I perceive “The Bible is the Word of God” to be language that is not even found in any of the various collected canons that some traditions label their “Bible,” and quite questionable as a ‘Biblical’ belief.
2 Likes
This is an interesting thing… I’ll put Randy in the hot seat for a while.
"If you Randy think the Bible account of the flood was world wide, would you not think that there was a resounding ‘incredible story’ in that narrative, as God told a man to put all the animals on the boat…
But if you Randy think that the Noah flood was somewhat regional, would that not make you at least question the Noah story in it’s composition (as told by evangelicals), thus it’s truthfulness? Or at least in it’s translation? I realize that you have answered my question already, but what say you?
Amen to both of these opinions. However, I am somewhat puzzled. Why stress the obvious? If any of us on the conservative side of this forum’s contributors have referred to the Bible as the Word of God, we were innocently mistaken. Scripture indeed refers itself as being the word (lower case) of God and reserves the title Word of God solely as a title of Jesus.
Would that all differences - political, theological, social, etc. - that sometimes cause disagreements between us were so easy to put to rest. 
2 Likes
What is called “Scripture” in our day, is a collection of writings:
- The “Old Testament” written by Moses and the prophets.
- The “New Testament” written by the “gospel” writers and the apostles.
So how can “The Scripture” refer to itself in any sense? I don’t see how any of the writers had any concept that their writings would some day be part of the book we call “the Bible.”
However, if you have a quote from the Bible that affirms that the Bible is the word of God, I would very much like to become aware of that quote.
Don’t try to be clever, Don. It rarely works with me. You know full well that there is no specific quote “from the Bible”, as you put it. Heb. 4:12 speaks directly about the word of God but, no doubt, you will have some different understanding from mine how that verse should be understood and tutor me as to what the Greek actually means.
Sorry if I seem blunt, but it’s late, the Calgary Flames are playing hockey and I’m tired.
Do they play in the stampede? I’m a NY Ranger fan! Long suffering.
Awesome! I have heard that verse but never applied it as a validation that the bible is the word of God! Of course I can guess the arguments coming like the writer only meant Hebrews or only meant the OT etc.
Many scriptural texts refer to “the word(s) of God,” but I remain ignorant of any that define this term as “the Bible.” I think that our 66 book conception of the canonical Bible, was unknown to its writers.
“The Bible” as we understand and use that term today was not applied as such back in biblical days… what they had they called the Scripture/s’ which was any part or totally inclusive of… ‘the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms’ as per Jesus’ use in Lk 24:44-45.
Thus technically speaking the Old Testament as we know it (there were also additional writings as per the Apocrypha) was ‘the Scriptures’ referred to in the NT, and thus… ‘the Word of God’ as per the likes of Psa 119:105; Heb 4:12 etc.
I don’t mind the hot seat, Chad. I think it was global, based upon the other flood myths and legends - around the world. And I don’t think there were that many variety of species, way back in Noah’s time. So they could all fit, on the ark.
Having said that, I don’t think global vs regional flood views, takes away from the central messages - of the New Testament. Any more than young earth creation vs old earth creation…or folks siding with big bang, evolution and old earth - who are Christians - takes away from the New Testament understanding of Christ.
I hope this clears things up… But let’s explore some science stuff a bit!
Is there evidence that the flood was global?
I’ll let folks taking a “regional” flood view, refute the scientific evidence - the article presents. Notice that the article author is Harold Coffin, Ph. D. Geology, paleobotany.
1 Like
If you go to the original article and click on the About tab, there’s a subtab called Contact Us. Since the author is a PhD. scientific “expert”, and he brought up the dinosaur subject…Just mentioned the article and author, in the contact form - and ask your questions. If you get some answers, from the “expert” - please share them with us.
Two very good reasons, Michael.
- Only two of every “kind” of animal were needed to preserve the species. Nor was there any need for them to be the 100 tonne variety.
- I doubt their meat was very appetizing.
Cool. Here’s some perspective, from Got Questions:
For the record, I subscribe to Big Bang, Old Earth and I’m agnostic on evolution - all within a Christian theological framework.
Having said that, let me quote from the first - Got Questions paragraph!
The topic of dinosaurs in the Bible is part of a larger ongoing debate within the Christian community over the age of the earth, the proper interpretation of Genesis, and how to interpret the physical evidences we find all around us. Those who believe in an older age for the earth tend to agree that the Bible does not mention dinosaurs, because, according to their paradigm, dinosaurs died out millions of years before the first man ever walked the earth. The men who wrote the Bible could not have seen living dinosaurs.
And it says this, for those who believe - in a young earth!
Those who believe in a younger age for the earth tend to agree that the Bible does mention dinosaurs, though it never actually uses the word “dinosaur.” Instead, it uses the Hebrew word tanniyn , which is translated a few different ways in our English Bibles. Sometimes it’s “sea monster,” and sometimes it’s “serpent.” It is most commonly translated “dragon.” The tanniyn appear to have been some sort of giant reptile. These creatures are mentioned nearly thirty times in the Old Testament and were found both on land and in the water.
In addition to mentioning these giant reptiles, the Bible describes a couple of creatures in such a way that some scholars believe the writers may have been describing dinosaurs. The behemoth is said to be the mightiest of all God’s creatures, a giant whose tail is likened to a cedar tree (Job 40:15). Some scholars have tried to identify the behemoth as either an elephant or a hippopotamus. Others point out that elephants and hippopotamuses have very thin tails, nothing comparable to a cedar tree. Dinosaurs like the brachiosaurus and the diplodocus, on the other hand, had huge tails which could easily be compared to a cedar tree.
Dragons might be “dumb”…as Yosemite Sam, discovered in the Middle Ages!
1 Like
Steve, if by “stampede” you are referring to the Saddledome on the Stampede grounds then “yes”. They won the game last night, 6-5 in a shoot-out against the Panthers. I see the Rangers won 6 - 2. so we’re both happy this morning!
Of course the denials gush forth but again, it may not come down to what a particular author happened to know himself but whether God may have inspired him to write.
I sense that you may have hit in on the nail, Michael, especially when verse 12 is read in the context of the surrounding verses.
I’m pretty sure NT references to the “Scripture” did mean some such corpus (as yet not fully deliniated as the Jewish canon). But how do we know with surety that Psalm 119 refers to this whole group
(and not e.g. just commands of the Law), or that Hebrews divine ‘word’ refers to the Scriptures?
We don’t know anything very much about anything with absolute certainty, Bob. I may be speaking solely for myself, but the older I get the more I realize how little I know. In my younger days, I thought I knew it all and acted accordingly. “It takes a fool to know one”. How little I actually knew! 
2 Likes