The Bible: God Speaks to MankindIntroduction

I. The character and structure of the BibleA. The character of the Bible

1. The Bible is uniquely a revelation from God to man.

2. The Bible is the complete written record of God’s revelation.

3. The Bible is inerrant/infallible.

4. The names of the Bible (references:

a)

b)

c)

d)

e)

f)

g)

h)

i)

~ 1 ~

B. The structure of the Bible1. The Hebrew Bible

a) The Jewish Scriptures

b) The divisions of the Hebrew Bible

1)

2)

3)

2. The English Bible

a) The English Bible is divided into two sections

b) The Old Testament

c) The New Testament

II. Revelation: The Bible is the word of God.A. Some important terms

1. Revelation

2. Illumination

3. Inspiration

4. Canonization

~ 2 ~

B. Revelation1. Definition

2. Natural revelation

3. Supernatural

C. The Bible claims to be the Word of God (internal evidence).1. Declared to be the Word of God in the Old Testament.

2. Declared to be the Word of God in the New Testament.

3. Declared to be the Word of God by the Son of God.

D. The Bible has proven to be the Word of God (external evidence).1. The continuity of the Bible.

2. The extent of the revelation of the Bible.

~ 3 ~

3. The influence of the Bible

4. The information of the Bible

5. The Bible as a literary masterpiece

6. The authority of the Bible

7. The supernatural nature of the Biblea)

b)

III. The Bible: its purpose and subject.A. The purpose of the Bible.

1. The Bible was written to reveal God to man.

2. The Bible was written to reveal God’s and the that He is accomplishing.

3. God’s supreme purpose in all that He does is to make His known (Isaiah 46:13; 48:11)!

a) All things were for God (Col. 1:16; Psalm 9:1).

b) Was created for God’s glory (Isa. 43:7; Jer. 13:11).

c) Of men is for God’s glory (Rom. 9:23).

d) All is to the glory of God (1 Cor. 10:31).

e) and is to glorify God (Phil. 1:20-21).

f) The believer’s is to see God’s glory (Rom. 5:2).

g) The believer will one day in God’s glory (John 17:22; Col. 3:4).

4. To equip mankind to know and to be able to do all of God’s will.

~ 4 ~

B. The subject of the Bible.

1. The Bible reveals the Person of God.

a)

b)

1)

2)

3)

4)

2. The Bible reveals the plans of God.

a)

b)

c)

3. The Bible reveals the works of God.

a)

b)

C. The Bible reveals the history of mankind.

1. Of mankind.

2. The fall of mankind into .

3. Of mankind.

4. Three major emphases in the Bible.

a) The nation of .

b) The (Spiritual Body of Christ).

c) The (1,000 year reign of Christ on earth).

~ 5 ~

IV. InspirationA. Definition of the word inspiration

1. Two important passages of Scripturea) 1 Timothy 3:16 answers the question the Bible came from (origin).

1) All Scripture (plenary)

2) God-breathed (theopnuestos)

3) Profitable

b) 2 Peter 1:20-21 answers the question did we get the Bible (process).1) Prophecy of Scripture

2) Private interpretation

3) Holy men of God

4) Spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit

2. Definitiona) Inspiration may be defined as Spirit moved men of God wrote God-breathed words

which are divinely authoritative for Christian faith and practice. (Geisler & Nix p. 12)

b) Explanation: The Holy Spirit of God chose human authors and using their own language, personality and styles, overruled in their expression of thought and choice of words so that they recorded accurately all that God wanted them to say and exactly how He wanted them to say it.

c) The Bible is the harmony of the mind of the writer and the direction of the Holy Spirit.

~ 6 ~

3. Three essential elements of inspiration

a) The Divine origin or cause

b) The human agency

c) The Inspired result (written words)

B. The extent of inspiration1. Incorrect theories of inspiration.

a) The Bible is a holy book.

b) The Bible is a dictated book word for word.

c) The Bible contains the word of God.

d) The doctrine of the Bible is inspired.

e) The Bible becomes the word of God.

2. The correct theory of inspiration.

3. The originals (autographs) are inspired.

C. The implications of inspiration1. Because the Bible is inspired it is (infallible).

2. Because the Bible is inspired it is .

~ 7 ~

D. The inspiration of the Old Testament1. The Old Testament itself claims to be God’s Word.

a) Prophetic office

b) The Law

c) The Prophets

d) The Writings

2. Jesus declared the Old Testament to be God’s Word.

~ 8 ~

3. New Testament writers recognized the Old Testament to be God’s Word.

4. Other supporting argumentsa)

b)

c)

d)

~ 9 ~

~ 10 ~

E. The Inspiration of the New Testament1. The Promises of Christ

a) When He commissioned the Twelve.

b) At the Olivet discourse.

c) In the upper room with His disciples.

d) At the Great Commission.

2. The Claims of the Apostles and New Testament Writers.a) The claim of Luke

b) The claim of Peter

c) The claims of Paul

d) The claim of the writer of Hebrews.

~ 11 ~

3. The claim from within the Scriptures themselves.

4. Other supporting argumentsa)

b)

c)

d)

e)

~ 12 ~

F. The evidence of inspiration1. Internal evidence

a)

b)

c)

2. External evidencea)

b)

c)

d)

V. CanonicityA. Definition

1. Meaning of the word

~ 13 ~

2. The canonization of Scripturea) The canonization of the Bible is not a history of church councils or ecclesiastical

decisions. b) Canonization is the recognition and systematic collection of those divinely inspired

writings.c) Inspiration of the Scriptures determines canonization.

B. Understanding canonicity1. “God gives the divine authority to a book and men of God receive it. God reveals and His

people recognize what He reveals.” Geisler & Nix p. 66

2. Rules that are used to discover the canonicity of a book do not determine the canonicity of a book. God determines canonicity by inspiration and man recognizes it when he receives the word that God has given.

C. Incorrect theories of canonization1.

2.

3.

4.

D. The basic criteria to discover the canonicity of a book1. Is the book divinely authoritative?

2. Did the book have prophetic authorship?

~ 14 ~

3. Does the book have complete authenticity?

4. Does the book have the dynamic nature?

5. Was the book accepted as Scripture by the original recipients?

E. The evidence for the Old Testament canon.

1. The Jewish people were very meticulous in collecting and preserving the inspired writings that were given to them making the evidence to the Old Testament canon very sure.

2. Old Testament books were written at or near the time of their historical setting.

3. The Jewish people began compiling those books immediately.

4. By the time of Josephus the 22 books (39 in our English O.T.) of the Hebrew canon were already established.

5. The 14 to 15 books known as the Apocrypha were written in the 400 year period of time between the Old and New Testaments.

a) The Jews never accepted the Apocrypha as inspired Scripture.

b) Josephus did not accept the Apocrypha as inspired Scripture.

c) In our Biblical record Jesus and the Apostles never used or referred to the Apocrypha as Scripture.

d) The Apostles never quoted from the Apocrypha in their writings.

6. The Dead Sea Scrolls do not contain a list of Old Testament books, but they do contain all of the Old Testament books with the exception of Esther.

7. For the Jews, the Old Testament canon was completed around 450 BC with the book of Malachi.

~ 15 ~

F. Terms relevant to the Old Testament Canon

1. Homologoumena- The books accepted by all

a) The word means “to speak as one”

b) 34 out of the 39 books of the Old Testament have always been accepted.

2. Pseudepigrapha- The books rejected by all

a) The word means “false writings”

b) Seventeen books found in the Septuagint that were never accepted as canonical. For a list see Geisler and Nix p. 88-89.

c) These books contain historical error, religious fancy & outright heresy.

3. Antilegomena- The books disputed by some

a) The word means “to speak against”

b) All thirty nine books of the Old Testament were accepted by the original recipients without question.

c) Five books were later questioned by some as to their place in the canon:

1) Song of Solomon

2) Ecclesiastes

3) Esther

4) Ezekiel

5) Proverbs

4. Apocrypha- The books accepted by some

a) The word means “hidden” or “hard to understand”

b) Fifteen books written after Malachi and before Matthew (the intertestamental period from 300 BC – 30 BC) for a list see Geisler and Nix p. 93.

c) These books have some historical significance. They are accepted by the Roman Catholic Church and some Orthodox churches to some degree.

d) These books contain doctrinal error and religious fancy.

e) As noted earlier, Jesus and the Apostles NEVER quoted from the apocrypha.

~ 16 ~

G. Development and extent of the New Testament Canon

1. The compilation of a list of New Testament Books

a) The earliest list of N. T. books is the Muratorian Canon dated around 150 A.D.

1) The four

2) The book of

3) The thirteen letters of

4) The book of

5) Two letters of

6) The book of

b) Only four gospels were ever used by the Church.

c) Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the Apostle John.

1) He wrote Against Heresies (Adversus Haereses) refuting Gnostic writings.

2) He explains that all the churches used the same writings and doctrines as a foundation, and he references almost all of the 27 N.T. books in his writings.

3) Irenaeus clearly states that only four Gospels were used by the Church.

d) Lists of the New Testament books

1) AD 150 Muratorian Canon – 24 of 27 books

2) AD 180 Irenaeus of Lyon – 23 of 27 books cited in his writings

3) AD 240 Origen of Alexandria – 27 books

4) AD 325 Eusebius of Caesarea – 22 + 5 books

~ 17 ~

5) AD 367 Athanasius of Alexandria – 27 books

6) AD 397 Council of Carthage – 27 books

e) The two earliest translations

1) The syriac translation in the east

2) The Old Latin translation in the west

2. Why did it take so long?

a) The originals were sent to different geographical locations spread out across the Roman Empire.

b) No one scroll could contain more than one or two books of the New Testament.

c) The early church was expecting the return of Christ at any time. They were not thinking of handing down a volume of the Scriptures to succeeding generations.

d) Early in the history of the Church no one church leader was dominant over all of the churches. Each church made decisions on their own making a universal list unlikely.

e) Early church leaders had no question as to what was authoritative Scripture and what wasn’t. They were guided by apostolic authorship or influence.

f) The need for a list was necessitated by heretics and the circulation of their false writings.

g) The need for a list was necessitated by Constantine’s call for 50 copies of the Scriptures in AD 315.

3. Evidence of Apostolic confirmation from within the text of the New Testament

a) The signature of Paul

b) The clarification by Peter

~ 18 ~

c) The clarification by John

d) The clarification by Luke

VI. The Transmission of the BibleA. The importance of a written record

1. Precision

2. Permanence

3. Objectivity

4. Dissemination

B. The languages used in the Bible1. Old Testament

2. New Testament

C. The tools of the Bible writers1. Introduction

a) Writing was developed by 3,500 BC

b) Moses wrote no earlier than 1450 BC

c) Phoenicians developed the alphabet

2. Writing materials

a) Clay

~ 19 ~

b) Stone

c) Papyrus

d) Animal skins

1) Vellum

2) parchment

3) Leather

e) Metal

f) Wax

g) Precious stones

3. Manuscriptsa) Definition

b) Rolled into scrolls

4. Codexa) Definition

b) Bound into books

D. The results1. The Old Testament Manuscripts

2. The New Testament Manuscripts

~ 20 ~

E. The extant manuscripts1. The Old Testament

a) Scarcity

b) Dead Sea Scrolls

c) “The integrity of the Old Testament text was established primarily by the fidelity of the transmission process which was later confirmed by the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Geisler and Nix p. 144

2. The New Testament

a) Integrity of the New Testament comes from three sources

1) Greek manuscripts

2) Ancient translations

3) Quotations of the text by the early church fathers

b) Greek manuscripts

1) Papyrus

i. Begin one century removed from the originals.

ii. Contain most of the New Testament

2) Uncials (writing in upper case letters)

3) Minuscules (writing in lower case letters)

F. Textual criticism

1. Higher criticism

~ 21 ~

a) Seeks to establish the date, historicity and authorship of the text.

b) Has been used by modern liberals to undermine the text of Scripture.

2. Lower criticism

a) Seeks to establish the authenticity of the text.

b) Has been used by both orthodox and liberals.

~ 22 ~

VII. History of the English Bible

A. Latin Vulgate (382 AD)

B. Wycliffe’s Bible (1384 AD)

C. Gutenberg Bible (1456 AD)

D. Erasmus Greek New Testament (1516 AD)

E. Luther’s Bible (1522-1534 AD)

F. Tyndale New Testament (1525 AD)

G. Coverdale Bible (1535 AD)

~ 23 ~

H. Matthew Bible (1537 AD)

I. The Great Bible (1539 AD)

J. The Geneva Bible (1560 AD)

K. The Bishop’s Bible (1568 AD)

L. The King James Bible (1611 AD)

~ 24 ~

VIII. Translation of the ScripturesA. Original languages of the Scripture

1. The Bible was written in the common language of the people to whom is was given.2. The common language of the Jews before Christ was Hebrew. The Old Testament which

was given to the Jewish people was written in Hebrew for the most part.3. The common language of the people in the first century after the birth of Christ was

Greek. The New Testament was given to all believers of every tongue and nation and was therefore written in Greek.

B. The need for a translation in the language of the people1. The gospel was taken by the Apostle Paul to the Gentiles. It was brought to many peoples

of many nations and many believed. After the fall of the Roman Empire, there was a need for the Bible to be translated into the languages of the people.

2. Thoughts of the translators of the King James (Authorized) version.“But how shall men meditate in that, which they cannot understand? How shall they

understand that which is kept close in an unknowen tongue? as it is written, Except I know the power of the voyce, I shall be to him that speaketh, a Barbarian, and he that speaketh, shalbe a Barbarian to me. The Apostle excepteth no tongue, not Hebrewe the ancientest, not Greeke the most copious, not Latine the finest. Nature taught a naturall man to confesse, that all of us in those tongues which wee doe not understand, are plainely deafe; wee may turne the deafe eare unto them. The Scythian counted the Athenian, whom he did not understand, barbarous: so the Romane did the Syrian, and the Jew, (even S. Jerome himselfe calleth the Hebrew tongue barbarous, belike because it was strange to so many) so the Emperour of Constantinople calleth the Latine tongue, barbarous, though Pope Nicolas do storme at it: so the Jewes long before Christ, called all other nations, Lognazim, which is little better then barbarous. Therefore as one complaineth, that alwayes in the Senate of Rome, there was one or other that called for an interpreter: so lest the Church be driven to the like exigent, it is necessary to have translations in a readinesse. Translation it is that openeth the window, to let in the light; that breaketh the shell, that we may eat the kernel; that putteth aside the curtaine, that we may looke into the most Holy place; that remooveth the cover of the well, that wee may come by the water, even as Jacob rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well, by which meanes the flockes of Laban were watered. Indeede without translation into the vulgar tongue, the unlearned are but like children at Jacobs well (which was deepe) without a bucket or some thing to draw with . . .” (from the preface to the reader of the 1611 KJV with emphasis added)

3. Thoughts of Philip Schaff the Church historian on Luther’s translation of the Bible into German taken from his Church History.

“The richest fruit of Luther's leisure in the Wartburg, and the most important and useful work of his whole life, is the translation of the New Testament, by which he brought the teaching and example of Christ and the Apostles to the mind and heart of the Germans in life-like reproduction. It was a republication of the gospel. He made the Bible

~ 25 ~

the people's book in church, school, and house. If he had done nothing else, he would be one of the greatest benefactors of the German-speaking race.

His version was followed by Protestant versions in other languages, especially the French, Dutch, and English. The Bible ceased to be a foreign book in a foreign tongue, and became naturalized, and hence far more clear and dear to the common people. Hereafter the Reformation depended no longer on the works of the Reformers, but on the book of God, which everybody could read for himself as his daily guide in spiritual life. This inestimable blessing of an open Bible for all, without the permission or intervention of pope and priest, marks an immense advance in church history, and can never be lost.”

C. Some thoughts on the philosophy of translation1. A copy of the Scripture is a reproduction of the Scripture in the same language.

2. A translation of the Scripture is to put the words of the Bible into another language. A translation of the Bible tackles the difficulties of the difference in vocabulary, grammar, idioms, and culture etc.

3. Languages are alive and they change as time goes on. English is a language that has been influenced by a number of languages and is quite unique.

4. Different types of translations: The following is taken from the introduction to the Believer’s Bible Commentary by William MacDonaldEnglish is blessed with many (perhaps too many!) translations. These fall into four general types:

a) Very literalThe “New” (in 1871) Translation of J.N. Darby and the English Revised Version (1881) and its U.S. variant, The American Standard Version (1901) are extremely literal. This makes them helpful for study but weak for worship, public reading, and memorization. The masses of Christians have never abandoned the majesty and beauty of the KJV for these versions.

b) Complete (formal) EquivalenceVersions that are quite literal and follow the Hebrew or Greek closely when English allows it, yet still permit a freer translation where good style and idiom demand it, include the KJV, and the RSV, the NASB and the NKJV. Unfortunately, the RSV, while generally reliable in the NT, is wedded to and OT that plays down many Messianic prophecies. This dangerous trend is seen today even among some previously sound scholars. The Believers Bible Commentary was edited to conform to the NKJV as the most viable position between beautiful (but archaic) KJV and today’s usage, yet without using any “thee’s” and “thou’s.” It also retains many verses and words eliminated in most modern Bibles .

~ 26 ~

c) Dynamic (functional) EquivalenceThis type of translation is freer than the complete equivalence type, and sometimes resorts to paraphrase, a valid technique as long as the reader is made aware of it. The Moffatt Translation, NEB, NIV, and the Jerusalem Bible all fall into this category. An attempt is made to put whole thoughts into the structure that John and Paul might have used if they were writing today – and in English. When done conservatively, this methodology can be a helpful tool.

d) Paraphrase A Paraphrase seeks to transmit the text thought by thought, yet it often takes great liberties in adding material. Since it is far removed from the original text in wording there is always the danger of too much interpretation. The Living Bible, e.g., while evangelical, makes many interpretive decisions that are at best debatable.The paraphrase of J. B. Phillips (he calls it a translation) is very well done from a literary viewpoint. He also usually says in his words what he believes Peter and Paul meant in theirs.

~ 27 ~