The Bible and Higher Criticism
We will consider the liberal view of Scripture and how it
came to that view.
We have been tracing the manuscript records of the Old and New Testaments.
We have followed the background of our
English Bible through the Old English period and then as the language
developed in to the Middle English with the various translators in each section,
and we have come to the first translator of the English Bible John Wycliffe. Middle
English continued to evolve into our modern English of today, and in time another translation was needed
into English that was readable to people since the time that Wycliffe did
We found that that time arrived in the day of a man named
It was an opportune time because of certain great things which had taken place in the world. One was the invention of the printing press
in 1450 which now made it possible, instead of taking ten months to
make a copy
of Wycliffe’s Bible, in a short time hundreds and hundreds of
copies could be
made at a fraction of the cost.
there was the capture of Constantinople by the Turks
which resulted in driving out Christian scholars, and with them went
learning and their valuable manuscripts.
there was the printing of Erasmus’s Greek testament,
the first Greek testament in print in 1516.
This was one year
before the Protestant Reformation began in Wittenberg,
Of course, the
Reformation, being based upon the authority of the Word of God, it was
to have this printed testament.
there were the various discoveries of exploration which
were broadening the outlook of people all over the civilized world.
the scene was now set for the translating of our English
Bible into modern English.
This was done
by a man named William Tyndale.
born in 1484 and he died in 1536.
determined to make a new English translation to replace
the one that Wycliffe had made.
translated the Bible into English, not from Greek and Hebrew, but he
it from the Latin Vulgate version.
Tyndale wanted a
Bible translated from the original languages. He
prepared himself to do this.
He had studied
under Erasmus who had prepared
what became the Textus Receptus, the first printed copy of the Greek
that the Bible should be translated into the language of the people. Tyndale
also had a teacher, a professor … who
had stressed the exposition of the Word from the original Greek and
was in the
habit of gathering people together and explaining the Bible to them on
basis of what the original said. He
an expository preacher.
This had a deep
influence upon William Tyndale.
opposition to the Roman Catholic Church errors and the abuses
and the sympathy with the Protestant Reformation which was taking place
continent all served to make William Tyndale a marked man in England. It
was illegal at this time to publish the
English Bible in England.
consequently he left England and went to Germany where he went to work
and completed in secrecy the English translation of the New Testament. He
had to smuggle this back into England in
one way or another.
Hidden in sacks
luggage and baggage of one kind or another it was being shipped into
The King of
England at this
time was the famous Henry VIII.
opposed to the circulation of the Tyndale New Testament but, do what he
the King could not stop the copies flowing in and people buying up the
as quickly as they were made available.
As a matter of
fact, the king’s agents made contacts with people on the
continent who had access to the printing of the Tyndale Bible, and the
agents made arrangements to buy the printed copies of
Tyndale’s Bible in order
to burn them.
The agents were
to make this deal because they jacked the price up and charged the
agents enough to be able to produce twice as many Bibles after they
ones that they had sole them.
So the king
himself contributed in a great way to the circulation of the Tyndale
providing ample profits for its continued reprinting.
time Tyndale, while living Antwerp, was betrayed one
night when going out to dinner with a friend, a man he thought was his
As they left the
Tyndale lived, the king’s agents, under the order of Charles
V, king of Spain
and king of most of Europe in 1535—the king’s
agents were there and they
arrested William Tyndale because of his work of translating the Bible. He
was held in prison for 16 months. During
that time he worked on his translation
of the Old Testament which he was never able to complete.
efforts were made to secure the release
of this brilliant and dedicated godly man, translator of the Word of
the efforts were to no avail.
was tried, condemned, and executed in 1536.
Since he was not
a Baptist, he was not burned alive. Only
Baptists (Anti-Baptists) were burned
Since he was not
he was strangled first and then his body was burned at the stake. Just
before he died, he lifted his eyes
heavenward and he said, “Lord, open the King of
England’s eyes.” Three
years later, Henry VIII ordered
Tyndale’s New Testament to be read in England.
our King James Version that many of you hold in your
hand this morning, just to show you how good a translation that Tyndale
Our King James
in effect a fifth revision of the translation of Tyndale.
much indeed we owe to this godly scholar
who gave his life to make Bible doctrine available in a language that
the time of Tyndale to the King James translation there
were a series of English Bibles that came along. The
first one was the Coverdale Bible in
This was a
translation from German
and Italian versions, so it was again a translation of a translation. In
1537 came the Matthews Bible.
This was actually
a combination of the parts
of the New Testament and Old Testament that Tyndale had translation,
the Coverdale version was added to fill in those areas in the Old
that Tyndale had not completed.
in effect the first revision of the Tyndale Bible.
1539 came the Great Bible.
This was a
revision of the Matthews Bible.
It was called the
Great Bible because the
pages were so large—13.5 inches by 7.5 inches.
It was the first
English Bible officially authorized by Henry VIII.
was the second Tyndale revision. Then
in 1539 came the Taverner’s Bible which
was a slight revision again of the Matthews Bible.
1560 came a Bible that really took hold in England.
was called the Geneva Bible because it was
done by English reformers who had been driven into exile, so they went
Geneva in Switzerland, the stomping ground of John Calvin and the
This was the time
persecution in England under Bloody Mary.
From Greek and
Hebrew, which had now become very popular in England,
with the sympathetic surrounding of Geneva, they translated the Bible
English and made a very good translation.
was quietly approved by Queen Elizabeth. It
held sway stronger and stronger among the
1568 the Bishops Bible was translated. It
was done by the clergy in order to counter
the popularity of the Geneva Bible. It
wasn’t entirely the Bible translation itself that disturbed
them, but the
translators in those days had a way of putting commentaries in the
when you bought a Bible, you not only received the translation but you
comments in the notes, sort of like your Scofield Bible.
have the translation but you have certain
notes that are inserted along with it.
These notes were
often not complimentary to the clergy nor to the divine
rights of kings.
The Bishops Bible
the fourth Tyndale version and it was never really very popular. It
did not succeed in replacing the Geneva
I, Queen of England, in Elizabethan era had a
cousin, Mary Stuart, Queen of Scots. Mary
was a Roman Catholic.
She married Lord
They had a son
who became James
who became James VI of Scotland. Mary
time was driven from Scotland and the throne was given to her son James. James
was reared a staunch Calvinistic
There were many
on the part of sympathizers with Mary Stuart to assassinate her cousin
In time, in order
to put an
end to this, it was necessary for Elizabeth to order the execution of
Stuart which she did in 1587.
Elizabeth I died, James VI of Scotland became James I of the united
England and Scotland.
One of the first
things he did on assuming the throne was to call a meeting of a
Puritan clergymen to discuss the matters of church reform.
their discussions, nothing particular
came of those discussion, but one idea did come out.
recommendation was made that a new
English translation of the Bible be undertaken under the royal auspices. This
appealed very much to James I who was no
mean scholar in his own right.
during the Elizabethan era there had been great
advancement in English literature, in style.
There had also
been much progress in Greek and Hebrew scholarship.
the idea pleased the king and it was a
timely thought, so in 1604 he appointed 54 men—men of various
all who had good scholarship.
large, as far as we can tell, they were men who respected the Bible as
written Word of God.
with that respect.
Forty seven of
finally finished in 1611.
They worked in
six teams—two at Oxford, two at Cambridge, and two at
was not at all
filled with many errors, but the king was pleased with it.
indicated that it was the
version, so it came to be known as the Authorized Version.
over 300 years it was the favorite in the
English-speaking world, and is a prime translation in our day. Since
then there have been other attempts to
update the King James Version but none have been able to put together
these 47 men finally produced in the way of the flow of the English
the style, and the conveying of the accuracy of the Word.
is a very accurate translation, especially
when it has been updated with words that have changed meaning. As
in your New Scofield Bible, these words
are corrected right in the text itself, and the old word is put out in
margin so as you read along you read the corrected word.
problem that they did have was that in their desire to
rise to the literary style of the age in which they lived, they did
policy of using different English words for the same Greek word, and
not always desirable.
You have some
places where you have three consecutive verses that use the identical
word in each verse, and in each verse they used a different English
So you miss some
significance of what the Scriptures say because they varied these words. However,
this was a magnificent
They did not have
the manuscripts that we have today. They
worked from the Textus Receptus which originated with the text that
didn’t go back farther than the 10th
then the later manuscripts
have not appreciably changed, by and large, the text of the New
certainly has not vitally affected any doctrinal area.
we come with the King James Version. Since
then of course there have been all
kinds, and we can’t take time this morning to run through all
In 1881 to 1885
the English Revised Version
This was an
retain as much the flavor and color of the King James Version, but to
it on the basis of later manuscripts.
This never seemed
to take hold too well.
Standard Revised Version in 1901 was an American expression
of this English version.
Revised Standard Version in 1946 was produced in this
country as a result of liberal scholarship.
The New English
Bible in 1961 was produced in England, also the result
of liberal scholarship.
Both of those
translations you will notice that in the preface they say that whenever
refer to deity they will use the word “thou” and
“thee,” and when refer to
people they will use the English word “you.”
Then you will
discover that as you read about the Lord Jesus Christ as
He went about His ministry on this earth, you will discover the word
being referred to Him.
This is a subtle
way that liberal scholarship has of conveying their viewpoint of the
of Christ and of stripping Him of His deity.
you have to be careful as you read these Scriptures that
there is a liberal bias that has been injected.
Isaiah says that a virgin shall conceive, they
translate it as a “young woman” on the basis that
the Hebrew word “almah” can
be translated “young woman” as well as
that same verse is quoted in
the New Testament Scriptures, the Greek word
“parthenos” is used, and that can
only mean “virgin.” It
anything else, which indicates to us what God the Holy Spirit meant
in the Old Testament when that Hebrew word was used.
translators should therefor had taken
their clue, if they had respected the supernatural origin of the Bible
superintendency of God the Holy Spirit, they should have taken their
the New Testament as to how to translate that variable word in the Old
this is the sort of thing that you need to be aware
won’t go into that, but there are
many many translations, and they’re coming out regularly. There
is one that is a paraphrase that
perhaps we should mention.
News for Modern Man. That
identify itself as a paraphrase, but it is a paraphrase.
is always important that you recognize
that when you read a paraphrase you are not reading the Word of God. I
think it is unfortunate when volumes are
written that the authors will sometimes quote from paraphrased editions. Paraphrased
editions have a way of conveying
an impression to people that the Word of God as translated from the
text as a translation is dead, but when somebody comes along who has a
for words and he puts what the Bible says in his own words, it comes
becomes a living Bible.
But this is
deceptive and it gives people the wrong impression.
people who are not versed in Bible
doctrine find a true translation to be dead.
It is people who
are not versed in the Word of God that find a
paraphrase to be living.
paraphrase is a commentary.
author express this in his own words.
came up to me last Sunday morning and said, “You
know it’s strange.
once before about paraphrases.
long time I noticed that I’d read a paraphrased edition and
it would leave me
to the Word of God and my
heart would be blessed.” She
didn’t really why.
understand that a paraphrase was no the Word of God.” So
don’t get in the habit of saying, “I’m
going to spend time with the Lord,” and you reach over and
pick up a
You pick up a
when you study the Word of God just like you pick up a commentary and
a writer has said.
let’s take a look at the modern view of the Bible
because this is important to see where we are today.
are certain basic views that you may
hold now toward this translation that has come to you over the scene of
in so many ups and down.
One view is
that the Bible is authoritative and that it is an inerrant revelation. That
means that it has no mistakes in
Also that it is
from God and
consequently it has the right to command and to enforce obedience. This
means that you view the Bible as a
supernatural product of divine inspiration.
This is of course
what the Bible claims for itself that it is. In
this case a student of the Bible will
subject to the teachings of Scripture and he will follow those
wherever they may lead.
attitude toward the Bible.
attitude toward the Bible is that the Bible is a
purely human production filled with errors, myths, and inventions. This
is the attitude which is most prevalent
in our day.
This is the
attitude that by
far the majority of ministers hold to concerning the Bible, that it is
filled with errors, myths, and inventions—yet a book that has
instruction and ideals.
But you must
understand that the majority of religious leaders hold this second
view, or you
will be deceived because somebody who is a prominent religious leader
up and open his mouth on some religious subject, and if you
don’t know how to
classify him, you’ll be inclined to take what he says as
gospel truth rather
than being prepared to have some insidious little error slipped in to
is the viewpoint which has come to be called higher
criticism is a study of the date, the composition, the nature, and the
of the books of the Bible.
already been looking somewhat at what is called lower criticism, or
criticism, which is a study of the text itself to determine how the
originally were written—what the original manuscripts look
today, while in itself is
not an objectionable study.
We do want
to know who wrote these books.
want to know something about their composition, and so on.
higher criticism, as it is constituted
today, has a deep liberal bias, so it has come to be called and
destructive higher criticism.
Satan’s effort to destroy the Word of God.
destroy the effectiveness of the Word of God toward the
unbeliever just as he must neutralize it relative to its doctrinal
to you as a believer.
higher criticism rejects the statements of the Scripture
as being authoritative, and instead it submits them to human judgment. It
treats the Bible, in other words, on a par
with any other piece of written literature.
the theory of higher criticism is one that perhaps you
ought to know about because those of you who have students who take
courses in secular universities, you have friends who have friends who
gone to college where they have studied the Bible as literature are
going to be
confronted with certain ideas that will throw you if you’ve
never heard about
century, the age of reason.
It was based upon
three principles of rationalism. Here
go be accepted not because of their age or custom, but because of their
not believe a
thing because it has always been believed; because my parents held
because this historically has been accepted.
I only believe
now what is reasonable to me.”
number 2 was that the elevation of reason—reason
was to be elevated as the supreme judge as the supreme judge in all
What is best for
humanity is to be determined, rationalism says, by reason—by
sitting down and
a problem in
We do not go to
like the Bible and say, “Well, what does the Bible teach
about war so we will know
what to do in Vietnam?
will not take a look at poverty and say, “No
what does the Bible teach, of principles, relative to poverty so that
know what to do with poverty in this country?”
we will determine these questions and solutions
entirely on our reason and our thinking.
third principle was to give a high estimate to the moral
qualities of man, as a man, minimizing the necessity of the grace of
That man had a
great spark of good in
That man, if he
were given the
right conditions would blossom out and would welcome that man who was
opportunity to solve his poverty problems would welcome it. That
man who was given an opportunity to
solve his criminal tendencies would welcome it.
That man who was
given an opportunity to solve his problems of human
conflict in international affairs, he would welcome it.
would act with integrity.
There is a good
The boy is good. Why
does he steal your car?
Because you were
bad enough to leave your
keys in it when you walked into the store.
why that good boy stole your car.
that’s rationalism. That’s
intelligence of the highest kind.
rationalism, of course, had some pretty sharp boys
take a look at them
It started with a
man name Semler.
Mr. Semler was
not too bad in a way.
He was a
professor of theology. He
is called the father of German
He proposed a
the accommodation theory.
This was that
Jesus Christ and the apostles accommodated themselves to the
errors, and the superstition of the people in the time in which they
That is, Jesus
knew that there
was no such thing as miracles.
knew that there was no such thing as demon possession or resurrection,
accommodated Himself because people believed that these things were
he was trying to lead them into a better way of life.
of the original social gospel concepts
was interjected here by Semler.
the attempt was here to make the Bible acceptable to an
age of rationalism.
In other words,
you didn’t have to condemn the Bible for what it said
relative to what is
doesn’t really teach that. The
only explaining how Jesus and the apostles accommodated themselves with
ideas, but they weren’t really teaching that.
As a result he
also rejected several Old Testament books as
non-canonical simply because these books violated these three
second man that came along was a man named Eichhorn
(1752 – 1826).
He was also a
and he is called the father of higher criticism. Eichhorn
proposed three principles which
became the basis of the higher critical analysis of Scripture, and it
Bible to shreds.
declared that ancient people
attributed to the direct action of God whatever awed them and whatever
beyond their power of understanding. So
he said this is what the people of the Bible did. They
found something they couldn’t understand
or something that frightened them, and they said, “Oh, god
he said there was a principle of exaggeration
among Oriental people, which is the norm.
they say is not to be taken as literal fact, and
rationalism decides what is exaggerated.
he said the Hebrew’s thinking in terms of the
supernatural working of God omitted details which would show events as
Because they were
looking for supernatural explanations, Eichhorn said, they described
a way that made it look like it was supernatural. But
if they had given us all the historical
details we would say, “Well, you see it wasn’t
He declared that
Genesis chapters 1 through 3
and the miracles of the Old Testament were consequently poetic
symbolic pictures, oriental imagery, and rhetorical exaggeration. Now
Eichhorn hesitated to attack the New
said, were a misunderstanding of the readers, not of what they wrote. This
way, by removing the supernatural elements
from the Bible, he hoped to make the Bible acceptable to rationalism.
next man was Paulus (1761 – 1851), another
of Bible miracles but he pressed it toward the New Testament writers as
He said they
intended to give the
idea that these were miracles.
proposed, as a defense for the apostles, what is called the
theory—that the New Testament writers were unbalanced and
they suffered from
illusions and hallucinations, and they imagined that they saw visions
In other words,
the Lord Jesus
Christ surrounded himself with a bunch of nuts.
Every one of them
was a mental offbeat.
were able to produce a New Testament with all these
ideas in it.
It makes you
wonder who the
real nut is.
all this was done by Paulus, mind you, as by these other
men, to try to defend the Bible against rationalism.
decided supernaturalism is out.
supernatural do they’re out. Revelation
from God is supernatural.
God, the book of Daniel telling you how world empires were
going to come along, Daniel written in the time of the exile when he
in the first of those empires, three of them not even on the scene,
impossible, that’s prophecy—it’s out.
written later by somebody who used Daniel’s name.
another man that came along was de Wette (1780 –
He was a
He rejected the
idea that all the New
Testament writers were lunatics and unbalanced.
At least he did
the right thing there.
another theory called the myth theory. He
said that these writers were simply using
fables and folklore and projecting them as history.
next man was Jean Astruc (1684 – 1766). Now
this man was a doozy.
He was a French
physician, a man of great
learning, a Roman Catholic, a free thinker, and just as immoral and
as they come.
He published a
You wonder why a
man like this
would even be interested in studying the Bible.
He accepted the
Mosaic authorship of Genesis, but he denied any
inspiration or authority.
As he read
through the first five books of the Bible, the Pentateuch, the books of
it irritated him that Moses would monotonously use the name for God
times in 31 verses in the first chapter of Genesis.
would seem to Astruc that Moses would have
some other name for God than “Elohim.”
Then he noticed
when he started reading Genesis 2 and 3 that Moses used
another name for God, “Jehovah Elohim.”
When he got to
Genesis 4 he noticed that Moses was calling God
So he said,
“Aha, here I
smell a rat.
didn’t write these
Moses found some
different writers, and these different writers called God by different
and Moses sat down with a piece of paper and a bottle of rubber cement
glued the thing together.
He put the
story in with a pair of scissors and he just patched it all up into a
all of a sudden God is called “Elohim,” and you get
someplace else and He’s called “Jehovah
Elohim,” and He’s called
he came up with what is known as the documentary
hypothesis—that there was a
writer called the “Elohists,” the
“E” document; the “J” document
Jehovahists; and the “JE,” the
“Jehovahist Elohim” writer. Also,
Astruc claimed that there were ten
This theory was
accepted by Eichhorn who elaborated it, maintaining all the time Mosaic
documents was extended to take in the whole Pentateuch.
it was extended to the whole Old
an attack on the books of Moses and then spread all the way through the
the Mosaic authorship final was abandoned because the
time of the writing of these books was brought down from the 15th
century B. C. to the 5th
century B. C., long after Moses lived. Now
the later date was welcomed by de Wette
because his myth theory fit this better.
Since the Bible
incidents and the teachings which were written were so
many years after their supposed occurrence, it was easy to view them as
folklore which had been handed down.
This was the
idea—that people were really handing down folklore, and
then you get to the centuries about the time Amos and the Jews begin
down this folklore and pretending that Moses wrote it back there. And
what they’re writing also included these
documents that came down by different writers who wrote and now
patching them together and presenting them as consistent books from
in this way inspiration and the supernatural were
eliminated and the Bible was shredded.
felt in this way they were protecting the writers from
What they were
saying was that
they were just gullible.
next man that came along was K. H. Graf (1815 – 1869). He
was a professor and he popularized this
documentary hypothesis of Astruc with some writings in 1866. He
claimed that the Pentateuch had been
written way after the Babylonian exile by various writers.
came to be known as the Graf-Keenan
began with the
time of Amos, 800 to 700 B. C.
that was fiction.
There was no real
Jewish history such as is described in the books of the
were identifiable by the use of their name for God and their literary
were the ones who were responsible for these writings.
the Pentateuch is a product of
interweaving these documents and circulating them separately.
later there was a “D” document written which was
the farewell address of Moses in Deuteronomy.
was combined at the end of these “JE” documents. Then
there was a “P” document written by the
priest at the time of the exile. It
the events in the “JE” document. Later
was cut up into sections and it produced the “JED”
document which was beginning
to piece it together.
Those are very
famous letters well worth remembering because they are the initials of
among other things.
But I had no
responsibility for this.
what happened was that the Pentateuch ended up not being
Mosaic literature, but a literary Mosaic.
Some concepts of
legend and myth were then extended into the New
Testament and into the areas of the gospel history—no
miracles and no
resurrection of Christ.
The same thing
last man is Julius Wellhausen (1844 – 1918).
was a rationalistic radical theologian of the
University of Marburg in Germany. These
are the men who set the tenor of German society which set the scene for
acceptance of Hitler and his ideas. In
1878 Wellhausen published a book that applied the theory of evolution
It was called The
History of Israel. This
enormous impact and it saved the Graf-Keenan hypothesis which was
fall into discredit.
It was combined
the Graff-Wellhausen theory.
What it did
was that it said that Moses had no concept of one God, monotheism. He
lived too early for that.
But what Moses
did was to persuade the Jews
to choose one of their idols as the only god.
So the Jews
selected the god (the idol) named Jehovah and He became
their tribal God.
Later on the Jews
elevated Jehovah to the point where He was the god greater than all the
Finally, in the
time of Amos
and Hosea, they declared He was the only God in existence, so full
declared that the religion of Israel was merely a
human creation evolved by natural stages from heathenism, and it has
with high ideals and spiritual concepts but they’re all of
called his idea The
Developmental Hypotheses, and he tied this to The Documentary
Graf for the Graf-Wellhausen theory. The
“JEDP Documentary Hypotheses” became the standard
thinking of the liberal
theologians and the higher critics—religion
evolving—concepts of God
today this Developmental Hypotheses about the Jewish
religion is by and large rejected, but the Documentary Theory is still
what I want you to
understand—that most ministers you will come in contact
will not understand.
I can tell when
people ask me certain
questions that if they understood this they would know what that
by what he said.)
this documentary view of the origin of Scriptures.
the finds of archaeology have shown that the higher
critics have operated on limited and wrong information—false
Though the Mosaic
authorship is still
rejected, there is no good ground for doing it except these theories of
able to analyze the style.
They reject the
The same myth
evolvement idea was
taken to the New Testament.
Jesus was a
man with natural birth so miracles are impossible.
is what’s known as the study of the historical
He was a
traveling preacher who
had popular appeal and he ran afoul of the Roman authorities, so he
martyrdom for his revolutionary views. The
higher critics claim that the ideas we find about Christ and
the New Testament were added by his apostles, his disciples, in a burst
the book of Isaiah is viewed as written by two
From chapter 40
you enter the
makes it sound like a different person is writing—naturally
it’s because he has
a different theme.
letter will find that he writes differently in one part of his letter
another depending on the subject that he’s dealing with. Daniel
is dated so late because of its
what were the conclusions of the higher critics? Their
conclusions are a fiasco.
results are constantly changing.
… said that the higher
critics were people who sat in the dark and chirped.
they’re still sitting in the dark and
chirping—these higher critics.
it has been interesting to see their attempts in
our day to return to a theological basis for a message in the Bible. They
still view the Scripture as a human
product but they want to find a message now.
So the higher
critics who destroyed all ground for authority are
struggling now to find ground for authority.
A person cannot
subscribe to the views of higher criticism and to orthodox
biblical Christianity at the same time.
Get that straight. Once
tells you he has this higher critical view, you know that he cannot
orthodox biblical Christianity.
use orthodox terminology but they mean different things by it.
Bible is rejected by them as a permanent divine
statement or a revelation of truth to be believed.
Christianity has historically
viewed the Bible as God’s completed revelation for faith and
rejects it as a collection for
theological doctrine or for any record of historical events. Now
this is very significant.
They do not want
to view the Bible as a book
of propositions of truth.
They say that
the Bible is not a systematic theology.
that’s true, but the Bible gives us the materials by which we
The Bible is a
book filled with doctrines that fall into various categories. Liberalism
does not believe that God is still
speaking through the Bible to men today.
it’s a record of His past dealings with men, so
it’s a dead
So while the
Bible is a record
of marvelous revelations from God to a sinful race, it itself is
being a current revelation.
This is not
the view that the Bible holds for itself and we reject this. The
Bible is a book given in history once and
What it has said
in the past it
speaks to us today.
us that it is living and powerful. It
not a dead revelation.
The liberal says
that the Bible is not a collection of infallible doctrines, and that it
a series of propositions of truth or beliefs about God and man, and we
presents itself as,
indeed, a book filled with propositions of truth.
you just start reading through your Bible—that statements
that God makes about Himself; the statements that He makes about life;
that He makes about people; and, the explanations He gives. These
are all doctrinal propositional
statements of truth.
the idea that the Bible is not a series of propositions
of truth or doctrine has even contaminated some evangelicals,
the neo-evangelical camp.
They shy off
from viewing the Bible as propositions of truth.
next week we’re going to look at a few great ideas that
most college students pick up, especially if they go to state schools,
sometimes even from Christian schools. They
have certain attitudes toward absolutes, toward relativism, and toward
don’t realize that
someplace along the line they have been poisoned, even in a Christian
they can be insidiously poisoned by four or five men who came onto the
history in the last century and who made philosophical declarations
permeated our educational systems, even down to the elementary school
we’re going to explain
to you why your college student friend thinks what he does on certain
relative to love, to sex, to family, to authority, and right on down
Once you get this
and then you
realize how this poison also took hold in theological circles, then you
all of this human encounter junk which is being cranked out for
get emotional over and to relate to one another on all of these false
will look at the origin of the liberal’s
biblical views beginning next Sunday morning.
John E. Danish, 1971
to the Basic Bible Doctrine index
the Bible Questions index