The Problem With Saying The Bible Is The Word Of God

Inevitably, whenever I engage with someone over the issue of whether or not the Word of God is Jesus or a Book about Jesus, the argument is always raised that “All scripture is God-breathed” [quoting from 2 Timothy 3:16] and therefore no one has any authority to question the Bible.

There are more than a few problems with this.

First of all, when Paul wrote those words in 2 Timothy, he was not thinking of the “Bible” in the same way that you and I might think of it today. 

To Paul, and to most First Century believers, the “Scriptures” were the Law and the Prophets and the Books of Wisdom, which would include the Psalms. It probably also included works that most Protestants today do not consider to be scripture like the Book of Enoch [which gets quoted in the New Testament book of Jude] and the Wisdom of Solomon and other Hebrew writings like Sirach and Tobit, that many considered to be Holy writings.

One thing for certain is that Paul was not thinking of his own epistles when he said this. It must be stressed that Paul did not think that he was writing Scripture when he wrote to the churches in Ephesus, Corinth, Rome, etc. He thought – correctly – that he was writing letters to various Christian communities who needed encouragement and wisdom about certain challenges that threatened their faith.

He also was most certainly not thinking about any of the four Gospels which were not even written when he said this.

Yes, we are very blessed to have copies of some of those epistles, and other Apostolic writings, but none of those people had any inkling that they were writing something that one day might be added to a book alongside Genesis, Isaiah or Malachi and considered scripture.

Secondly, the book that eventually became known as the Bible went through several wildly different forms before finally being Canonized in the Fourth Century. Before this the church referred to a fluid collection of Hebrew scriptures and First Century Apostolic writings and the various Gospel accounts for insight. 

In other words, their idea of scripture looked radically different from ours and, depending on who you were talking to and what time in Church history, you might be surprised what was considered scripture and what was not.

For example, several New Testament books that every Protestant today considers an essential part of the Bible were, at various times and by various Church Fathers, eliminated from the accepted Canon of Scripture. Books like Esther, Hebrews, Jude, Revelation, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John and James were left out of several lists of accepted books of scripture by many church leaders. 

Consequently, many other books that most Protestants have never even heard of were accepted by some as Canon like the Didache, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Book of Baruch, Jubilees and the Letter of Jeremiah, for example.

Sometime around 363 AD several attempts were made to establish an official and accepted list of which books or epistles were scripture and which should be eliminated. There was no firm consensus on the contents of that list for several decades, but eventually a group of Christian leaders – whose names the average christian does not even know – decided for the rest of us forevermore which books were to be accepted and which were to be rejected as scripture.

Today there is still no universal consensus on what is and what is not the “Bible” or Holy Scripture. 

Like the early church, depending on who you ask, and where you live, and what Christian tradition you belong to, the book you carry around and refer to as the Holy Bible might look very different from another book from another Christian community that might be called the “Bible.”

I’ve started to wonder, “How do we know those people who decided what was and what wasn’t Scripture got it right?” Furthermore, I’ve started to wonder who gave those men the authority to decide that God was no longer speaking to His people and inspiring them to write down what the Holy Spirit was revealing to them about the nature and character of God?

Why do we so blindly accept the authority of these nameless and faceless men who made these decisions for the rest of us? What if they didn’t really have the authority to make this decision? What if they left writings out, or included writings, in error? How are we so sure that they were inerrant and infallible in their process?

Ultimately, for those who insist on inerrancy and infallibility of scripture, what they are actually trusting in is the perfection of those decisions made by a group of people centuries ago about what was and wasn't worthy to be included in the Bible.

Frankly, the canon of Scripture most of us hold to today was originally compiled and assembled by people that most consider to be heretics today – namely Marcion and Origen – who were the original compilers of a canon and the basis for the bulk of what we accept as scripture, respectively. 

If we reject many of the theological assumptions of Marcion and Origen, why do we unquestionably accept their judgement regarding what is and what isn’t to be included in the Holy Bible?

Honestly, I am playing devil’s advocate here in many respects because I don’t outright reject everything that those two Church Fathers taught simply because I disagree with some of their theological conclusions. But for those who do reject those Church Fathers as heretics, I have to wonder why they have no trouble accepting their respective lists of what is and what isn’t their Bible.

Ultimately, it boils down to this: Our Scriptures are a loose collection of writings by various people throughout history who were inspired by God to write down what they believed and what they experienced of God. 

Some of what we may currently accept as Scripture might not actually be inspired by the Holy Spirit. Some of what we reject, or are simply unaware of due to obscurity, might actually be worth considering as a legitimate source of wisdom about God. 

But everything - and I do mean everything - needs to be filtered through the lens of Christ. If it lines up with our revelation of Him, we should take it to heart. If it disagrees with the Word of God who became flesh and came to dwell within us, we should dismiss it as being the flawed testimony of men.

Jesus is our hermeneutic. Jesus is our ultimate authority. Everything else is subject to Him and His authority.

So, before you claim that the Bible is the Word of God because Paul claimed that "all scripture is God-breathed" be sure to remember that what he considered scripture and what you're currently referring to as scripture are not the same. 

Also, remember that just because something is "God-breathed" doesn't mean it is infallible and inerrant. Humans are also "God-breathed" and we are neither infallible or inerrant. 

Yes, scripture [whatever that might be], "is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness..." but determining how and in what ways scripture is profitable for us is something that must be discerned by the Holy Spirit of God that lives within each and every one of us.

This should cause each of us to cling more to Jesus and to dive deeper into Christ for wisdom and insight. 

After all, if we abide in Him then we experience Christ abiding in us, and this is the only way any of us can bear fruit.

-kg