My Last Hub Article
At least for now
This is my 200th article to be published at this website but it is time to make a change for now. I am working on 2 books hoping to get them published soon. To keep up on any news just go to theologyarchaeology to get the latest information.
As I was looking for a topic to write about, I went to a local Christian bookstore. There I picked up the book Confronting Old Testament Controversies by Tremper Longman III.
As the person I am, I wanted to see what controversies the author was talking about and what he had to say. Since this was an evangelical bookstore I was hoping to get some true Christian insight to the topics he was discussing.
Sadly, that was not to be. The book is written by a person who looks for ways to create openings in the biblical content to insert his person theological views. This article will only address the few I have come across in the first 25 pages.
Even in that small amount of reading there are too many to address here
Analyzing the words of the author
#1. Recent surveys show that an alarming number of young people are abandoning the faith because they feel that they must make a decision between what they learn in science class and what they hear in church (pg. 3)
The author approaches this issue in the wrong manner and provides no solutions for those students. He also ignores the Bible verses telling God’s people to not walk in the counsel of the ungodly.
Most science classes are not taught by Christian scientists thus they will not be teaching the truth especially about our origins. They will be teaching what they know filtered through deceived minds that are led astray by evil.
That fact should make the choice these students have to make easier, after all God has said we have to make a choice. We either believe and go with him or we reject God and go with evil and unbelievers.
Science does not hold the truth especially when it comes to our origins. Only God is right and Christians must side with God. What also is troublesome about that author comes a line or two later where he says we can learn from science but remain true to God and his word.
Then he states his question- does the Bible actually teach that God created two humans from a non organic past?
In other words, that author’s idea of fidelity to God is done through the author’s preferences and point of view and not God’s. To remain faithful to God and his word, one must accept what God wrote as he wrote it.
#2. The term inerrancy, however, has been much abused in recent years both by people who want to make it claim more than it does and by those who believe it claims too much and does so crudely. (pg. 7)
In other words, the author is framing this point in the context of that is your interpretation of God’s word not mine argument. When he does this, he opens himself up, and leads others to, letting evil turn their minds and hearts away from the truth.
Since Jesus did not instruct us to use interpretation, then that means there is a truth that we can know and that all the other arguments are not correct. Those people,like that author, are rejecting the truth because they have let unbelieving scientists and others, convince them that God cannot be right and that a field of research excluding the creator of all things is correct.
Attacking inerrancy is the only way that author’s, et al, arguments can get any notice or foothold in the church. On page 10 he makes the statement that our origins is an argument that is not essential to our salvation.
But that is a point in direct contrast to what Jesus said, when he said if you do not believe Moses, how will you believe me? Having the correct view of our origins is essential to our salvation.
#3. Interpretation seeks to discover the message of the biblical text that we are reading. (Pg. 11)
That may be the justification used by the people who think like that author but it is not what Jesus said. Jesus told us to follow the Spirit of Truth to the truth and that the secular world cannot have the Spirit of Truth.
What those words tell us is that all those unbelieving scientists, including those who claim to be Christian, are not teaching the truth about our origins. Only God is through the Bible.
This interpretation purpose and the use of interpretation is only a means to avoid learning the truth and humbling oneself so that they follow God and not their own ways.
The long drawn out argument in the book under study here continues to find ways to ignore what God has written and dismiss it once it disagrees with secular science or the author’s personal views.
#4. ...it is absolutely imperative that we remember that the biblical books were written to a specific ancient audience and not to those of us who are reading them in the twenty-first century. (pg.16)
Under that logic, then, John 3:16 is not written to us and is only for the ancient audience of Jesus’ day. He cannot make an exception for the New Testament because his term ‘the biblical books’ include all the books of both Testaments.
With those words, the author has erased hope for everyone born after the 1st century AD and removed any divine instruction God has given to us. He also leaves us with no replacement scriptures to guide us today.
In his thinking, everyone can do what is right in their own eyes, an attitude God punished the people of Israel for doing. He is also unaware that the situations in the ancient church have not changed to this day making the biblical books written to us and words we must accept and follow.
That thinking also allows that author to incorporate those secular non-scientific views that try to govern life today, for example marriage and divorce, abuse, sin, and more. Sin i snot sin anymore under that author’s point of view.
#5. To read the biblical books correctly, we must first of all read them as if we were living at the time of the original audience. Otherwise, we run the risk of imposing our meaning on the text. (pg. 18)
Again that is erroneous thinking on the part of that author. God does not change and the modern world is part of the original audience. We the Spirit of Truth guiding us, we do not run the risk of imposing our own meanings on the biblical texts.
We also, do not import unbelieving secular thinking into God’s word. That is a sin as God has warned us twice about adding or taking away anything to and from his words. We do not add words God did not say or actions he did not do into the Bible.
Nor do we remove those words or actions that he did say and do.
#6. Since God is the ultimate author of both Scripture and nature, both are true. (pg. 22)
This is only possible if the people looking at nature have the correct content for the book of nature. The supposed book of nature describes the glory of God, his creativity, his innovative nature and his foresight.
It does not tell us how God created. The book of nature is made up by those people who refuse to obey God and stop following unbelieving science and scientific thinking. It is also used by those people who refuse to use faith and believe God.
The author’s next comment on the same page says that ‘scripture doe snot trump nature.’ That is a very heretical thing to say because both God and Jesus did not teach us to use nature to figure out our origins’
Plus, neither God nor Jesus told us to use science to answer our questions about our origins. They pointed to scriptures to answer those questions and scriptures does a very good job in answering them.
His admonition on the next page tells believers to stop rejecting sinful scientific theories etc., when they contradict traditional interpretations of Scriptures. What he is doing is telling people to stop believing God and believe those people who are blinded by sin and deceived by evil.
That is not what a Christian does. A believer does not lead people away from God or his truth. It is a dangerous activity to get involved in.
#7. The Bible teaches us that God created everything but is not interested in telling us how he created the cosmos and humanity. (pg. 24)
Again, this is erroneous thinking as the Bible is very clear in HOW God created. The first chapter of the Bible makes it very clear that God used his power and spoke everything into existence.
What is also very troubling is that later in the paragraph that author states that science shows us that the Bible is wrong and does not claim we all descended from Adam and Eve.
How does science know better than God when science is blind to the past, not working with the Spirit of Truth and rejects Jesus as its savior? They do not serve someone who is greater than God rather science serves someone who hates God and wants to hurt him through destroying is people through various methods including using that author.
Some final words
Be careful out there. In this world there are many wolves in sheep’s clothing who, maybe unwittingly, seek to ruin the lives of those who believe God over science and unbelievers.
They frame their arguments very carefully to make it sound like they love God and his word even though they are twisting it to send you a false message. They may call themselves dedicated Christians but if they were, they would not lead people away from God and his word.
That author’s final words in the section I have read go like this: ‘if we interpret the Bible correctly, it will never conflict with science if science is correctly interpreting nature.’
Those words are so wrong. What he should have said was, ‘If we follow the Spirit of Truth to the Truth, we will see that science is in error and contradicts God and His Word.’ Science cannot be followed or believed over God’s word for only God’s word has the truth.
© 2020 David Thiessen