Attacks on the Bible – The Word of God is a direct address to man

Deutsch

The Bible, the Word of God, is (of course) at the center of attacks by God’s opponents. Anyone who wants to attack God or Jesus Christ automatically also directly violates His Word. They pull out all the stops, from blatant falsifications of the Gospel, to carefully sown doubts about the entire exclusive path to salvation, all the way to outright rejection.

The Bible is the basis of the entire faith.

Adopting what one sees and hears, taking it to heart, and living accordingly is one thing. Quite another is whether one has even checked whether what one has heard or read could possibly be true, or whether one has been misled. An erroneous doctrine doesn’t necessarily have to be completely wrong and out of control. That would be too obvious and therefore easily recognizable as an error. Rather, it is the “creeping in” errors that can render the entire package absurd. Even a single detail is enough to destroy the true core of a doctrine.

An example would be the claim that Jesus Christ abolished the entire law through his death on the cross. “Fulfilled” in the sense of abolished (e.g., Matthew 5:17). The only missing piece of the puzzle is the distinction between the different laws. Are we talking about the Law of God (the Ten Commandments) or the Law of Moses (ceremonial law, statutes – Info)? Did Jesus abolish both laws or only one of them? Is “fulfillment” truly synonymous with “abolishment”? These are questions that urgently need answers, but few people ask them anymore, let alone seek the answers.

Matthew 4:4:

Relativizing the word of God

“The Bible is not the word of God; it may contain [excerpts] of the word of God. And if so, only in light of the interpretation and circumstances of the authors living in antiquity,” according to a standard thesis of neo-Protestantism (Info). This leaves open the imagination and arbitrariness of those who, depending on the situation and what suits them, define one word as God’s view and another as human thought. This simultaneously forces them to disqualify entire chapters, such as John 1, as purely human utterances.

John 1:1-3;14:
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.“

For if the Bible is not the word of God, then Jesus is not the word of God either, certainly not the incarnate word of God. Logically, everything would have to be rejected and thus denied. And then there would only be one step left to admit that the entire gospel is worthless.

For if the Bible is not the word of God, then Jesus is not the word of God either, certainly not the incarnate word of God. Logically, everything would have to be rejected and thus denied. And then there would only be one step left to admit that the entire gospel is worthless.

War against God’s Word from the very beginning

It would be extraordinary if the adversary and his devoted followers had fought against God and His prepared path of salvation for humankind from the very beginning, but this were no longer the case today for whatever reason. The fact is, however, that these attacks never ceased and, on the other hand, have increased dramatically in intensity and subtlety. Banning the Bible and burning books did not lead to success, nor did the mass murder of those who clung to God’s word bring about the desired result.

Satan began the war on earth against God’s word in the form of the serpent in the Garden of Eden. He questioned His words, the prohibition against eating from the Tree of Knowledge, and even declared His words a lie, for it was not the case that neither Eve nor Adam would die after disobedience. Instead, both would become like God and be able to distinguish between good and evil. A triple lie that can still be found today as official teaching in the Roman Catholic Catechism (Info).

Change in company

However, the attempt to change societal thought patterns was all the more successful, albeit with dismal results. The primary target was Protestantism and its insights and teachings of the Word of God. The resulting fruits are now ubiquitous. It began with “reason,” continued with Neo-Protestantism, the creation of the idea of ​​evolution as a “rational” substitute religion (Info), and has now reached a stage where entire church organizations misuse Lutheranism merely as a label to give their theosophical worldviews a Christian veneer.

Either do everything or just leave it alone.

One could also put it in pragmatic, secular terms: Anyone who views the Bible as merely a contemporary collection of pious people from antiquity who simply committed their experiences with “their” God to paper might as well not bother with it at all. For, regardless of the degree of self-deception, such a person cannot accept Jesus Christ as the living Word of God. When this doubter encounters the words of Paul,
“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:” (2 Timothy 3:16),
they must either come to their senses or simply accept this as untruth and therefore consider God a liar.

This applies equally to simply accepting the Bible as the Word of God, merely sharing its teachings, and to the view that Holy Scripture is only relevant as long as its words seem fitting and guiding to one’s personal life situation and plans. Jesus Christ, however, was not some antiquated purveyor of wise sayings that can be hung on the wall today as a tear-off calendar for various tastes. He IS the living Word of God, who came to His earthly ministry in His own creation to save what would otherwise be hopelessly lost.

The Word of God is timeless

The Word of God is completely independent of era, epoch, region, culture, and contemporary fashions, let alone the moral values ​​currently being promoted (by humankind).
“And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,” (Revelation 14:6)

“Study on your own” – But do the right kind of study!

Taking God’s word for oneself, literally and independently, opening it in one’s own hands to study it, is already a very good start. However, another hurdle then reveals itself, and this is truly no small matter, but a real dilemma and also extremely dangerous. This concerns the selection of the right Bible. At this point, one can indeed speak of “wrong” or “right,” because it is not a matter of linguistic variations, but rather the difference between God’s word and a collection of crude forgeries.

Unfortunately, the majority of modern Bible translations are based on the so-called “text-critical” version according to the “scribes” Eberhard Nestle and Kurt Aland, while Martin Luther, for example, based his translation of the New Testament on the Majority Text, the “Textus Receptus.” This is a compilation of the New Testament by Erasmus of Rotterdam, who, as fate would have it, first completed the Majority Text in 1516—just one year before the catalyst of the Reformation.

The majority text has received its name because more than 5,000 nearly identical copies of it have been found. The so-called “text-critical” text, on the other hand, has only a dozen or so known copies and, moreover, originates from the Alexandria region, thus imbued with the “wisdom” of Gnosticism. Strange as it may sound, this very text has been given preference for some time now, with the “kind permission” of the Roman Catholic Church.

Truth or Vulgate

For centuries, the Roman Catholic scripture, defined as the “norm,” reserved only for the priesthood, and misused as the “Word of God,” was the Latin Vulgate until the “rebellious Reformation.” This is based primarily on the Septuagint, a translation of the Hebrew Masoretic Old Testament into Greek by Hellenistic scribes in the Alexandria region. Defiantly, as usual, the Church of Rome, in response to the Reformation, reaffirmed the Latin Vulgate as the sole, authoritative Bible at the Council of Trent.

Gnosticism finds its way in the Bible

The extent of the differences between the Textus Receptus and the “critical” base text is anything but insignificant. The Nestle-Aland texts, compared to the Majority Text, contain no fewer than 17 completely omitted verses, 185 deletions of important statements, 212 changes to the titles of God and Jesus Christ (all reductions), and 280 substantive alterations. In total, this amounts to approximately 2,000 (two thousand!) variations. More details and examples of literal Bible forgeries in modern translations can be found here.

The very term “textual criticism” carries a certain sting. “Critically examining God’s word.” In principle, it’s nothing more than the Pharisees’ spirit, albeit presented in a more objective manner. “We have serious doubts about the words you preach, because they contradict our worldview and our established goals. Furthermore, some details simply cannot be true due to a lack of clear evidence. As a general rule, a fact cannot exist until it has been discovered and scientifically evaluated. Besides, who are you anyway, daring to question our authority!“

New theology based on biblical forgery

Even seemingly minor omissions in the original text of the apostles can be extremely dangerous and ultimately lead to a “new gospel.” Here is a simple example from Mark 2:17 (German Bible editions translated into English).

Neue Genfer Übersetzung:

“Jesus heard this and replied to them: “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”“

Züricher Bibel:

“And when Jesus heard this, he said to them: “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”“

Einheitsübersetzung:

“Jesus heard this and said to them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”“

Gute Nachrichten Bibel:

“Jesus heard them and answered them: “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to invite those who are well into the kingdom of God, but those who have turned their backs on God.”“

Hoffnung für Alle:

“Jesus heard this and replied: “Those who are well have no need of a doctor, but those who are sick. I have come to call sinners to the fellowship of God, not those who think they are good enough already.”“

Luther 2017:

“When Jesus heard this, he said to them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”“

Neue Evangelische Übersetzung:

“Jesus heard this and replied: “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”“

Einheitsübersetzung 2016:

“Jesus heard this and said to them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”“

Menge Bibel:

“When Jesus heard this, he said to them, “Those who are well do not need a doctor, but those who are sick do. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”“

Here are 5 examples of New Testament Bible translations based on the Majority Text, or “textus receptus”.

Schlachter 2000:

“When Jesus heard this, he said to them: “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”“

Luther 1545:

“When Jesus heard this, he said to them, “Those who are well do not need a physician, but those who are sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”“

Luther 1912:

“When Jesus heard this, he said to them, “Those who are well do not need a doctor, but those who are sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”“

King James Version 1611:

“When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.“

The seemingly minor detail of omitting “for repentance” makes a significant difference compared to another, and therefore false, message of salvation. A common heresy today is that a person is saved IN their sin, as long as they believe IN Jesus Christ. Anyone can go to Jesus Christ, regardless of who they are. That’s true, but it also implies: “You can stay as you are.” What a mistake! (Info).

“To repentance” means recognizing one’s mortal sin, remorse, and conversion. Turning away from it and overcoming sin. Not through one’s own strength, but through the power of God.

God’s power in the living Word

Im Wort Gottes, der in Worte gefasste Charakter Gottes selbst, verkörpert in Jesus Christus, befindet sich diese Kraft, welche nur dann zum Tragen kommt, wenn das Wort in Seiner Gänze als wirklich das angenommen wird, was es ist.
“Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.” (2. Timotheus 3,5).

Another important statement lies in the acceptance of the word of God:
“He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.” (1 John 5:12).

Jesus Christ is the Word. Whoever rejects the Word also rejects Jesus Christ. Makes sense, doesn’t it?

Study and think for yourself

Just a few sentences from preacher Nicola Taubert sum it up. An excerpt from his sermon “Gottes Wort bleibt” (“God’s Word Remains”), Part 1, starting at 15:10 (Source).

“We’re no longer used to studying the Bible on our own, without help, just with the Holy Spirit and prayer. We’ve unlearned that. When we need revival, we listen to Doug Bachelor, Mark Finley, Walter Veith, and someone else. Why? Is that bad? No! It’s not bad, it’s edifying, it’s good, go for it! But if you live only on that, on the revival sermons of other preachers, you’re going downhill! Because you’re crippling your ability to think for yourself. You say, ‘he said, that one said,’ that’s completely irrelevant.

Because that’s exactly how the Jews interpreted the Bible back then. ‘Rabbi So-and-so said, Rabbi So-and-so said.’ It wasn’t about whether the statements were true or false. That’s secondary. But their way of teaching back then was to emphasize the authority of a teacher, whether what I said carried weight or not. I’m not against quotations. Quotations in the right place have power. But even revivalist sermons from an Adventist preacher have their place. Listen to revivalist sermons, don’t get me wrong. But if that’s your only source for your spiritual growth, then God help you.

Because you lose your independent thinking, even if you listen to good sermons, if you no longer have your nose in the Bible and can’t find your own solutions to problems. You have to find the answers yourself. Because when you experience that, reading the Bible becomes so joyful, so fun, that you can’t stop. When God suddenly shows you things you haven’t read anywhere, and have never heard in a sermon, but you’ve discovered them yourself through study—that’s so wonderful. That’s what brings me joy about the Bible.“

Bible verses from King James Version (1611)