РефератыИностранный языкBiBible And The Word

Bible And The Word

“Inspire” Essay, Research Paper


The Bible and the Word “Inspire”


According to the Random House Dictionary, the word inspire means “to infuse an


animating, quickening, or exalting influence into, or to communicate or suggest


by a divine influence.” This definition indicates, when applied to the scripture,


that the stories and writings in the Bible did not come solely from the minds of


the respective authors, but rather from a divine source. This suggests that the


authors were scribes, reproducing what was instilled in them by God. This idea


is strengthened by looking at distinct examples from the scripture that show


that scripture is inspired, and not made up. By using the form of criticism


known as literary criticism, we can analyze certain installments of the


scripture and use them to prove that the scripture is, in fact, inspired, not a


collection of false statements.


There are times in the Bible and in Biblical history that the prophets


themselves are confronted with people doubting the validity of the scripture,


and trying to discredit it. “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for


teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness, so that the man


of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” Here Timothy is


relating a charge given to him by Paul. As a story that is being told, it can be


easily inferred that Paul had confronted opposition to the belief that scripture


was in fact inspired by God, and therefore valid. Using literary criticism


allows us to stay on the surface of what is being said, and not necessarily have


to dig behind it to find the true meaning (we’ll leave that to historical


criticism) and therefore by looking at the phrase “scripture is God-breathed” we


can further say that God breathed His word into the authors, and they recorded


it. God can be viewed as an indirect author, and the inspiration for scripture.


“We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the


power and the comings of our Lord Jesus Christ but we were eyewitnesses of His


majesty.” “Above all you must understand that no prophecy of scripture came


about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in


the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy


Spirit.” From the standpoint of a literary critic, these two passages represent


the question at hand as to whether or not scripture is inspired. Literary


criticism looks at the passage as a whole, and reads what it says, just as a


normal person would.

Using this method, we see easily that scripture is in fact


inspired, because it states that there were no cleverly invented stories, but


rather God’s own words. God’s plans for his people are carefully laid out, and


there is much doubt that He would entrust average people to teach others about


His word without careful explanation as to exactly what it is, and how it came


to be. This is why much of the Bible, especially the Pentateuch, tells the


historical story of the Israelites and there great escape from Egypt. God needed


to be sure that exactly what He wanted to be in what was to be called His word


was there, and nothing was added or falsified. In this sense, God can be seen as


the editor of the Bible.


Historical criticism says that if only facts are reliable, than find


facts in the Bible. Historical critics are forced the differentiate between fact


and myth, leaving quite a bit of room for human error. Due to this weakness,


historical criticism is the least compatible method of proving that scripture is


inspired. Historical criticism seems to ignore the fact that scripture is also


literature, and to use their method of historical criticism, you must take apart


the Bible, thereby destroying the literary flow. Literary criticism looks at the


scripture in a way that is similar to how the average person reads it.


Historical criticism is traditionally elitist, and not available to anyone


except the academy. Also, is using historical criticism, complete objectivity is


never achieved, because one cannot observe without influencing the object being


observed. Many times when scholars are using historical criticism to try and


explain certain things about the Bible, the Bible becomes irrelevant to the


Church, therefore killing the entire reason for the Bible’s existence; the


teaching of God’s word. Lastly, the Bible itself says that none of its contents


are interpretations of God’s word, but rather an unadulterated version of the


truth; God’s word verbatim. Historical criticism uses a historical


interpretation to try and prove its point, thereby disproving its own validity.


If historical scholars use a method that does not apply to the Bible, then it


becomes irrelevant itself. This irrelevance is displayed using the Hermeneutical


circle, because the circle implies that there is a cycle and a relationship


between history and the content of the text, and while there may be in certain


parts, that does nothing to prove that scripture is inspired, and only says that


scripture has a possibly factual background.

Сохранить в соц. сетях:
Обсуждение:
comments powered by Disqus

Название реферата: Bible And The Word

Слов:919
Символов:6019
Размер:11.76 Кб.