Biblical Authority

Historical Revelation and the Divine Inspiration of the Bible. IAB-04/10

Historical Revelation and the Divine Inspiration of the Bible. KP10-IAB-04/10

A. Biblical revelation is historical revelation. God established a covenant with Israel in the time of Moses, governed by a written document. This document which should be seen in the context of the suzerainty treaties of the ancient Near East…God’s relation to Israel is structured by a written text. The covenant words are a holy text from the God of the Covenant. Precedent for written prophecy. Prophets after the time of Moses and Joshua also produced written documents setting forth the words that God gave to them. It is evident that during the OT period itself, a body of writings developed that could be quoted as divinely authoritative.

B. The New Testament as God’s Written Words
There is no reason for thinking that the new covenant is any less verbal than was the old. Covenants by their very nature are verbal transactions… Jesus and the apostles revered the OT as God’s Word, as we have seen, and they also identified themselves as God’s prophets, bringing God’s words to the world…The words of Jesus and the apostles were also intended to be preserved for later generations…Only a written document can preserve these words as God’s personal words to us.

C. Biblical Definition of Inspiration
In revelation we have the vertical reception of God’s truth while in inspiration we have the horizontal communication of that revelation accurately to others. Continue reading “Historical Revelation and the Divine Inspiration of the Bible. IAB-04/10”

Christ’s Attestation of the Bible as the Word of God. IAB. Part 03/10

A. Christ’s attestation is the foundation of Christian belief in the Bible as God’s word. IAB. Part 03/10

B. Question: What did Jesus Christ say about the nature of the Bible as God’s Word being? Christ as the resurrected saviour spoke with infallible authority. He confirmed the divine authority of the Old Testament, that is, Scripture as God’s revealed Word is normative for moral conduct before God and is the final authority in settling theological disputes.

C. The New Testament claims to be on the level of authority of the O.T. (2Peter 3:16). Christ had promised the disciples of the Spirit to guide them into all the truth (John 16:12, 13; Matt. 10:20; Mark 13:11; Luke 12:12); and the commandments of the Lord did come through the apostles (2 Peter 3:2).

D. Conclusion: The bible as the basis of faith is thus well summed up in Eph. 2:20, “Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone.”

You can view the video at:
Christ’s attestation is the foundation of Christian belief in the Bible as God’s word. IAB. Part 03/10

Attestation of Bible as God’s Inspired Word Grounded Christ’s Infallible Authority. IAB Part 02/10

Attestation of Bible as God’s Inspired Word Grounded in Christ’s Infallible Authority. IAB Part 02/10

A. The Finality of the Bible
WCF 1.10. The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined…and in whose judgment we are to rest, can be nothing other than the Holy Spirit speaking in Scripture.
Only an infallible Bible is adequate to serve as the final authority in religious truth claims. In concrete terms, the Holy Spirit will bear witness about Jesus (John 15:26)

B. The self-attestation of the Bible is not an abstract assertion. It is grounded in the words of Jesus Christ.

C. The Classical Method in Proving the Bible as the Inspire Word of God
1. The Bible is basically a reliable and trustworthy document.
2. On the basis of this reliable document we have sufficient evidence to believe confidently that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
3. Jesus as the Son of God is an infallible authority.
4. Jesus Christ teaches the Bible is more than generally trustworthy; it is the very Word of God.
5. That the Word, in that it comes from God, is utterly trustworthy because God is utterly trustworthy.

Conclusion – on the basis of the infallible authority of Jesus Christ, the Church believes the Bible is utterly trustworthy, i.e. infallible.

You can view the video at
Attestation of Bible as God’s Inspired Word Grounded in Christ’s Infallible Authority. IAB Part 02/10

The Self-Attestation of the Bible as the Inspired Word of God.

The Self-Attestation of the Bible as the Inspired Word of God. KP10-IAB.Part 01/10

A. God has spoken: Necessity of special or biblical revelation.
Two divisions of revelation: (1) General or natural revelation which pertains to God’s revelation in nature and history, (2) Special revelation inscribed in the Bible which is God’s authoritative, infallible and inerrant Word.

B. Two approaches to the Bible
1. Approach the Bible based on so-called neutral criteria & evidence. Problem: a) In reality there is no neutral criteria of judgment. b) At best this approach can demonstrate the Bible as an accurate document but it cannot demonstrate the Bible as God’s revealed Word.

2. Begin with the Bible’s self-testimony to be the inspired Word of God which is self-evidencing and self-authenticating, and then proceed to handle doubts and difficulties.
Premise: God’s revealed Word should display its own power of conviction when it is accompanied by the Holy Spirit.

The final foundation in doctrine of inspiration and authority of the Bible is not historical-critical scholarship, the magisterium etc. It is the infallible attestation of Jesus Christ with the witness of the Spirit.

You may view the video podcast at
The Self-Attestation of the Bible as the Inspired Word of God. KP10-IAB.Part 01/10

Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone) Does Not Mean Solo Scriptura (Scripture Only – Biblicism)

What is Biblicism?
To be Protestant is to believe in biblical authority. However, biblical authority and biblicism are not synonymous. Biblicism moves beyond believing in the final authority of the Bible to imposing a restrictive hermeneutical method onto the Bible. Biblicism can be identified by the following symptoms:

(1) Ahistorical mindset: Biblicism is a haughty disregard (chronological snobbery in the words of C. S. Lewis) for the history of interpretation and the authority of creeds and confessions, chanting an individualistic mantra, “No creed but the Bible,” which in practice translates into “No authority but me.” Sola scriptura is radicalized into solo scriptura. As a result, biblicism fails to let theology inform exegesis, which is designed to guard against heresy.

(2) Irresponsible proof texting: Biblicism treats Scripture as if it is a dictionary or encyclopedia, as if the theologian merely excavates the right proof texts, chapter and verse, tallying them up to support a doctrine. Biblicism limits itself to those beliefs explicitly laid down in Scripture and fails to deduce doctrines from Scripture by good and necessary consequence. Continue reading “Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone) Does Not Mean Solo Scriptura (Scripture Only – Biblicism)”

Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity, Part 2: Why the Canonical Gospels are more reliable than Gnostic Gospels.

Question: But critics like Elaine Pagels & Bart Ehrman argue that this traditional history of orthodoxy is skewed because it grants greater authority to the canonical gospels and ignores the other (gnostic ) gospels. Why do you think the canonical four gospels provide more accurate historical information about Jesus than the gnostic gospels?

Discussants: Dr. Ng Kam Weng and Mr. Micheal Lim

You are welcome to join the discussion at:
Why the Canonical Gospels are more reliable than Gnostic Gospels.

Please forward this message if you find the video discussion helpful.

Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity Part 1: Was there diversity of Christian beliefs in the early church as different sects competed for influence?

Question: Many secular university scholars argue that there was diversity of Christian beliefs in the early church as different sects competed with one another for influence. When the sect in Rome gained power it declared itself orthodox and condemned the other sects like Gnosticism to be heretical. What is your response?

Discussants: Dr. Ng Kam Weng and Mr. Micheal Lim

You are welcome to join the discussion at:
Part 1: Was there diversity of Christian beliefs in the early church as different sects competed for influence?

Please forward this message if you find the video discussion helpful.

Bart Ehrman’s Historical Revisionism. Part 2/3. Relegating Orthodoxy in Early Christianity

A. Bauer-Ehrman Revisionist History – “Heresy Preceded Orthodoxy”
Ehrman’s assertion that the early Christians took liberty with scripture flows from his contested claim that there was no defining leadership in the early church. According to Ehrman, there was no notion of orthodoxy in early Christianity. Instead, a variety of “christianities” like the Ebionites, the Marcionites, the Gnostics and “proto-orthodoxy” [Ehrman’s coins the term “proto-orthodoxy” as he refuses to acknowledge that there was orthodoxy in early Christianity] vied for power and influence. Ehrman argues that alternative forms of “christianities” and their sacred writings which include the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary and the Gospel of Peter should be regarded to be of equal authenticity (or in Ehrman’s real estimation, of equal inauthenticity) as the four canonical gospels. Indeed, he questions the special regard given the canonical gospels by orthodoxy since to him, the New Testament canon as it is, came to be only when the politically powerful “proto-orthodox” Christians in Rome unilaterally decided which book to be included in or excluded from Christian Scripture, and then applied ecclesiastical machinations and coercive policies to force other Christians to accept their decision. The other forms of “christianities” were then stigmatized by the victorious “proto-orthodox” party to be heretical and their writings were erased from history until some of them were discovered in Nag Hammadi in 1945. Ehrman writes, Continue reading “Bart Ehrman’s Historical Revisionism. Part 2/3. Relegating Orthodoxy in Early Christianity”

Bart Ehrman’s Historical Revisionism. Part 1/3. Misquoting Scripture

Bart Ehrman’s primary mission in life is undeniable. It is to discredit Christianity and to deconvert Christians from their faith. Ehrman’s attack on Christianity has been effective because he claims to be speaking as an objective historian (which is debatable), in contrast to apologists and theologians defending their faith and because he is speaking as a lapse fundamentalist with insider-knowledge. Ehrman’s attack on Christianity is comprehensive, but I shall only highlight three of his favorite lines of attack on Christianity. Continue reading “Bart Ehrman’s Historical Revisionism. Part 1/3. Misquoting Scripture”

Compromise in Biblical Inerrancy and Authority of the Bible is an Existential Threat to the Church

Former church turned into a bar

The article offers some sober lessons for the church. Churches begin to decline when they they make compromises in the final and sufficient authority of the Bible in order to remain ‘relevant’ to wider culture and society. Some of us can remember how many Malaysian churches in the 1960s went into decline because they neglected the Great Commission due to the influence of liberal theology. Compromise in biblical inerrancy and biblical authority is an existential threat to the church.

Lessons:
1) Compromise in biblical inerrancy and final authority is the slippery slide which results in the death of a thousand cuts for the church. Continue reading “Compromise in Biblical Inerrancy and Authority of the Bible is an Existential Threat to the Church”