to this day. On the other hand, it must be questioned whether the concepts of inerrancy and infallibility can truly be applied to the Bible.
This is based on the widely known fact that the bible as we know of it today is a combination of select scriptures by the council of Nicaea (325 AD) and as such excludes certain scriptures that could have similarly had the distinction of being considered inerrant and infallible.
Considering that the inerrant and infallible nature of the Bible is based on its divine origins, the fact that the there are some text that are intentionally excluded creates a sufficient amount of reasoning to assume that the Bible is not as inerrant and infallible as it would seem given that it can be deemed as incomplete.
It is based on this that it must be asked should the concepts of inerrancy and infallibility in the Bible be utilized as sufficient justifications of the legitimacy of religious positions on social issues?
Religious Positions on Social Issues
Religious positions on social issues encapsulate a wide variety of instances such as gay marriage, stem cell research, the death penalty, divorce and other such issues that have ethical and moral underpinnings.
It is usually the case that religious positions on such issues often result in positive or negative effects depending on the inherent intent of the religious group involved.
For example, due to the advocacy of various religious groups stem cell research has in effect been halted in the U.S. and in other countries around the world due to idea that continuing along this path of research is unethical according the views of God in the Bible involving the sanctity of life.
The delay in the social and governmental acceptance of gay marriage in the U.S. and in other countries as well is also a manifestation of the actions of religious groups over their interpretation of the Bible and how this results in their aversion to actions that have been distinctly stated as “abhorrent” within a variety of scriptures.
When examining such issues it can be seen that position of religious on a variety of social issues is connected to interpretations based on the Bible with the inherent justification behind its use being related to its infallibility and inerrant nature.
As explained by the article “The Evolution of the Debate (2012), various religious groups justify their arguments on social issues based on a literal and single minded interpretation of the Bible without sufficiently thinking if such a point of view is actually applicable to the present day circumstances6.
This is due to the fact that they believe that the infallible and inerrant nature of the bible deems their actions as justifiable given that they are supposedly in accordance with the will of God.
It is this way of thinking that calls into considerable whether utilizing the supposed inerrant and infallible nature of the bible actually creates a justifiably legitimate position by various religious groups on social issues7.
This calls into question whether the utilizing the bible as a means of arguing against the use of stem cell research, gay marriage and other such issues is truly valid.
Ethos and the Use of Inerrancy and Infallibility in the Bible as Methods of Justification
What must be understood is that Ethos refers to the way in which a person portrays themselves in an argument, in a sense it is a method in which persuaders present an “image” to people that they are attempting to convince.
This particular “image” refers to a persuaders “character” in the sense that a person is attempting to persuade another person of the righteousness of their statements based on their inherent character.
In the case of the various religious groups this takes the form of them attempting to convince other people of the righteousness of their cause on the basis of the image that they are portraying, namely, that the inerrant and infallible nature of the Bible justifies their arguments against a variety of social issues.
It is this argument on the basis of a projected image that is a cause for concern since basing it on a projected image alone does not justify the action itself8.
For example, a person may argue for the righteousness of a cause on the basis of their knowledge of the event yet this attempt at persuasion may in itself be self-serving for the person that is attempting to persuade other individuals.
An examination of the motivations behind the use of ethos by various religious organizations reveals that many of their bible based interpretations utilizing the inerrancy and infallibility as a method of justification actually originate from a self-serving nature.
Ethos in effect justifies their actions under the basis of a righteous cause yet in the end is more beneficial to them than to other individuals. In the case of ethos what must be understood is that it is “artifice”, meaning that is created, manufactured, made, constructed etc.
It can be considered a type of surface image which may in fact have an entirely fictitious relationship to what is actually true9.
For example, a teacher could show up in class one day wearing cowboy boots, a ten gallon hat and long sleeved t-shirt with a large image of a cactus on the front, the next day he can wear an average suit and tie while the day after that he could wear a Scottish kilt, bagpipes and one of those patterned hats.
The reason I mention it is due to the fact that despite the different outfits he wears the person and the ideas that are being presented have not changed at all, however, what is changed is the perception of the audience regarding the idea being presented.
The same can be said for ethos wherein the method in which the idea is “packaged” drastically changes the perception of the audience towards accepting the idea itself or the validity of its statements.
In the case of the ethos of various religious groups it can be seen that when boiled down to its very essence it is merely a statement which says the following: “believe in what I say since it is based on inerrant an infallible scripture”.
It is in the way that it is packaged and presented to the public that changes the perception of the public to the idea that is being presented.
What the public sees as an argument based on an ineffable and infallible scripture is in essence is a statement allowing to do whatever they want.
Inerrancy and Religious Positioning
Inerrancy is based on the concept that what is present is not false and affirms the truth whether it is religious, scientific or physical in nature.
What you have to understand though is that the Bible being inerrant does not mean that the interpretations of the Bible that manifest itself through religious doctrine, are sufficiently inerrant themselves.
For example, the current church doctrine which is specifically against the advancement of stem cell research is based off the supposedly inerrant notion of the right to life within the bible.
Since stem cells are at times derived from zygotes which are incomplete versions of a proto-human fetus their use in medical research is considered to be an abhorrent violation of the right to life as indicated by the bible.
It must also be noted that the concept of bible ambiguity can be considered a serious problem when it comes to religious positioning based on inerrancy since passages from the bible can be interpreted in a multitude of possible ways.
For example, The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood through their interpretation of the bible specifically state that the roles of men and women should be differentiated to specific roles within the family with no degree of overlap.
As a result of this, leadership positions within the family as well as in businesses, organizations and even in government institutions under the council’s view should be exclusively isolated to men alone.
On the other hand, the religious group “Christians for Biblical Equality” interpret the bible under the context of men and women being equals and possessing the ability to have the same rights and roles.
This type of variant interpretation has manifested itself into the creation of numerous church groups such as the Westborough Baptist Church, the Living Church of God and other such radical segments of Christianity that state that their interpretation of the Bible makes them the “true” church of God. Given that such groups have teachings that are considered “abnormal” even by the main orthodoxy of the Catholic Church is clear evidence that religious positions on social issues based on the inerrancy of the bible is unjustifiable given the different ways in which statements within it can be adjusted in such a way that they can actually promote hate.
One of the best examples of this can be seen in the numerous instances where the Westborough Baptist Church has openly picketed in numerous areas openly stating their hatred for gays, the fact that soldiers who died in Iraq for their country are going to hell and that God does not have a place in heaven for individuals that support concepts outside of their acknowledged religious orthodoxies.
From a certain perspective it can even be stated that the interpretation of the inerrancy of the Bible in the case of the West Borough Baptist church is one that actually promotes hate and bigotry, which were aspects that Jesus was clearly against during his time on Earth.
Other interpretations based on the inerrant nature of the bible take the form of religious groups within the Philippines which has the largest Catholic community in Asia.
Religious groups such as “Iglesia ni Christo” do not believe in venerating Mary based on their own interpretation of the Bible.
Other groups such as the Born Again Christians do not even believe in the concept of saints which is similarly based on their belief in their own interpretation of the inerrant nature of the scripture of the Bible.
As it can be seen, interpretations of the bible can be utilized to justify a whole gamut of possible manifestations whether religious or social in nature.
Can the Bible be Considered Infallible?
The premise of the infallibility of the bible is based on the fact that it was created as a direct action of divine intervention wherein the Holy Spirit inspired the original writers of the text to create the scriptures that we know of in the present.
As such, it is considered by many religious scholars as the word of God that has been imparted to all of us as a message of love, peace and the affirmation of our faith and our destiny as God’s children.
From the point of view of Grass (2007), the Bible is only considered infallible within the context of the Catholic faith given that other religions have their own versions of religious text which they similarly consider infallible (the Qur’an being a prime example of this)10.
Grass (2007), points out though that the infallibility of the bible at the present is often taken out of context regarding its original purpose.
The bible was meant as a means of guiding people to interact with their fellow man, to establish peaceful relations within society and to create a culture that values love, sharing and the development of social bonds that would discourage violent actions.
Thus, as a guide, it has indeed served its purpose given that biblical text has helped to inspire society towards a more “humane” way of interaction. Yet, as Galli (2011) is quick to point out, the bible was never meant as a means of dictating every aspect in relation to how society was meant to operate11.
What you have to understand is that the “timelessness” that is attributed to the infallibility of the Bible is connected to its nature of ethical actions within social relationships.
This means that aspects related to governance, development of technologies, conservation, environmentalism and other such topics which are at the forefront of modern day debates are not specifically included in the bible for the reason that it was never meant to encapsulate such aspects in the first place.
Hylton (2011) goes on to state that it was only when religious institutions started interpreting the various scriptures within the bible based on its inherent inerrancy that the current problems related to religious interference in social issues started12.
It based on this that it can be stated that the infallibility attributed to the bible when it comes to religious positions on social issues is unfounded given that what is stated within is taken out of context.
It must be noted though several studies which have examined current teachings within religious institutions reveal that many religious orders have started to teach students that facts contained within the Bible pertaining to specific scientific or historical events which do not have an impact on their concept of faith and the Christian practice of religious devotion, may in fact contain considerable errors.
This is in direct opposition to other groups who state that everything within the Bible should be considered as incontrovertible fact. What you have to understand is that despite the statements of a multitude of religious scholars, the Bible was in fact created in order to conform to ancient beliefs and practices.
This means that the story of genesis, marriage to children and even the stoning of women that cheat on their husbands were all manifestations of practices at the time and as such reflected themselves accordingly into the different scriptures.
In an era of modern science and greater social conscious involving ethical marriage practices and commensurate methods of punishment, the examples presented within the Bible can no longer be considered wholly accurate, and various religious groups have started to also acknowledge this as well.
It is based on this that the inerrancy of the Bible as an entirely accurate source of information is doubted and as such is the basis behind an argument against the use of the concept of the infallibility of the Bible as a sufficient justification of the legitimacy of religious positions on social issues.
Justification of Position Based on Inerrancy
Inerrancy is based on the concept of there being no errors whatsoever within a given piece of text. Aside from grammatical errors brought about by issues in translation, the bible supposedly has no errors and is thus the pivotal text often utilized to justify religious positions.
This has been seen in numerous instances throughout history such as the debate in stem cell research within the U.S., the removal of the death penalty within several Catholic oriented states within Europe as well as the Republic Health Bill within the Philippines which focuses on the introduction of sexual education classes to combat adverse increases in the population.
The justification behind church interference in such issues comes directly from doctrines based on the bible involving the right to life, the orders of God to “go forth and multiply” and the teachings of Jesus which specifically connote the necessity of protecting life.
In justifying their position on such matters religious scholars often point towards the inerrant nature of the Bible which focuses on the plan of God for humanity and the doctrines by which we should live our lives.
The inherent problem though with the bible is that it lacks sufficient advice regarding the current overpopulation of the planet, the spread of HIV and other sexually transmitted illnesses and the fact that stem cell research could potentially improve the lives of countless number of people.
As such, while Evangelical scholars point out that the Bible is “without error in all that affirms” the fact remains that its affirmations lack sufficient precedent on modern day issues.
This is not to say that the bible is wrong, the fact is that the bible acts as a sufficient foundation for reasonable action and behaviors which acts as the cornerstones of society, however, the fact remains that it should be considered as a foundation and not the entirety by which social actions should be based upon13.
In a rather debasing fashion, Hansen (2008) points out that the bible states that it is perfectly fine to stone a woman to death, have sex with a child and other similar types of behavior14.
Hansen (2008) utilizes this as evidence that the bible is not necessarily inerrant given that such methods of behavior are widely considered to be socially unacceptable at the present.
While the arguments utilized by Hansen (2008) are far from academically appropriate, the fact remains that they do point out the inherent weaknesses of the bible and the necessity of modifying the general attitude towards its inerrant nature.
For example, post modernist Christians point out that the bible should be considered partially inerrant with some aspects being utilized in order to justify methods of behavior but should not be utilized in order to affect issues which are social in nature.
On the other end of the spectrum scholars point towards the inspirations drawn from inerrant scriptures as the means by which moral and ethical decisions concerning society should be based upon.
As Jelen and Lockett (2010) explains, the fact is that the bible acts as a moral compass by which society compares its current position with the intended destination by God.
It is only through such an examination that we are able to determine whether as a society we are heading towards a path of positive development or adverse debasement under the guise of technological innovation.
Jelen and Lockett (2010) goes on to explain that society needs an inerrant comparison by which it can compare itself to in order to develop in such a way that it is in conjunction with the intended path set forth by God.
Such arguments are related to the concepts of the protection of life, barring the use of contraception, affirming the dual nature of the sexes (i.e. being against homosexuality) and the establishment of a life based on religious doctrine15.
Conclusion
Based on the given arguments presented within this paper it can be seen that the concepts of inerrancy and infallibility when applied to the bible should not be utilized as sufficient justification on religious positions on social issues.
One of the reasons behind this stems from differences in interpretation, whether intentional or not, that results in differing groups manifesting a plethora of divergent arguments.
What you have to understand is that the context in which the bible was written can be interpreted in either a literal or spiritual sense and as such can result in a variety of differing religious observances.
This can be seen in the general acceptance of homosexuality by one faction of Christianity and disdain from another. The same applies to views regarding women’s rights, religious observances and general ethics.
As explained earlier, the bible was never truly meant to encompass all aspects and changes that could occur within society. It was written within the context of the time of the authors and as such manifests ethical and moral principles that were inherent to this particular time frame and culture.
Thus, when compared to present day circumstances, the various social observances that were noted within the bible at the time become distinctly different. As such, when applied to present day social standards the bible cannot be considered wholly inerrant given that it can no longer sufficiently apply itself to modern day issues.
Not only that, it was originally meant as a means of helping promote social relationships such as friendship, love and peace and; it was not meant as a means by which people should dictate the way in which society should evolve.
It must also be noted that the infallible notion of the Bible is also highly questionable when applied to concepts related to technological development, population control and environmentalism given that it was not meant to encapsulate such aspects.
It was originally meant as a guide for interaction, faith and the development of love for one’s fellow man. Taking this into consideration, it can be stated justifying religious positions on the inerrant and infallible nature of the Bible is thus inapplicable since what is being done is merely interpreting what is being said in order to fit the definitions that suit the needs of that particular religious group.
It can also be stated that based on the presented information it can be seen that ethos can be manufactured and created for a certain purpose and in the case of the ethos utilized by religious groups its basis is one which advocates the manipulation of facts in order to serve the ends of that particular group.
The fact remains that due to reasoning of the ethos used by religious organizations that keeps on justifying itself on the basis of the infallible and inerrant nature of the Bible shows itself to be inherently flawed.
The ethical flaw in this particular case is the fact that basis a system of ethos on self-interpretation creates far too many risks in terms of the ethical principles behind the creation of the ethos itself.
In fact further examination of this type of ethos reveals that it seems more self-serving to religious groups than to the general public.
As it was established earlier the concept of ethos can be shaped and molded in order to entice greater public support for a particular issue.
That is what is being seen in the ethos of various religious groups wherein the justification for actions are based on an ethos that has been molded to create positive public opinion but in fact is nothing more than a method of allowing such groups to do what they please.
Bibliography
Audi, Robert. “Belief, faith, and acceptance.” International Journal For Philosophy Of Religion 63, no. 1-3 (February 2008): 87-102. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
Beale, G. K. “Can the bible be completely inspired by god and yet still contain errors? a response to some recent “evangelical” proposals.” Westminster Theological Journal 73, no. 1 (Spring2011 2011): 1-22. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
Durland, Stanley. “The Structure of Biblical Inspiration.” Journal Of Spirituality & Paranormal Studies 30, no. 2 (April 2007): 101-111. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
Jelen, Ted G., and Linda A. Lockett. “AMERICAN CLERGY ON EVOLUTION AND CREATIONISM.” Review Of Religious Research 51, no. 3 (March 2010): 277-287. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
Kantzer, K. “Why I still believe the Bible is true.” Christianity Today 32, no. 14 (October 7, 1988): 22. MasterFILE Premier, EBSCOhost .
“Leaving Out the Bible Can Lead to Incorrect Results.” Biblical Archaeology Review 37, no. 6 (November 2011): 12-66. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
“No Errors? The Baptists and the bible.” Time 114, no. 1 (July 2, 1979): 61. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
Sherkat, Darren E. “Religion and Scientific Literacy in the United States.” Social Science Quarterly (Blackwell Publishing Limited) 92, no. 5 (December 15, 2011): 1134-1150. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
Sheler, Jeffery L. “Mysteries of the Bible. (cover story).” U.S. News & World Report 118, no. 15 (April 17, 1995): 60. MasterFILE Premier, EBSCOhost .
Smith, Andrew. “Secularity and biblical literalism: confronting the case for epistemological diversity.” International Journal For Philosophy Of Religion 71, no. 3 (June 2012): 205-219. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
“The Evolution of the Debate.” Christianity Today 56, no. 7 (July 2012): 28. MasterFILE Premier, EBSCOhost .
Footnotes
1 Sherkat, Darren E. “Religion and Scientific Literacy in the United States.” Social Science Quarterly (Blackwell Publishing Limited) 92, no. 5 (December 15, 2011): 1134-1150. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
2 Beale, G. K. “Can the bible be completely inspired by god and yet still contain errors? a response to some recent “evangelical” proposals.” Westminster Theological Journal 73, no. 1 (Spring2011 2011): 1-22. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
3 Smith, Andrew. “Secularity and biblical literalism: confronting the case for epistemological diversity.” International Journal For Philosophy Of Religion 71, no. 3 (June 2012): 205-219. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
4 “No Errors? The Baptists and the bible.” Time 114, no. 1 (July 2, 1979): 61. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
5 Kantzer, K. “Why I still believe the Bible is true.” Christianity Today 32, no. 14 (October 7, 1988): 22. MasterFILE Premier, EBSCOhost .
6 “The Evolution of the Debate.” Christianity Today 56, no. 7 (July 2012): 28. MasterFILE Premier, EBSCOhost .
7 “Leaving Out the Bible Can Lead to Incorrect Results.” Biblical Archaeology Review 37, no. 6 (November 2011): 12-66. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
8 Audi, Robert. “Belief, faith, and acceptance.” International Journal For Philosophy Of Religion 63, no. 1-3 (February 2008): 87-102. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
9 Sheler, Jeffery L. “Mysteries of the Bible. (cover story).” U.S. News & World Report 118, no. 15 (April 17, 1995): 60. MasterFILE Premier, EBSCOhost .
10 Grass, Tim. “Scripture alone: ‘Is the Bible all we need?’.” Evangel 25, no. 3 (September 2007): 66-68. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
13 Durland, Stanley. “The Structure of Biblical Inspiration.” Journal Of Spirituality & Paranormal Studies 30, no. 2 (April 2007): 101-111. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
14 Hansen, Collin. “Bishops Battle for the Bible.” Christianity Today 52, no. 12 (December 2008): 16. MasterFILE Premier, EBSCOhost .
15 Jelen, Ted G., and Linda A. Lockett. “AMERICAN CLERGY ON EVOLUTION AND CREATIONISM.” Review Of Religious Research 51, no. 3 (March 2010): 277-287. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
Religious positions on social issues encapsulate a wide variety of instances such as gay marriage, stem cell research, the death penalty, divorce and other such issues that have ethical and moral underpinnings.
It is usually the case that religious positions on such issues often result in positive or negative effects depending on the inherent intent of the religious group involved.
In justifying their position on such issues, religious groups utilize the supposed inerrancy and infallibility of the bible, as stated by their respective religious doctrines, in order to show that their position on particular social issues is based off of the word of God (Durland, 2007).
Importance of the Study
What you have to understand is that the bible being inerrant does not mean that the interpretations of the bible that manifest itself through religious doctrine are sufficiently inerrant themselves.
On the other hand, the premise of the infallibility of the bible is based on the fact that it was created as a direct action of divine intervention wherein the Holy Spirit inspired the original writers of the text to create the scriptures that we know of in the present.
It must be noted though that various biblical scholars have indicated that the bible was originally meant as a guide for social interaction and not as a means of dictating how people should live. Not only that, it was not meant to encompass issues related to overpopulation, medicine and the spread of AIDS.
As such, this study sheds light on the current problem in utilizing the concepts of inerrancy and infallibility of the bible and will attempt to argue against its continued usage by religious groups who reinterpret the bible and use biblical scripture out of context in order to justify their own agendas.
Significance of the Study
The significance of this study is related to its use in enlightening individuals that religious positions on social issues based on the inerrant and infallible nature of the bible are inherently fallacious.
It was seen in the work of Grass (2007) that interpretations of the certain text within the bible is selective in that different religious groups had diverging methods of interpreting particular types of scripture (Grass, 2007).
For example, one religious group in particular, the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, actually interprets biblical text in such a way that they indicate that all women should be subservient to men and that only men should have leadership roles both in households and at work.
On the other hand, the religious group “Christians for Biblical Equality” interprets the bible under the context of men and women being equals and possessing the ability to have the same rights and roles.
It is due to these diverging methods of interpretation of biblical scripture that the justification of church groups regarding their position on certain social issues based on the inerrancy of the bible must be called into question.
For something to be considered inerrant it should not have multiple interpretations. It should have a single all encompassing interpretation that is not subject to the whims and agendas of third parties.
If such a text is subject to interpretation, then it cannot be considered completely inerrant and as such should not be utilized as a means of justifying particular social positions based on its supposed inerrancy.
Reference List
Durland, Stanley. “The Structure of Biblical Inspiration.” Journal Of Spirituality & Paranormal Studies 30, no. 2 (April 2007): 101-111, www.EBSCOhost.com .
Grass, Tim. “Scripture alone: ‘Is the Bible all we need?’.” Evangel 25, no. 3 (September 2007): 66-68, www.EBSCOhost.com .
Reference List from Main Paper
Audi, Robert. “Belief, faith, and acceptance.” International Journal For Philosophy Of Religion 63, no. 1-3 (February 2008): 87-102. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
Beale, G. K. “Can the bible be completely inspired by god and yet still contain errors? a response to some recent “evangelical” proposals.” Westminster Theological Journal 73, no. 1 (Spring2011 2011): 1-22. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
Durland, Stanley. “The Structure of Biblical Inspiration.” Journal Of Spirituality & Paranormal Studies 30, no. 2 (April 2007): 101-111. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
Jelen, Ted G., and Linda A. Lockett. “American clergy on evolution and creationism.” Review Of Religious Research 51, no. 3 (March 2010): 277-287. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
Kantzer, K. “Why I still believe the Bible is true.” Christianity Today 32, no. 14 (October 7, 1988): 22. MasterFILE Premier, EBSCOhost .
“Leaving Out the Bible Can Lead to Incorrect Results.” Biblical Archaeology Review 37, no. 6 (November 2011): 12-66. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
“No Errors? The Baptists and the bible.” Time 114, no. 1 (July 2, 1979): 61. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
Sherkat, Darren E. “Religion and Scientific Literacy in the United States.” Social Science Quarterly (Blackwell Publishing Limited) 92, no. 5 (December 15, 2011):1134-1150. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
Sheler, Jeffery L. “Mysteries of the Bible. (cover story).” U.S. News & World Report 118, no. 15 (April 17, 1995): 60. MasterFILE Premier, EBSCOhost .
Smith, Andrew. “Secularity and biblical literalism: confronting the case for epistemological diversity.” International Journal For Philosophy Of Religion 71, no. 3 (June 2012): 205-219. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost .
“The Evolution of the Debate.” Christianity Today 56, no. 7 (July 2012): 28. MasterFILE Premier, EBSCOhost .
The book How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth by Fee and Stuart is an outstanding work of the 20th century, which is accessible and, at the same time, the deep study of the Holy Bible. The authors involved in the field of theology carried out significant activities to analyze and interpret the main Christian text, and each of them contributed to the development of the book (Fee and Stuart). Professor Fee is a world-famous theologian and honorary representative of the Christian church. According to the introduction to the book, he wrote most of the chapters in How to Read the Bible, and in general, his contribution is more extensive (Fee and Stuart 13). Professor Stuart also took an active part in writing, and due to him, the sections of the book the Psalms and the Prophets with a focus on the Israeli background were developed comprehensively (Fee and Stuart 13). Thus, both authors are competent and sufficiently qualified to present their book to the general public.
The Bible is the subject of research in the book, and as approaches to analysis, the interpretation of its provisions and doctrines through a contextual approach is applied. Along with a critical analysis, Fee and Stuart emphasize a contextual assessment of the ideas described in God’s Word, for instance, historical assessment (53). This research principle makes it possible to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the aspects that influenced the creation of the Bible and explains its individual events and provisions on the basis of specific premises. The most significant elements of God’s Word are considered – the gospels, the parables, and other structural parts of a single theme. The practice of hermeneutic analysis based on raising specific questions and finding answers to them is an objective approach that eliminates bias and helps in the research process. As Fee and Stuart note, this work contributes to a standard and, at the same time, credible assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the hypotheses under consideration (66). Thus, the subject and purpose of the book are defined in detail and cover a wide range of research.
Regarding the unique comments suggested in How to Read the Bible, one can note individual chapters on the study of the Israeli biblical background. Fee and Stuart, in particular, the second researcher, gives an individual analysis of the Old Testament and its influence on Israel, that country that has a large role for the entire Christian community (164). In addition, the authors compare the concepts and ideas of two different eras and analyze the wisdom of God’s Word from the perspective of the modern principles of interpretation (Fee and Stuart 226). All these aspects, including numerous references to the primary source, make How to Read the Bible a book that deserves attention as an example of one of the most important works of the world’s religious heritage.
Premise for Writing
The premise for writing How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth is detailed and understandable, which makes the work of Fee and Stuart reasonable from the standpoint of relevance. In particular, the authors explain that initially, they pursued two key objectives: to evaluate the Bible from an exegesis perspective, which means interpreting its doctrines and individual topics, and analyze the contextuality of the issues raised through modern approaches and research principles, which corresponds to hermeneutics as a scholarly methodology (Fee and Stuart 12). Moreover, the roles of both researchers are distributed in accordance with their professional competencies, and despite the fact that both professors work in the field of theology, their academic background is distinctive, which, in turn, allows them to demonstrate their individual capabilities to the full. Therefore, the premise for writing the book is defined in detail and clearly, and this aspect gives an additional practical value to the work.
One of the most important prerequisites, according to the authors of the book, is the desire to provide readers with understandable and accessible ways of interpreting the Bible (Fee and Stuart 16). The need for this is justified by the fact that in God’s Word, numerous terms and definitions are given, which may not be understood by people due to ignorance of individual concepts and their origin. In this regard, Fee and Stuart draw attention to the importance of interpreting the Bible not from the perspective of a believer who takes the text of the Scripture for granted but from the standpoint of a reader who wants to understand the essence and basis (18). The nature and symbolism of God’s Word are aspects that are deeper than it might seem, and perception through analysis is one of the few ways to grasp the meaning of biblical messages. Thus, the reason for interpreting the Bible is not only of academic but also of practical importance for ordinary readers.
Finally, the explanation of widespread religious dogmas given in the Bible is one of the objectives of the book. Fee and Stuart state that the numerous quotes used in different sources often reflect incomplete or incorrect meanings, which, in turn, is fraught with semantic errors (24). Understanding the essence of the messages left in the Gospels and other sacred texts helps provide a more holistic picture and, thus, increases the value of analysis. As a result, the authors’ premise has clearly defined goals and includes a number of essential objectives associated with the concepts of exegesis and hermeneutics.
Authors’ Thoroughness of the Research
The research presented in this book is thorough and deep, and in addition to explaining numerous hypotheses and theories, comparisons and examples from religious literature are presented. In particular, Fee and Stuart turn to individual chapters and sections of the Scripture and analyze the context that might be interpreted in a new way by evaluating specific passages and using the literary context (59). The authors draw attention to the Epistle to the Corinthians and offer readers to pay attention to Paul’s answers not only from the perspective of their meaning but also based on the context of the narrative (Fee and Stuart 60). Such an example of engaging in reasoning indicates that the Bible is analyzed as thoroughly as possible, and every paragraph has been studied and evaluated carefully. In addition, Fee and Stuart note hidden problems in the content of individual sections, although the authors also remark that researchers themselves do not always have responses to all the questions due to the complexity and depth of the narrative in the Bible (65). This critical assessment confirms the thoroughness of the authors’ analysis and the scrupulousness of their work.
One of the main strengths of How to Read the Bible is the analysis of various branches of Christianity. The assessment of the individual nuances and characteristics of biblical subjects is conducted in detail. For instance, Fee and Stuart consider Protestantism both from the perspectives of hermeneutics and the historical premises of development and argue that this religious trend was associated with the mentality of restoration, which affected the content of individual biblical plots (104). Numerous references to individual chapters and verses enhance the credibility of the work done and allow evaluating the book as a detailed study rather than a general and superficial assessment. One of the conclusions that Fee and Stuart come to is that Bible doctrines are divided into three main categories: “(1) Christian theology (what Christians believe), (2) Christian ethics (how Christians ought to behave), (3) Christian experience and Christian practice (what Christians do)” (116). This statement largely explains the interpretation concepts proposed in the book and helps delimit individual fields, thereby increasing the depth of the research process.
Nevertheless, despite the thoroughness of the work done, some aspects of the book could be disclosed in more detail to make How to Read the Bible an even more reliable academic source. In particular, aspects concerning Christian shrines are touched upon superficially. Fee and Stuart emphasize the Israeli context of the formation and manifestation of Christianity, but they do not discuss other regions in which the religion also played a big role, for instance, Palestine that is mentioned only once in the text (173). The potential controversy is that Israel is not the only place on which Christian laws, including psalms, stories of the prophets, and other topics have had a significant impact. Therefore, despite an in-depth analysis, this aspect could be addressed more thoroughly, although, in general, the research is comprehensive and credible.
Impacts of the Authors’ Research
The book opened for me some interesting aspects of the analysis process concerning not only the interpretation of the Bible but also the research work as a whole. Individual sections offer valuable recommendations and guidelines on how to learn God’s Word correctly. For instance, Fee and Stuart mention three levels of narrative when analyzing the Old Testament, which allows distinguishing between the individual elements of this large part of the Bible and using suitable tools for interpretation (86). Several chapters about Israel have opened up much me, for instance, the principles of the formation of Christianity and the strict rules and laws that existed in the era of the ancient civilizations of Israel and Egypt (Fee and Stuart 173). From a theoretical perspective, the book has given me an opportunity to clarify the differences between exegesis and hermeneutics and understand which concept is utilized for specific research purposes and objectives. As a result, the acquired knowledge can help me in the future when analyzing other works in the theological sphere since many of the considered interpretation tools are universal and may be applied regardless of the direction of analysis.
At the same time, some minor aspects of the narrative seem controversial and biased since I would not accept them for the truth and regard them as the authors’ personal convictions. For instance, Fee and Stuart note that “unique interpretations are usually wrong,” which may be challenged (16). In case a competent and objective analysis is applied with the use of appropriate tools and approaches, there is no reason to believe that the interpretation process is incorrect or unfounded. This work may be uninteresting, outdated, or superficial, but one cannot argue that the research process involving an objective assessment by using current methods is incorrect a priori. In addition, I would not agree with the authors’ statement that “modern parents teach their children all sorts of wisdom, virtually every day” (Fee and Stuart 231). Many parents do their best to help their children socialize and acquire valuable skills. However, firstly, the everyday aspects of upbringing can hardly be called wisdom, and secondly, not all adults pay enough attention to children and teach them life values. Therefore, despite the many strengths of the book, I would also note some controversial aspects.
Conclusion
The book How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth by Fee and Stuart is a valuable and significant work in the field of theological research, and the authors’ numerous findings and concepts help interpret a large number of biblical doctrines in ways that modern readers can understand. The premise for writing is presented objectively, and useful practices for analysis are presented, in particular, exegesis and hermeneutics. I would recommend this book since it contains many references to the original Scripture, which allows delving into the interpretation process and confirms the thoroughness of the authors’ research. Despite a few controversial aspects and statements, the work done is of high practical value due to the coverage of a wide range of topics, and it may help understand the class content better. For me, How to Read the Bible has become the book that made it possible to review contextual approaches to analytical activities and pay attention to the variability of personal assessments.
Works Cited
Fee, Gordon D., and Douglas Stuart. How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth. 2nd ed., Zondervan, 1993.
The nature of human beings is one of the central throughlines in the Bible. According to the story of the first human, he was created in the image of God, “let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness” (NIV Bible Gen. 1:26). Thus, there is an inherent goodness to humans, as they bear a likeness to God, and “no one is good—except God alone” (NIV Bible Mark 10:18). Nevertheless, humans’ free will distinguishes them from other creations and defines their nature. Thus, people have both good and evil in them, and their choices and the actions of the first man are what determine their essence.
The problem of good and evil
As noted above, people were made to be inherently good and righteous. However, humanity’s nature changed when the first humans fell, as every descendant of Adam would bear his sins. It is written that “just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned” (NIV Bible, Rom. 5:12). Therefore, the nature of humans is evil as their free will drives them to commit sins. People’s choices lead to them either moving away from badness and repenting or accepting evil into their hearts. People can struggle because of their nature and consciousness when making moral decisions, and they can rely on faith to bring goodness back – “we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ” (NIV Bible Gal. 2:16). By having faith in Christ, people may transform their sinful nature.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Scripture demonstrates the path of humans from good to evil. Although people were created in God’s image, their sinful nature has led to the Fall and changed their lives. Thus, people are inherently evil from birth due to the original sin. The Bible shows that the only possible way to transform one’s life is to have faith in Jesus Christ and strive for redemption.
Work Cited
The New International Version (NIV) Bible. Biblica, 1978.
Topics on spiritual gifts and baptism among others ignite heated debates amongst scholars. Similarly, the topic on hell is large and complicated and it equally sparks debate amongst different people depending on one’s beliefs and perceptions. Two theological concepts form the basis of this controversial debate, viz. the existence of eternal punishment through fire and the view that the unrighteous have a chance to repent after death but before the judgment day (Kvanvig 2010, 61). The controversy revolves around what exactly unfolds to the wicked after their demise. The debate takes a form argument where the classical view differs with the annihilationist perspective (Boyd and Eddy 2009, 232).
The controversy is compounded by the view that different people interpret the scriptures disparately (Burley 2006, 178). For example, the annihilationist adherents assert that the words used to describe the final home for the wicked, viz. hell, should be interpreted literally as used (McFarlane 1990, 406). However, the traditionalists have a deeper interpretation of the scriptures by deriving an entirely different meaning of the same reading. This paper seeks to explore the hell debate by considering the different views on the issue. In this paper, the words used in the scripture to describe hell will be identified and explained. In addition, the paper will also explore the history surrounding the concept of hell and analyze the two central views that characterize the protestant evangelicalism to draw a personal conclusion on the concept of hell based on the analyses.
Terms used in the bible to refer to hell
Some of the words used to refer to hell in the New Testament include geenna, which is a Greek term meaning the eternal home for sinners (Burley 2006, 181). The term is the most used in the scripture and it appears twelve times. The second most used word is hades, which refers to the grave or simply the place where the dead are laid to rest (Holten 1999, 42) and it appears ten times in the scripture. The third word that is commonly used in the scripture is tartaroo, which denotes the action of sending the wicked to hell and it appears only once in the scripture (Smith 2012, 107). The words are derived from Greek and the first one (geenna) means a place deeper than the grave as per the Greek language and culture (Kvanvig 2010, 252). Similar words are also evident in the Old Testament where words like seol are common (Watson 1994, 222). The meaning of the terms depends on where it appears in the bible. For example, in Hebrew, the term seol is taken to mean hell or rather the home for the unrighteous (Boyd and Eddy 2009, 277). In the book of Proverbs, the term refers to the home for all people after death whether righteous or unrighteous.
Biblical teachings about Hell
Biblically, Jesus describes hell fire as “unquenchable fire”, which is preserved for all those who do not repent their sins before meeting their demise (Holten 1999, 52). According to the scriptures, Jesus will send angels to collect and throw the wicked people into a furnace where they will suffer eternally (McFarlane 1990, 419). In the judgment day, Jesus will send sinners to hell. The scripture describes the term to be used when sending the wicked to the eternal fire as “depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire” (Fudge 2011, 77). These words clearly indicate that hell fire shall last forever and that the wicked shall perish for the rest of their after death lives. The use of the term eternal fire, according to those who belong to the classical school of thought, means that the souls of the wicked shall remain in hell forever. According to the classical adherents, the main purpose of hell is to separate the wicked from God’s righteousness.
Annihilationist view vs. classical view
The annihilationist view refutes the scriptural idea that God will punish the unrighteous for all eternity (Watson 1994, 304). Instead, they argue that God’s punishment for the wicked will be short lasting after which they will be annihilated or rather destroyed meaning that they cannot suffer forever. The length of the punishment will vary from one individual to another depending on the nature of the sins committed (Kvanvig 2010, 249). On the other hand, the classical view holds that hell fire will continue forever. Both schools support their arguments by quoting biblical verses as explained in the following section.
Traditionalists cite Revelation 20:10 in their argument of eternal suffering of the wicked. The verse explains that the wicked shall be tormented and the smoke from the punishing fire shall go up “day and night forever and ever” (McFarlane 1990, 402). Traditionalists claim that the combination of the two terms “day and night” and “for ever and ever” in the aforementioned verse is convincing enough that the fire shall last forever. In their response, the annihilationist view claims that the term “day and night” means that smoke will go up as long as the targeted sinners exist (Boyd and Eddy 2009, 34). Given that fire is meant to destroy, the fire will thus consume the sinners and the smoke go away.
However, the annihilationist views remains silent on the other part “forever and ever” in their counter argument. The annihilationist view also claim that its assertion is supported by some other verses in the scripture that define the eternal fire as a “second death”, which is a clear indicator that the fire shall cause death of the soul, and thus end the suffering (Holten 1999, 41). In their response, the traditionalists argue that death signifies separation, and thus in this case, the term “second death” signifies eternal separation between God and the wicked (Watson 1994, 265). The traditionalists further argue that if the term “eternal torment” did not mean eternal fire, John, the writer of the verse, would have clarified its meaning in his latter writings on the same issue.
The annihilationist view also supports its argument by quoting the Old Testament, which illustrates how God destroys cities (Smith 2012, 107). The scripture describes fire used to destroy cities as one that reduces them to nothing, hence meaning that it leaves everything destroyed (Harvey 1997, 239). Therefore, based on the above teachings, the annihilationist view holds that hell fire shall be used to destroy sinners. In addition, the wicked shall not remain in hell forever as asserted by the traditionalists. The term “torment” as used in Revelation 14:10 is taken by the annihilationist view to mean “moments of destruction” and not eternal suffering as interpreted by the traditionalists (Kvanvig 2010, 263). The same verse (Revelation 14:10) indicates that cloudy smoke is seen in the process of destroying cities. They argue that the smoke signifies the destroying fire and it only lasts for the period of destruction, and thus fire can only last for a given period and then go away after the burning object is consumed. However, the traditionalists decline the annihilationist view of attributing fire to destruction.
The conscious nature of hell has also been noted as an issue causing heated debate between the two schools of thought. According to the classical view, hell exists in a conscious state (Boyd and Eddy 2009, 256). In a bid to make its assertions sound, the classical view refers to the teaching in Romans 2:89, which describes the pain and anguish that the wicked shall experience in hell (McFarlane 1990, 397). Those in support of the classical view claim that for the described pain to be felt, the wicked people must be in a conscious state. In addition to the aforementioned verse, the classical view cites teachings by Jesus Christ in the New Testament that center on the conscious state of hell. In his teachings, Jesus clearly painted a picture of hell as being eternally conscious in both scenery and duration (Burley 2006, 170).
On the other hand, the annihilationist view refers to the New Testament that describes God’s love for humanity and it rules out the possibility of such a loving God to leave his people to suffer in eternal hell (Janes 2011, 495). This argument is based on the logical view because human beings have equal standards of justice. However, the classical view refutes this perspective by adopting a logical view in response to the annihilationist idea. The classical view claims that a criminal must pay for his or her acts unless he or she ceases to exist consciously and in that case, justice will not have been served (Fudge 2011, 267). They argue that a wrong against God is infinite since He is infinite and thus any wrong done against Him deserves an infinite chastisement (Watson 1994, 245).
The conditional immortality doctrine is similar to the annihilationist view as it defines hell as a place where the wicked shall suffer for a specified period after which they will be destroyed (Harvey 1997, 247). This doctrine has drawn wide support from a section of Christian Protestants. In addition, certain prominent theologians such as John Wenham and John Scott support the doctrine. This section of Christians has rejected the traditional teachings on soul immortality by arguing that the soul dies together with the body.
The Seventh-day Adventist and Jehovah Witness are good examples of sects that belong to the conditional immortality school of thought (Holten 1999, 37). The two sects do not recognize the existence of an entity by the name “soul” that survives after death (Kvanvig 2010, 243). In other words, they are of the view that the soul dies with the body after which they will only resurrect in the judgment day. In addition, the two dominions do not believe in eternal suffering of sinners. Instead, they hold that the sinners will be subjected to punishments that will be determined by God in the judgment day and after serving the punishment, they will be destroyed. Both the soul and the body shall be equally destroyed and the suffering will end at that point. Therefore, these sects are opposed to the concept of soul immortality.
Conclusion
The scripture is mainly comprised of good news, but it also covers the topic on hell, which is deemed unattractive for most people. The topic on hell has ignited heated debate amongst Christian theologians who interpret the scripture in their own different ways. The hell debate is mainly formed of the traditionalist and the annihilationist views. Both schools differ on what exactly happens to the wicked after death. The traditionalists believe in life after death and eternal punishment for the wicked. The annihilationist view equally believes in life after death, but it differs with the traditionalist view on eternal fire. Both sides agree on the existence of hell, but the annihilationist view counters the argument by traditionalists that the wicked shall perish in hell forever. I
n its argument, the annihilationist view states that the wicked shall be exterminated. In light of the above description of the various views by different theologians and the scripture at large, it can be concluded that all people shall die before being raised from death to appear before God for judgment. However, according to the scriptures, some people will be ruptured if the event happens before they die. The judgment will grant either eternal life or condemnation to hell. In addition, there is no other way that leads to the glory of God apart from Jesus Christ who died on the cross for the sake of humankind. Christians should thus rely on the scripture for unbiased information on the nature of hell and the glory of God.
Reference List
Boyd, Gregory, and Paul Eddy. 2009. Across the spectrum: understanding issues in evangelical theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.
Kvanvig, Jonathan. 2010. Heaven and Hell: Oxford Bibliographies Online Research Guide. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McFarlane, Stewart. 1990. “Mushin, Morals, and Martial Arts: A Discussion of Keenan’s Yogācāra Critique.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 17, no. 4 (Dec.): 397-420.
Smith, Christian. 2012. The bible made impossible: Why Biblicism is not a truly evangelical reading of scripture. Grand Rapids: Baker Books.
Watson, Robert. 1994. The Rest is Silence: Death as Annihilation in the English Renaissance. Oakland: University of California Press.
There is a debate on whether or not Paul the apostle authored the highest number of books in the Bible. Bible fanatics view 80% of the New Testament as Paul’s work. While there is a degree of truth behind their assertions, based on the content of the books, there too stand some significant clashes concerning Paul’s work and that of other authors.
The book of Hebrews in the Bible forms the basis of this ancient argument, with some people declaring it as Paul’s and others refuting the claim to the level of campaigning for its removal from the Bible. However, the latter lot might not win in their demands based on what the adherents hold concerning the content and the authorship of the book.
Despite the unknown author, the adherents have gone further to declare it a canon. As the paper unveils, although the Bible has several books attributed to Paul, scholars claim that some of them, though treated as Paul’s were not really written by him based on their wording and content but despite the claims, churches found them worth including in the Bible as their content concurred with the overall theme of the Bible.
One might ask, ‘What makes the books mistaken for Paul’s?’
Similarities
In answering the afore-posed question, once something or somebody is mistaken for another, the two must feature outstanding similarities as so are those books in the bible, whose authorship is mistaken for Paul. Taking the book of Hebrews as an epitome of the argued books, “…there is still much evidence that Paul wrote the letter” (Allen 2003, Para. 8) arousing the need to find out why this might turn true.
The readers of the Bible need to realize the synonymous use of the words Hebrews and Jews. With such a light, they will concur with Peter’s words that Paul actually wrote the book of Hebrews. Addressing the Jews and therefore the Hebrews, Peter says, “…just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him” (2Pet. 3:15 NIV).
He therefore credits Paul as the author of the book. In addition, as evidenced in several works of one author, the themes of most of his/her works are more or less the same regardless of the title of the publication. Building on this awareness, Paul’s books, Philippians and Ephesians for instance, address the theme of salvation by faith. Paul says, “You were saved by faith in God…” (Eph. 2:8).
The same theme dominates the book of Hebrews thus passing Paul for its authorship. The verses 6:12, 4:2, 10:22 and 38, and the entire chapter 11 of the book of Hebrews address the theme of salvation by faith. Therefore, based on these revealed relationships, the reader can mistake Paul for the authorship. In fact, Allen confirms this when he declares the book “the grand finale of Paul’s letters” (Allen 2003, Para.4).
Therefore, the book features several connections with other Paul’s writings and hence the mistaken authorship. However, other people still refute the claim declaring Paul not the author, based on the evident differences and errors manifested in the book in relation to the true letters of Paul.
Differences
Paul’s patterns of writing, as evident in his letters, differ significantly from the patterns presented in the book of Hebrews. Taking Paul’s letter to the Ephesians as an illustration of the patterns, Paul asserts, “A husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the head and savior of the church, which is his own body” (Eph. 5:23).
The same message revolves around the verses 1Cor. 12:12-27 and Col. 1:18 among others featuring Christ as the head of the church. However, the pattern has, not even a single share in the book of Hebrews, which in turn restricts Christ’s priesthood to the Israelites only, as evident in Heb. 2:17 and Heb. 9:11-12 among others.
In addition, while Paul’s books point out the everlasting union between Christ and his people, the book of Hebrews presents the possibility of the breaking of the union and thus not eternal as Paul puts it.
The difference stands out well in 1Cor. 5:5 and Heb. 6: 4-6. Another striking difference comes in when Paul’s letters address much on the equality of both Jews and Gentiles while the book of Hebrews specifies the Israelites as better than the rest.
Further, based on the wording, the word ‘World’ appears more than 40 times in Paul’s writings, stressing on the redeeming power of Christ Jesus to the world whereas it appears not even once in the book of Hebrews. The exposition arouses the reader’s insinuation that Paul cannot pass for the writer of the book of Hebrews, who does not recognize Jesus’ redeeming capability as Paul does.
Moreover, while Paul points out the fall of the people of Israel in virtually all his books, the author of Hebrews addresses the issue differently with the same Israelites assuming the ‘Promised Land’. Despite the differences in opinions concerning the authorship of some of the books presumed to be of Paul, churches have further canonized them.
Canonization
The content, style, logic and beliefs among others, but not the author, determine the worthiness of a book such as that of Hebrews. In understanding the reason behind the inclusion of the book in the New Testament (NT) canon, the reader needs to understand the bottom line theme of the NT as well as the Bible at large. The church council cannot accept any book that does not address the central biblical message.
Therefore, the book of Hebrews must pass through the test prior to its canonization. Irrespective of the author, Lyoid observes, “The author of Hebrews presents strong arguments that we all need Christ, including: He is more wonderful than angels, for they worship Him. He is superior to Moses, for He created him.
His sacrifice is once for all time, whereas…” (Lyoid 2009, Para.8) Therefore, the central message in the book, Christ as above all, concurs with what other NT books claim concerning the same and therefore fit in the canon.
In addition, despite the difference in style between the book of Hebrews and the rest, he further questions, “can one really claim that Hebrews does not empower, inspire, humble the ego, and elevate the spirit in the same way that all other scripture does?” (Lyoid 2009, Para.3) showing how the book fits in the canon based on its contents and influence to the reader.
Books Disqualified
However, some books such as Tobit, Sirach, Maccabees, and Baruch, did not fit in the Bible based on the qualifications that a book has to meet before its canonization. Most of them did not concur with the Torah. In addition, their contents conflicted with the moral lessons of the Bible.
For instance, the Bible presents Jesus as the son of God and God too as evidenced in Jn. 1:1-3, the rejected books on the other hand contain contradicting issues concerning the same, further addressing Jesus as a man who had a wife. Therefore, the church council could not canonize such books as they did for the book of Hebrews, despite its unidentified author.
Human beings have always been trying to cognize the Universe and determine their roles in it. This desire could be considered one of the main distinctive features of our race. Since the first stages of evolution, we had been creating different tools to broaden knowledge by investigating the world and finding logical answers to numerous questions. However, along with the desire to understand the way mechanisms of the Universe work, people also possess the quenchless belief in the reality of miracles.
It could be explained by the fact that despite all efforts, there are still many mysteries that could not be explained by science or other approaches. In such a case people create a myth or miracle story which describes a unique phenomenon that has an overwhelming impact on individuals mentality. The great importance of these stories could b evidenced by the fact that the Bible, one of the most ancient and influential books that try to describe our origin, also includes several tales belonging to this very genre.
The influence of the Bible on people
Besides, when speaking about the Bible, its great role in the formation of people’s mentality should be mentioned. It is considered one of the most influential books in the history of humanity. Besides, its origins and purpose are unique. It was created as peoples attempt to cognize the dark, unfriendly, mysterious, and complex world that surrounded them1. Being not able to determine the purpose of their lives, the nature of death and existence, individuals created their religion which served as a landmark for those who wanted to obtain a certain aim and feel himself/herself a part of something greater2. In this regard, the majority of biblical texts are devoted to the description of this world through the prism of religion3.
It presents a unique perspective on creation and the origin of things which could be used by people to understand the world. Besides, the majority of genres that could be found in the book are introduced with the purpose to explain the divine origin of miracles and other unique phenomena as well as to assure people that faith is a great miracle itself.
For this reason, the Bible became the unique collection of ancient texts that contributed to the appearance of a certain mentality peculiar to Christians. One should assume the fact that the book formed the modern world as it shaped peoples mentalities and introduced certain behavioral patterns. Besides, this impact was exercised through stories and narrations that belonged to different genres.
The diversity of genres included in the Bible contributes to its better understanding and acceptance. The given approach results in the fact that the Bible and biblical plots could be found in any aspect of modern society. In this regard, we could say that the literature of the Bible plays a unique role in the formation of Christianitys appearance and its evolution. The understanding of its impact becomes very important in terms of modern society.
Traditionally, theologians distinguish a variety of genres that could be found in the Bible These are psalms, letters, poetry, parables, miracle stories, etc. The kinds of literature are included because of their unique power and their ability to impact readers. If to analyze the choice of the form of narration, we could see that only those which could meet certain requirements are chosen. For instance, the Bible consists of numerous stories that aim at teaching a person and showing him/her the right way to act in different situations. For this reason, the genre that is the most appropriate one is chosen. Furthermore, it has already been stated that the Bible also rests on the fact that miracles could happen in case people believe in God.
In this regard, miracle stories could be defined as another unique genre that is included in biblical texts. In general, these stories describe an event that contradicts the existing laws of nature and could not be explained by logic, science, or some other approach.
The most important thing in these stories is faith. Only in case, a persons faith is strong, he/she will be able to face this experience. Moreover, the Bible contains numerous stories of this sort that are devoted to God, his actions, and other unique phenomena that come from faith. The importance of these miracle stories could hardly be overestimated. Describing an unusual event, they might inspire people, strengthen his/her belief, and help in difficult situations. For this reason, miracle stories are one of the most popular and beloved among other ones.
From the historical perspective, the popularity of this very genre can be explained by the fact that Christianity as a religion arose in dark times when life was extremely dangerous, complicated, and depressing. People needed some landmarks which could show them that miracles were possible and they all could experience them. Moreover, living in extreme poverty and hardships, individuals wanted to know that a better life would wait for them.
The only thing they had to do was to believe and hope. For this reason, miracle stories, as the symbol of peoples hope and faith appeared4. The majority of these stories revolve around a simple plot or issue. However, they describe mysterious events that altered peoples lives and helped them to cope with difficult situations. That is why they became so important.
For instance, feeding five thousand people with five loaves of bread and two fish is a perfect example of a miracle story. Having arrived at a town where people suffered from hunger, Jesus was able to feed them with these products. He looked up to heaven, gave thanks, and broke these loaves, giving pieces to his disciples that were waiting for it5. One perfectly realizes the fact that it contradicted the laws of nature; however, it was a miracle performed by Jesus because of his divine nature. Moreover, it was possible because people believed in his ability to feed them and accepted Jesus gift. The given motif could be considered archetypical for the majority of miracle stories included in the Bible as they revolve around things or events that could not be explained from the traditional perspective6.
Jesus walking on water is another miracle story that could be found in the Bible. It could be considered one of the most well-known ones as it presents the unique power of faith. Jesus was walking on the lake, and people were scared by it Trying to calm them down he asked Peter to come to him. Peter was also able to walk on water but shortly he started to sink because of his lack of faith7. The given story shows people the unique power of their beliefs and religion. It makes individuals think that if they believe, their power is stronger and they can perform miracles by themselves. The miracle story could be considered one of the most powerful ones as it affects people who suffer from the same problem Peter faced.
Nevertheless, these two miracle stories are not the only representatives of the given genre that could be found in the Bible. Many other ones describe unique events and actions and inspire people. Analyzing these two different plots, we could state that they have some common similarities. First of all, miracles happened to those who believed. Moreover, they were performed by Jesus whose faith was doubtless8. For this very reason, they could be taken as the most important impact tools that make people read the Bible and follow the main patterns outlined and appreciated there as only in this way they could evidence a real miracle.
Conclusion
Altogether, we could state that being one of the most influential books, the Bible contains numerous literary genres and miracle stories are one of them. These describe unusual and mysterious events and actions that happen to someone whose faith is strong. For this reason, this genre is very popular with people as it helps them to face hardships and difficulties and look forward, hoping for a better future. The overwhelming impact of these stories is obvious. They are clear to everyone who starts to read the Bible and wants to acquire a certain landmark and behavioral pattern that should be followed to become better.
Bibliography
DePaola, Tomie. The Miracles of Jesus. London: Puffin Books, 2008.
Elwell, Walter. Topical Analysis of the Bible: A Survey of Essential Christian Doctrines: Keyed to the New International Version. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Pub, 2012.
Frye, Northrop. The Great Code: The Bible and Literature. Boston, MA: Mariner Books, 2002.
Gabel, John, Wheeler, Charles, York, Anthony, Citino, David, and Nicola Denzey. The Bible As Literature: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
The Holy Bible, New International Version. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2015.
Twelftree, Graham. “The Miraculous in the New Testament: Current Research and Issues.” Currents in Biblical Research 12, no. 3 (2014): 321-352. Web.
Footnotes
Frye, Northrop. The Great Code: The Bible and Literature (Boston, MA: Mariner Books, 2002) 77.
Graham Twelftree, “The Miraculous in the New Testament: Current Research and Issues,” Currents in Biblical Research 12, no. 3 (2014): 321-352. Web.
Ibid., 345.
John Gabel et al., The Bible As Literature: An Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005) 78.
The Holy Bible, New International Version (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2015), 136.
Walter Elwell, Topical Analysis of the Bible: A Survey of Essential Christian Doctrines: Keyed to the New International Version. Peabody (MA: Hendrickson Pub, 2012), 101.
The Holy Bible, New International Version (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2015), 254.
Tomie DePaola, The Miracles of Jesus (London: Puffin Books, 2008), 54.
The Bible is not just one book, but rather is a collection of many books that are historical, prayer, poems, epistles, prophecies and other kinds of books which were written by different authors. All these books are interrelated and they are compiled together to form the Bible which has one principal message of redemption of the human race.
Skeptics, agnostics and atheists have for a long time challenged the reliability of the Bible while trying to undermine its message and Christianity in general.
Over time however, there has been the emergence of numerous apologists who have defended the bible’s reliability against the objections presented by these skeptics, agnostics and atheists. This paper seeks to explain the reliability of the Bible based on the questions raised by those challenging its reliability. Among the questions raised are:
The reliability of the oral tradition on the basis of which the New Testament was written
The ancient Jews had their customs, teachings and practices handed down from generation to generation by oral traditions and great emphasis was placed on accuracy and reliability. Jewish children would be introduced to oral material at an early age which would then be perfected all their lives hence ensuring accuracy and attention to detail.
Those challenging the Bible argue that individuals were prone to forgetting and bias that would have distorted the original information2. However, the same information was taught to the community in general hence safeguarding it against faulty transfer to subsequent generations, as it is highly unlikely that the entire community would forget or exhibit the same bias.
The authors of the Bible were also inspired by God and though they were allowed to write on their own personalities and view of events, they were guided by their belief and the Holy Spirit rather than their own perceptions on the validity of the information.
Their personalities in this case were evidenced where people like Isaiah wrote with a powerful literary style, medical over tones in the case of Luke, while Jeremiah wrote with a mournful tone. John on the other hand took a simple approach to his writing.
This ensured that though the Bible was written by different individuals, living in different times and coming from all walks of lives and classes, its message was consistent all through the whole text. It has continuity as there are similarities and relations between the different books.
The bias of the gospel writers with theological motives
Contrary to popular belief, people do not always distort history just because the author is giving an account of something he or she passionately believes in. Though everyone has a point of view, it doesn’t mean that the analysis of as a particular event is that people’s witness is expressed according to their point of view.
In resent history the most accurate and reliable reports on events such as the holocaust were provided by the victims who were mainly Jews without being influenced by their views on the genocide3.
The New Testament is mainly made of eyewitness reports on events and some of the writers actually gave up their lives so as to defend the truth that they had witnessed. They also included events that were quite embarrassing which rules out any bias that they could have had since they could have included flattering stories about their lives.
Availability of archaeological evidence
It is evident that a number of non-believers have questioned the authenticity of the Bible in which they have raised alarm as to whether the events that are recorded in the Bible have been archaeologically proven. In order that this question raised by these atheists can be answered well, it is paramount that the term archeology is understood with reference to the study.
Archeology study refers to the study of things that were developed and used in the past by the early man. Therefore, this study aims at providing archaeological evidence that is meant to prove that the events recorded in the Holy Scripture are true.
All the events in the Bible have been accurately and articulately proven so that the information contained in this book is reliable. Many archaeologists both Christians and non-Christians have set sort to put the matter to rest and this has proved and verified the information in the Bible over and over again.
One of the verification explanations that have been relayed by the archaeologists is the existence of the customs that were practiced by the people in the Bible and are still being practiced to date. There are places mentioned in the Bible and they exist today, names and events all have occurrences that have been dated.
It should be noted that to date more than 25,000 sites have been discovered as they have been narrated in the Bible thus depicting the exactitude of the voluminous accounts narrated in the Bible.
An example of archaeological evidence that has been discovered thus proving the reliability of the Bible is evidence of the Hittites community in the Bible. It is evident that many atheists had taken this account hostage as the basis of grounding their criticism, but archeological digs have been made and they uncovered the existence of the Hittites thus silencing the critics.
Lack of extra biblical support
Atheists have impelled that the Bible lacks references that would otherwise authenticate its legitimacy. They have greatly faulted the Bible as having failed to show conclusive evidence that is expected to prove that Christ lives and that all the accounts narrated about him are true.
In order that this query could be resolved and the existence of Christ be authenticated, Christians have quoted a number of Christian and non-Christian extra biblical references that have set the record straight in authenticating the reliability of the Bible. One of the considerations that has been used to clarify existence of Christ in the Bible was the writing made by Clement.
Clement was a prominent figure in early church in Rome and at one juncture in his writing as recorded in the book of Corinthians he cites quotes from the book of Matthew, Mark and Luke. It is in this writing that he introduces those quotes as the true words of Jesus.
Reasons for the accurate transmission of biblical information through the centuries
The reliability of the Bible has been questioned by atheists in which they uttered that the biblical manuscripts that exist should not be trusted as there is a possibility of them being delusional imagination of human beings. To counter this proposition there are manuscripts of the Bible that have overwhelmingly approved the reliability of the Bible as the Holy Scripture.
It is evident that there are over 5600 partial and complete copies of the New Testament manuscripts of ancient nature. These manuscripts have been preserved and can be inspected to prove their authenticity. An example of the manuscripts includes the Chester Beatty papyrus manuscript that dates back to the third century A.D.
This manuscript contains four gospels and the book of Acts. The magnitude of the evidence that has been collected to prove that the Bible can be relied on and thus sets a deathblow to the atheists who have constantly questioned the sources of the Bible and the evidence that supports its contents.
The availability of variants in the Bible manuscript
The magnitude of the biblical manuscripts has made atheists to raise questions on the reliability of the Bible. This happens because there are over 200,000 variants that have arisen in analyzing the contents of the manuscripts. To counter this falsehood, Christians who hold the Bible as the Holy Scripture have watered down this allegation.
They have conceded that for sure there are over 200,000 variants that have arisen from the manuscripts. They hold that, despite this figure seemingly so high, for a levelheaded person this figure is negligible if they had been in a position to study the manuscripts.
In a nutshell the evidence highlighted from the manuscripts is incredibly accurate and it holds that the manuscripts are technically accurate in narrating the accounts recorded in the New Testament as they had taken place during the time of Jesus and the early church. Therefore, Christians holds that the manuscripts should be trusted absolutely.
In order that Christians could have down played the high figures of the variants that had arisen from a close analysis of the manuscripts, they have cited a number of things that could have contributed to the increase in variants that have been identified in the Bible. For instance, if a single word is misspelled in around 2000 manuscripts these results in 2000 variants and this alone undermines the severity of the variant’s problem.
Therefore, based on the example given above, Christians have legitimately held that over 99% of the variants that have identified in the manuscripts are of zero significance. It would not be prudent if any one justifies their criticism of the Bible based on this premises. This is not applicable because many of the variants have arisen either from the misspelling of a word or missing of a particular letter in the word.
In order that Christians can justify the reliability of the Bible, they have tabulated all the variants that have arisen and when all the variants that had been identified were put in the table only 40 of the 200,000 were identified as of having real significance. It should however, be noted that none of the variants juxtaposes any of the paramount Christian doctrines or moral standards as they are spelt out in the Holy Scripture.
Books that belong to the scriptural cannon
Atheists have stated that no one can for sure acclaim that this or that book in the Bible certainly was inspired by God. To ascertain their belief they had cited the books of Jude, James, Peter, Hebrews and John as having been doubted once as being the inspired books of the Holy Scripture.
To answer this proposition held by the non-believers, Christians have explained exhaustively on the criterion that was applied in discerning which book would be included in the Bible as the only God inspired books. It is evident that all books in the New Testament were subject to a five question canonical test4.
The questions that were asked were: firstly, discerning whether the book had been written by a prophet or an apostle who was a believer of God. Secondly, discerning whether the message relied in the book was authoritative. Thirdly, was discerning whether the book in question relayed the message of God and aligns itself along the doctrines that had already been revealed.
Fourthly was whether the book evidently portrayed as having power of God as any inspired book would have to exhibit the trans-formative power of God to all the readers. Lastly, they sort to discern whether the book had been wholeheartedly accepted by the people of God.
It is, therefore, prudent to conclude that God determined the canon and all the books that were written by the prophets and the apostles inspired by God are for sure the work of the Holy Scripture. This finding thus deflates the proposition that is held by atheists that some of the books in the Bible are not canonicals.
It is evident that the oral traditions in the Bible are reliable as Christians have proved beyond any reasonable doubt that it was God’s will to have all His revelation written down as they took placed under the inspiration of the holy spirit.
Both the old and the new testaments are the true cannons and they cannot be discredited by prejudicial or dissatisfied non-believers who do not have the underlying facts that form the foundation of Christian faith.
Bibliography
Albright, William Foxwell. Archaeology and the Religions of Israel. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2007.
Glueck, Nelson. Rivers in the Desert: History of Negev. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America. 1998.
Ramm, Benard. Can I Trust My Old Testament? The Kings Business. New York: R. R. Bowker Co., 1992.
Rhodes, Ron. Answering the Objections of Atheists, Agnostics, & Skeptics. Oregon: Harvest House Publishers, 2006.
Footnotes
1 Albright, William Foxwell. 2007. Archaeology and the Religions of Israel.
2 Glueck, Nelson. 1998.Rivers in the Desert: History of Negev.
3 Benard, Ramm. 1992. Can I Trust My Old Testament? The Kings Business.
4 Ron, Rhodes. 2006. Answering the Objections of Atheists, Agnostics, & Skeptics.
Why can the words of the Bible be considered as the Word of God? This question was discussed by a lot of scholars in different periods of history.
Thus, there are some main religious principles on which this discussion and possible considerations of the Bible as the Word of God can be based. Theologians are inclined to determine such significant aspects as the question of the authority of Scripture, the problem of inspiration and inerrancy and their relationship.
The question of the authority of the Bible is one of the most controversial issues for Christians. Their faith is based on their trust in the words written in the Bible as the source of God’s will. The evidences of the fact that the Bible is the authoritative source of the Word of God are given in the biblical text itself.
It is written here that all the words of the Bible were inspired by the Holy Spirit. That is why this text is not only the representation of God’s will but also the Word of God itself. “All Scripture is breathed out by God and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16 ESV).
As it was stated, the words of the Bible were inspired by God. However, what can be considered as the inspiration in the Bible? The inspiration of the Bible has the divine origin and realizes according to God’s will through His Word in the Bible.
According to Peter, “No prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. 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” (Pet. 1:21 ESV). Moreover, “long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets” (Hebr. 1:1 ESV).
Elwell states in his dictionary that “the Bible is from God and his character is behind it, it must be inerrant and infallible” (Elwell 2001, 158). Thus, the question of the biblical inspiration is closely connected with the problem of the biblical inerrancy.
The Bible is inerrant because it is the Word of God which is written by the inspired prophets. That is why the biblical inerrancy can be discussed along with the infallibility. All the words in the Bible should be considered as the truth according to this principle. “The sum of your word is truth, and every one of your righteous rules endures forever” (Psalm 119:160 ESV).
Elwell discusses four arguments for inerrancy of the Bible. The biblical and historical arguments can be considered as the most significant. According to these arguments, “the Bible teaches its own inspiration, and this requires inerrancy” and moreover, the Bible’s “authority can only be justified by or grounded in inerrancy” (Elwell 2001, 157).
It is impossible to speak about the biblical inspiration without references to the biblical inerrancy. Thus, “in each period of the church’s history one can cite clear examples of those who affirm inerrancy” (Elwell 2001, 158). Inerrancy of the Bible can be affirmed by a lot of historical facts.
The epistemological and slippery slope arguments prove the evidences of the first two arguments. Thus, from the point of epistemological argument “inerrancy guaranties the incorrigibility of every statement of Scripture” (Elwell 2001, 158). That is why the words of the Bible can be justified by the fact of the biblical inspiration. Thus, the relationship between inspiration and inerrancy is rather obvious.
We can conclude that there cannot be errors in Scripture because it is inspired by God. That is why we organize our life according to God’s revelation. We trust in the Word of God written in the Bible and consider it as authoritative. Our attitude to the relationship between inspiration and inerrancy determines the main principles of our life.
Reference List
Elwell, Walter A., ed. 2001. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. USA: Baker Academic. The Holy Bible. English Standard Version. USA: Crossway Bibles.