The Biblical Jesus ~ It Depends on which Bible You Mean.

The Bible . . . Is it a book given to us by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, written by men, infallible and inerrant or is it a book sort of inspired by God but written by men whose political and social agendas tainted its content?

Is it a book that God has allowed to become corrupted over time to include errors in translation, errors in the historical record, and filled with fictional stories made up by men? Is it a book that has no absolute truth but is completely pliable in the hands of anyone who reads it, able to be interpreted any way we choose? Can we pick out the parts we want to believe and set aside those we don't? Can we pick out the parts that make us happy and comfortable, using them as if they are accurate or relevant but scrap the parts the make us uncomfortable, claiming them to be inaccurate or irrelevant?

Does it matter really? I mean, so what if we come at this book from totally different positions. We all love Jesus, right? But what Jesus do we love? And was he really here? And did he really perform miracles? And did he really die on the cross? And did he really rise from the dead? If we claim in any form or fashion that the Biblical record is unreliable then we have absolutely no right or ability to make any statements about its truth or quote from it. If we can't believe it we certainly shouldn't base our lives on it. Unless of course, we see it as a book that has some good things to grab a hold of like "Chicken Soup for the Soul" then we can, I guess, just pick out the parts that make sense to our lives and leave the rest for the right wing Jesus freaks (Like me)

Here is the issue, at hand, and one that I believe is monumental to the Christian faith: The Gospel of Jesus Christ stands or falls on what we see the Bible to be. Many today claim that the Bible is not a document that has solid, unchangeable truth but is moldable and shapable to the reader. It can be interpreted as we see fit. I want to give a couple examples to make this more clear:
The Old Testament reveals a God who is the creator of all things including man. When man sinned God revealed not just his love for man but also his holy justice with regard to sin. It revealed a God who demonstrated some serious wrath against sin and sinful man. Now, those who claim that the Bible isn't to be taken literally, claim that this is just the story of an ancient people who fought other nations with their own political and religious motives. So then they can forgo any aspect of God that might seem intolerant, harsh, violent, or contrary to their religious beliefs. It was man's evil not God's wrath. One quick note regarding the description of Bible believers as "Literalists" (ie. they take the Bible literally). We can be smart enough to understand that when Jesus said, "I am the vine . . " or when Jesus was called, "the Lamb of God" that Jesus wasn't a vine or a lamb. But we can also see that when Jesus said, "The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations." He said, "In his name." What name? Jesus.

The New Testament reveals the story of a man named Jesus who was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life, performed miracles, died on a cross, and rose from the grave three days later. It claims Jesus to be God in the flesh who died for the sins of man. But Jesus was not always the gentle soft spoken peacemaker but made many claims about himself and about the judgment to come. But many today leave out all of the statements Jesus made about judgment, hell, and repentance. They leave out any statement that precludes salvation via any other person other than Jesus Christ. They do so by claiming that those who read the whole of scripture do so in a literal fashion while they themselves leave room for a much bigger God who can make the Bible all things to all men. Jesus can be their Lord and their Savior and their truth, way, and life but he is not for those of other faiths. Kind of like flag day. It is for us but not for Japan.

Can this be true? Can we both be right and does it matter? Can we ever preach from the Word and teach a church full of hearers from scriptures if we claim the Bible is not reliable and is only relevant or true to those who want them? Can we preach "I am the way and the truth and the life." as some sort of biblical feel good but claim that the next verse, "No one comes to the Father but through me." not to be true?

This is way more than can be addressed in a 10 minute blog post so we will be hanging here for a couple weeks. But, I want to share a couple things to start. First, if we believe Jesus lived and was divine (ie. God) then we should look at what he thought about the Old Testament and its reliability. Jesus quoted from twenty four of the Old Testament books and stated that he didn't come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it." Jesus spoke of Jonah's time in the belly of the fish, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, Lot's wife who was turned to a pillar of salt, and he quoted many of the prophets. Did Jesus believe that the Old Testament was corrupted in its translation or the product of the minds of man? No! Paul believed that all scripture was "God breathed" and even if you claim he was talking about only the Old Testament then we can start there. Lastly, when the Dead Sea Scrolls were found they contained a near complete copy of the book of Isaiah dated to around one hundred years before the birth of Christ. These texts from Qumran proved to be word-for-word identical to our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of the text. The 5 percent of variation consisted primarily of obvious slips of the pen and spelling alterations (Archer, 1974, p. 25).

The dilemma is this: If we claim the Biblical documents to be less than what Jesus and the Apostles believed them to be then we preach a Gospel that strips Jesus of his Lordship and of his Divinity. We make faith in Christ unnecessary for salvation and relegate Jesus to one of many religious leaders who taught us a better way to live. We can cut and paste the verses of the bible and use them as personal and social improvement tools and deny the truths we don't like.

Maybe God wasn't powerful enough to maintain the accuracy or truth of his Word and allowed it to be made virtually meaningless. Maybe the writings of Mohammad, Buddha, Krishna, Joseph Smith, Stephen King, and Mark Twain are all equally valid. Maybe Jesus didn't really exist and was just a fictitious character made up by these men, who for some crazy reason gave their lives to tell people about him. Maybe Paul didn't really meet Jesus on the road to Damascus and was later told what to preach. Maybe he just didn't like living high on the hog as a wealthy Jewish leader but instead wanted to see what it was like to be flogged, stoned, shipwrecked, beaten with fists, imprisoned, and beheaded for sharing the whole, uncompromising Gospel of Jesus Christ and him crucified. Maybe.

Although we can believe that how we see the Bible makes little difference as long as we all "love Jesus" it is not so. Either Jesus is the One and Only Son of God, God in the flesh, the name above all names, God with us, the name to which every knee will bow, the Judge of the living and the dead, the King of Kings, the one through whom all things were made, or he is not. If he is then we better get back to proclaiming him to all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit and not trusting that those without Christ can climb in another way. Jesus said he was THE way and not a way.

Stay tuned friends. Much more to come.

Peace, David