Re: The Whole Bible Revealed in Zechariah (was Re: NT truth (formerly inerrancy?))

From: Robert Schneider <rjschn39@bellsouth.net>
Date: Tue Jan 06 2004 - 09:21:43 EST

Whoever the theologian was that said, "The Bible is the Word of God, not the words of God," was right on. So many Christians misunderstand and literalize the phrase, insist that every word in the Bible was dictated by God to the biblical writers (which no inerrantist scholar believes), and therefore must be taken as spoken, and that has resulted in no end of confusion and conflict within the Body of Christ.

Bob
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Don Winterstein
  To: Michael Roberts ; Robert Schneider ; Gary Collins ; asa@lists.calvin.edu ; richard@biblewheel.com
  Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 11:53 PM
  Subject: Re: The Whole Bible Revealed in Zechariah (was Re: NT truth (formerly inerrancy?))

  Richard McGough wrote:

  "Concerning the Word of the Lord as refering to the Bible - of course it does
  not *always* refer to the Bible, but that certainly does not mean that it
  *never* so applies."

  Some years ago I did a concordance study on "Word of God," etc., and as I recall I was unable to find a single instance where that and like terms referred unambiguously to Scripture. There were a couple of cases where that was a *possible* meaning. Can you cite instances where Scripture is the *only* reasonable meaning?

  Don

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: richard@biblewheel.com
    To: Michael Roberts ; Robert Schneider ; Don Winterstein ; Gary Collins ; asa@lists.calvin.edu
    Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 3:43 PM
    Subject: Re: The Whole Bible Revealed in Zechariah (was Re: NT truth (formerly inerrancy?))

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Michael Roberts" <michael.andrea.r@ukonlineco.uk>
    To: <richard@biblewheel.com>; "Robert Schneider" <rjschn39@bellsouth.net>;
    "Don Winterstein" <dfwinterstein@msn.com>; "Gary Collins"
    <gwcollins@algol.co.uk>; <asa@lists.calvin.edu>
    Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 3:02 PM
    Subject: Re: The Whole Bible Revealed in Zechariah (was Re: NT truth
    (formerly inerrancy?))

> I note that the scholars you cite are of the Dispensationalist school,
> except of course Foxe (I would like to know what he actually said). I do
    not
> have much respect for Dispensationalism with it n dispensations and
> virtually ignoring chunks of the bible for us in this "dispensation". They
> have gone overboard on taking prophecy literally and adopting a gross
> typological approach as George Murphy highlighted recently. The result is
> that though they aimed to defend scripture they have reduced it to
> absurdity. (Typology in the bible is important provided it is not
> overblown.)
> If you want to read more see "The Intellectual Disaster of Fundamentalism"
> in Mark Noll's wonderful book "The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind" and
    read
> all of the book.
>
> Incidentally you cite Coffman and Unger on the word of the Lord in
    Zechariah
> but in the OT prophets The Word of The Lord is NOT synonymous with the
> bible.
>
> It is interesting to note that a modified dispensationalist approach is
> developing now which is more in line with scripture. However the Left
    Behind
> series still sells well and does the Gospel no favours.
>
> Michael
>

    Wow! An intelligent response. Thanks Michael, it is greatly appreciated.

    First of all, I am not a dispensationalist. Not that it matters, since not
    everything a dispensationalist says is wrong. To assert such is known as the
    Genetic Fallacy.

    I could write a dissertation on the question you asked, but I need not,
    since I have a witness from the eight century who is clearly NOT a
    dispensationalist. I refer to the Venerable Bede's Explanatio Apocalypsis
    (written about 710 AD). Here's what he has to say about the Two Olive Trees
    in Revelation (which are clearly correspond to those in Zechariah):

    olive trees. The Church is irradiated by the light of the TWO TESTAMENTS,
    and ever waits upon the commands of the Lord. So also the prophet Zechariah
    saw one candlestick with seven branches, and these two OLIVE-TREES, that is,
    TESTAMENTS, pouring oil into the candlestick. This is the Church with its
    oil, which never fails, which makes it shine for the light of the world.

    Note the profound and perfect integration with my Kerygma. Here's an online
    source:

    http://www.apocalyptic-theories.com/theories/bede/bedeii11.html

    Of course, it is a big mistake to appeal to authority as a proof of an
    interpretation of Scripture. I felt it necessary to cite others because you
    were ignoring the evidence. The only question that really matters is if I
    succeeded in making my case. Curiously, no one has yet to address the
    evidence I give.

    Concerning the Word of the Lord as refering to the Bible - of course it does
    not *always* refer to the Bible, but that certainly does not mean that it
    *never* so applies. To assert such is to impose a HUGE limitation on the
    interpretation of Scripture. Concerning its use in Zechariah 4, Coffman
    specifically asserted that it did indeed mean the whole Bible. I quote: "Nor
    should the meaning of it be restricted to that immediate portion of the word
    of the Lord addressed to Zerubbabel. (See a full discussion of this
    candlestick as the word of God in my commentary on Hebrews, pp. 181-183.) "

    Here's the source:
    http://www.studylight.org/com/bcc/view.cgi?book=zec&chapter=004

    Good chatting Michael,

    In service of the Everlasting Word,
    Richard Amiel McGough
    Discover the sevenfold symmetric perfection of the Holy Bible at
    http://www.BibleWheel.com

    PS - I don't like the Left Behind series at all. Neither it, nor
    Dispensationalism, have anything to do with my understanding of Scripture.
Received on Wed Jan 7 09:21:15 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jan 07 2004 - 09:21:16 EST