(By John MacArthur)

Biblical truth is objective. It is true by itself. It is true whether or not we feel it’s true. It is true whether or not it has been validated by someone’s experience. It is true because God says it is true. It is wholly true, and it is true down to the smallest jot and tittle. Psalm 119:160 says, “The entirety of Your word is truth, and every one of Your righteous judgments endures forever.”

That is the very starting point and the necessary foundation for a truly Christian world-view. Give up the ground of biblical truth, and whatever belief-system you have left is not worthy to be labeled Christian, even if it retains vestiges of Christian symbolism and terminology.

Many who would call themselves Christians today are in precisely that situation. They use the language and symbolism of Christianity, but their real source of authority is something besides Scripture. Some simply live by their feelings and shape their beliefs in accord with their own personal preferences. Others actually claim God speaks directly to them through voices, strong impressions, or vague feelings which they interpret as direct revelations from the Holy Spirit. Still others think of the Scriptures as an improvisational script, which they can modify or interpret any way they please. In any case, their lives and beliefs are ordered in accord with their own personal preferences.

But historic Christianity is based on the objective revelation of Scripture. That is why our first key word for describing the Christian world view is objectivity. Our faith is grounded in the conviction that God has spoken, and His Word is objective truth. What He has given us is absolute and unshakable — and it is the truth by which all other truth-claims are measured.

(By John MacArthur)

Scripture always speaks with absolute authority. It is as authoritative when it instructs us as it is when it commands us. It is as true when it tells the future as it is when it records the past. Although it is not a textbook on science, wherever it intersects with scientific data, it speaks with the same authority as when it gives us moral precepts. Although many have tried to set science against Scripture, science never has disproved one jot or tittle of the Bible—and it never will.

It is therefore a serious mistake to imagine that modern scientists can speak more authoritatively than Scripture on the subject of origins. Scripture is God’s own eyewitness account of what happened in the beginning. When it deals with the origin of the universe, all science can offer is conjecture. Science has proven nothing that negates the Genesis record. In fact, the Genesis record answers the mysteries of science.

A clear pattern for interpreting Genesis is given to us in the New Testament. If the language of early Genesis were meant to be interpreted figuratively, we could expect to see Genesis interpreted in the New Testament in a figurative sense. After all, the New Testament is itself inspired Scripture, so it is the Creator’s own commentary on the Genesis record.

What do we find in the New Testament? In every New Testament reference to Genesis, the events recorded by Moses are treated as historical events. And in particular, the first three chapters of Genesis are consistently treated as a literal record of historical events. The New Testament affirms, for example, the creation of Adam in the image of God (James 3:9).

Paul wrote to Timothy, “Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression” (1 Timothy 2:13-14). In 1 Corinthians 11:8-9, he writes, “Man is not from woman, but woman from man. Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man.”

Paul’s presentation of the doctrine of original sin in Romans 5:12-20 depends on a historical Adam and a literal interpretation of the account in Genesis about how he fell. Furthermore, everything Paul has to say about the doctrine of justification by faith depends on that. “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive” (1 Corinthians 15:22). Clearly Paul regarded both the creation and fall of Adam as history, not allegory. Jesus Himself referred to the creation of Adam and Eve as a historical event (Mark 10:6). To question the historicity of these events is to undermine the very essence of Christian doctrine.

Moreover, if Scripture itself treats the creation and fall of Adam as historical events, there is no warrant for treating the rest of the creation account as allegory or literary device. Nowhere in all of Scripture are any of these events handled as merely symbolic.

In fact, when the New Testament refers to creation, (e.g., Mark 13:19; John 1:3; Acts 4:24; 14:15; 2 Corinthians 4:6; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:2, 10; Revelation 4:11; 10:6; 14:7) it always refers to a past, completed event—an immediate work of God, not a still-occurring process of evolution. The promised New Creation, a running theme in both Old and New Testaments, is portrayed as an immediate fiat creation, too—not an eons-long process (Isaiah 65:17). In fact, the model for the New Creation is the original creation (cf. Romans 8:21; Revelation 21:1, 5).

Hebrews 11:3 even makes belief in creation by divine fiat the very essence of faith itself: “By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.” Creation ex nihilo is the clear and consistent teaching of the Bible.

One afternoon an enthusiastic author takes a seat behind a table at the local bookstore to promote his newly released, Everything You Need to Know to Fix Your Car.

“So,” a customer inquires skeptically as he approaches the table, “you claim this book is everything I need to know?”

“Yes sir,” the author beams. “It contains everything you need to know about fixing cars. If you purchase this book, you will need no other. It is absolutely sufficient.”

“Sufficient?” the customer retorts. “Well how is this book going to help me if my plumbing backs up?”

“Well I must confess that my book is not able to offer assistance in the area of plumbing, but when it comes to—“

“Then how can you say it’s sufficient?” the customer interrupts. “It doesn’t include everything I need to know, does it?!”

“Well sir, it actually does contain everything you need to know about fixin—”

“And take cooking,” he interrupts again. “How will this book help my wife improve her cooking? And how will this book help my son with his physics homework? Or my daughter with deciding whom to marry?”

“But sir, if you notice by the title, my book only claims to—“

“Sufficient??!!” the customer interrupts in disgust as he turns to leave. “Your book isn’t sufficient at all.”

————-

Ever since its waves first arrived on the shores of Christendom in the 1950s, psychology has increasingly grown in its influence on the people of God. Having captured and secured the fascination of the church of Jesus Christ, this field of study now permeates the thinking and ministries of God’s sacred institution at almost every level. As Tim Stafford writes:

Without any central institution nor any single leader, and almost without anyone paying attention, Christian psychology has moved to the center of evangelicalism. Psychologists write best-selling Christian books. Psychologists are prominent on Christian television and radio shows; they are the ones we look to for guidance on family problems and personal growth. Today, if you want to become a successful conference speaker, the surest route is psychology graduate school, not seminary.

To many, this infiltration of psychology into the mainstream of Christianity is seen as a much-needed move of the church in the direction of being able to adequately address the real problems of real people. To others, however, the adoption of psychology is not only unnecessary, but also tantamount to denying the sufficiency that the Word of God claims for itself.

As vigorous debate has ensued, a significant question has been thrust to the forefront of the discussion: Is the Bible alone sufficient for the ministry of counseling believers unto godliness? In other words, when a pastor or another member of the Body of Christ has opportunity to counsel a fellow believer who is struggling with a spiritual problem, is the Bible alone sufficient for effectively helping that individual?

In response to this question, the integrationist movement has said no, the Bible alone is not sufficient, and therefore the truths of Scripture must be supplemented by truths discovered through the study of modern psychology. According to Stanton Jones and Richard Butman, “[W]hile the Bible provides us with life’s most important and ultimate answers as well as the starting point for knowledge of the human condition, it is not an all-sufficient guide for the discipline of counseling.”

Many integrationists base their denial of Scripture’s sufficiency for counseling on the fact that truths such as 2+2=4 and E=MC2 cannot be found in the Bible. Because sources other than Scripture must be consulted to learn these truths and others, it is argued that the Bible cannot be considered sufficient for helping people overcome their spiritual problems. This objection is raised by a number of integrationists. Consider the following:

The Bible’s own claims to sufficiency (for example, 2 Tim. 3:16-17) are sometimes interpreted to mean that reliance on wisdom from extrabiblical sources is forbidden. Yet few if any Christians live consistently with this interpretation. All of us use the products of science and technology, take advantage of the discoveries of medical research, consult lawyers and accountants for advice, and watch news broadcasts on television. Do these activities run counter to the thrust of scriptural teaching? Not really. Rather than avoiding the use of extrabiblical sources of insights, we need to evaluate the information they provide within the framework of a Christian understanding of truth and life (Harold W. Faw).

Note that while inspired (“God-breathed”), [in 2 Timothy 3:16-17] Scripture is not declared to be the only and all-sufficient source for every word ever needed anytime by anyone for any purpose related to human need; rather, it is called “useful.” In other words, we do not look to Scripture for guidance for plumbing; nor should we for distinguishing schizophrenia from a character disorder (Stanton Jones and Richard Butman).

Physicians do not expect to find the treatment for a case of tuberculosis contained within the pages of the Holy Scriptures…. Geologists do not expect to find there a description of the sand containing oil reserves. Similarly, one would hardly expect to find material related to the field of psychology within the Scriptures, except where they directly illustrate or discuss a particular aspect of human behavior (Paul Meier, Frank Minirth, and Frank Wichern).

I know it sounds unscriptural to say that some individuals need more than the church can offer—but if my car needs the transmission replaced, do I expect the church to do it? Or if I break my leg, do I consult my pastor about it? For some reason, when it comes to emotional needs, we think the church should be able to meet them all. It can’t, and it isn’t supposed to (Dwight L. Carlson).

According to the integrationist, because Scripture lacks sufficient information in fields such as medicine, law, accounting, and plumbing, neither should it be considered sufficient in the field of counseling. Therefore, in the same way it is valid for a believer to consult doctors, lawyers, accountants, and plumbers to supplement his knowledge in these fields, it should likewise be acceptable for a believer to consult the findings of secular psychologists to supplement the teaching of Scripture as he seeks to counsel a fellow believer.

Initially this argument may sound sophisticated and compelling, but in the end it misses the mark. As Jay Adams writes:

True, the Scriptures do not contain everything. They are not a textbook for electrical engineering, shipbuilding (unless you are building an ark), aeronautics, or a hundred and one other disciplines. But they are entirely adequate as the textbook for living, and for changing our living to conform to God’s requirements.

In a similar way, John MacArthur states:

Certainly, Scripture does not claim to be a thorough textbook on medicine, or physics, or any of the sciences. But psychology differs from these in two important regards. First, psychology is not a true science…. Second, and most significant, psychology, unlike medicine and physics, deals with matters that are fundamentally spiritual. In fact, the word psychology literally means, “study of the soul.” What are the deep psychological needs if they are not the spiritual issues the gospel is concerned with? And Scripture certainly does claim absolute sufficiency in addressing those needs: “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16-17, emphasis added). “The law of the Lord is perfect, restoring the soul” (Ps. 19:7). Scripture itself promises believers the most comprehensive spiritual resources: “everything pertaining to life and godliness” (2 Pet. 1:3).

In other words, while the Bible was never intended to be a textbook for disciplines such as math or physics, it does claim to be an all-sufficient guide for godly living. Therefore, if the goal of Christian counseling is godliness in the life of the counselee, the counselor need not look beyond the wisdom found in the pages of Scripture to be equipped for his task. For if the counselee’s problem is spiritual in nature, Scripture is sufficient to meet the demand. On the other hand, if the problem is the inability to bake tasty muffins, a cookbook might be a better place to look.

(By Phil Johnson)

This concludes Phil’s series on the fad-driven church. For those who missed any of the earlier portions of this series, here are links to the previous posts: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, and Part 6.

As we have seen in the last two posts, the Word of God is both powerful and penetrating. Third—

3. The Word of God is precise.

Notice how this verse describes the ministry of the Word of God as precision surgery, not wanton destruction: “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.”

Now, obviously, surgery is ordinarily done with a scalpel, not a sword. Scalpels are small and precise, and razor sharp—just like the Word of God:  “sharper than any twoedged sword.” The surgeon uses a scalpel with great care to cut precisely, sometimes dividing fine layers of tissue with remarkable precision.

That is exactly what is described here. The Word of God divides soul and spirit, joints and marrow, and it is capable of great discrimination. It discerns “the thoughts and intents of the heart”—something that is not even visible to the human eye.

We cannot look upon the heart—the innermost part of the human soul. First Samuel 16:7: “Man looketh on the outward appearance, but [only] the LORD looketh on the heart.”

We can’t even correctly discern the thoughts and intents of our own hearts.  Jeremiah 17:9: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” We are all subject to self-deception and blindness when it comes to judging our own hearts. But the Word of God reveals what is really in our hearts, and it correctly assesses our thoughts and intentions. It shows our motives and our imaginations for what they really are. And that is why it is capable of such precision surgery—even in the deepest recesses of our souls.

Some people misread this phrase “the dividing asunder of soul and spirit”  and imagine that this describes two completely separate parts of the immaterial makeup of our beings. I don’t believe that’s what it is teaching. I realize there  are good Bible teachers who teach that man is a tripartite creature, consisting of body, soul, and spirit. But I don’t think that’s the point of this verse. Scripture often uses the expressions “soul” and “spirit” interchangeably. It is difficult to make any meaningful division between soul and spirit, and that is the whole point.

Just like the “joints and marrow” of your bones and the “thoughts and  intentions” of your heart, these things are so inextricably linked that it’s impossible to separate them without destroying one or the other. They aren’t  separate entities that exist apart from each other. They aren’t distinct human faculties. There is overlap and interdependence. But the Word of God is precise  and exact, and it cuts with painstaking accuracy. It divides what cannot otherwise be divided. It is sharper than any two-edged sword, and yet more precise than any surgeon’s scalpel.

Here’s the point: We ought to make better use of the Word of God in our ministry, and ignore all the evangelical fads that come and go. After all, only the Word of God has the powerful, penetrating precision that is necessary to reach and revitalize hearts that are cold and dead because of  sin. And this is also our clear biblical mandate: “Preach the word . . . in season, out of season”—no matter which way the winds of doctrine are blowing and no  matter how many fads and fashions come and go.

Obey that mandate, and God will bless your ministry. Chase every bandwagon that comes down the road, and you will regret it on that day when you give account for your ministry.

As we saw in yesterday’s post, the first characteristic of the Word of God is that it is powerful. Here’s characteristic number 2:

2. The Word of God is penetrating.

Notice how vividly the writer of Hebrews portrays this idea: “the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow.”

The Word is like a sword—”a two-edged sword.” It has no blunt side. It cuts no matter which way you swing it. Not only that, but it also has a penetrating point. It is “piercing.” You can swing it like a saber or thrust with it like a rapier. You don’t have to be highly skilled to use it with effect. In the hands of an amateur, it will still work. And there’s nothing so hard or so deeply concealed that it can’t penetrate.

In fact, look at the verse again: the Word of God is “sharper than any twoedged sword.” No human instrument or worldly technique or psychological therapy is more effective than the Word of God to penetrate the human heart. It lays bare the true thoughts and intents of every heart.

I had a friend in college who was describing his efforts to evangelize a fellow student. My friend was convinced—quite incorrectly—that stealth evangelism is the best way to win people to Christ. So he was trying to be a subtle as possible and as delicate and indirect as possible while waiting for an opening to tell this non-Christian student about Christ.

He kept telling me about conversations he had with this guy, and how he was looking for some kind of “opening” to work the gospel in. This went on for months. And it seemed to me that he had already wasted several good “openings,” but he just lacked the boldness to bring up the subject of Christ. It seemed to me that he was waiting for the guy to be like the Philippian jailer and ask, “Sir, what must I do to be saved?” And I could see it wasn’t going to happen. So I said, “Why don’t you just bring up the subject, and tell him in the plainest possible language what the Bible says about Christ?”

And he said, “I just don’t think he’s really open yet.”

But you know what? We don’t have to be “open” for the Word of God to penetrate. It is “sharper than any two-edged sword,” and quite capable of opening even the hardest heart.

We need to have more confidence in the ability of the Word of God to penetrate people’s hearts. This is one of the real deficiencies in this generation of evangelicals. We don’t have enough faith in the power of God’s Word to penetrate a hardened heart. And so some Christians—and even lots of churches—actually back away from proclaiming the simple Word of God to unbelievers in plain language. They think it’s necessary to have music and drama and other forms of entertainment to soften people up and prepare them to receive the Word. And in many cases they never do get around to declaring the Word of God with any kind of boldness.

You hear people today talking about “pre-evangelism.” I don’t know what that is supposed to mean, but usually it refers to some activity or technique that entertains people and tries to make them friendly to Christianity while carefully avoiding the risk of confronting them with the truth of Scripture—as if something besides the Word of God might be more effective than Scripture at penetrating their hearts. That is sheer folly, and it is a waste of time. Nothing is more penetrating and more effective in reaching sin-hardened hearts than the pure and unadulterated Word of God. All our human techniques and ingenuity are like dull plastic butter knives compared to the Word of God, which is “sharper than any two-edged sword.”

There’s a story in the biography of George Whitefield about a man named Thorpe, who was a bitter opponent of everything that is holy. He and a group of his friends—all of them young, rebellious thugs—conspired together to mock and oppose George Whitefield’s evangelistic ministry while Whitefield was preaching in Bristol, England.

George Whitefield had severely crossed eyes, if you have ever seen a realistic likeness of him. And these guys used to refer to him as “Dr. Squintum.” They called their little gang “The Hell-Fire Club,” and they disrupted meetings, mocked Whitefield on the streets and in public places, and generally tried to make his ministry a reproach in their community. Whitefield’s preaching had already made a deep and lasting impact in Bristol, and these young ruffians hated him for it. So this guy Thorpe got one of Whitefield’s published sermons and took it to the local pub, where the “Hell-Fire Club” was gathered to drink together while they make a burlesque of Whitefield.

Thorpe was apparently pretty good at doing impressions, and he had all Whitefield’s mannerisms and gestures down pat. So he stood in the center of this pub and crossed his eyes and began to deliver a derisive rendition of Whitefield’s sermon. But in the middle of the sermon, the Word of God pierced his heart, and he suddenly stopped and sat down, trembling and broken-hearted. Right then and there, he confessed the truth of the gospel and gave his heart to Christ. His aim was to taunt and ridicule, but he accidentally converted himself! Or rather, the power of the Word of God penetrated his soul and cut him to the heart. He became a preacher himself and quite an effective evangelist, because he knew so well the power of the Word of God to penetrate hardened hearts.

Notice that the Word of God pierces to the very depths, “even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” It probes to the deepest recesses of the heart, no matter how hardened or how closed the heart might be. In fact, only Scripture can do that.

Notice how militant this language is. It sounds like the language of armed conflict—swords and cutting, and dividing asunder of the joints and marrow. It’s vivid, destructive-sounding language—the language of warfare and devastation. And it is true that sometimes the Word of God pierces hearts as a judgment, without remedy and without any healing.

But I don’t think that’s primarily what the writer of Hebrews has in mind. In this context, he is urging his readers to examine themselves, lest they fall away from Christ before they have truly embraced Him with saving faith. He is warning them that it is possible to come close to Christ and yet fall away without entering into His rest—the rest that comes with redemption and the forgiveness of sins.

Verse 11: “Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.” And our verse comes immediately after that admonition: “For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword.” He wants them to allow the Word of God to cut through their pretensions and their false professions and reveal the true thoughts and intents of their hearts.

And this is a reminder that there’s a painful process involved in regeneration. In Ezekiel 11:19, the Lord describes what is involved in this process, “I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh:” Spiritual open-heart surgery.

This is the very thing that was pictured in the act of circumcision. According to Deuteronomy 10:16, it pictured the cutting away of the foreskin of the heart. Jeremiah 4:4 speaks of it too: “Circumcise yourselves to the LORD, and take away the foreskins of your heart.” That’s why the apostle Paul wrote in Romans 2:28–29, “he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit.”

That’s the very imagery our verse in Hebrews 4 calls to mind. It’s the cutting away of that which defiles. Circumcision of the heart. The Word of God is the instrument that makes this possible.

Painful cutting is often the necessary prerequisite for true and thorough healing. That’s what surgery is all about. And that is precisely the ministry the Word of God has in the lives of those who genuinely know Christ. If you have never experienced that painful piercing of the two-edged sword, then you ought to examine yourself to see whether you are really in the faith. Because you cannot possibly know Christ in a true and saving way unless the Word of God has rebuked your sin and cut into your fallen heart and convicted and convinced you of your own desperate need of cleansing and spiritual heart surgery to deal with your sin.

And that, I believe, is the very thing the writer of Hebrews is speaking  about here. It’s a wholly beneficial thing. Although the Word of God is like a sword that cuts deeply and penetrates to the very depths, it is a necessary and beneficial incision that ultimately is designed for our own good. And for those who submit to the Word of God rather than resisting it, the cutting and  probing of the two-edged sword always results in salvation, rather than destruction.

(By Phil Johnson)

This is continued from last Tuesday’s series on the ”fad-driven” church. This article is adapted from the transcript to Phil’s 2005 Shepherds’ Conference seminar on this topic.

We left off, in the last post with this thought:

Scripture is better than any fad. Preaching the Word of God is more effective than any new methodology contemporary church experts have ever invented. I don’t care who thinks preaching is “broken.” If we would get back to the clear proclamation and exposition of God’s Word, everything that’s broken about contemporary preaching would be fixed.

The nature of God’s Word guarantees that. And that’s exactly what I want to do in the time we have remaining in this session. I want to preach to you about the superiority and the excellence of Scripture.

Hebrews 4:12 says, “The word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.”

That’s a rich text, full of meaning, but let me take a few minutes to try to isolate what seem to me the three main qualities of the Word of God that are highlighted in this text, and let’s carefully consider what they mean.

First of all, it teaches us that—

1. The Word of God is powerful.

The King James Version says, “the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword.” Quick, of course, is the old English word for “living.” I was surprised in reading John Owen’s commentary on Hebrews that even though he wrote in the 1600s, he had to explain the word quick to his readers. He referred to the word quick as an improper translation, because, he said, “that word doth more ordinarily signify ‘speedy,’ than ‘living.’” So I don’t know when the word quick stopped meaning “alive,” but it was apparently before John Owen’s time.

I grew up in a church where we used to recite the traditional version of the Apostles’ Creed, which says, Christ “ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.” And that made perfect sense to me. I figured “the quick” were those who made it through the crosswalk, and “the dead” were those who didn’t.

But, of course, quick in this kind of context just means “alive” or “living,” and that is what this text is saying. “The Word of God is living.” That’s the correct sense. It speaks of vitality, life, activity, energy. The Word of God has a life-force that is unlike any merely human book. It is not only alive; it has the power to impart life to those who are spiritually dead. Jesus said in John 6:63: “The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” First Peter 1:23: “[We are] born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.” James 1:18: “Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth.” Psalm 119:50: “This is my comfort in my affliction: for thy word hath quickened me.” “Your word has given me life.”

You can take all the great books and all the great literature in the world combined, and they do not have this life-giving power. No book changes lives like the Word of God. You might occasionally hear a person say, “that self-help book transformed my life”; or “that diet book was revolutionary”; or “that book on philosophy changed the way I think.” Rick Warren makes a promise in the introduction to The Purpose Driven Life that his book will change your life.

But the life-giving and life-changing power of the Bible is something far deeper than any other book can legitimately claim. The Word of God renews the heart by giving spiritual life to the spiritually dead. It changes our character at an essential, fundamental level. It transforms our desires and impacts us at a moral level no human literature can touch. It brings a kind of cleansing and renewal and sanctification that no other book could ever claim to offer. It resurrects the soul. It has the same creative power in the command of God when He said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.”

The Word of God is inherently powerful. It has a kind of life and vitality that is unlike merely human words. Proverbs 6:22–23 says this about the Word of God: “When thou goest, it shall lead thee; when thou sleepest, it shall keep thee; and when thou awakest, it shall talk with thee. For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light; and reproofs of instruction are the way of life.” And a familiar passage, 2 Timothy 3:16–17 says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”

No other book has that effect. It rebukes us. It chastens us. It comforts us. It guides us and gives light to our path. It preaches to us. It restrains our foot from evil. It frowns on us when we sin. It warms our hearts with assurance. It encourages us with its promises. It stimulates our faith. It builds us up. It ministers to our every need. It is alive and dynamic.

And the vitality of Scripture is eternal and abiding. In John 6:68, Simon Peter said to Jesus, “Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.” The eternality of divine life is perfectly embodied in the Word of God. Again, Jesus said (Mark 13:31), “Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.” Isaiah 40:8: “The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.” Psalm 119:89: “For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.” First Peter 1:25: “But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.”

Every page of the Bible has a life-changing power that is just as fresh as the day it was written. We don’t have to make it come alive; it is both alive and active. It is always relevant, eternally applicable, speaking to the heart with a power that is unlike even the greatest of human works. The thoughts and opinions of men come and go. They fall from fashion and fade from memory. But the Word of God remains “quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword.”

And what is true of the whole is true of the parts. Every part of Scripture is alive and powerful. Proverbs 30:5: “Every word of God is pure.” Jesus said “Every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” gives life and sustenance. That’s why Deuteronomy 8:3 says, “man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.”

I’m always amazed at the passages of Scripture that have been instrumental in bringing people to Christ. I’ve told you before how I came to saving faith in Christ by reading 1 Corinthians as a senior in high school. The passage that drew me to Christ is not one you would necessarily think of as an evangelistic text. First Corinthians 3:18: “Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.” But it rebuked my sin and turned me to Christ.

I have heard people tell how they were awakened to eternal life by verses from the gospels, the epistles, the psalms, and even some of the obscure parts of the Old Testament. I doubt there’s a page anywhere in Scripture that has not at some time or some place been used by the Spirit of God to convert a soul. None of it is superfluous. Second Timothy 3:16 again: “All scripture is . . . profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.”

My friend Joe Aleppo, who is here this week, introduced me to a man in Sicily who came to Christ during a severe paper shortage after World War II because of a single page of Scripture from a Bible someone had thrown away. Paper was almost impossible to come by, so merchants used old newspapers and other scrap paper to wrap whatever they sold in the marketplace. This man went to the fish market and bought a fish. When he unwrapped it at home, one of the papers used to make the package was a page from a discarded New Testament. He read it, and this man who had been a lifelong Roman Catholic and had never before read a verse of the Bible for himself became a believer. That man’s conversion was the beginning of the first significant Protestant movement on the island of Sicily.

The Word of God is powerful. The Greek word translated “powerful” in Hebrews 4:12 is energes, which is the source of our English word “energetic.” It’s translated “active” in some versions, and that’s a good translation. It speaks of something that is dynamic, operative, and effectual. The apostle Paul wrote to the believers in Thessalonica (1 Thessalonians 2:13): “For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.”

The Word of God always works effectually. It always accomplishes its intended purpose. In Isaiah 55:11, God says, “So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.”

Sometimes God’s purpose is rebuke and correction; sometimes it is instruction and edification. Sometimes it is blessing; sometimes it is judgment. The gospel is “the savour of death unto death” for some; for others, it is “the savour of life unto life.” Either way, the Word of God is effectual, productive, powerful. It always produces the effect God intends.

That’s why preachers ought to preach the Word instead of telling stories and doing comedy. That’s where the power for ministry resides: in the Word. It’s not in our cleverness or our oratorical skills. The power is in the Word of God. And our task is simple: all we have to do is make the Bible’s meaning plain, proclaim it with accuracy and clarity. And the Spirit of God uses His Word to transform lives. The power is in the Word, not in any technique or program.

(To be continued tomorrow)

(By Nathan Busenitz)

Today’s post is Part 10 of our ten-part series on why we can trust the reliability of the New Testament Gospels. Earlier parts of the series can be found here: Parts 1-6; Part 7; Part 8; Part 9.

Tenth, we believe the New Testament Gospels are reliable because they have been faithfully preserved throughout church history.

Up to this point, we have considered various reasons why the New Testament Gospels can be rightly considered to be historically reliable documents. But all of this is predicated on the fact that those Gospels have been adequately preserved throughout history, such that the copies we have today accurately reflect the originals. If the Gospels had been irrevocably corrupted at some point in church history, we would not be able to trust the copies we now possess.

In point of fact, the New Testament documents (including the Gospels) have been preserved remarkably well. This, of course, is not true of all ancient documents. Caesar’s Gallic Wars can boast only ten extant manuscripts, the oldest of which is dated 1,000 years after the original. Only eight surviving manuscripts have been found of Herodotus’ History, the earliest of which is 1,300 years newer than the original. Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War is similarly attested to by only eight extant manuscripts, again dating from about 1300 years after the work was first penned. And these are just a few examples. [1]

In contrast to secular texts, the New Testament documents (including the Gospels) are very well attested, and from only a short period of time after the originals were penned.

Approximately 5,000 Greek manuscripts, containing all or part of the New Testament, exist. There are 8,000 manuscript copies of the Vulgate (a Latin translation of the Bible done by Jerome from 382–405) and more than 350 copies of Syriac (Christian Aramaic) versions of the New Testament (these originated from 150–250; most of the copies are from the 400s). Besides this, virtually the entire New Testament could be reproduced from citations contained in the works of the early church fathers. There are some thirty-two thousand citations in the writings of the Fathers prior to the Council of Nicea (325).[2]

Among the ancient manuscripts are the Chester Beatty Papyri (a group of early Christian manuscripts written on papyrus) most of which are dated in the 200s. Three of these codices (or books) of papyri contain portions of the New Testament. The first (known as “p45”) originally consisted of about 220 leaves and contained all four Gospels and Acts. The second (“p46”) had 104 leaves and included ten of Paul’s epistles. And the third (“p47”) is thought to have had 32 leaves, and contained the Book of Revelation. Today only a portion of those codices remain (around 126 leaves altogether), yet it is enough to serve as a valuable witness to the reliability of our modern Bibles.

Another important papyrus is “p52.” It is one of the oldest copies of any portion of the New Testament yet found, and contains a few verses from the Gospel of John (dated to between 100-150).[3]  Its significance lies in the fact that it “proves the existence and use of the Fourth Gospel during the first half of the second century in a provincial town along the Nile, far removed from its traditional place of composition (Ephesus in Asia Minor).”[4] The finding of this fragment shattered liberal theories about a late second-century date for the composition of John’s gospel.

The Bodmer Papyri also warrant mentioning. One of them, “p66” contains a large portion of the Gospel of John (of which John 1:1–6:11 and 6:35b–14:15 are still in tact) and dates from around 200. Another Bodmer papyrus “p77” includes Luke and John (of the original 144 pages, 102 have survived) and dates to between 175 and 225. It is the earliest known copy of the Gospel of Luke. In 1994, one other early papyrus was discovered by a German scholar named Carsten Peter Thiede. Though only fragments remained, it contained the Gospel of Matthew and may date to as early as A.D. 70.

That any manuscripts survived from the few centuries of church history is remarkable, since it was a time of such intense persecution for Christians. From the fourth century on, however, the number of surviving manuscripts becomes much more plentiful. The earliest and most important of these include Codex Sinaiticus (350, which contains almost all of the New Testament), and Codex Vaticanus (325–50), which contains virtually the entire Bible).

Along with these manuscripts and other ancient translations, the records left by the church fathers also confirm that the Gospels have been faithfully preserved. In fact, there are over 19,000 quotations of the New Testament Gospels in the extant writings of the early church fathers.[5] Their testimony bears witness to the fact that the Jesus they worshipped is the same Jesus we worship today.

Of course, there are sometimes discrepancies among the manuscripts that have survived. This is to be expected, given the thousands of copies that were handwritten throughout history. Such discrepancies, then, are due to scribal errors that were made (at various points in church history) as the manuscripts were being manually reproduced. 

But Christians need not worry too much about them. For starters, the vast majority of them are very minor (such as a word added here, or a word missing there). Most have been readily explained and corrected, through the science of textual criticism. And none of them pose a serious threat to any major Christian doctrine. The fact that there are so many manuscripts available to examine, some of which are very early, has enabled “textual scholars to accurately reconstruct the original text with more than 99 percent accuracy. [One] noted Greek scholar, A. T. Robertson, said the real concerns of textual criticism is on ‘a thousandth part of the entire text’ (making the New Testament 99.9 percent pure).”[6]

We can have confidence, then, in knowing that the Gospels we read today are faithful representations of the original Gospels, though we are separated by 2,000 years and by translation from Greek to English. Thus, we can trust the historical reliability not only of the original Gospel accounts—but more significantly (to us), of our own English copies. In the words of Frederic Kenyon:

The Christian can take the whole Bible in his hand and say without fear or hesitation that he holds in it the true Word of God, handed down without essential loss from generation to generation throughout the centuries.[7]

* * * * *

Notes:

[1] Cf. F. F. Bruce, The Books and the Parchments (Old Tappan, N. J.: Fleming H. Revell Col, 1963), 180. Bruce notes, “There is no body of ancient literature in the world which enjoys such a wealth of good textual attestation as the New Testament” (p. 178). See also the chart by Josh McDowell in The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1999), 38.

[2] J. P. Moreland, Scaling the Secular City (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 135–36.

[3] Cf. Carsten Peter Thiede, The Jesus Papyrus (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1996).

[4] Bruce Metzger, The Text of the New Testament (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 39. Metzger’s work was the primary source consulted for information on these papyri.

[5] Josh McDowell, Evidence, 43.

[6] Ravi Zacharias and Norman L. Geisler, Who Made God? (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003), 127.

[7] Frederic G. Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1958), 23.

Recently, I have been studying biblical prophecy from an apologetics perspective. It is a fascinating topic, and one that I have found to be very confirming.

In my studies I have come across five major objections to biblical prophecy (from critics and skeptics). Perhaps there are others, but these are the primary ones that I have found. Without going into too much detail, for the sake of space, I would like to briefly respond to each of these five objections in today’s post.

Critical Objection 1: Many biblical prophecies were written after the events they predict.

This objection is usually reserved for prophecies that were both predicted and fulfilled during Old Testament times (since it is impossible to credibly assert that the messianic prophecies of the OT post-date the life of Christ).

In response, a couple points can be made. First, very compelling cases have been made by conservative commentators for the authenticity of each of the Old Testament prophecies in question. Excellent discussions on the dating of each prophetic book, and even each individual prophecy, can be found in solid exegetical commentaries and other resources on the Old Testament. 

To cite one example, after extensively studying Daniel’s prophecies (one particular hotbed among critics) from a linguistic and historical point-of-view, Gleason L. Archer concludes, “The linguistic evidence from Qumran makes the rationalistic explanation for Daniel no longer tenable [i.e., that it was written later than the events it predicts]. It is difficult to see how any scholar can defend this view and maintain intellectual respectability.” Later he notes, “There is no evading the conclusion that the prophecies of the Book of Daniel were inspired by the same God who later fulfilled them, or who will fulfill them in the last days.”[1]

Second, it is important to understand that the case for redating OT prophecies (as the critics attempt to do) is an arbitrary one—driven primarily by their antisupernatural presuppositions. But if messianic prophecies (which everyone agrees predate Jesus Christ) can be shown to have been fulfilled by Christ, then there exists an undeniable example of predictive prophecy being fulfilled. Such would directly undermine the antisupernatural presupposition that critical scholars bring to the text.

Evangelical scholar Robert C. Newman, who has written considerably on the topic of biblical prophecy, notes the failure of critical scholarship to discount the authenticity of OT prophecies: “Even when critical scholarship has done its best to redate Old Testament texts so as to avoid fulfilled prophecy, the constraints provided by the translation of the Old Testament into Greek (250–150 B.C.) and the rise of the Christian church leave a substantial residue of clear examples [of fulfilled prophecies].”[2]

Critical Objection 2: Many “fulfillments” were arbitrarily directed toward Jesus by His followers (even though the original prophecy had nothing to do with the coming Messiah).

I believe this objection is due in large part to confusion over the way that the New Testament writers speak of prophetic “fulfillments.” As Bible scholar William Varner explains:

Regarding the specific number of promises about the Messiah, there is a wide divergence of opinion. Rabbinical writings refer to 456 separate Old Testament passages used to refer to the Messiah and messianic times (Edersheim, 710-41). One Christian scholar lists 127 personal messianic prophecies (Payne, 667-68). The differences are due to the way in which the New Testament refers to the Old Testament promises. There are direct messianic prophecies (e.g., Micah 5:2; Zech. 9:9); typical messianic prophecies, utilizing an immediate referent in the prophet’s day which pointed to the ultimate referent (e.g., the sacrificial levitical system); and applications of Old Testament concepts to the Messiah (e.g., the reference Matthew 2:23 makes to the prophets saying: “He will be called a Nazarene.”) If we limit ourselves to the direct messianic prophecies just mentioned, a conservative number would be around 65.[3]

When we talk about “fulfilled prophecy” with unbelievers, I believe it is best to either explain how the New Testament speaks of fulfillment, or to focus on direct messianic prophecies. Narrowing the “prophetic field” to just the direct messianic prophecies does not diminish the apologetic value of prophecy. Rather (in our opinion) it increases the credibility of our apologetic case by removing potential confusion from the hearer.

It has been calculated that the probability of only 48 prophecies coming true in one person is 10 to the 157th power, making it a statistical impossibility.[4] The point is that the case for Christ does not get any weaker when we get more specific.

We would add also that the Jews before the time of Jesus saw key passages like Genesis 3:15; Deuteronomy 18:15, 18–19; Psalm 2; 118:22; Isaiah 7:14; 11:1–10; and 53:1–12 as messianic in nature. Jesus’ followers did not invent the messianic implications of these passages.[5] As Alfred Edersheim explains, “A careful perusal of their [the Rabbi’s] Scripture quotations shows that the main postulates of the New Testament concerning the Messiah [i.e. that Jesus Christ is the Jewish Messiah] are fully supported by Rabbinic statements.”[6]

Critical Objection 3: Many of the “fulfillments” were intentionally fulfilled by Jesus, meaning they were faked. Jesus was motivated to try and fulfill messianic prophecy, so He manipulated the circumstances to make that happen.

The answer to this objection is easy. On the one hand, there are prophecies that Jesus intentionally fulfilled. We cannot deny that He was very aware of the Father’s timing (cf. John 13:1; 17:1), and that He deliberately purposed to accomplish certain things at the proper moment (cf. Luke 9:51; 18:31).

On the other hand, Jesus fulfilled many prophecies that no mere man could accomplish in his own power, no matter how intentional he might be. The Old Testament predicts that the Messiah would be a physical descendant of Abraham (Gen. 22:18), Jacob (Num. 24:17), Judah (Gen. 49:10), Jesse (Is. 11:1), and David (Jer. 23:5), but not of Jeconiah (Jer. 22:30—making the virgin birth necessary); that He would be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2); that He would have a forerunner like Elijah (Mal. 3:1); that He would be able to perform miracles (Is. 35:5, 6); that He would cause a major stir among His people and eventually be rejected by them (Psalm 118:22); that He would be beaten and killed as a criminal (Is. 53:5–12); that He would be buried in a rich man’s tomb (Isaiah 53:9); that He would have His side pierced (Zech. 12:10); that He would die before the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple (Dan. 9:26); and that, in spite of His death, His days would be prolonged, implying resurrection (Is. 53:10).

This list is not exhaustive, but it makes the point because these are things that would be humanly impossible to fake or manipulate. Jesus fulfilled many prophecies that an ordinary human being could not have “orchestrated” or “pre-arranged.”

Finally, it should be noted that even if Jesus did fulfill some prophecies intentionally, this does not invalidate those predictions. The fact that Jesus fulfilled OT prophecy perfectly, intentionally or not, points convincingly to Him as the Messiah. No one else in all of history (in spite of their best efforts) can make such a claim.

To quote Newman again: “Of all the Messianic claimants that Judaism has ever had, the only one ever considered an outstanding historical figure and ethical teacher (even by atheists) is Jesus of Nazareth. And He ‘just happened’ to conduct His short public ministry and be ‘cut off’ (killed) in the period A.D. 28-35 [in fulfillment of Daniel 9]!”[7]

Critical Objection 4: Many of the “fulfillments” were invented by Jesus’ followers (as recorded in the NT gospels) and cannot be independently verified by other sources.

This objection can also be answered on several fronts. First, as we have discussed in previous articles, the New Testament gospel writers demonstrate themselves to be historically reliable sources. Second, the main points of the Jesus’ life are attested to by sources outside the Bible (see here).

Third, even Jesus enemies (in places such as the Babylonian Talmud) do acknowledge certain key aspects of Jesus life by attempting to explain them away: such as the virgin birth (prefigured in Isaiah 7:14), Jesus’ healing and other miracles (see Isaiah 35:5–6; 61:1–2), Jesus’ claim to deity (prophesied in Isaiah 9:6), His rejection by the religious leaders (foretold in Psalm 118:22); and His horrific death (predicted in Isaiah 53).[8] 

Fourth, as we noted above, Daniel 9:26 predicted that the Messiah would come before the destruction of the temple (something that would have been necessary for his ancestry to be confirmed by the temple’s genealogical records). Not only would this have been completely outside of Jesus’ control, it is also clearly attested by historical fact.

It might also be added that other prophecies (regarding the nation of Israel) have also been fulfilled since the time of Christ. Following the destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem by the Romans (Daniel 9:26; cf. Luke 21:24), such prophesies include the dispersion of the Jews among the nations (Deuteronomy 28:64; cf. Ezekiel 22:14–15; Hosea 9:17), the persecution of the Jews throughout much of history (Deuteronomy 28:65–67), and the subsequent return of Israel to the land (Ezekiel 20:34; Hosea 3:4–5; Amos 9:14–15; cf. Isaiah 11:11).

Nearly two millennia after Rome destroyed Jerusalem, the Jews again established a nation in the Promised Land in 1948. As Jewish-Christian scholar Arnold Fruchtenbaum explains, “The restoration of the Jewish State is a fulfillment of those prophecies that spoke of a regathering [of the nation] in unbelief in preparation for judgment” (cf. Ezekiel 20:33–38; 22:17–22; 36:22–24; Isaiah 11:11, 12; Zephaniah 2:1, 2).[9]

Critical Objection 5: Many biblical prophesies have not come to pass.

This is easily answered by noting the difference between historical prophecies (those which spoke of events which would occur in a relatively short time after they were predicted—including messianic prophecies), and end-times prophecies (which will not be fulfilled until Jesus returns) or heavenly prophecies (those which are not fulfilled on this earth).

To quote again from Dr. Varner:

The key to understanding the role of the promised Messiah, and also the main difference between traditional Jewish and Christian messianic views, lies in recognizing His dual role of suffering and reigning. While there are many passages that describe a glorious reign for the Messiah (Jer. 23:5,6; 30:1–10; Zech. 14:3ff), there are others that describe His rejection and suffering (Psalm 22, Isa. 53, Zech. 9:9; 12:10; 13:5-7). The NT views the suffering and glory passages as fulfilled in Jesus’ first and second comings respectively (Luke 24:25-27; I Peter 1:10,11).[10]

* * * * * 

Notes: 

[1] Gleason L. Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1982), 24–26.

[2] Robert C. Newman, “Fulfilled Prophecy as Miracle,” pp. 214–225 in In Defense of Miracles, edited by Douglas Geivett and Gary R. Habermas (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1997), 224–225.

[3] William Varner, The Messiah: Revealed, Rejected, Received (Bloomington, Ind.: Author House, 2004), 7.

[4] John Ankerberg with John Weldon and Walter Kaiser, The Case for Jesus the Messiah (Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House, 1989), 21.

[5] Josh McDowell, in The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1999), 169ff surveys some of the Jewish testimony to such prophecies.

[6] Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, one volume edition (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1972), 165.

[7] Robert C. Newman, “The Testimony of Messianic Prophecy” 203–214 in Evidence for Faith, edited by John Warwick Montgomery (Dallas, Tex.: Probe Books, 1991), 212.

[8] Peter Schäfer, Jesus in the Talmud (Princeton University Press, 2007) catalogues many of the references to Jesus found in Jewish writings after Christ.

[9] Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, The Footsteps of the Messiah (San Antonio, Tex.: Ariel Press, 2003), 104.

[10] Varner, The Messiah, 7.

Recently, the good folks at Bible Bulletin Board posted a two-part series that John preached just a few weeks ago, on the authority, sufficiency, and inerrancy of Scripture (from Psalm 19). The transcripts can be read here (Part 1) and here (Part 2). 

The entire sermons are worth a read, but here is a short excerpt to give our readers a taste.

* * * * *

We are living in a time, as I pointed out in our last study together, when the sufficiency of Scripture is under unique assault. The move to psychology as a necessary component in solving man’s problems indicates that the Bible in itself is not enough [in the view of many]. The search for methods found in the world’s economics and the world’s businesses and the world’s techniques, and the world’s strategies to apply in building the church are an indication that the Scripture itself is [considered to be] not enough for the life and growth and expansion of the church.

The demand for political power as the key to the church’s influence, as the key to revival in a society and in a culture is testimony to the fact that among some people the Bible itself is not sufficient. The cry for miracles, the cry for signs, and wonders, and new revelations and supernatural activities is another indication that the Bible in and of itself is [considered] not enough to demonstrate the great power of God. The invention of a synthetic gospel, a pop gospel of prosperity and indulgence and sensuality and success and self-fulfillment and self-indulgence is another testimony to the fact that there is a lack of confidence in the sufficiency of Scripture to do its work of changing lives.

All of these really are a demonstration of the tragic worldliness of the church. When the church has to design its ministry around non-biblical things, it has abandoned its confidence in the Word of God and thus has brought reproach upon God who Himself affirms the absolute sufficiency of His Word. It forces us to ask this substantially foundational question: Is the Scripture enough? 

Is it enough to do the work of evangelism? Is it enough to do the work of sanctification? Is it enough to solve the problems of the human heart?  Is it enough to build and extend and advance the church? Or do we need to concede that the Scripture has its limitations that have to be overcome by psychology, by human wisdom, and strategy, by political clout, by new revelations, by wonders and signs? Do we have to somehow overcome the stigma of the gospel by inventing a more popular message that will be acceptable to people? Is the Bible so lacking in its own power and sufficiency that we have to apply human wisdom and human technique to help God overcome the natural resistance of a fallen world?

Well the answer to that question about the sufficiency of Scripture is given by God Himself in Psalm 19.  Let’s return to Psalm 19.  In fact, there are many, many places in the Scripture where its own sufficiency is attested, more than one could exposit, probably, in a lifetime. But here is one that is a great and rich and comprehensive summation. Here is God’s own witness, God’s own revelation as to the sufficiency of Scripture. 

(By Nathan Busenitz)

This is the next installment in our series on why we can trust the New Testament gospel accounts. Today we consider a ninth reason in our list of ten.

Ninth, the biblical gospels are clearly superior to other supposed gospels.

It sometimes surprises, or even frightens, contemporary Christians to learn that there are other “gospels” outside of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. But they need not be afraid. “The apocryphal gospels, even the earliest and soberest among them, can hardly be compared with the canonical gospels. The former are all patently secondary and legendary and obviously slanted.”[1] Of these extra-biblical traditions about Jesus, “only a tiny proportion have even a slight claim to being genuine. The vast majority of the material is quite worthless as a historical source for knowledge of Jesus, and their real value lies more in highlighting the quality of information preserved in the canonical gospels themselves.”[2]

It is possible, of course, that we might find some factual accounts about Jesus outside of the biblical gospels. The gospels do not claim to be exhaustive biographies of the life of Jesus. In fact, John closes his gospel by stating: “Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written” (John 21:25). What the gospels do claim, however, is that the information they provide is both accurate and sufficient, so that when you read them “you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught” (Luke 1:4).

It is also important to recognize that the New Testament continually warns against the reality of false teachers—those who would distort the truth for their own gain. In their letters, the apostles warned their readers about the danger of certain heresies, including lies that might affect their understanding of Jesus and His redemptive work (e.g. 1 Cor. 15:13–14 Gal. 1:6–10; Col. 2:4; 1 Tim. 4:7; 1 John 4:1–3; 2 Peter 1:16; Jude 3–4).

Among these heresies, gnosticism was a growing concern. “The name gnosticism comes from the Greek word gnosis, meaning ‘knowledge,’ and stresses the character of this heresy. Gnosticism was a philosophical system built upon Greek philosophy that stressed matter was evil but spirit was good.”[3] The gnostics believed that matter was evil, which caused them to reinterpret and distort the incarnation of Christ. If matter is evil but Christ is good, the gnostics reasoned, then He could not have possessed a physical body. To solve this problem the gnostics invented two possible explanations: “one view was that because matter was evil, Jesus could not have actually come in human form; He only appeared in human form and only appeared to suffer. The other view suggested that the divine Logos came upon the human Jesus [at His baptism] and departed prior to the crucifixion.”[4]

In either case, the gnostic view of Jesus was completely incompatible with that taught by the apostles (cf. Titus 3:9; 1 Tim. 4:3). In the words of the apostle John, “Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God” (1 John 4:2–3). Paul likewise warned Timothy to “avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called ‘knowledge’ [gnosis]” (1 Tim. 6:20).

The gnostic gospels, along with other grossly imaginative accounts of the life of Jesus Christ, were rightly rejected by the early Christians.

The emergence of documents with strange fairy-tale-like stories about Jesus and skewed theological ideas in works such as the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of Mary, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, and indeed the Gospel of Truth (which in fact is not a gospel in the sense of Gospel genre but more of a theological treatise) bear witness to the necessity in the church for authoritative Gospels to combat the growth of deviant views and fanciful legends concerning Jesus. To peruse these noncanonical documents and reflect on the stories about Jesus preserved in them and other early documents gives the reader the immediate sense of the genuine reserve and feeling of authenticity that is present in the canonical presentations concerning Jesus.[5]

Following the warning of the apostles, the early church rejected these gospels. They were either so fanciful or so theologically skewed (by gnosticism or the like) that their historical authenticity was clearly lacking. In some cases, such as the Gospel of Thomas, they are little more than a collection of sayings, and therefore not really “gospels” at all.

By contrast, the four New Testament Gospels all contain orderly accounts of the birth, life, deeds, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. They also point to the glorious “good news” of redemption in Jesus Christ, and are therefore “gospels” in the truest sense of the word.[6]

The New Testament gospels are clearly superior—both in terms of being straightforward accounts of Jesus’ life, and also by being theologically consistent with what the apostles taught in the rest of the New Testament. This again affirms the trustworthiness of the NT gospels, and helps explain why the early Christians, from the earliest points of church history, were able to distinguish between the true gospels and the counterfeits.

* * * * *

Notes: 

[1] Edwin Yamauchi, cited in Geisler and Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible (Chicago: Moody Press, 1986),  311.

[2] J. W. Drane, Introducing the New Testament (Oxford: Lion Publishing, 2000), 227.

[3] Paul Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology (Chicago: Moody, 1997), 415.

[4] Ibid., 416.

[5] G. L. Borchert, John 1-11 NAC (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2001), 33.

[6] Ron Rhodes, “Crash Goes the Da Vinci Code,” Online Source.