Paul said: 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. (2 Tim 3:16,17) The word inspired means literally, God breathed, and although the personality of the prophet shines through his work, the work is the work of God. As a musical instrument in the hands of an artist, so is the prophet under the power of God. It is not possible to be a Christian without believing this, as: faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. (Rom 10:17) and: With the heart man believeth unto righteousness. (Rom 10:10)
Even more clear that faith in God’s word is necessary to receive the Spirit, are Peter’s words: Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. (1 Peter 1:23) And after salvation we should: desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby. (1 Peter 2:2)
But what is the word of God? Is it everything contained in the Protestant Bible, or have the Scriptures been added to or corrupted? Is God, the God of the Old Testament, who terminates the lives of the evil? or Is God, a cruel vengeful God, who subjects a man to eternal torment for the slightest fault? I will endeavour to show in this article that this horrible picture of God, supposedly contained in some parts of the New Testament, is a corruption of the New Testament Scriptures, and that which destroys a man’s love for God.
Most of the Scriptures are contained in the Old Testament. When Paul said: now brethren I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified, (Acts 20:32) he was speaking of the Old Testament Scriptures. The New Testament had not been written at this time.
And I think that the words, Old Testament, and New Testament, are an unfortunate choice of words to describe the older Scriptures and the newer Scriptures. Most of the Old Testament is directly relevant to today, and the rest we can learn from.
The New Testament does not replace the Old. It brings out hidden meaning; it shows the importance of obedience from the heart, in the sight of God rather than man; it shows the person of the Lord Jesus Christ, that he is the Son of God, and not merely a man. It shows the church age and spreads the word to the Gentiles, and it shows the kingdom of God after the millennium, a mystery to the Jews. Some ceremonial laws are also cancelled, as the responsibility for obedience now lies upon the individual in his own time and way, rather than on civil laws.
But, this being said, it is the Old Testament primarily, which teaches us how to live: the Ten Commandments, and the exhortations of the prophets. It is the Old Testament primarily also, which teaches us of the character of God: the creation of the world; that there is only one God, and his greatness is shown in Isaiah. It is also the Old Testament which shows us the blessings of God for obedience, and the chastening judgements of God for sin and disobedience.
As our relationship with God the Father is stronger than with Jesus Christ our Lord and brother, the Old Testament is more fundamental to our obedience and understanding than the New. Nevertheless we need the words of Christ to fully understand the Old Testament. Without Christ, the Jews regarded the commandment not to steal, but despised the gift of the poor widow who cast into the treasury two mites. The prophecy of Christ shows that the goodness of the heart is more important than the might of the deeds.
Having discussed the relationship between the two testaments, I will now examine the evidence for the inspiration, or lack of it, in various doctrines, starting with the Old Testament.
The Old Scriptures were written over thousands of years by many prophets. The Scriptures were regarded as the word of God and read in the synagogues. Jesus Christ, who exposed the hypocrisy of the scribes and Pharisees, for their neglect and misinterpretation of the Scriptures, never criticised the Scriptures or pointed out errors in them. He certainly would have, had there been any significant errors in them.
He quoted from nearly every book of the Old Testament, regarding it as authoritative, not only over others, but also over himself. When tempted he said: Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. (Matt 4:4) Jesus also said: Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all is fulfilled. (Matt 5:17,18) Jesus is saying that not only do the sacred writings of the Jews contain God’s message, but they are totally God’s message.
Hence Christians must, like Jesus, accept, believe, and live their lives under the authority of the old Scriptures. Fulfillment of prophecies of the crucifixion such as Psalm 22, and Isaiah 52, 53 prove that the Old Testament contains the word of God. Jesus’ words teach us that they contain nothing else.
When the Jews copied the Scriptures, if they made a mistake with one letter, they recopied the entire page. It is therefore unlikely that errors crept into the Old Testament Scriptures, except for difficulties concerning the changing of meaning of words, as language changes over centuries. Chaucer's English is quite different to that today.
Jesus said that there would be new Scriptures containing the words he spoke and the actions he did, when he said: these things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. (John 14:25,26)
In fulfillment of this promise some of the gospels were written. Mark’s gospel was written under the direction of the apostle Peter, and carries his apostolic authority. It shows the miracles of Christ and his mighty works, and is God breathed.
It is reported that the apostle Matthew wrote the Logia, which was a collection of the sayings of Jesus. This should have been the second gospel, but unfortunately someone, using their own wisdom, added extra narrative to it by mixing the God breathed Logia of Matthew, with the best estimation of the context, which was drawn mainly from Mark’s gospel. So now, not all of Matthew’s gospel is God breathed, but what is not, is not usually harmful. But it does make the gospel seem somewhat repetitive. Nevertheless, the sayings of the Logia, and the details of fulfilled Scripture, contained in Matthew are invaluable. Matthew did not make the final compilation, but some good Christian. Best advice is to read it as though all the sayings, with a possible few exceptions such as the reference to the adulterous look, are God breathed, and don’t worry overmuch about the addition of context.
The final compilation of the gospel of Luke, also, is not inspired by God. It contains a mixture of the inspired Logia, and testimonies of Christians at the time, some of which are true and some of which are fables. Some sayings have been attributed to Jesus that were sayings of the Pharisees. The story of the rich man in hell, with his tongue tormented in the flame, seems to have been a saying of the Pharisees, which may have been handed down from ancient mythology. Jesus is a prophet who speaks his Father’s words. He doesn’t respect the sayings of the Pharisees. At the end of this article I discuss the corruption of the doctrine of hell in the new Testament Scriptures.
The conclusion then is that some of Luke’s gospel must be rejected as Scripture, and should be deleted from the Bible. But if these arguments fail to convince, there is additional evidence that the final compilation of Luke’s gospel is not God breathed. Luke was a Gentile, but the Scriptures are written by Jews. Paul says: What advantage then hath the Jew? . . . chiefly because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. (Rom 3:1,2)
As Luke wrote the book of Acts, it may not be Scripture. It is however useful as church history, being mostly written a good man, the beloved physician, a companion of the apostle Paul, but a physician, not a prophet.
The gospel of John was, like Matthew’s logia, written by an apostle and eye witness of the Lord Jesus upon the earth. The author never divulges his name, referring to himself only as the disciple whom Jesus loved. But there were three disciples to whom Jesus gave special revelation. Only Peter, James, and John saw the transfiguration, so these were the three whom Jesus loved the most. Jesus also said to Peter of the author: if I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee. (John 21:22) So the author cannot be Peter. The author seems to have lived a long life (tarrying for Jesus,) so it cannot be James, who was killed by the sword soon after the advent of church history. So it seems that the author was John, and the gospel is certainly God breathed. God, by his Spirit helped John to remember the words and deeds of Jesus.
But Jesus is not the only prophet under the New Covenant. He promised that his disciples would prophesy new things, when he said: I have yet many things to say to you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself: but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. (John 16:13) In fulfillment of this prophesy, the book of Revelation was written by the apostle John. Perhaps the different mode of revelation accounts for the different style of writing.
The book of Revelation was God breathed, every word, when it was written. Unfortunately, it seems that the word has been added to or amended. Perhaps some contamination from the Roman Catholic apocrypha occurred. Satan wants to destroy people’s love for God, and he does this by saying that God is cruel. And ignorant people, who think that an excessive fear of God will instill righteousness, facilitate Satan’s methods.
This only leaves the letters to be discussed. The letters were written by Paul, John, Peter, James and Jude. There is no logical reason to believe that every word spoken by anyone (other than Christ) is Scripture. We should believe this of faithful men, only when they claim to be prophesying. This applies to both speech and writing.
One of Paul’s letters to the Corinthians, we know, has been lost, and probably there are countless letters, written by many other apostles that are no longer in existence. Were all these Scripture? If not, what reason do we have to believe that every word preserved in an apostle’s letter is Scripture? The answer lies in their content and their claims, and is best seen in Paul’s first latter to the Corinthians.
As regards content, in 1 Corinthians 15 Paul speaks of the resurrection body arising from a seed, yet as different from a seed, as the plant is from the germ. He also says: Behold, I shew you a mystery, we shall not all sleep but we shall all be changed. In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump, for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible and we shall be changed. (1 Cor 15:51) Also in the same chapter he says that when angels and men are made subject to Christ, Christ will be subject to his Father (1 Cor 15:27) These things spoken are obviously revelations of Jesus Christ to the apostle Paul.
He claims that: I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received. (1 Cor 15:3) He says also that he teaches: not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth. (1 Cor 2:13) So some of Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians is God breathed. But that does not mean that the glue of wisdom, counsel and advice which holds the scriptural gems together is all God breathed.
Paul admits this, saying regarding another matter: I have no commandment from the Lord: yet I give my judgement, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful. I suppose therefore that this is good. (1 Cor 7:25,26) So then, Paul states that some of this letter is God breathed, and some, his own opinion.
And some of his opinion is wrong. Paul was celibate and said: I would that all men were even as myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God. (1 Cor 7:7) But this is not the will of God as God revealed at the creation of man: It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. (Genesis 2:18) and God created Eve to be his wife.
God wills that every man be married, yet Paul preferred that all be celibate, regarding the marriage gift as inferior. Paul had the gift of celibacy, necessary because of his travels, imprisonments and execution, and he inferred from his own experience that this was best for everyone. Yet he was mistaken.
However his advocating of celibacy has been widely misapplied however. It is not generally good advice, but he said: I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress for a man so to be. (1 Cor 7:26) The only reason for celibacy is to be faithful to a temporary mission, enduring afflictions too difficult to take a wife and children through. When the mission is accomplished the man can marry. No one should take a permanent vow of celibacy. Even Jesus said that during the Great Tribulation: woe to them that are with child and give suck in those days. (Matt24:19)
Although there is nothing wrong with 1 Cor 7:26 Paul goes on in error to blur the distinction between the meritorious denying of oneself temporarily, by delaying marriage for a brave and noble reason, with the false, unnecessary, aesthetic reason. He says: the unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy in both body and spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband. (1 Cor 7:34) By so saying, Paul is saying that God’s plan for love between husband and wife does more harm than good. In this he is utterly wrong. I wonder also whether perhaps the gnostics have added to Paul's words, whether Paul in fact even said this at all.
So we must conclude therefore that the letters of the apostles are not all completely authoritative, but only certain portions are God breathed Scripture. The other qualification that must also be added, is that is that over the centuries, alterations have crept into the Scriptures. Therefore we must also use conscience and logic as well as the voice of the Scriptures.
The revelation of Jesus Christ ceased with the apostle Paul. He says: last of all he was seen of me also as of one born out of due time. (1 Cor 15:8) During the time of Great Tribulation there will be prophesy again, two prophets being mentioned (Rev 11:3) but will there be any other prophets born out of due time, after the apostle Paul, but before the Great Tribulation? There will be a mighty prophet soon before the Lord returns. God says: Behold I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the hearts of the Fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to the fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse. (Malachi 4:5,6) The church must be ready for the millennial reign of Christ.
In Matthew 18:6-10, Jesus uncorrupted words regarding judgement are recorded, and he says: But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depths of the sea. woe to the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh! Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire. Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones: for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. Note that the warning is to those who offend or harm or deliberately stumble young Christian children.
But in Matthew 5:27-30 the same terrible warning is given directly after Jesus speaks against adulterous looks. Did Jesus repeat the terrible warning originally given to a very few, the second time applying it to virtually everyone, or did the compiler repeat the verse, putting it in the context that he imagined. It is most unlikely that Jesus generalised the threat, because the threat shows God's special protection of his children: He that touches you touches the apple of his eye, the Scriptures say. A repetition would teach there is no worse judgement for hurting a Christian child than for any other sin. This would defeat Christ's purpose in declaring the protection. Christ said not to look adulterously, and he also said to pluck out the eye that offends, but not at the same time. The eye that offends is the eye that watches, with an intent to harm. The compiler obviously grouped the sayings wrongly. So in this case, the terrible judgement attached to a fault of the average man, is man made, rather than pronounced by Christ. What of the other threats of judgement, and how are we to interpret them?
If Jesus did speak the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, it would be applicable not to all rich men who were selfish, but only to those who had done gross offence. Perhaps it would apply to a German guard who starved the Jews to death in the concentration camps of WWII. This is within the spirit of Jesus' message in Matthew 18, and also Mark 9, that the terrible judgements, are for terrible sins, rather than human weakness. (As explained in my article on judgement, the punishment ceases in time, but the memorial endures eternally.)
What of the saying that the antichrist and the false prophet and the devil shall be cast into the lake of fire and tormented 'to the ages of the ages' according the literal translation of the Greek. This is to those who murder millions corruply, not for the average sinner. It need not have any relevace whatever to what happens to aduterers and thieves etc.
But there are instances in the New Testament where such judgements are applied to the average sinner. Are these compiler errors as was Matthew 5:27-30, or does God think that one who looks at a woman in a miniskirt, is almost as bad as Hitler, and both should go to the same place? Here we can be guided by the Old Testament. God told Adam that the punishment for eating of the forbidden fruit was death, and the New testament also says that the wages of sin is death. Now death is cessation from life. Solomon says that the dead know not anything. Punishments in the Old Testament after death were reserved for the few who were exceptionally wicked and also mighty, like Dathan, Korah and Abiram, who defied Moses and led a rebellion, trying to overthrow God's priesthood. David also speaks of those full of violence and pride, who persecute the saints, saying that they are consumed with terrors. But to the avearage Israelite, even those who committed idolatry, their lands were perpetuated after them, to remember their names forever with good.
So it seems that the judgement of hell fire is not for the average sinner, but for wicked, powerful persecutors, and that some New Testament Scriptures have been corrupted. How did this happen? Perhaps sometimes by misinterpreting the genuine Scriptures. In revelation chapters two and three it says that those who overcome fear and imprisonment, will not be hurt of the second death. The interpretation is that their persecutors will be. It is the persecutors, not the saints who have reason to fear. But someone, using their own wisdom, said that the converse was true and that if you do not overcome fear, you will go to hell later in the book. And so Rev 21:8 was added to corrupt the book of Revelation.
The antichrist's men will be tormented with fire and brimstone (Rev 14). But through misunderstanding this judgement seems to be applied to everyone whom he deceives. This is clearly in contravention of Jesus's messages. He warned Judas of woe, but to the deceived multitude who crucified him, he prayed, Father forgive them for they know not what they do. We must conclude that those threatened in Rev 14, with the mark of the beast, are specially marked, and specially loyal to him: that they are the deceivers rather than the deceived.
It must be concluded, in the light of Jesus context of judgement, and the Old Testament teaching, that the other few examples of the judgement of hell fire coming upon weak and foolish sinners, are also due to misinterpretations and errors creeping into the New Testament Scriptures. God is angry with men when they sin, as a mother who is angry with her children when they are naughty, but he reserves his wrath for cruel oppressors of his people. But not to ignorant persecution like that of the Muslims, but to inexcuable cruelty like that of the Nazis.