deepundergroundpoetry.com
The Bible Doesn't Need to be 100% Truth to be the Word of God
As long as something comes from God
THAT validates it.
It doesn't have to be perfect.
Take manna for instance.
There the Children of Israel were - in the desert on their way to the Promised Land
after escaping from slavery in Egypt.
They run out of food; but God, thru Moses,
provides this thing called "manna" to eat.
It was much less appetizing than they would have liked but they swallowed their pride and accepted it.
Why? Because that's all they had?
Yes, but also because IT CAME FROM GOD !!
Ditto with the Bible, it can sometimes seem as inadequate as manna.
But there are other parts of it that are like rich food - you couldn't ask for teachings and miracles more glorious.
About that manna, the Jews later waxed rapsodic about it, calling it "the bread of heaven".
But Christ contradicted them, saying, "Moses gave you NOT that bread from heaven"( ).
Then He explained that He was "the true bread from heaven"( ).
That idea (that Christ compensates for the shortcomings of (what's written in) the Law of Moses) is true in other ways too.
I mean that like manna was much less than it was supposed to be, but Christ makes up the shortfall, so too with the inerrancy of the Bible !!!
It is supposed to be all true, but sometimes it is only "the shadow of the very image"(Colossians 2.15-17; Hebrews 10.1), which is the Apostle Paul's polite way of facing up to something very unpleasant: the Bible falls short of being inerrant.
But Christ comes to the rescue!!!
HIS sinless perfection is enuff to make the Bible as though it really was inerrant, infallible.
While the written Word of God isn't flawless, the living Word of God is flawless,
which trumps everything else !!!
Like Christ Himself said, "I come to fulfill the [Bible]"( ).
Meaning to fulfill the promise of the inerrancy of the Bible !!! That promise is clearly not fulfilled apart from Christ.
Tonight at the Bible Study at Church, the Pastor asked me to read 2nd Timothy 3.10-17. Verse 16 says,"all scripture is God breathed and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction.."
I commented that the Bible can do all those things even if it is less than ideal.
Unsurprisingly, that didn't go over well.
I tried to explain by talking about David.
and Goliath.
One verse says David killed the Philistine giant with a stone fired from his slingshot.
But the very next verse explains that David cut the giant's head off.
THAT was what killed Goliath.
If David hadn't followed thru, the giant would surely have come to and gotten back on his feet.
(After all, the stone didn't go thru his head like a bullet would have.
It only lodged in the exterior of his head.)
My point was that its not true that every verse in the Bible is true.
Like fundamentalists like to say.
Rather you have to take the passage as a whole, not verse by verse.
To get to the real truth: yes, the slingshot did the job but it wasn't the whole story.
Saying David killed Goliath with the slingshot is shorthand for the more complete statement.
Namely, he killed him with the slingshot plus the sword.
There is at least one other passage where the Bible is written in shorthand.
So we have to add the part that is left out, if we want the truth.
For example, Christ speaking to the Pharisees, "It is written in your LAW.."( ).
But the passage He was quoting is found in the Psalms, not the first 5 books called the Torah Law.
So we can take Christ's words as shorthand for "the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings."
Speaking of the Law of Moses, the Gospel according to John is pretty hard on the Law.
Listen to this,"The LAW was given by Moses but ..TRUTH came by Christ Jesus" (John 1.17).
Of course the books of the Law are truthful, but NOT TO BE COMPARED to the truth of the Gospel.
So for us to say the truth of the Bible is consistent thruout seems to flat out ignore the Apostle John's words.
By emphasizing the difference between the Books of the Law and the New Testament, John is condemning the first 5 books of the Bible as less than 100% truthful !!!
For example, Noah's Flood as recorded in Genesis is clearly only "a shadow" of what happened.
If we go by the historical "Black Sea Flood"
that took place 5,500 years ago, (1,500 years before Abraham) that demythologizes the Biblical Flood account.
John's words (John 1.17) basically gives us permission to espouse the Black Sea Flood.
My point is that Noah in the Bible is still "profitable for doctrine" etc.
For that flood was the Judgment of God
and so was the Black Sea Flood, presumably.
I mean that the message that God judges sin by letting destruction take place is true.
Jesus ties the future judgment by fire to the flood of Noah's day."As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be in the day of the Son of Man"(Luke 17.26-27).
Now if we demythologize the flood by seeing it as the Black Sea Flood, this is helpful to us.
The Black Sea is located in Russia.
By Christ tying the future fire falling from the sky (Luke 17.29-30) to the Russian flood,
its like He is hinting to us that the fire from the sky(nuclear war) will have to do with who?? With Russia, Russia, Russia !!
And that much is confirmed by other passages.
PS: look up "Black Sea Flood" on YouTube or Google.
Paul wrote," you are my epistle of Christ."
Now the disciples he was writing to were not perfect people, of course.
But he calls them sort of the Word of God, nevertheless.So an imperfect Word of God can still be useful !!!
More later
THAT validates it.
It doesn't have to be perfect.
Take manna for instance.
There the Children of Israel were - in the desert on their way to the Promised Land
after escaping from slavery in Egypt.
They run out of food; but God, thru Moses,
provides this thing called "manna" to eat.
It was much less appetizing than they would have liked but they swallowed their pride and accepted it.
Why? Because that's all they had?
Yes, but also because IT CAME FROM GOD !!
Ditto with the Bible, it can sometimes seem as inadequate as manna.
But there are other parts of it that are like rich food - you couldn't ask for teachings and miracles more glorious.
About that manna, the Jews later waxed rapsodic about it, calling it "the bread of heaven".
But Christ contradicted them, saying, "Moses gave you NOT that bread from heaven"( ).
Then He explained that He was "the true bread from heaven"( ).
That idea (that Christ compensates for the shortcomings of (what's written in) the Law of Moses) is true in other ways too.
I mean that like manna was much less than it was supposed to be, but Christ makes up the shortfall, so too with the inerrancy of the Bible !!!
It is supposed to be all true, but sometimes it is only "the shadow of the very image"(Colossians 2.15-17; Hebrews 10.1), which is the Apostle Paul's polite way of facing up to something very unpleasant: the Bible falls short of being inerrant.
But Christ comes to the rescue!!!
HIS sinless perfection is enuff to make the Bible as though it really was inerrant, infallible.
While the written Word of God isn't flawless, the living Word of God is flawless,
which trumps everything else !!!
Like Christ Himself said, "I come to fulfill the [Bible]"( ).
Meaning to fulfill the promise of the inerrancy of the Bible !!! That promise is clearly not fulfilled apart from Christ.
Tonight at the Bible Study at Church, the Pastor asked me to read 2nd Timothy 3.10-17. Verse 16 says,"all scripture is God breathed and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction.."
I commented that the Bible can do all those things even if it is less than ideal.
Unsurprisingly, that didn't go over well.
I tried to explain by talking about David.
and Goliath.
One verse says David killed the Philistine giant with a stone fired from his slingshot.
But the very next verse explains that David cut the giant's head off.
THAT was what killed Goliath.
If David hadn't followed thru, the giant would surely have come to and gotten back on his feet.
(After all, the stone didn't go thru his head like a bullet would have.
It only lodged in the exterior of his head.)
My point was that its not true that every verse in the Bible is true.
Like fundamentalists like to say.
Rather you have to take the passage as a whole, not verse by verse.
To get to the real truth: yes, the slingshot did the job but it wasn't the whole story.
Saying David killed Goliath with the slingshot is shorthand for the more complete statement.
Namely, he killed him with the slingshot plus the sword.
There is at least one other passage where the Bible is written in shorthand.
So we have to add the part that is left out, if we want the truth.
For example, Christ speaking to the Pharisees, "It is written in your LAW.."( ).
But the passage He was quoting is found in the Psalms, not the first 5 books called the Torah Law.
So we can take Christ's words as shorthand for "the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings."
Speaking of the Law of Moses, the Gospel according to John is pretty hard on the Law.
Listen to this,"The LAW was given by Moses but ..TRUTH came by Christ Jesus" (John 1.17).
Of course the books of the Law are truthful, but NOT TO BE COMPARED to the truth of the Gospel.
So for us to say the truth of the Bible is consistent thruout seems to flat out ignore the Apostle John's words.
By emphasizing the difference between the Books of the Law and the New Testament, John is condemning the first 5 books of the Bible as less than 100% truthful !!!
For example, Noah's Flood as recorded in Genesis is clearly only "a shadow" of what happened.
If we go by the historical "Black Sea Flood"
that took place 5,500 years ago, (1,500 years before Abraham) that demythologizes the Biblical Flood account.
John's words (John 1.17) basically gives us permission to espouse the Black Sea Flood.
My point is that Noah in the Bible is still "profitable for doctrine" etc.
For that flood was the Judgment of God
and so was the Black Sea Flood, presumably.
I mean that the message that God judges sin by letting destruction take place is true.
Jesus ties the future judgment by fire to the flood of Noah's day."As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be in the day of the Son of Man"(Luke 17.26-27).
Now if we demythologize the flood by seeing it as the Black Sea Flood, this is helpful to us.
The Black Sea is located in Russia.
By Christ tying the future fire falling from the sky (Luke 17.29-30) to the Russian flood,
its like He is hinting to us that the fire from the sky(nuclear war) will have to do with who?? With Russia, Russia, Russia !!
And that much is confirmed by other passages.
PS: look up "Black Sea Flood" on YouTube or Google.
Paul wrote," you are my epistle of Christ."
Now the disciples he was writing to were not perfect people, of course.
But he calls them sort of the Word of God, nevertheless.So an imperfect Word of God can still be useful !!!
More later
Published 8th Jun 2017
| Edited 15th Jun 2017
All writing remains the property of the author. Don't use it for any purpose without their permission.
likes 0
reading list entries 1
comments 7
reads 927
Commenting Preference:
The author encourages honest critique.
8th Jun 2017 12:09pm
WTF? YOU MEAN, GOD DON' NEED TO BE TELLIN THE TRUTH 100% OF THE TIME? ARE YOU SURE YOU HAVEN'T BLASPHEMED IN THE TITLE MA MAN?
Thanx for commenting. "God is a man of war"( ).A soldier, in other words. And soldiers fight wars how? Thru the use of deception, which is synonymous with lying. God told Gideon to lie by having 300 men spread out over a mountainside at night and whip out oil lamps.So that the enemy camp would conclude that 300 camp fires must mean 100 (?) troops per fire for a total of 30,000 fighters (?) It was God who told Solomon to lie to the two mothers who both claimed the baby belonged to her. He told them he would have the baby cut in half giving each mother half the baby. That was a LIE designed to evoke a plea for mercy from the real mother.So Solomon could determine which woman was telling the truth. So lies have functionality. If God is willing to stoop to the use of lies in this way, why get offended at the claim that He allows partial truths, half truths into His Word.- if it serves His purpose.
Also, Christ taught us, "don't cast your pearls before swine nor give what is holy unto dogs." Which means He can't do it either. Since some forms of truth are pearls, God didn't share them with primitive society - piggish people of Moses's day. God reserved those truths, such as the Big Bang Theory, for only modern society. I mean He didn't reveal the truth of the Big Bang in the Bible. Instead He waited until Christians had progressed (and Christian civilization) to the point that they (scientists who were Christians) could discover it themselves. That way they brought glory to the (Mother) Church - like a child that does well brings glory to the parents who raised him/her. And glory to the Church means "glory to God thru the Church"(Ephesians ). I will fill in the blanks later.
Also, Christ taught us, "don't cast your pearls before swine nor give what is holy unto dogs." Which means He can't do it either. Since some forms of truth are pearls, God didn't share them with primitive society - piggish people of Moses's day. God reserved those truths, such as the Big Bang Theory, for only modern society. I mean He didn't reveal the truth of the Big Bang in the Bible. Instead He waited until Christians had progressed (and Christian civilization) to the point that they (scientists who were Christians) could discover it themselves. That way they brought glory to the (Mother) Church - like a child that does well brings glory to the parents who raised him/her. And glory to the Church means "glory to God thru the Church"(Ephesians ). I will fill in the blanks later.
9th Jun 2017 1:11pm
to each their own a say..coz what ya sayin, based on ya own interpretation, is not, was not, can not and can never be anything close to GOD.
ya sayin God resembles his creation? and has a weakness? and has limited powers? read all ova again what ya sed up here.. that entity ain't ma God which has any weakness or imperfection. may be to ya, so to each their own a say. peace. chicken grease.
ya sayin God resembles his creation? and has a weakness? and has limited powers? read all ova again what ya sed up here.. that entity ain't ma God which has any weakness or imperfection. may be to ya, so to each their own a say. peace. chicken grease.
15th Jun 2017 8:44am
Spesking of weakness, who was it who said, "My grace is made perfect in WEAKNESS " Christ (Acts ). Paul the apostle described "the Law" ( which can refer to the first 5 books of the Bible) as "WEAK thru the flesh" ( ). I will fill in the blanks later
22nd Jun 2017 7:25am
verse 1 2 Corinthians 12:9New King James Version (NKJV) 9 And He said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for My strength is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore most gladly I will rather boast in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.verse 2 Romans 8:2-4New King James Version (NKJV) 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, 4 that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. ps. I am not sure that where you are going with this verse is what the verse is saying but Romans in complicated.
22nd Jun 2017 7:47am
So I am a bit rusty on my Bible facts, but I thought I would take the proposition you put out here as I believe the whole bible is true though maybe not directly. I do not mean to be mean or offensive just having a biblical dialog which I love.
First, about David. Slings were commonly used as a combat for slow moving marchers like the giant. A sling can move a rock as fast as a bullet according to wiki. In Bible times the point of death was less clear as our modern medicine has made it. The word kill is the same in both places in the Hebrew supporting your view yet that word could also be translated as surely kill. so cutting off the head was just to make sure the job was done as either event could have killed the giant.
Second the Jewish law had expanded greatly after the Babylonian captivity the Jewish leaders wanted not to ever sin against God again so they were extremely careful on all things so while the verse may be from Psalms (i don't know what verse you are talking about here) it may be that the song had been made into a law or the psalm was based on an unwritten law.
Third, the flood was a world wide event that has lots of scientific evidence behind. The flood is an important part of the biblical understanding of how the world was created. The flood explains the fossil layers (found everywhere) as smaller animals could not escape the flood as fast as large dinosaurs. By being picky on what you believe in the Bible you can loose some of the power of the time. (not saying that believe means you must follow as I believe i should not cause men to sin by lusting after me but i still try to make men lust after me).
The Bible may not always make sense. The Bible may tell stories as they happened with all the sin and lying or decide that maybe a part of it. Some parts of the Bible are not literal yet they are still true in one way or another. for example in Danial and Revelations dreams are used to tell the future yet the dreams use symbols for what will really happen as Danial 2 makes clear. It is good to look for these passages that don't seem quite right. change them look in the Greek Hebrew and Arabic (a very small part of the Bible). ask your biblical friends to find the truth in the Bible with you. It is a powerful tool to find the 100% true God in His Word.
First, about David. Slings were commonly used as a combat for slow moving marchers like the giant. A sling can move a rock as fast as a bullet according to wiki. In Bible times the point of death was less clear as our modern medicine has made it. The word kill is the same in both places in the Hebrew supporting your view yet that word could also be translated as surely kill. so cutting off the head was just to make sure the job was done as either event could have killed the giant.
Second the Jewish law had expanded greatly after the Babylonian captivity the Jewish leaders wanted not to ever sin against God again so they were extremely careful on all things so while the verse may be from Psalms (i don't know what verse you are talking about here) it may be that the song had been made into a law or the psalm was based on an unwritten law.
Third, the flood was a world wide event that has lots of scientific evidence behind. The flood is an important part of the biblical understanding of how the world was created. The flood explains the fossil layers (found everywhere) as smaller animals could not escape the flood as fast as large dinosaurs. By being picky on what you believe in the Bible you can loose some of the power of the time. (not saying that believe means you must follow as I believe i should not cause men to sin by lusting after me but i still try to make men lust after me).
The Bible may not always make sense. The Bible may tell stories as they happened with all the sin and lying or decide that maybe a part of it. Some parts of the Bible are not literal yet they are still true in one way or another. for example in Danial and Revelations dreams are used to tell the future yet the dreams use symbols for what will really happen as Danial 2 makes clear. It is good to look for these passages that don't seem quite right. change them look in the Greek Hebrew and Arabic (a very small part of the Bible). ask your biblical friends to find the truth in the Bible with you. It is a powerful tool to find the 100% true God in His Word.
Sorry about the delay in replying. I put it off in case my mulling your points over in my mind might produce some idea that i didn't think of at the time i originally read your comment.
Its good to hear that you "love having a biblical dialog." l hope we can have some, even many, of them. About the Flood, yes it was supposed to be global. But the part about the waters covering even the mountain peaks, well I can't buy that.
But the good part about rejecting the too-good-to-be true Biblical version is this: you
get to settle for the more believable version. I am talking about "the Black Sea Flood" of about 5,500 BC. If I recall the video correctly. Anyway I recommend it.Actually there are a few.please check them out on YouTube, etc.
The thing that appeals to me about it is this.The survivors of that flood would logically go south which, if you look on a map, means down toward like Iraq !!
And the Iraqis are the ones who created or passed on to us the Noah flood account.
But using a different name- Gilgamesh?
Anyway, the idea is that the northern half of today's Black Sea was originally towns on dry ground, a civilization. I mean the scientists dated the mud sediments. They found the remains of a much older coastline/shoreline going horizontally across the middle of today's Black Sea.
Anyway, i think it is great that at least there is scientific support for the Biblical Flood, just on a much reduced level.No submerging of mountain tops this time.
And it could still be true that the real flood was a judgment of God upon the civilization that got destroyed.Just as with the wildly exaggerated Biblical account.
It is easy to become decadent like the West has done today.I speak from personal experience. I like to think that I have outgrown "youthful lusts," etc.So it is not far fetched for us to think that the ancient towns that got submerged were Sodom-like, etc.
Anyway, if the first 5 books of the Bible (called the Law of Moses) are not as inerrant as they are cracked up to be, that just allows us to take Christ's words about coming to "fulfill the Law" in a new way.
I mean that by Christ's miracles, doctrines, etc being TRUE that makes up for the shortfall or shortcomings of the Law.
He fulfills the shameful nontruthful parts of the Law of Moses. By bringing
Truth instead of mythology, you see what I mean.
Imagine a relay race where the first runner is pathetic.The remaining 3 runners can make up for his shortcomings, and still win the race,OK? Likewise, Christ can make up for the errors in the socalled "history" portion of the Law. - as long as the resurrection of Christ is true, THAT is enuff to overcome the shameful errors in the Law.
So instead of defending Noah's Flood or 900-year-old men like Melthusalah, I say that the Cross of Christ serves as the weight-bearing wall or beam that HOLDS UP THE WHOLE EDIFICE OF THE BIBLE !!!
Its good to hear that you "love having a biblical dialog." l hope we can have some, even many, of them. About the Flood, yes it was supposed to be global. But the part about the waters covering even the mountain peaks, well I can't buy that.
But the good part about rejecting the too-good-to-be true Biblical version is this: you
get to settle for the more believable version. I am talking about "the Black Sea Flood" of about 5,500 BC. If I recall the video correctly. Anyway I recommend it.Actually there are a few.please check them out on YouTube, etc.
The thing that appeals to me about it is this.The survivors of that flood would logically go south which, if you look on a map, means down toward like Iraq !!
And the Iraqis are the ones who created or passed on to us the Noah flood account.
But using a different name- Gilgamesh?
Anyway, the idea is that the northern half of today's Black Sea was originally towns on dry ground, a civilization. I mean the scientists dated the mud sediments. They found the remains of a much older coastline/shoreline going horizontally across the middle of today's Black Sea.
Anyway, i think it is great that at least there is scientific support for the Biblical Flood, just on a much reduced level.No submerging of mountain tops this time.
And it could still be true that the real flood was a judgment of God upon the civilization that got destroyed.Just as with the wildly exaggerated Biblical account.
It is easy to become decadent like the West has done today.I speak from personal experience. I like to think that I have outgrown "youthful lusts," etc.So it is not far fetched for us to think that the ancient towns that got submerged were Sodom-like, etc.
Anyway, if the first 5 books of the Bible (called the Law of Moses) are not as inerrant as they are cracked up to be, that just allows us to take Christ's words about coming to "fulfill the Law" in a new way.
I mean that by Christ's miracles, doctrines, etc being TRUE that makes up for the shortfall or shortcomings of the Law.
He fulfills the shameful nontruthful parts of the Law of Moses. By bringing
Truth instead of mythology, you see what I mean.
Imagine a relay race where the first runner is pathetic.The remaining 3 runners can make up for his shortcomings, and still win the race,OK? Likewise, Christ can make up for the errors in the socalled "history" portion of the Law. - as long as the resurrection of Christ is true, THAT is enuff to overcome the shameful errors in the Law.
So instead of defending Noah's Flood or 900-year-old men like Melthusalah, I say that the Cross of Christ serves as the weight-bearing wall or beam that HOLDS UP THE WHOLE EDIFICE OF THE BIBLE !!!
