CHRIST ON SCRIPTURE

by Richard L. Routh, Ph.D.

This is a treatise on the inerrancy of the Bible.

It examines how Jesus would have answered the question:

"Is the Bible really God's word?"

It does this by critically examining what the New Testament

writers record that Jesus said about the Scriptures.

© Copyright 1994, 1996 Richard L. Routh

All rights reserved but the author gives permission to

print and distribute the entire text of this treatise

provided it is distributed in its entirety.

This treatise is dedicated to my wife's mother,

Dr. Caroline Jane Williams Nichols

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction

Chapter 1:

The Context of His Person

Chapter 2:

Christ Thinks Scripture is Historically

Defining

Chapter 3:

Christ Thinks Scripture is Eternal

Chapter 4:

Christ Thinks Scripture is True History

Chapter 5:

Scripture: The Highest Source of Intellectual

Proof

Chapter 6:

Right Thinking

Chapter 7:

Christ Uses Scripture as a Powerful Spiritual

Weapon

Introduction

"You have exalted above all things your name and your word." (Psalm 138:2)

Have you ever watched something beautiful die by being slowly tortured to death? That

is the feeling I have had for the last ten years as I have heard, upon occasional visits, the

Sunday school teaching of a respected community leader that has artfully, and with

apparent credibility, systematically undermined the belief in the authority of Scripture

for some of my friends and loved ones. The primary means has been to teach the

documentary hypothesis as if it were fact. (I will describe the documentary hypothesis a

little later on.) The particular setting of this teaching has made it difficult to respond

with a counter view without being discredited through polite mockery. I have struggled

for ten years with how to appropriately respond to this teaching. I am well schooled in

the apologetics of the authority of Scripture, but in the face of the teaching style and the

well cultivated general attitude of prideful pseudo-intellectualism that exists in that

particular Sunday school class, the arguments of other intellectual men would more

likely build conviction for the errant views than cause repentance. I may be wrong, but

I have come to the opinion that only God could soften their hearts and open their ears.

This perspective has caused me to search Scripture and discover that Christ has said

some startling things about the authority, authenticity, and proper use of Scripture.

Some of these are things I have never heard taught in evangelical circles, but they ought

to be. I suspect that even many evangelicals would find Christ's views on Scripture too

piercingly poignant to easily accept and live by. As difficult as it may be to understand

and accept, it is important to know these things if we are committed to knowing the

truth.

What does God think about the Bible? Does that seem to be an out-of-place question?

There is much debate among modern-day theologians about the authority and

authenticity of Scripture. Inerrancy is another word that is frequently used. Billy

Graham made this statement about the subject in his book Storm Warning:

In numerous churches the Bible is treated as a collection of fairy tales and fables

written by half-educated men of an ancient time. While it offers challenging

spiritual myths and wholesome encouragement, some "modern" churches seem to

feel that no one should go to the Bible expecting to find absolute truth.

Such teaching is an abomination before God. Nothing could be more destructive to

true faith and peace on earth. In the face of such a growing storm, the world

desperately needs moorings, and God has given us that anchor in His Word, the

Bible (pp. 78-79).

As we listen to so many different voices critically dissect these ancient writings, does it

not make sense to consider what Christ Himself had to say on the subject?

Over the centuries, the Church has maintained an exalted view of Scripture, believing it

to be the very word of God. However, when men's hearts are examined, and trapped, by

the bright convicting searchlight of Scripture, some invent ways to discredit its

authority. Some of these are quite creative and clever, and given that "the heart is more

deceitful than all else" (Jeremiah 17:9), these degradations of God's word are presented

apparently with utmost sincerity. This treatise is written for the Christian who desires

to know the truth but is confused or disturbed by the persuasive arguments of some

modern day theologians. That many are confused is not surprising. There are

multitudes of mind-stretching and intellectually challenging arguments on the subject.

Pondering these will likely cause one to ask questions about the authority of Scripture.

Some cast doubt on the authority of Scripture by claiming that significant portions of

the Old Testament Scriptures are the combined efforts of many different editors who

over the centuries added their own perspectives and themes to the evolving texts. This

theory, known as the "Documentary Hypothesis" was originated in modern times

because, for a while, some "learned" scholars had concluded that no written form of a

language existed at the time of Moses. As they hypothesized how the Mosaic writings

might then have come into being, they conjectured, based on no currently standing

historical or archaeological evidence, that multiple editors constructed these writings

from the folklore and partial manuscripts handed down in later generations. These

hypothesized and anonymous editors go by the names of J (for the Jehovah

perspective), E (for the Elohim perspective), etc. Since the initial fabrication of this

hypothesis, its premise has been proved false by the discovery of the "black stele" on

which the detailed laws of Hammurabi were written at least three centuries prior to the

time of Moses. However, instead of recanting this "Documentary Hypothesis," those

minds that imagined it were unwilling to do so; so it continues to be taught today. Only

now the case for the existence and contribution of these multiple editors is based

primarily on the diversity of style and theme in Scripture. My personal response to

those who advocate this theory of multiple editors is that, aside from ignoring history as

well as the strict ritual religiously used by the ancient Jews to copy and preserve

Scripture in its original form, they have apparently failed to recognize that the diversity

in creation itself points to a God who delights in diversity. His own being is presented to

us in three persons. If God is diverse in His own being, and if the diversity of the

Creator is obviously reflected in his creation prolific with diversity, then why should

one not expect to find diversity in a set of writings that themselves claim to be the

thoughts and words of this single God of diversity? But my response to the proponents

of this or other discrediting theories is only one man's opinion. For those who seek to

know the truth, it can be quite confusing and debilitating to hear men debating among

themselves about these theories. Would it not be far more valuable to hear the words of

Jesus Christ on this subject?

But how can we be reasonably sure that we have the sayings of Jesus Christ accurately

recorded and available to us? Those who advocate the "Documentary Hypothesis" of

multiple editors modifying Scripture down through the ages (the earliest portions of the

Old Testament were probably written in the 15th century B.C.) tend to restrict this

hypothesis to the Old Testament writings. The reason for this is the overwhelming

evidence that the Greek manuscripts we have available to us today are so close to the

original New Testament writings, that no significant grounds for debate as to its

authenticity as a primary document remain. (It was written by eyewitnesses or their

secretaries, completed probably prior to 80 A.D., and the great multitude of existing

New Testament manuscripts allow us to reconstruct the original Greek documents.

Additionally, there are many first and second century secular writers who attest to the

existence, authorships, and authenticity of account of the New Testament writings.)

Furthermore, the "Documentary Hypothesis" claim is required by literary history to

restrict itself to the fact that all significant modifications to Old Testament Scriptures

must have been made prior to the first century since it can be demonstrated by extant

documents of that time that the present day versions of the Massoretic Old Testament

texts are accurate copies of the first century version of Old Testament Scripture (with

the exception that vowels have since been inserted to assist with pronunciation, not

significantly changing any words or meaning).(Endnote #1)

Because the Old Testament Scriptures at the time of Christ are nearly identical to the

present day version and because there is no significant scholarly debate as to the

authenticity of the modern Greek version of the Gospels as accurate copies of the

primary documents (with the exception that Matthew may have been originally written

in Aramaic and translated into Greek very soon after its writing), then it makes a great

deal of sense to examine what Jesus Christ had to say about how we ought to view Old

Testament Scripture as recorded in these Gospel writings. Since the average reader of

this treatise will not speak Greek, Scripture quotes used herein come from the New

American Standard Version, except in a few cases when the Greek itself was deemed

necessary which is quoted from The Greek New Testament edited by Kurt Aland, et al.

There is a second motivation for writing this treatise. For some who seek the truth,

there is an unsatisfying shallowness to simply parroting the traditional claim that

Scripture is inerrant without understanding the justification for that claim. Scripture

itself instructs Christians to be "ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to

give an account for the hope that is in you" (I Peter 3:15). In preparing an answer, I

think one will receive a deeper blessing that comes from better appreciating the richness

and depth and the fuller implications of the authority of Scripture. I think that many

Christians would benefit from being encouraged to deepen their view of the authority of

Scripture and, in doing so, would be encouraged by a deeper understanding of God and

His purpose for us. This would also help them properly respond to those who would

challenge their faith. It is for this purpose of building up and equipping the Saints to be

prepared to give a reason for the hope that is in us that this treatise is written.

There are a plethora of good intellectual arguments to support the authority of

Scripture. Although not the subject of this treatise, it is useful to mention just a few of

them. The authority of Scripture can be addressed from many vantage points. For one,

archaeology provides an impressive and growing set of evidences for the consistent

accuracy of Scripture. Impressive arguments can be made for the authority of Scripture

because of the miraculous logical consistency of theme and lack of contradiction despite

the fact that Scripture has had many authors in many centuries, each with diverse

backgrounds. Certainly the record of the Biblical prophesies and their fulfillment is at

least astonishing and presents a compelling argument that their authorship is credited

to someone with the power to see and know the future unlike man. Having been

educated to the doctorate level in modern sciences, I think it is impressive that after

much study of the Scriptures, I am unaware of any single scientific inaccuracy in these

ancient writings. All of these vantage points when considered together form an

impressive and overwhelmingly convincing argument for the authority and authenticity

of Scripture as the Word of God. But I have come to believe that all these collectively do

not form the strongest argument for the authority of Scripture. Nor do they form the

most complete case to rebuff those who say that not all Scripture is the Word of God,

but only that it "contains" (in some parts, presumably to be determined by the reader

because he is smarter than Scripture and qualified as its judge) the Word of God.

The strongest and clearest argument for the authority and authenticity of Scripture can

be made by examining the convictions that Christ himself held of Scripture. This

treatise intends to examine what Christ, God in the flesh, said concerning the authority

of Scripture. His words are powerful and provide an impressive and very strong,

perhaps the strongest, argument for the inerrancy, but beyond that, the historically

defining authority of Scripture.

In the Gospel writings, Jesus Christ was succinct and startlingly pointed about the

authority of Scripture. I hope and pray that my discussions herein of His words on the

subject will help you better understand some of the riches of what God himself, in

human form, has said, and what I believe God would have us understand, about the

authority of Scripture. It has been for me a very settling discovery. I hope you will find

it the same.

Chapter 1: The Context of His Person

The sayings of Jesus Christ cannot be fully appreciated without understanding Jesus's

identity. This Man who spoke these things recorded in New Testament writings spoke

from a position of authority that is far above any other. Three attributes of Jesus Christ

are particularly pertinent to a discussion about the meaning and significance of His

comments on Scripture: (1) Jesus was and is the Almighty God; (2) Jesus has always

existed and was the means by which all things in heaven and earth were created; and (3)

Jesus, in particular, is the Word (Logos) of God--in a very real sense, Scripture in the

flesh. When one understands who Jesus was and is, His comments about Scripture

become strikingly penetrating.

Certainly Jesus Christ, as He is portrayed in New Testament writings, was fully human-

-a man in every sense of the word. I would not say just as human as any one of us, but I

see a man who is more human than any of the rest of us. He was born a helpless child

needing care from his imperfect human mother; He wept; He grew tired; He was deeply

moved with emotion; He was quintessentially compassionate to those who suffered; He

suffered greatly; He bled; He got hungry; He submitted to His earthly parents even

when their understanding of the situation was more limited than His; He was concerned

for the underdog; and at times He was surprised, even astonished. Even though He was

fully human as He walked on earth, Jesus was fully God. In fact, Colossians 1:19

records for us that all the fullness (of Deity) dwelt in Him. In John 1:1, taken together

with John 1:14, we see this again: "In the beginning was the Word [Logos], and the

Word was with God, and the Word was God. ... And the Word became flesh, and dwelt

among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of

grace and truth." With these words, John tells us that Jesus was God and the creator

(agent of creation) in that "All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him

nothing came into being that has come into being" (John 1:3). Again Colossians repeats

this theme saying, "For by Him [Jesus, God's Son] all things were created, both in the

heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or

authorities--all things have been created by Him and for Him" (Col 1:16). Jesus is God

the Creator.

These three interwoven attributes (that Jesus is God, that Jesus is the Word (Logos) of

God, and that Jesus is the creator) all tie together in Genesis chapter one where we read

that "God said, 'Let there be ...'" and creation was spoken (through the Logos) into

existence, made from nothing. We see this same power at work through Jesus in the

New Testament. He spoke and a dead man's decayed body came back to Life (John

11:44). With our current understanding of human physiology, we now know something

of the complexity of what was going on here that those bystanders of Jesus's day

probably did not appreciate. Within minutes of death, most of the cells of the body

explode because the sodium pump, the cellular mechanism that keeps the cell's wall

intact, ceases to function. When this happens, the cell's contents begin to dissipate

throughout the fluid around them. In short, the structure of the body at the cellular

level is destroyed. A trillion complex micro universes (the cells of the body) begin to

disintegrate rapidly. Only a force equal to that which could speak a universe, with all of

its unfathomable complexities, into existence would be able instantly and simultaneously

to recreate and repair the billions of destroyed cells within Lazarus's body and bring

him back to life.

As remarkable a miracle as it is that Jesus would command the simultaneous recreation

and reconstruction of billions of small complex universes known as Lazarus's body cells

to bring Lazarus back to life, consider the miracle when Jesus gives sight to a man born

blind (John 9). In order to accomplish this feat, not only did Jesus demonstrate creation

from nothing, but He also demonstrated that He was the master of time. Sight is

dependent not only on the mechanical operation of the eyes and the brain, but also on

the perception mechanisms that are developed over time in the cerebral cortex of the

brain. When a child is born, although his eyes and brain work mechanically, he cannot

really see so as to actually perceive, but instead the images being played on his striate

(visual) cortex must be associated, in many complex ways, with other stimuli over time

so as to "train" the cortical perception mechanisms to actually "see" (perceive) any

meaning in those images. This training involves the chronologically sequential

establishment of many hierarchies of perception. This sequential establishment requires

at least many months, if not years, of associative cortical development in a developing

child. Thus for a man who was born blind to be able suddenly to see as an adult, not

only must the mechanics of sight be created from nothing, but the cortical structure

must be created in such a way so as to simulate a long period of experience in the use

and development of that sight. Otherwise, the man born blind would not have any

cognitive perception of the visual images moving on his retina. This miracle may be the

greatest of all the miracles because it requires the creation of a long time of experience

to be developed and placed instantaneously in the cortical structure of the man's brain.

This displays a power of mastery even over time--a power reserved only for the eternal

God and Creator.

The recognition of the importance of Jesus's ability to perform these miracles is that

God, even in view of His enormous and displayed power over creation and time,

considers himself unalterably bound by the words contained in Scripture. (This

statement will be justified later.) This realization will bring us to an appreciation of

Scripture that is considerably higher than that held by the average evangelical today. In

this we will see that Scripture is a great deal more than simply inerrant; it is alive and

powerful so as to be the ultimate authority, even to the point of binding the actions of

the one who has control over creation and time. In later chapters we will see that Jesus

held this view.

Some people find it surprising that Jesus is exalted by God the Father to the highest

status. Often we see Jesus praying to the Father and making statements such as "the

Son [Jesus] can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing"

(John 5:19). But let us not overlook the fact that the Father also makes such statements

about the Son. In Hebrews we read: "But of the Son He [the Father] says, 'Thy throne,

O God, is forever and ever" (Hebrews 1:8). Here we see that the Father refers to the

Son as His (the Father's) God.

In Philippians (2:11) we read that "every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is

Lord (kurios) to the glory of God the Father." The Greek word "kurios" is defined

(Endnote #2) as "he to whom a person or thing belongs, about which he has the power

of deciding; master, lord." The "kurios" in Philippians is Jesus Christ whose domain is

explicitly stated as extending over "those who are in heaven, and on earth, and under

the earth," in other words, the whole universe. The Father acknowledges that the

rightful Lord (Kurios) of the universe is Jesus Christ the Son because again here the

Father says, "Thou [the Son], Lord, in the beginning didst lay the foundation of the

earth, and the heavens are the works of Thy hands" (Hebrews 1:10). Here the Father

acknowledges that the Son is the Creator of the earth and the heavens.

This theme of the deity of Jesus the Christ is not new to the New Testament writings.

The Old Testament writings declare this in many places in many ways. One such

occurrence is in the ninth chapter of Isaiah. Many messianic prophesies occur in Isaiah.

In the following verses, Isaiah makes some astounding claims about a human child yet

to be born:

For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will

rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty

God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.(Isaiah 9:6)

The Old Testament practices regarding names were different than ours today. In our

society, if you want to call someone Sam because you like the sound of the name, you do

it--even if you don't know the meaning of the name or intend that the meaning is in

some way significant about the child. This was not the practice of Old Testament times.

We see a consistent practice throughout the Old Testament writings from the beginning

to the end of them (about a thousand year span) in which names were given because of

their meaning. It was clearly understood by Isaiah's readers prior to the time of Christ

that this child to be born would be named "Eternal Father" and "Mighty God" because

those were rightful titles for that child to bear. They no doubt struggled with how this

could be true, but nonetheless, they were clear about Isaiah's intent in the

communication. Isaiah's communication was clear: The Messiah would be the Mighty

God, He would be the Eternal Father, He would be a human child.

While Jesus walked on this earth, he understood quite clearly who He was and told the

Jewish religious leaders so plainly that He was the God of the Old Testament (John

8:58), that they had no trouble understanding His claim. The way He did this was

characteristically brilliant and unambiguous. For us to understand the full impact and

clarity of what he was saying to them and to hear it the way the Jews heard it, we have

to review a few things first. Remember in the third chapter of Exodus, God speaks to

Moses from the burning bush. He calls Moses to lead the Israelites out of Egypt. When

Moses asks God what His name is, God, from the burning bush, answers by saying, "'I

AM WHO I AM'; and He said, 'Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, "I AM has sent

me to you."' And God, furthermore, said to Moses, 'Thus you shall say to the sons of

Israel, "The Lord, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the

God of Jacob, has sent me to you." This is My name forever, and this is my memorial-

name to all generations'" (Exodus 3:14,15). This statement was the genesis of the

Hebrew tetragrammaton "YHWH" (the consonant portion of "I AM THAT I AM").

This name for God was revered by the Jews as so sacred a name that they would not

speak it casually for fear of violating the third of the ten commandments to not take the

name of the Lord in vain.

In the eighth chapter of John, Jesus makes the statement that "Abraham rejoiced to see

My day, and he saw it and was glad." The Jews therefore said to Jesus, "You are not yet

fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?" Then Jesus says the most explosive

words: "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am" (John 8:56,58). The

grammar here does not work in Greek just as it does not work in English. But Jesus did

not make a grammatical error. It is clear by the grammar, the specific choice of words,

and the context that He was claiming this most sacred name of God as His own name.

He clearly said to the Jews, in a way they would be sure to understand, the modern

rough equivalent to "You know who that was who spoke to Moses in the burning bush

and told him that He was the Lord, the God of Abraham? That was Me! I am the God

of the Old Testament!" The Jews did understand this meaning and immediately picked

up stones and tried to stone Him to death, the penalty for blasphemy.

As we delve into the study of Jesus's view of Scripture, let us keep in mind that this was

not an occasionally fallible man expressing his best, but limited, understanding of

Scripture (as would at best be the case with any of the rest of us), but these words are

from Jesus, the living Word (Logos) of God who unerringly speaks truth with the

deepest profundity and highest authority. This mouth that spoke the universe and time

into existence is the same voice that has spoken some amazing things about Scripture;

let us remember the source as we read them.

Chapter 2: Christ Thinks Scripture is Historically

Defining

"...and not one of them perished but the son of perdition, that the Scripture might

be fulfilled" (John 17:12b).

"... to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken) ..."(John

10:35).

Judas Iscariot was a favored companion of Jesus's. He was given special honor. For

example, Judas was given charge over the money bag (he was the treasurer of the twelve

disciples). Judas was given the place of honor at the last supper. He was served bread by

Jesus at the last supper, a gesture customarily extended to the guest of honor. In Psalm

41:9, we read the following words, identified by Jesus in John 13:18 as being spoken

prophetically by the Holy Spirit, of the anguish Jesus would experience at the betrayal

of his close friend Judas:

Even my close friend, in whom I trusted,

Who ate my bread,

Has lifted up his heel against me.

Judas was beloved of the Lord. Judas was favored and trusted by Jesus.

In John 13:18, Jesus identifies this passage from Psalm 41:9 as referring to Judas's

betrayal of Jesus. Jesus tells his disciples that the reason Judas betrayed Him was so

"that the Scripture may be fulfilled." Later when Jesus was in prayer, He spoke these

words to the Father: "While I was with them, I was keeping them in Thy name which

Thou hast given Me; and I guarded them, and not one of them perished but the son of

perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled" (John 17:12). The question asks and

answers itself from these verses: "Why was Judas not kept by Jesus in the name of God

as the other disciples were?" The answer is given in the passage here: so "that Scripture

might be fulfilled." Scripture, Psalm 109, prophesied that Judas would betray Jesus and

be lost (see Acts 1:15 - 22).

In spite of the fact that Judas was loved and honored among men by Jesus, Jesus

considered that He, God in the flesh, was bound by what was written hundreds of years

before in a potentially obscure Psalm in Scripture. Some mistakenly dismiss the Psalms

as only the folk songs of the ancient Jews; it is obvious that Jesus considered the

authority of the Psalms so binding that they dictated His very actions. Could Jesus have

also saved his good friend Judas? The question is moot. Jesus would not, could not, for

only one reason--the reason cited by Him--that Scripture must be fulfilled.

We see this fulfillment of Scripture as a recurrent theme. For example, although not a

quotation by Jesus, John says that the reason Jesus spoke the words "I am thirsty"

while dying on the cross was "in order that the Scripture might be fulfilled" (John

19:28).

The question that glares out at us in these passages is: "Why would God feel so

constrained by anything that it would dictate His actions?" Does that not seem the most

absurd, out of place convolution? It makes no logical sense that God should be

constrained by anything other than His own will. Logically, the requirement that

Scripture be fulfilled must be the explanation for this phenomenon. Scripture is a

statement of God's will and, since God is not fickle, it therefore states that which God

has already determined. This elevates Scripture to a point that not only can one say it is

always true, but that it also records the unalterable decisions of God. At least this

appears to be the way Jesus saw it. This decidedly leaves no room for those theologians

who claim that these passages are not God's word, but attempt to dilute them with

explanations such as that they are only man's attempts to express the best he

understands about God, or other such rationalizations. These alternate explanations

disagree with Jesus's view ... and ought He not know? These alternate explanations

seem to portray Jesus as somewhat misinformed or limited in His thinking. Does that

not highlight the unreasonableness of these alternate explanations?

The binding authority of Scripture is also conveyed in John 10. In the middle of a

discussion about the exalted status of men as gods in God's sight, Jesus speaks some

remarkable words: "the Scripture cannot be broken." The text of the conversation is

recorded for us and translated into English in the following words:

Jesus answered them, "Has it not been written in your Law, 'I said, you are gods'?

If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot

be broken), do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world,

'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'? (John 10:34-36)

There are some magnificent assertions in this passage. Explicitly, Jesus refers to the

quoted passage in Psalm 82 as "the word of God." Psalm 82 was not called "the word of

God" by some uneducated back-woods preacher who presumably has not been

"enlightened" by the higher thinking of modern analysis and thought, but this

statement was made by the One who is unerring in what He says because He is Himself

the Word (Logos) of God and speaks with the highest authority and most precise

accuracy in heaven and on earth. Jesus thinks that Scripture is the word of God, not

just the writings of well-intentioned men!

There is more to be gleaned from John 10:35. Do we think that Jesus would mislead us?

If Scripture is not the infallible, authentic, unadulterated word of God, why doesn't

Jesus take this opportunity, or any other opportunity (none is taken anywhere in the

New Testament writings), to enlighten our thinking to understand these finer points?

Wouldn't it be a hideous crime to allow men to continue to assume that every word of

Scripture can be trusted as the authentic word of God if it were not so? The mere fact

that Jesus refers to Scripture as the "word of God" without qualification, would lead

any clear thinking person to conclude that no qualification is necessary. Can we not

reasonably conclude from this discourse of Jesus in John 10:34-36 that all of Scripture

IS the "word of God"? Do we not think that Jesus would have taken the opportunity to

correct our thinking about interpreting Scripture so strictly if some correction were

necessary? Instead, Jesus powerfully reinforced this strict, high interpretation of

Scripture: He said, "the Scripture cannot be broken."

Jesus could have used less definite language if He had meant something less definite.

Why did He not use the words "should not be broken" or even "must not be broken" or

something else a little less definite? To use the words in Greek "ou dunatai", meaning

literally "not able to be" or "cannot be", lucidly communicates and reinforces the fact

that the accuracy and authority of the Scriptures was accepted by Jesus as perfect and

directly from God without qualification. The realization that Jesus held such a high

view of the precision and accuracy of the Scripture should give correction and comfort

to those who have been mislead by rationalizations that would argue otherwise.

Chapter 3: Christ Thinks Scripture is Eternal

"But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of

the Law to fail." (Luke 16:17)

"O foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken.

Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and enter into His glory?"

And beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained the things

concerning Himself in all the Scriptures. (Luke 24:25-27) To what extent does this very exalted view of Scripture apply? Is it possible to say that

only selected portions of Scripture are the true Word of God? Is all of Scripture the

original unaltered communication from God? In the previous chapter we examined

Jesus's words "the Scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35). We saw how, by

implication, Jesus refers to all of Scripture. This would be enough to convince us that

Jesus's view of Scripture as the unalterable Word of God was inclusive of all of

Scripture, but He has said other more explicit things that add weight to this implication.

Furthermore, it was the practice of the Jewish religion of the day to exalt all of

Scripture as given by God. There were, by tradition, elaborate and extremely strict

rules as to how Scripture was to be copied (this was prior to the printing press) that

ensured the precise copy of each letter in the original. Among other strict detailed

practices of those who copied the Scriptures, each letter was counted in the original and

in the copy to ensure not even a single letter was omitted or inserted. This attention to

each letter was indicative of the view that each letter had sacred value. If this were an

inaccurate view of Scripture, Jesus had many opportunities, and one might argue even

the obligation, to correct this thinking. He did not. Instead, Jesus reinforced the fact

that even every letter is sacred with these words recorded in Matthew:

For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or

stroke shall pass away from the Law until all is accomplished. (Matthew 5:18)

On another occasion, Jesus said, "But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away

than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail" (Luke 16:17).

Let us keep in mind that Jesus considered it His mission to show men "the truth, the

way, and the life" that would lead them to the Father (John 14:6). In fact, Jesus

apparently considered this mission inseparable from His very identity (John 12:46). It

would be ludicrous to think that Jesus would not have gone out of His way to correct the

thought that all Scripture is from the mouth of God if it were not true (He did not

hesitate to correct many other errors in the Sermon on the Mount). Otherwise He would

be violating His own stated reason for being by allowing the Jews to continue to search

all of Scripture as though it were from God and pointed the way to Him. The Jews of

the first century were not wrong in thinking that all Scripture was from God or Jesus

would have corrected this thinking; instead He reinforced it.

Immediately prior to Jesus's saying in Matthew 5:18, was another statement of scope.

Before we look at this quotation, in order to properly understand what Jesus was

saying, we need first to look at the organization of the Scriptures during the time Jesus

spoke them. The Hebrew Canon contained the same books as the modern Protestant

Old Testament but the books were organized differently. They were divided into three

named sections: (1) The Law, (2) The Prophets, and (3) The Writings. The divisio ns

were as follows:

The Law: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

The Prophets: Joshua, Judges, Samuel (I & II as one book), Kings (I & II as one

book), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, The Twelve (Hosea through Malachi as one

book).

The Writings: Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Esther,

Ecclesiastes, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah (as one book), and Chronicles (I & II as one

book).

In Matthew 5:17, Jesus makes a statement about the criticality and centrality of the

Law and the Prophets. He says, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the

Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill." Again this is significant that Jesus

gives the reason for His mission as being the fulfillment of Scripture. In Jesus view, at

least the Law (a first century figure of speech referring to the Mosaic writings: Genesis

through Deuteronomy) and the Prophets (Joshua through Malachi as listed above) were

so authoritative as to be sufficient justification to require God to humble Himself to take

on human form and be sacrificed on the cross for our sins to accomplish our salvation

(Endnote #3). Here again we see that the Scripture is so authoritative that it binds God

Himself.

In Luke 11:51 (also recorded in Matthew 23:35), Jesus indicates that the scope of

legitimate Scripture extends beyond the Law and the Prophets. As we have seen above,

the Hebrew Canon began with the book of Genesis and ended with the book of

Chronicles. In Luke 11, Jesus is accusing the Pharisees and other experts of the Law of

approving of the martyrdom of the prophets. He says:

"I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they will kill and some

they will persecute, in order that the blood of all the prophets, shed since the

foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, from the blood of

Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the house of

God" (Luke 11:49-51).

Not only do we have here a statement from Jesus verifying the authenticity and

historical accuracy of early chapters of Genesis, but we also have a statement that seems

to indicate that Jesus recognized the authenticity of the entire Hebrew Canon. Abel was

the first recorded martyr in the first book of the Hebrew Canon (Genesis chapter four)

and Zechariah was the last recorded martyr in the last book of the Hebrew Canon (II

Chronicles 24). Is this not the equivalent of a sweeping validation from Jesus of the

authenticity of the Hebrew Canon from the first to the last?

In The Revelation to John, chapter 22:7, Jesus says, "Blessed is he who heeds the words

of the prophecy of this book." The "this book" referred to in this statement is The

Revelation to John. By this pronouncement, Jesus plainly indicates that the Scriptures

extend beyond the writings of the Old Testament. The quotations of Jesus, who is the

Word (Logos) of God, are obviously the word of God since Jesus is God. A strong case

can be made to show that the Gospel writings are of the same authenticity as the

Scriptures of the Old Testament. Among other arguments that can be made for this are

the words of Jesus Himself when He says:

"These things I have spoken to you, while abiding with you. But the Helper, the

Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, He will teach you all things,

and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you." (John 14:25,26) Here Jesus is saying that the Disciples will have supernatural recall of the words Jesus

spoke, thus enabling them to write the Gospels with the inerrant precision required to

qualify as Holy Scripture. (Endnote #4)

Chapter 4: Christ Thinks Scripture is True History

"What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." (Mark 10:9)

A common criticism of the Scriptures is that, as I have heard one religious leader say,

"Anyone with half a brain can see that the Bible obviously contains fables, myths, and

fictional folk stories." If it were true that portions of Scripture were not historical fact

when the context clearly suggests that they are, but rather are only add-ins by folk

writers (like the works of many other ancients such as Homer) or other later-than-the-

original-editors, then we would have a situation in which the case for the inerrant,

historically defining authority of Scripture would be undermined. Some of the accounts

most commonly labeled as fables are (1) the Genesis account of creation, (2) Noah's ark

and flood, (3) Jonah being swallowed by the big fish, and (4) the authorship of the book

of Daniel by Daniel during the Babylonian and early Medio/Persian empires. Altho ugh

convincing extra-biblical evidence supports the authenticity of each of these (Endnote

#5), this treatise is concerned with what Jesus has to say about such things.

More than any other person, Jesus Christ was and is a realist. The Man who said, "I am

the ... truth" (John 14:6), has nothing to be gained by dealing in fables and a great deal

to lose by presenting fables as fact. We have several examples of Jesus correcting

erroneous religious teaching when he found it. But what did He have to say about the

authenticity of the Genesis account of creation, or the Noachian flood, or Jonah's big

fish, or Daniel's writing of the book of Daniel?

Jesus underscores the authenticity of the Genesis account when He refers to the

"beginning" of creation and that it was at that time that a man and a woman were

created and joined together by God in marriage. During this discussion, He even quotes

from the first and second chapters of Genesis, thereby acknowledging its authenticity.

In Jesus's words:

But from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female. For this

cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and the two shall become one flesh;

consequently they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined

together, let no man separate. (Mark 10:6-9) Here two observations can be made. First, by quoting from the creation account in

Genesis, Jesus is acknowledging its authority and truth. Second, by using the words

"What God has joined together..." He recognizes God to be the author of these Genesis

writings. (Endnote #6)

Of the authenticity of Noah's flood, Jesus speaks of it as factual history. In Matthew 24

(also Luke 17:26-27), Jesus links the certainty of his second coming to the certainty of

Noah's flood. In His words:

For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah. For as in those

days which were before the flood they were eating and drinking, they were

marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the Ark, and they

did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so shall the

coming of the Son of Man be. (Matthew 24:37-39)

If Jesus were not completely convinced of the historical accuracy of Noah's flood, He

would hardly have used it as the proof text for the certainty of His second coming!

Of the swallowing of Jonah by a big fish (or whale or sea monster) (Endnote #7), Jesus

says, "For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster,

so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth"

(Matthew 12:40). Again, Jesus is trying to convey the reality of a coming event (His

death and resurrection) by appealing to the reality of a past event (Jonah being

swallowed by the sea monster). The credibility of His prophecy about His resurrection

would be destroyed if the account of Jonah were not true.

Some might argue that Jesus was relying on a literary mechanism such as a metaphor

and therefore, it is not logically necessary for the Jonah event to be historical fact, only

that the concept existed. This argument would ignore the fact that this was the Man of

Truth speaking; that Jesus was by demonstrated pattern predisposed to exposing

religious myth; and that Jesus had demonstrated at other times the validity of literal

interpretation of the prophets' words. For Jesus to have changed His modus operandi

and begun appealing to prophecy simply as metaphorical myth would contradict His

past practices and undermine His own teaching. If Jesus thought this story of Jonah

were not true, why would He not have taken this opportunity to correct the wrong

thinking of His day instead of reinforcing its factual occurrence by linking it to a certain

coming factual event? Aside from all this, the context of this saying in Matthew 12:40,

the logic being used, the people he was talking to and their beliefs, and the flow of the

focus of theme, all require the conclusion that Jesus was convinced of the historical fact

of Jonah being swallowed and then regurgitated three days later by the sea monster. It

does not seem to me to be honest or good scholarship to attempt to construe any other

interpretation.

Some skeptical modern critics have said that the book of Daniel was written nearly 400

years after Daniel's death. This is because even a cursory reading of the prophecies of

Daniel and of the secular history that took place during the four and a half centuries

following the reign of Nebuchadnezzar reveal an extraordinarily detailed and startlingly

accurate prophecy of those events. The book of Daniel, perhaps more than any other

book in the Old Testament, clearly demonstrates this supernatural characteristic of

Scripture. Either only the supernatural or the later writing of Daniel could account

reasonably for this. If it were the supernatural, then that would unequivocally

demonstrate that at least parts of Scripture are authentically supernaturally authored

(i.e. written by God)(Endnote #8). In the twenty-fourth chapter of Matthew, Jesus says,

"Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation which was spoken of through

Daniel the prophet, ..." (Matthew 24:15). The "abomination of desolation" is referred to

in three places in the book of Daniel (verses 9:27, 11:31, and 12:11). In Matthew 24,

Jesus clearly attributes the authorship to the historical person Daniel.

As we review these sayings of Jesus about the four events most referred to by the

skeptics as fables, can we not conclude that Jesus believed in their historical accuracy?

It seems obvious. The implication here is that the entire argument that Scripture

contains fables and myths written by folklore editors is erroneous. Not even the four

most "obvious fables" stand up under the scrutiny of Jesus, but instead are pronounced

by Him to be historical fact.

Chapter 5: Scripture: The Highest Source of Intellectual

Proof

"But regarding the fact that the dead rise again, have you not read in the book of

Moses, in the passage about the burning bush, how God spoke to him, saying, 'I am

the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the

God of the dead, but the God of the living; you are greatly mistaken." (Mark 12:26-

27).

This passage from Mark is amazing. Jesus is a very good scholar; remember He claims

to be the source of all truth. Who among us would dare to prove a major theological

principle on the basis of only one word that was written over a millennium before and

copied and recopied many times by many different people since then? But that is what

we see Jesus doing in this passage. He is stating that adequate justification for the

theological principle of the resurrection of the dead (a hotly debated principle in the

first century among Jewish religious leaders) is a single word: the word "am" as

contained in the passage in Exodus 3:6. To picture the explosiveness of these words of

Jesus, remember that the major theological differentiation between the Pharisees and

the Sadducees was that the Pharisees believed in the resurrection of the dead in the life

to come and the Sadducees did not (Mark 12:18, Acts 23:6-10). The Jewish religious

leaders wrote much about their interpretations of Scripture. I suspect there were many

discourses written by many different Jewish pontificators over the years that piled up

arguments on both sides of this debate. Jesus dismisses it all in a moment on the basis of

a single word written in Exodus fourteen hundred years before. Does Jesus believe there

is more credibility in a single word of ancient Scripture than all the writings of the

finest minds of His modern times? Obviously He does.

Note the weight and authority Jesus gives to the accuracy of the smallest details of

Scripture, regardless of its age. He says Scripture has been preserved with such

meticulous accuracy that one can, with absolute reliability, put ultimate faith in even a

single word. Without studying the ceremony and methodology for copying Scripture in

ancient times, this would seem ludicrous to us today. But an examination of the extreme

care, ceremony, and precise methodology of the scribes who copied the Scriptures will

reveal that it was copied with such meticulousness that it is quite reasonable to believe

that the Hebrew words were preserved as originally written in their entirety from the

15th century B.C. until the first century A.D. At any rate, Jesus obviously believed, and

taught by His example here, that it was reasonable to rely on the first century copies of

Scripture as exact replicas of the original writings.

Chapter 6: Right Thinking

"Jesus said to them, 'Is this not the reason you are mistaken, that you do not

understand the Scriptures, or the power of God?'" (Mark 12:24)

Right thinking--that ability to clearly see necessary insights and reach correct

conclusions. Jesus seems to say that understanding Scripture produces right thinking in

a person. In the previous chapter of this treatise, we looked at a portion of the passage

in the twelfth chapter of Mark where the Sadducees attempted to trap Jesus in a logical

argument about the resurrection of the dead. They had spent the equivalent of many

dissertations and had done research papers analyzing the issue of resurrection from

death and had come to the conclusion that it did not exist. What can cause someone who

is intellectually gifted, as no doubt many of the Sadducees were, to come to the wrong

conclusion of a matter after so much study, analysis, and peer review? That question is

certainly raised when one's entire prolonged study and understanding of a matter is

brushed aside by God in a moment and replaced by a single word of Scripture. Jesus

anticipates this question and directly points out to them that their mistake is due to the

fact that they do not understand the Scriptures or the power of God. This is a point

worth re-emphasizing: Jesus states that the reason they are mistaken, that the reason all

of their studies, analysis, peer review, and conclusions, are mistaken, is because they do

not understand the Scriptures or the power of God. How much of the Scriptures would

they need to understand to be able to come to the correct conclusion of this matter? In

this case, it was only one word. As we have seen, Jesus's epitaph of this matter is that

because they missed that one word, they were "greatly mistaken" (Mark 12:27).

Right thinking: understanding Scripture and the power of God produces right thinking.

In Matthew 21, Jesus discusses with the Pharisees their hard-heartedness. He points out

to them that their hard-heartedness about to cause them to lose their inheritance in the

kingdom of God. Jesus brings them to an understanding of this reality when He says to

them:

"Did you never read in the Scriptures, 'The stone the builders rejected,

This became the chief cornerstone;

This came about from the Lord,

And it is marvelous in our eyes'?

Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you, and be

given to a nation producing the fruit of it."(Matthew 21:42,43)

This is a very grave warning by Jesus. Someone is about to lose the opportunity to live

in the kingdom of God. What is causing this loss of opportunity? Read carefully this

twenty-first chapter of Matthew. Does it not say the cause of this lost opportunity is due

to the rejection of God on God's terms? Does it not say that God will not be found on

man's terms? Does it not recognize that the religious leaders are rejecting God's

authority and thereby voluntarily condemning themselves? Is not Jesus trying to bring

them to right thinking by pointing them back to Scripture? Cannot one conclude that

by rejecting Scripture as the inerrant word of God, one also rejects God's authority and

therefore forfeits the kingdom of God? Be very careful skeptical reader; what if the case

presented here is right thinking? Which camp will you join? The religious leaders'

camp or the camp of the fishermen who followed Jesus because they didn't have the

intellectual pride to re ject Scripture's authority and the one who authored it?

Chapter 7: Christ Uses Scripture as a Powerful Spiritual

Weapon

"And the tempter came and said to Him ... But He answered and said, 'It is written

...' ... 'it is written ...' ... Then Jesus said to him, 'Begone, Satan! For it is written

...'" (Matthew 4:3-11)

Jesus's opinion is that Scripture is not only historically defining as we have seen in

chapter 2, eternal as we have seen in chapter 3, true history as we have seen in chapter

4, more credible than the finest intellectual thought of men as we have seen in chapter 5,

produces right thinking and leads to the kingdom of God as we have seen in chapter 6,

but now we also see in the fourth chapter of Matthew that Jesus believes Scripture is a

powerful and effective weapon of spiritual warfare able to defend us against even the

temptations of Satan himself.

Here in the fourth chapter of Matthew we witness an awesome battle. The creature

comes to tempt his Creator. The clay attempts to subdue the potter. But the creator has

emptied himself, taken on the form of a humble servant, and voluntarily been made in

the likeness of a man. He has made himself vulnerable and His creation, Satan, knows

it. God does nothing for show--He has no reason to impress anyone. All that God does

and participates in is reality; there are no pseudo-real, play-acting events for God. Jesus

did not just appear as a man; He was a man. Hebrews 4:15 makes it clear to us that He

was indeed tempted; the temptation was real; the pull and lure to sin that we are all so

familiar with was quite real and deeply felt. Yet, as Hebrews 4:15 assures us, Jesus was

not overcome (He did not sin, He did not give in) by temptation as we have been. Here is

the record of this battle; Satan is at his most powerful and brilliant and convincing

moment and Jesus is at His weakest; as written in the first eleven verses of Matthew

chapter four:

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.

And after He had fasted forty days and forty nights, He then became hungry. And

the tempter came and said to Him, "If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread."

But He answered and said, "It is written, 'Man shall not live on bread alone, but on

every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God'" [Deuteronomy 8:3].

Then the devil took Him into the holy city; and he had Him stand on the pinnacle of

the temple, and said to Him,

"If you are the Son of God throw Yourself down; for it is written, 'He will

give His angels charge concerning You'; and 'On their hands they will bear

You up, Lest You strike Your foot against a stone.'" [Psalm 91:11,12]

Jesus said to him, "On the other hand, it is written, 'You shall not put the Lord

your God to the test.'" [Deuteronomy 6:16] Again, the devil took Him to a very high

mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world, and their glory; and he

said to Him,

"All these things will I give You, if You fall down and worship me."

Then Jesus said to him, "Begone, Satan! For it is written, 'You shall worship the

Lord your God, and serve Him only.'" [Deuteronomy 6:13-15, 10:20,21] Then the

devil left Him; and behold, angels came and began to minister to Him. (Matthew

4:1-13)

It is not the purpose of this treatise to expound on the intricacies of all that was going on

here. This can be studied in many other commentaries. Suffice it to say that these

temptations were very real, were brilliantly constructed, and were very powerful. The

purpose of this discussion is to focus on what Jesus did to defend Himself against

powerful temptation: He quoted Scripture--1400 year old Scripture.

We can only begin to imagine what was at stake in this battle. Certainly, the order of all

creation, the integrity of God, the Holiness of God, the humility of God, and the

Godhood of God were all at stake here. Had Jesus given in to any of the three

temptations, at least all these would have been lost. I am convinced that even a

collection of all the finest intellects of all men of all time arrayed in concert against

Satan could not have come up with a more adequate rational argument than those

proposed by Satan in these temptations. Satan is far more brilliant and powerful than

the intellects of men. To adequately defend Himself, Jesus had to come up with a better

defense than logic can produce. Notice Jesus did not defend Himself by trying to reason

with Satan as to why it was ludicrous that He should give in to the temptations. Jesus

had a more powerful and effective defense. He quoted Scripture. In the midst of all else

that was going on here, let us not lose track of the fact that when ALL hung in the

balance, Jesus let the outcome be determined by the veracity of the 1400 year old

writings of Moses.

In light of this foregoing spiritual battle, one must ask: Was Jesus convinced of the

authority, authenticity, and inerrancy of Scripture? Should His answer to this question

not also be our personal answer? Shall we not pattern our thinking and our defenses

after His? If we want to live the truth and not a lie, we have no choice.

ENDNOTES:

1. For those who would like to further explore the arguments and historical evidences

concerning the authenticity of both Old Testament and New Testament Scripture, Josh

McDowell has an excellent introduction to this subject including extensive

bibliographies for deeper study in his book, Evidence that Demands a Verdict, (San

Bernardino, CA: Campus Crusade for Christ, 1972), pp. 17-79.

2. See Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon.

3. In John 5:39, Jesus says, "You search the Scriptures, because you think that in them

you have eternal life; and it is these that bear witness of me." And He says in Luke

24:25-27:

" 'O foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken. Was

it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things [death on the cross] and enter into

His glory?' And beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained the

things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures."

Jesus understood the Scriptures required that He die to pay the price for our sins and

this was necessary for our salvation. He said, "Now My soul has become troubled; and

what shall I say, 'Father, save Me from this hour'? But for this purpose I came to this

hour." He said in Matthew 20:18-19 that He would be crucified and resurrected on the

third day. In John chapter 10, Jesus says that He is the door for men to go through to be

saved (John 10:9,10) and that He must lay down His life (die) for them so they can be

saved (John 10:15). Speaking of His life, Jesus says in John 10:18, "No one has taken it

away from Me, but I lay it down on my own initiative. I have authority to lay it down,

and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My

Father."

4. At this point, the skeptical reader might be tempted to argue that circular reasoning

is used to justify the statements in this book. Simply stated, one might say that since the

arguments of this book are based on the sayings of Jesus, and since the validity of the

sayings of Jesus are based on the accuracy with which they are recorded in the New

Testament, and since the accuracy is certified by the writings of the New Testament

itself, then the logic used to make the case is circular. This claim of circular reasoning

would ignore both sound logic and extra-biblical writings of the first century. To

elaborate: the writers of the Gospel accounts and other New Testament writings claim

to be writing Scripture by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (see II Peter 1:20-21, 3:1,2,

and 3:15,16, Titus 1:3, and many others). Making this claim would logically require that

one of the following four is true: (1) these authors are either deluded, or (2) these

authors are purposely propagating a great hoax through collusion, or (3) the New

Testament writings were not written by the Apostles as claimed but were fabrications

by ghost writers, or (4) these authors are telling the truth and they are writing Scripture

by the power of the Holy Spirit. The extra-biblical (secular) writings of the first century,

even by some non-Christian historians, plentifully validate the authorship and basic

claims and history presented in the Gospels, including the genuineness of the Disciples

in believing what they wrote as well as the radical life changes they experienced because

of what they believed. These secular accounts of the first century reasonably eliminate

numbers (2) & (3) above as possible explanations. If the authors were deluded, then it

was a common delusion that occurred to many and brought with it a power that turned

the Roman Empire upside down. This rules out the possibility that the authors were

deluded. This logically leaves only one choice: the New Testament authors were telling

the truth and were indeed writing Scripture by the power of the Holy Spirit. Therefore

the potential objection to circular logic is refuted.

5. There are many scientific evidences for the literal validity of the creation account as

described in Genesis chapter one. The best single compendium that I am aware of is

found in the book by Walter T. Brown, Jr., In the Beginning (Phoenix, AZ: Center for

Scientific Creation, 5th ed., 1989). There is an impressive set of evidences to suggest that

Noah's Ark still exists frozen in glacial ice on Mt. Ararat. A good bibliography of books

chronicling the eye-witness reports, photographs, and other corroborating evidences for

this are listed in ibid., pg. 56.

One of the best modern works I know of that effectively substantiates the authenticity of

the book of Daniel is Josh McDowell's book Daniel in the Critics' Den (San Bernardino,

CA: Here's Life Publishers, 1979). A list of 88 bibliographical entries appears at the end

of McDowell's book.

6. It is noteworthy that just a few verses before this passage in verse 3, Jesus asks by

way of introduction to the passages He quotes from Genesis: "What did Moses

command you?" How can He say that these verses from Genesis are God's authority

and also that these are from Moses? How can we reconcile this apparent double

accreditation? Jesus explains this by example in another of His discussions recorded in

Mark 12:36 where He says, "David himself said in the Holy Spirit, ..." and then goes on

to quote from Psalm 110. Here Jesus recognizes the authorship of David, but only as a

medium by which God (the Holy Spirit) writes. So, according to Jesus, the words of

Scripture are God's even though the instrument of the writing is a particular man. As I

heard someone say once, God could have used a brick or a donkey to write Scripture if

he had wanted to, but instead, God extended to man the extreme high privilege of being

that instrument.

7. Scripture does not divide animals into the same groups as evolutionists have. For

example, mammals (those animals that have cerebral cortex -- the only defining

characteristic of a mammal), are classified by evolutionists as all in one group. Scripture

does not do this. Bats are classified as birds by Scripture and whales and other large sea

creatures are classified by Scripture as fish. For example, see Deuteronomy 14:11,18

where Scripture classifies the bat as a bird.

8. For those who are interested in exploring this discussion further, I recommend Josh

McDowell, Daniel in the Critics' Den (San Bernardino, CA: Here's Life Publishers,

1979).

Any Comments you have, either affirming or critical, would be appreciated: Please

send me e-mail with your comments & questions to rrouth@ginesys.com .