Week five: Attributes of God

The Attributes of God

The importance of a right understanding of God cannot be understated. If your idea about God is incorrect, then you are in fact worshiping the WRONG God. This is not Christianity, but Idolatry. The study of the Nature of God is called “Theology Proper” and is perhaps the most fundamental endeavor that any Christian can ever undertake. Every other doctrine that you may study flows necessarily from Theology Proper. Your view of ethics is dependant on your view of God; your view on civil duty flows from your view of God; your view on the Bible (as the Word of God) is dependant on your view of the God who speaks the Word. Though there are numerous “attributes” of God, we will only look at several here, including Pure Actuality, the “Omni’s”, Simplicity, and last (but by no means least) God’s Unity and Trinity.

A quick word on some metaphors that we encounter in the Word of God that often confuse the Nature of God and lead to heresy:

1) Anthropomorphisms – human forms
a. God is often described with physical form, such as in Psalm 91:4, where God is described as having wings and feathers.
b. God is not to be understood to have a physical form, as the Bible also declares that God is Spirit in nature (John 4:24).
c. To understand which of the statements is metaphorical and which is to be taken literally, look at which could explain the other. Would it make sense to conceive of God as a very large physical being who is metaphorically described as pure Spirit? Or would it make more sense to have a God of pure spirit who is described metaphorically as having wings, arms, eyes, etc.?
2) Anthropopathisms – human feelings
a. God is often described as having human emotions or feelings, such as in Psalm 78:21, where God is said to have wrath and anger.
b. God is “impassable” or not affected by passion. Another way to state this would be to say that God experiences all of His “emotions” eternally and simultaneously; God’s feelings are beyond time and not affected by what we do. We, however, experience God’s “emotions” in time so our perception of them changes based on our situation (in relationship to God). Therefore, it is we who change, not God.
c. The limitations of language and our finitude means that in order for us to communicate things about God, we need to use phenomenological language (that which describes the phenomenon as we experience it).
3) Anthropoieses – human actions
a. God is often described as performing human actions, such as in Isaiah 43:25, where God is said to have forgotten our sins.
b. God can’t actually “forget”, for if He forgot something, He wouldn’t have all knowledge anymore.
c. Rather, God doesn’t “remember” in the context of judgment. He is still aware of your sin, He simply doesn’t count it against you (the penalty has already been satisfied in the Messiah).

Pure Actuality

Pure Actuality – God IS existence, with no possibility to not exist.
1) If it is accepted that the Theistic God exists, this is how He must exist; as Pure Actuality. If He had the potential to not exist, than He would be less than God.
2) Act vs. Potential
a. “Act” is being in itself, the very act of existence. Pure Act (or pure “being”) cannot not be.
i. Pure Actuality has no potential to change, since there is no potential in Pure Act. God does not have the potential to learn, forget, grown an inch, love you more, love you less, sin, etc.
b. “Potentiality” has the possibility to be otherwise.
i. A potential being could potentially be a different being (by changing it’s nature or attributes) or could be a nonbeing by ceasing to exist.
ii. God, as Pure Actuality cannot not exist and could not exist as a different being. God has no potential to be other than He is, nor does He have potential to cease to exist; He has no potential at all.
3) God IS existence, we HAVE existence. That is, in regards to our very nature, we are not “pure existence”; we are “given” existence by another. Only God is existence in His very nature; He is the reason for His own existence. (See Acts 17:28).
4) The Bible declares that God refers to Himself as “I AM that I AM” has been understood through the ages as a declaration of God’s Pure Actuality.

The “Omni’s”

I have no intention of defending these attributes, but will rather simply state and define these here.
1) Omnipresent – God, being infinite and immaterial, is everywhere present at all times. He is not limited by space.
2) Omnipotent – God, being infinite in power, literally has “all power”. This must be qualified to indicate that this does NOT mean that God can do anything. He can simply do anything that power can do; this does not allow for God to perform that which would be self-contradictory. All power is not enough power to “over power” logical consistency.
3) Omniscience – God has all knowledge. He cannot learn, He cannot forget. He cannot even think. He currently possesses all thoughts that could be known of any being at any time. He does not come to conclusions; He is always in a state or knowing.
4) Omni-benevolent – God is all loving. In fact, the Bible even declares that God is love. (1st John 4:16)

Simplicity

Simplicity – That God is One, both numerically and in His very Essence (He is without “parts” and therefore cannot come “apart”)
1) The Bible is literally full of declarations of God’s unique simplicity as the only God. Some examples should suffice:
a. Deuteronomy 6:4, “Hear O Israel: YHWH, our Elohim, YHWH is ONE.”
b. Isaiah 43:10-11
c. Isaiah 46:5, “To whom would you liken Me and make Me equal and compare Me, that we would be alike?”
d. 1st Timothy 2:5, “for there is one God”
e. Galatians 4:8, “those which by nature are no gods.” The Bible acknowledges that there are many other “gods” that are recognized by man; however there is only One God by nature, who is indeed really God.
2) There are no “parts” to God; He is actually “simple”.
3) God’s simplicity is indivisible, since God is also Pure Act; He has no potential to be divided.
4) If God were composed of parts, there would be a way to differentiate between where one part begins and another ends, which would mean that God were not actually infinite. If God were not actually infinite, then He would necessitate a creator beyond Himself. This is not possible. Therefore, God must be simple and can have no “parts”.

If God is “simple”, how can He have many attributes?
God’s attributes are not part of His essence but rather things that we predicate (or assert, state) regarding His essence. His essence is eternally and indivisibly one, but we can say many things (all of which are true) about this one essence. His infinite essence cannot be adequately described by a single finite word. Therefore, many attributes may be indicated of the one essence, without dividing or confusing the essence or denying the simplicity of God’s essence.

Unity and Trinity

The doctrine of the Trinity is perhaps the most misunderstood or ignored doctrine of the Christian faith. I would like to start off by first identifying several of the errors surrounding the nature of God’s Unity and Tri-Unity. I would like to look at the errors because they give us a window into the correct view; by knowing what God is not, we may get a more clear picture of what God is.

1) Tritheism – The belief that there are three distinct Gods, who are all separate beings within the Trinity. This is Polytheism.
2) Modalism – This view is also known as Sabellianism. Modalism is the belief that there is but One God, who exists as one person; God only appears as the Father, the Son, or the Spirit based on the need at the moment. This denies the distinct persons of the Trinity.
3) Arianism – Arius was an early Church leader, who unfortunately lead the church into considerable error. Arius taught that the Son was the first and greatest creation of God. Arius denied that Jesus was fully divine.
4) Nestorianism – The belief that there are not only two natures in Christ, but also two persons in Christ. Thus, the Trinitarian view of Christ is denied.
5) Monophysitism – Also known as Eutychianism. The belief that the natures of Christ are mingled; that the humanity and deity of Christ are not only both present, but also both intertwined. This Heresy mixes an infinite with a finite, which is impossible.
6) Adoptionism – This view states that Christ was simply a man with divine powers who was adopted b the Father at the baptism.
7) Binitarianism – This view denies the deity or personhood of one member of the Divine Trinity. Usually the Son or the Holy Spirit (who is usually recognized as an impersonal “force”).
8) Subordinationism – The view that the Son is subordinate to the Father in Nature. The Orthodox view is the Son is subordinate to the Father in function, but they share the same nature.

Basically, there are three main tenets in the Trinity: God’s oneness, God’s three-ness, and God’s equality.

If you overemphasize God’s oneness, you end up with Modalism.
If you overemphasize God’s three-ness, you end up with Tritheism.
If you reject God’s equality, you end up with Subordinationism.

The basic statement of the Trinity, which has been a standard of orthodoxy for hundreds of years in the Church is the Athanasian Creed,

“And the [universal] faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the persons: nor dividing the Substance [essence] (sic). For there is one Person of the Father: another of the Son: and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one: the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal.”

There are two twin truths that cannot be denied;
1) God is essentially One
2) There are Three separate Persons who are identified as God

The Trinitarian teaching is not that there are three Gods (Tri-Theism); nor is it that there is only one God who manifests in three forms (Modalism). Rather, there is but One God, who eternally exists as three distinct Persons within one Essence. There is One “What” but three “Who’s”.

While there is only one God, there are three persons who are all legitimately called “God” in the Bible. Several examples will be given to demonstrate that through the entirety of scripture, there are three who are eternally and essentially God.

This is not a mathematical error. It is true that 1+1+1=3, but we’re not adding the Persons of the Trinity. Mathematically, 1x1x1=1. The Trinity is not mathematically impossible.

Also, it’s not logically impossible, as we’re not holding that there are Three Gods who are One God, or that there are Three Persons who are one Person. Rather, we’re asserting that there are Three Persons who share one and the same Nature as God. This is not a logical contradiction. For example, my human nature makes me what I am, but my individual personality makes me who I am. Just as all humans share human nature collectively, all the members of the Trinity share the Divine nature identically. There are three persons who are God, yet only one essence that is Divine.

But is all of this even Biblical? Or was it developed by some church council in order to force the church to believe something that is not even in the Bible? Let’s look at the Biblical evidence.

No single verse teaches the Trinity; in fact, the word “trinity” doesn’t even appear in the Bible. However, all of the necessary components (God’s oneness, God’s three-ness, God’s equality) are present and it is the implied doctrine drawn necessarily from several verses in the Bible.

Old Testament Implications of the Trinity
That there is only one God has been shown already, but it is clear that there is more than one person who is called God.

Psalm 45:6-7, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; a scepter of uprightness is the scepter of Your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of joy above Your fellows.”

Psalm 110:1, “The LORD says to my Lord: ‘Sit at My right hand until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet.’”

Proverbs 30:4, “Who has ascended into heaven and descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has wrapped the waters in His garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name or His son’s name? Surely you know!”

Isaiah 48:16-17, “‘Come near to Me, listen to this: From the first I have not spoken in secret, from the time it took place, I was there. And now the Lord GOD has sent Me, and His Spirit.’ Thus says the LORD, your redeemer, the Holy One of Israel, ‘I am the LORD your God, who teaches you to profit, who leads you in the way you should go.’”

Zechariah 12:10, “I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplication, so that they will look on Me whom they have pierced; and the will mourn for Him, as one mourns for an only son, and they will weep bitterly over Him like the bitter weeping over a firstborn.”

New Testament Verses about the Trinity
If the deity of the Father can be taken for granted, then it remains to demonstrate that the person of the Son and the Person of the Holy Spirit are divine. If this can be done, then the doctrine of the Trinity can be deduced.

Deity of the Son:
John 1:1, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

John 1:18, “No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.”

John 20:28, “Thomas answered and said to Him, ‘My Lord and my God.’”

Romans 9:5, “Whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.”

Titus 2:13, “Looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus.”

2nd Peter 1:1, “Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Chris, to those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ.”


Deity of the Spirit:
Acts 5:3-4, “But Peter sand, ‘Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back some of the price of the land? While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not under your control? Why is it that you have conceived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men, but to God.”

2nd Corinthians 3:17-18, “Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image, from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.”

Compare Acts 28:26-27 with Isaiah 6:8-10, Paul is quoting a passage where it is the LORD speaking, but he attributes the quote to the Holy Spirit, in essence equating the Holy Spirit with the LORD.

It can be taken for granted that the Father is divine. The above verses demonstrate that the Son is divine and that the Spirit is divine. Therefore, if God is simple and numerically one, there are three persons who are divine and share the divine essence.



So what? If God is a Triune being, how does that affect us as believers?

The Trinity and Relationship:
God is not a being that simply demands us to obey a certain arbitrary ethical structure; rather He is a being that has relationship as a very part of His existence. The Father is in constant communion with the Son, who is constantly in communion with the Spirit (John 10:30). The motivation for Christian love and fellowship is deeply rooted in the eternal example of love and fellowship that God has within Himself (The Father Loves the Son, who is the beloved, and there is a Spirit of Love between them).

The Trinity and the Resurrection:
The Father raised the Son
• Acts 2:22-24, “Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know – this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless and put Him to death. But God raised Him up again, putting an end to the agony of death, since it was impossible for Him to be held in it’s power.”
• Acts 4:10, “Let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead…”
The Son raised Himself
• John 2:19, 21, “Jesus answered them, Destroy this temple, and in three days, I will raise it up… But He was speaking of the temple of His body.”
The Spirit raised the Son
• Romans 1:4, “Who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord.”

Trinity and Forgiveness of Sins:

The Father forgives: Isaiah 43:25, “I, even I, am the one who wipes out your transgressions for My own sake, And I will not remember your sins.”

The Son forgives: 1st John 1:7, “But if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin.”

The Spirit cleanses: 2nd Thessalonians 2:13, “But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.”


The Trinity and Salvation:
The Father Designed Salvation
1) Isaiah 43:11, “I, even I am the LORD, and there is no savior besides Me.”
2) 1st Peter 1:1-2, “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Glaatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithnia, who are chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May Grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.”
a. This verse actually mentions the work of all three members of the Trinity. The Father chooses and foreknows, the Son provides the Blood that saves, and the Spirit applies the salvation with the result of sanctification.

The Son Secured and Accomplished our Salvation
1) Acts 20:28, “Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.”
2) Colossians 1:19-20, “For it was the Father’s good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or in heaven.”
3) 1st Peter 1:17-19, “If you address as Father the One who impartially judges according to each one’s work, conduct yourselves in fear during the time of your stay on earth; knowing that you were not redeemed with perishable things like sliver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers, but with precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ.”
4) Hebrews 9:13-14, “For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?”
a. This passage explains that Jesus secured salvation through His blood, which He offered by way of the Spirit, to the Father. All three members of the Trinity were involved in the process of salvation.

The Spirit Offers and Applies Salvation
1) Romans 8:9, “However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him.”
2) Romans 8:16, “The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God.”

You are not saved into a subservient slavery to a capricious and arbitrary Deity. You are rescued from a certain destruction that you brought upon yourself by violating the moral fabric of the Universe. Indeed, “But your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God, and your sins have hidden His face from you so that He does not hear.” (Isaiah 59:2) And again, “Your iniquities have turned these away, and your sins have withheld good from you.” (Jeremiah 5:25) Instead, you are invited into a loving relationship with an infinitely caring God who is intimately concerned with your life. As it says, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Chris, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our affliction so that we will be able to comfort those who are in any affliction with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God.” (2nd Corinthians 1:3-4)

Week 6, The Bible; Introduction and Inspiration

Bibliology
Introduction

The study of the Bible in and of itself is called Bibliology. This is distinct from the study of the contents of the Bible, which is usually referred to as Hermeneutics. Bibliology is the study of the origin, nature, history, extent, transmission, and translation of the Bible. This is in distinction to Bibliolatry, which is the worship of the Bible. Bibliology is important, because everything that we know about God is derived from the Bible and must be in accord with what is recorded in the Word of God. Natural Revelation (Creation) certainly serves a part in God’s Self Revelation to mankind, but Natural Revelation will never supersede Special Revelation (the Bible) and must always be understood in light of the Clear Special Revelation in the Written Word of God.

There are four main sections to Bibliology:
1. Inspiration
2. Canonization
3. Transmission
4. Translation

Briefly, Inspiration is the process through which Spirit-moved writers record the words of God. Canonization is the process through which the believers (of either dispensation) recognizes and collects in one place those writings that were in fact inspired by God. Transmission is the repeated copying of these recognized and received texts, within the original languages in which they were written. Lastly, Translation is the process through which the sacred writings are rendered in another language (for example, Latin or English).

Tonight we will be looking at the nature and extent of Inspiration. Next week, we will examine the principles and extent of Canonization. The following week, we will be looking at the transmission of the Old Testament, followed by the transmission of the New Testament Text. Lastly, we will look at some of the important translations into various other languages, then the major English translations.

First, however, as a portion of the Introduction, we will look at the structure of the Bible in general.

Divided into two sections; Old Testament and New Testament
4 sections in each:

The Old Testament
Pentateuch:
Downward (God came down and chose His people) [Genesis – Deuteronomy]

History:
Outward (God’s people expanded into the Promised Land) [Joshua – Job]

Poetry:
Upward (God’s people looking Up towards Him) [Psalms – Song of Songs]

Prophetic:
Forward (God’s people looking forward to the coming of the Messiah) [Isaiah – Malachi]

The New Testament
Gospels:
Downward (God came down in the form of man) [Matthew – John]

History:
Outward (God expanding His people in all the world, “Jerusalem, Judea, and the uttermost parts of the world”) [Acts]

Epistles:
Upward (The exposition of Christ, looking up towards the high calling of life in Christ) [Romans – Jude]

Prophetic:
Forward (Looking to the eventual return of Christ) [Revelation]

As it can be seen, the divisions of the Bible, as we have it in its current English form are complimentary and logically arranged. This of course does not necessarily reflect it’s chronological record of history, it’s order of appearance, or it’s form through all of history. Though some of the various forms that the Bible has existed in are interesting, that lies beyond the scope of what we are looking at tonight and will not be addressed.


INSPIRATION

INSIPRATION: The mysterious process by which the Divine causality worked through the human prophets without destroying their individual personalities and styles to produce Divinely authoritative and inerrant writings. Inspiration is the process by which God enabled the writers of Scripture to record His words and thoughts.

First, what does the Bible have to say about Inspiration in general?

1) II Timothy 3:16-17 “All Scripture is inspired of God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be equipped for every good work.”
a. These verses disclose the “fact” of inspiration; namely that God has inspired certain writings and they are therefore profitable.
i. It is important to point out at this point that the writings of Scripture are profitable because they are inspired; they are not “inspired” because they are profitable.
b. It is the “Writings” that are inspired, not the “writers”.
i. It must be maintained that though the authors of Scripture are certainly used by God in a special sense, it is nonetheless their product that we study, not their person.
ii. For example, the book of Revelation is “divine,” John is not.
c. It is also important to distinguish that the Writings in particular are being discussed.
i. The Greek word in 2nd Timothy is “Graphe”, which is where we get our English word “Graffiti.”
ii. The written Word of God is inspired, not the spoken word (of the prophets), and certainly not the traditions of the church.
iii. Church traditions can be “correct”, if they are in accord with the Word of God as it is written, but they cannot be “inspired” (and are therefore not infallible).
iv. Jesus warned against this when He rebuked the Pharisees for replacing the commands of God with the traditions of man in Mark 7:8.

1) II Peter 1:20-21 “But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”
a. These verses discuss the “act” of inspiration.
b. At this point, it is worth making a distinction between “Inspiration” and “Revelation”.
i. Revelation is the “fact” of divine communication, inspiration is the “act.”
ii. In revelation, God is active while man is passive. In other words, Man “receives” God’s revelation.
iii. In inspiration, God guides the process like a wind guides a sailboat.
1. In Acts 27:15, it says, “and when the ship was caught in it and could not face the wind, we gave way to it and let ourselves be driven along.”
2. The same Greek word is used in II Peter and is translated “moved” by the Holy Spirit”.
b. God is the driving agent, but the men involved in the process are still in “control” of the words and phrases they choose.

In other words, inspiration is the process in which Spirit-moved writers record God-breathed writings.

Who wrote the Bible?
1) The short answer is God.
a. The long answer is a little more involved and “complicated”, but only in the sense that there are more “people” involved.
2) The Bible was written by Prophets of God.
a. Hebrews 1:1 and 2 states, “God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world.”
i. God spoke to the fathers through the prophets.
b. What does the Bible say about prophets?
i. Amos 3:8
ii. Numbers 22:18
iii. Deut 4:2
iv. 1 Kings 22:14
v. Jeremiah 26:2
c. Hosea 1:2 says, “When the Lord first spoke through Hosea, the LORD said to Hosea…”
i. God cannot speak though someone before He first speaks to someone.

What does the Bible say about Inspiration regarding the specific sections (testaments)?

Inspiration of the Old Testament
1) The Old Testament is literally full of claims for inspiration, both explicit and implicit. In interest of time, and by nature of importance, we will only look at a small selection of the explicit claims for inspiration.
2) Explicit claims:
a. There are literally hundreds of examples of the phrase, “Thus says the LORD” in the pages of the Old Testament, from nearly all of it’s various human authors.
b. The overwhelming predictive nature of the Bible is a clear evidence of Divine Inspiration.
i. The Old Testament predicts with absolute accuracy the time (Daniel 9), location (Micah 5:2), and specific unique circumstances of Christ’s Birth (Isaiah 7:14).
ii. The Old Testament predicts the destruction of nations (Ezekiel 26), the history of human government hundreds of years in advance (Daniel 2), the declaration of a king’s rule roughly 150 years prior to his birth (Isaiah 44:28 – 45:3), and numerous other “impossible” predictions.
c. New Testament claims that the Old Testament is the Word of God. Though there are several examples, we will only look at the Words of Christ in this study. If it is maintained that Jesus is God in human form, then His word on the topic will be authoritative and absolute.
i. Jesus confirmed events and People in the Old Testament, such as
1. Creation, Adam and Eve (Mark 10:5-9)
2. Jonah and the great Fish (Matthew 12:40)
ii. Jesus also confirmed all the major sections of the Old Testament (The Law and the Prophets [and the Writings]).
1. Luke 24:27
2. Luke 16:16
iii. Jesus and the other New Testament writers refer to or quote from nearly every Old Testament book:
1. Matthew 19:4-5, cf. Gen. 1:27; 2:24
2. John 6:13, cf. Exodus 16:4, 15
3. Matthew 8:4, cf. Lev. 14:2
4. Matthew 4:1-10, cf. Deuteronomy 8:3; 6:16; 6:13
5. Matthew 12:3-4, cf. 1 Samuel 21:1-6
6. Psalms is quoted frequently in the New testament, from the Gospels all the way through Revelation (often with dramatic import)
7. Matthew 24:15, cf. Daniel 9:27

Inspiration of the New Testament
1) The New Testament was promised before hand by Jesus (John 14:26; 16:12-15) and then verified by miracles (Hebrews 2:1-4).
2) Paul confirmed by Peter in 2nd Peter 3:14-16 and called Scripture.
3) Luke confirmed by Paul and called Scripture (1st Timothy 5:18, cf. Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7)
4) 1st Timothy 4:11, Paul understood his teaching to be authoritative.
5) Titus 2:15, Paul instructed Titus to speak according to what he had instructed him, “with all authority”.
6) What about the claims in 1st Corinthians that seem to be the apostle Paul denying inspiration?
a. 1st Corinthians 7:10
i. This verse is to be understood in context with verse 12 (below). Paul has clear teaching from the Lord (in the Old Testament) about divorce. Divorce is not permitted except for the case of adultery, and even then, it is not preferred, but rather allowed.
b. 1st Corinthians 7:12
i. Paul is here admitting that there has not been previous teaching from the Lord on this topic, though he is speaking about it now. His, “I say, not the Lord” is rather an admission that there is no Scripture on this yet, but God is speaking through Paul on the issue now.
c. 1st Corinthians 7:25
i. Again, Paul is saying much the same thing as above, just in slightly clearer language; “God hasn’t spoken about this yet, though I’m speaking about it now. By the way, did I mention that I’m an apostle who is divinely commissioned to speak the message of God?”
d. 1st Corinthians 7:40
i. When Paul says, “and I think that I also have the Spirit of God”, I don’t think that he’s doubting his commission. Rather, I believe this is to be taken as a rhetorical phrase, as in, “And I’m certain that God is supporting my ‘opinion’ on this issue.”
ii. For confirmation of Paul’s certainty of his apostolic authority, please see 2nd Corinthians 11 and 12 (especially 12:12).

What is the extent of Inspiration?

The Original copies (autographs) are inspired, not the copies.
We will cover this a little more in detail in weeks 8 and 9, but suffice to say that God Inspired the authors of the original hand written documents of the Bible; the various copies made of these original documents are not inspired by God. We can be sure that we have accurate copies (again this will be covered in more detail later) but the copies are not inspired.

The original copies are inspired; the various translations are not.
Though the translations that we have today can be trusted, they are not inspired. Some are “better” than others and some are more accurate than others. Different translations were developed based on different translational principles, some more reasonable than others. This will be covered in greater detail in week 10.

The original copies are inspired; our interpretations are not.
Though we often like to think that our understanding of the Bible is complete, this simply cannot be pressed too far. The Jews certainly were wrong about their understanding of the Messiah, it is clearly evident that there have been aberrant interpretations of various Biblical passages over time. This should not leave us in Agnosticism over the meaning of the Biblical text; rather we should be always seeking for further understanding while holding to what truth and certainty that we have. Some things can be known “for sure”. We should be cautious of our hermeneutical principles that we use (the literal, historical, grammatical interpretations of Scripture).

How much of the Bible is inspired?
1) All that is written (2nd Timothy 3:16)
a. The inspiration of Scripture extends to everything that is written.
b. Ipssissima verba vs. ipssissima vox (the very words vs. the very voice)
i. The very “words” are inspired but the meaning is found in the “voice”.
ii. This distinction is important because it gives us a few liberties
1. We can translate the Bible into other languages (like English)
2. We can present the Gospel message in a form that is relevant to the people we speak with, without changing the content of the message
iii. The Bible itself is recorded in Ipssissima Vox (the very voice).
iv. The divergent accounts in the Gospels and in Samuel, Kings and Chronicles demonstrate this.
v. It is the meaning of the message that is central, not necessarily the words used to convey the meaning.
vi. This does not render the actual words of Scripture meaningless, it simply places the greater importance on the meaning conveyed by the words chosen by the Divine Author and human agents.

What are the implications of Inspiration?

Infallible: will not fail (if God predicts it, it will come to pass).
1) This is actually one of the methods sometimes given to test that authenticity of Scripture. For example, see Isaiah 41:21-24,
“Present your case,” the LORD says. “Bring forward your strong arguments,” the King of Jacob says. Let them bring forth and declare to us what is going to take place; as for the former events, declare what they were, that we may consider them and know their outcome. Or announce to us what is coming; declare the things that are going to come afterward, that we may know that you are gods; indeed, do good or evil, that we may anxiously look about us and fear together. Behold, you are of no account, and your work amounts to nothing; he who chooses you is an abomination.
2) Since God is omniscient, He knows all things, including the future. Therefore, it is no problem for Him to predict with perfect accuracy events that have not transpired yet.
3) As the Word of God, the Bible will come to pass exactly as it is written.
4) Isaiah 40:8 states, “The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God stands forever.”

Inerrant: does not error (God cannot error; therefore the Bible cannot error)
1) If it is accepted that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, and it is accepted that God is perfect in knowledge, then it must be accepted that the Bible cannot contain any errors.
2) It is sometimes claimed that since the Bible has human authors (even though it is Divinely inspired), then it will have errors, as “to err is human”
a. Just because humans do err, it cannot be assumed that they always err.
b. Man can write a mathematics textbook and have it contain no errors about the facts of math.
c. If God is guiding the process and is personally involved, He could easily ensure that there are no errors in the content or intent of the text of Scripture, even through there are human authors.

Suggestion for Devotion:

Read Psalm 119. This is an entire Psalm written about the Word of God (and just the Old Testament at that!) written in acrostic from. If the saints of old had that much to say about the Old Testament, how much do you appreciate the Word? Or is it just another book to you?

Week 7, Canonization

CANONIZATION
Canonization is the second link in the chain “from God to us.”

CANONIZATION: The process by which all the inspired writings were collected and recognized.

Briefly, there are some five principles that were used to determine if a book was canonical. They are as follows:
1) Authoritative: Does the book have the Authority of God?
2) Authentic: Was the book written by a prophet of God? (Was the author a prophet either office or by gift?)
a. Affirmed: Was it accompanied by the acts of God (miracles)?
3) Orthodox: Did it tell the truth about God, man, the world, spiritual things, etc.?
4) Active: Did the book have the “power” of God to transform the lives of the People of God?
5) Accepted: Did the original People of God (the people to whom the book was written) accept it?

Each point has it’s own import, though they do not all stand or fall together. A book may not meet one criterion, but clearly demonstrate through other criteria that it belongs in the Canon. It’s also important to point out that the Church does not nor did it ever determine the Canon of Scripture. The church’s role is simply to discover which books were inspired, therefore adding them to the recognized canonical books. God determines the canon, the church merely discovers the canon.

1) Authority
a. Is there any claim that the book was a revelation from God? Or does the author claim that the writing deserves the respect of the People of God?
b. Examples:
i. Any/All of the literally hundreds of “Thus Says the Lord” passages in the Old Testament.
ii. The Gospel narratives claim to be the authoritative teachings of Jesus, who they claim is God in the Flesh.
iii. Paul confirms that his message is authoritative in 1st Thessalonians 4:2, 1st Timothy 4:11, Titus 2:15, and in especially clear terms in Galatians 1:12.
iv. The Author of Hebrews confirms that the message preached is authoritative in Hebrews 2:1-4.
v. 1st Peter 2:1-3 confirms that Peter held his message to be of God and able to produce salvation.
vi. John clearly held that his writings were authoritative and able to produce salvation as well, see 1st John 5:13.
vii. The Revelation claims to contain verbatim quotations from Jesus, who is God incarnate.
2) Authenticity
a. As discussed last week, God spoke through His prophets and Apostles.
b. If a prophet of apostle did not write the book, it was not generally acceptable into the Canon of Scripture.
c. Divine Confirmation
i. Though this is not always necessary, the Author of Hebrews stated that God testified to His Word with “signs and wonders and by various miracles…” (Hebrews 2:1-4)
ii. The message of Moses was confirmed through numerous miracles.
iii. It was then substantiated against the Sons of Korah, when the earth swallowed them whole. Numbers 16:23-24, 31-32)
iv. The apostles were confirmed by signs and wonders to confirm their message, as is attested in:
1. Acts 19:11
2. 2nd Corinthians 12:12
3. Hebrews 2:4
4. 2nd Peter 1:16-19
3) Orthodoxy
a. I can’t possibly say it any clearer than Paul in Galatians 1:8.
b. God cannot contradict Himself; therefore any message that legitimately comes from Him will be in accordance with every other message that has come from Him.
c. If we know that The Old Testament is from God, than any book that is included in the “New Testament” must be in agreement with all the previous revelations from God (and also must be internally consistent).
4) “Living and Active”
a. The Book of Hebrews states, “For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit…” (Hebrews 4:12).
b. If it is indeed the Word of God, it will come with the life changing Power of God.
c. This is what Paul was referring to in 1st Thessalonians 2:13, “For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God, which also performs its work in you who believe.”
5) Acceptance
a. The Books of Moses were immediately “accepted” as is evidenced by their placement besides the Ark of the Covenant (Deut. 31:26).
b. Joshua was placed in a Holy place and also immediately accepted by the people to whom it was written (Josh. 24:26).
c. As discussed last week, Peter accepted Paul’s writings, Paul accepted Luke. The early church distributed Paul’s letters as authoritative, the Revelation was accepted by the early church (most importantly by the seven churches to whom it was addressed). The four gospels we have are the oldest and most accepted in the early church. The “other” gospels are not attested to as authoritative in the early church, nor do any of the early church fathers quote from these books as if they were scripture.
d. The non-canonical books (Apocrypha, various other New Testament Pseudepigrapha were never accepted by the early church or the Jews, and therefore were rejected by those who were in the historical position to know whether the author was a spokesperson for God or not. It is foolish for us (who have the handicap of historical distance) to try and go back and confirm something that the original audience denied (especially as they would have been eye-witnesses).

The real difficulty in canonization is not defining it, but rather determining it. However, the most important thing to keep in mind is that man never decided the Canon of Scripture; the early Church Fathers and the Jews in the Old Testament simply recognized which writings God has inspired.


First, there are three main “classes” of books in the Cannon:
1) Homologoumena: “To speak the same things.” Books accepted by all. Once these books were accepted into the “cannon”, they were never questioned or disputed.
2) Antilogoumena: “Things spoken against, to speak against these things.” These books were initially accepted into the canon, but then disputed by some. They were all eventually accepted as belonging in the cannon. There is a list of disputed books for both the Old and New Testaments included below, with explanations.
3) Pseudepigrapha: “False writings.” Books rejected by all. The Roman Catholic Church sometimes refers to these books as the “apocrypha” (these are not to be confused with the “Apocrypha” that is contained in the Roman Catholic Bible, which they refer to as the “Deutero-Canonical” books).

Homologoumena:
These books were accepted immediately, as the ink was still drying so to speak. These are the books that were described above (including several others).

Antilogoumena:

Old Testament Antilogoumena:
1) Song of Songs: This book was disputed because it seemed too sensual. However it was eventually included in the Cannon and even referred to by Rabbi Akiba ben Joseph in the following terms: “for all the ages are not worth the day on which the Song of Songs was given to Israel; for all the Writings are holy, but the Song of Songs is the Holy of Holies.”
2) Ecclesiastes: This book was faced with objections on the grounds that seemed too skeptical. This book does, however, contain teaching that is profitable for the believer and was accepted by the majority of the ancient Hebrew community. Its rejection was a matter of inadequate interpretation, not of lack of inspiration.
3) Esther: This book was disputed because it seemed too unspiritual. The lack of the name of God in the book was a cause of concern to many. In the end, it was determined that even if the name of God is not explicitly mentioned, his providence certainly is. God is in the book of Esther implicitly.
4) Ezekiel: The book of Ezekiel was disputed because it was viewed by some as being too contradictory. It was alleged to be in contradiction with the books of Moses. However, there have been no specific examples given that are actually contradictory. The alleged contradictions were really a matter of inadequate interpretation, not lack of inspiration.
5) Proverbs: The book of Proverbs was questioned by some because it was said to be too illogical in that there were verses that are said to contradict the rest of the book. The verses in question are 26:4 and 5. In fact though, these verses represent a “on the one hand…, but on the other hand…” kind of teaching. It presents two different ways you could handle similar situations. In addition, the book of Proverbs is not intended to be Absolutes to live by, but rather general wisdom to guide you through life.

New Testament Antilogoumena:
1) Hebrews: This book was challenged because of its anonymity. Though the human author is never explicitly mentioned and there is still no definite scholarly consensus as to the author, the book carries apostolic authority, if not confirmed apostolic authorship.
2) James: James was disputed on the grounds that it contradicted Paul. Again, this was shown to be an error of interpretation, not a lack of inspiration.
3) II Peter: Some questioned this book because it did not seem genuine. There were too many differences between I Peter and II Peter, some claimed. It was also said to have been a late addition to the text of the New Testament. In response to these two challenges, I and II Peter do contain some differences, but they also contain a number of similarities both linguistically and doctrinally. Also, with the discovery of the Bodmer Papyri (P72), which dates prior to 300 AD, it has been established that the early Christian community both received and respected the book of II Peter. The differences could easily be accounted for by either the differing subject matter and/or the passage of time between the two epistles. In addition, Peter even explicitly says that he used a scribe in 1st Peter (5:12), which could easily account for the stylistic and/or grammatical differences between the two letters. The differences need not force us to the conclusion that the two epistles have separate authors.
4) II and III John: These two epistles were also questioned on the grounds of their questionable authorship. Because of the private circulation (and subsequent minimal acceptance initially) and the fact that the author designates himself as an “elder” and not an apostle, these epistles were doubted to be from the hand of John. However, there are significant stylistic similarities between 1st John and 2nd and 3rd John, which lend credence to the Johanine authorship of all three epistles. Also, the use of the term “elder” as a self designation for an apostle is not an obstacle, as Peter refers to himself as an elder in 1st Peter 5:1.
5) Jude: Jude was challenged on the basis of its quotation of the Book of Enoch, a recognized apocryphal book. However, on here separate occasions, Paul quotes secular poets (Acts 17:28, 1 Corinthians 15:33, Titus 1:12). This does not disqualify the writing of Paul, and in fact these particular books were never seriously questioned by anyone in the early church. Simply because Jude quotes a non-canonical source is not sufficient grounds to exclude his work from the canon. Jude’s epistle is also contained in the Bodmer Papyrus (P72) and there seems to be traces of its influence in the Didache (a recognized early Christian writing, which neither claims canonicity nor was recognized as such by any early church leaders).
6) Revelation: Ironically, Revelation was one of the earliest books to be widely quoted by early church fathers, but one of the longest to be debated in regards to its authenticity. Around the middle of the third Century AD, Dionysius, the Bishop of Alexandria rejected the doctrine of “Millennialism” presented in the book. However, this was a matter of interpretation, not inspiration. A mistaken view of theology was at stake, not the authenticity of the Revelation of John. In AD 397, the tides were turned and the book finally received full and widespread acceptance again.

Pseudepigrapha
In light of recent cultural interest, I’m only going to look at the Apocrypha and three of the New Testament pseudepigrapha.
1) The Apocrypha
a. The books that Protestants call “The Apocrypha” are referred to by the Catholic Church as the “Deutero-Canonical books”
b. The Apocrypha contains 7 books and 4 parts of books (for a total of 11 pieces of literature) that the Church has historically rejected.
c. The Apocrypha was not “officially” accepted into the Church until the Council of Trent, in the mid to late 1500’s. (1546)
i. The Apocryphal books actually belong to the Jews, who would have had the perogrative of either accepting or rejecting these books in their canon; the Christian Church actually doesn’t really have a say in this.
ii. The Jews rejected these books as being part of the Inspired Revelation from God.
iii. It is evident that they respected and revered these books, but nowhere is it evident that they accepted them as canonical.
iv. Though the books of the Apocrypha were discovered in the Dead Sea Scrolls, there are no commentaries written on any Apocryphal book (as there were for nearly every other Biblical book)
v. The Biblical books were actually written on a different material and in a different font; this is not true of the Apocryphal books (which were written on the common material and in the common font).
vi. The Council of Trent was on the heels of Martin Luther’s Reformation and has all the earmarks of a polemic reaction to Luther’s “Sola Scriptura” cry.
d. The Apocrypha fails the “Canon” test on the grounds that it was not written by a prophet of God (Principle 1)
i. The books were composed between the “intertestimental period”, where the succession of prophets had already ended. The book of 1st Maccabees actually makes a reference to this, thereby claiming that is was not written by a prophet (9:27)
e. It also fails on the grounds that it does not tell the truth about God and man (Principal 3)
i. 2nd Maccabees 12:45 indicates not only that we ought to pray for the dead, but also that there is redemptive worth in such an action.
ii. Hebrews 9:27 clearly states that after death comes judgment, not a second chance to earn salvation.
f. Some of the stories are fanciful and do not accord with the portions of Scripture that they allegedly belong to.
i. The Story of Bel and the Dragon (Daniel “14”) would be a case in point.
ii. This is an alleged account of Daniel proving that the god Bel is not a “real god”. The character of Daniel is very divergent from the Daniel that we encounter in the rest of the book.
g. The Apocrypha adds nothing to our understanding of the Messiah.
i. The rest of the Old Testament is looking forward to the coming of the Messiah; The Apocrypha does not contain this feature.
h. Should Christians study the Apocrypha? (Per David Easaw)
i. There is no harm in reading and even studying the Apocrypha, just as there’s no harm in reading and studying books like “Pilgrim’s Progress” or “Pursuit of God.”
ii. There simply needs to be some recognition that there is a large difference between a book that is the very Words of God and a book that is about God, even if the book is very good and happens to be doctrinally accurate.

New Testament Pseudepigrapha
2) The Gospel of Thomas:
a. This “sayings” gospel was probably written around the same time as the Four Gospels in our New Testament, though it may have come much later.
b. The entire Gospel is not heretical, and contains some material that parallels the four Gospels that we have in our Bibles. However, there is an unreasonable amount of unorthodox material. For example, consider the first and last verses:
i. “And He said, ‘Whoever discovers the interpretation of these sayings will not taste death.’” [Salvation by knowledge, not by the blood of Jesus.] (Gospel of Thomas 1)
ii. “Simon Peter said to them, ‘Make Mary leave us, for females don’t deserve life.’ Jesus said, ‘Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the domain of Heaven.’” [Is it a sin to be born a woman?] (Gospel of Thomas 114)
c. Also, consider the following verses:
i. “Jesus said, ‘Where there are three deities, they are divine. Where there are two or one, I am with that one.’” (Gospel of Thomas 30) Polytheism.
ii. “Jesus said, ‘I am the light that is over all things. I am all: from me all came forth, and to me all attained. Split a piece of woor; I am there. Lift up the stone, and you will find me there.’” (Gospel of Thomas 77) Pantheism.
iii. “Jesus said, ‘Damn the flesh that depends on the soul. Damn the soul that depends on the flesh.’” (Gospel of Thomas 112) Gnosticism, compare to 2nd Corinthians 6:19-20.
3) The “Q” Gospel:
a. Perhaps my personal favorite on this list, simply because this one doesn’t exist.
i. To quote the Jesus Seminar, “’Q’ is an abbreviation of the German word Quelle, meaning “source”. It is used to designate a document which most scholars believe the authors of Matthew and Luke used in writing their gospels. These gospel writers, it is believed, also used the Gospel of Mark. While Mark is an extant text, Q is a hypothetical construct. No independent copy of it exists. But it is widely believed that the passages in Mathew and Luke that are almost the same, and that did not come from Mark, must have come from this lost source, Q.”
ii. As if there’s no way that Matthew wrote first, then Luke used Matthew’s Gospel as one of the sources he admits to using in 1:1-2…?
b. Though this theory may be correct, the “text” of the Gospel of “Q” is simply a compilation of the material of Matthew and Luke.
c. That’s right, these “Scholars” have never seen a copy of this supposed document (that may or may not ever have existed), yet they have “reconstructed” this hypothetical document from the Gospels that do exist, then theorized that this reconstruction of theirs is the real document from which the Gospels that really exist must have been created.
d. It’s fairly easy to simply ignore this “gospel” as inconsequential. If some one ever discovers a copy of a manuscript of this alleged gospel, then I’ll be interested. Until then, I simply don’t worry about hypothetical documents. Hypothetically, if this document were found, it *might* be considered for inclusion in the canon, but since it’s never been found, it’s not eligible for canonization. If we try and include a non-existent gospel into the Bible, where do we stop? I could include a copy of the book that my pet unicorn wrote, even though no one’s ever seen it or read it. But I’m pretty sure it exists. Sort of.
4) The Gospel of Judas:
a. The authorship is not confirmed (it was certainly not written by an apostle or a prophet)
i. Despite what many might believe about the “Gospel”, it neither claims to be written by Judas, nor can it reasonably be attributed to him.
ii. It was written after his death (perhaps some time around 150 AD?)
iii. The work claims to be the “Good News [gospel] about Judas” (not the “Good News according to Judas”)
1. The other Gospels are “The Good News according to [kata] ________”
2. The Gospel of Judas reads, “The Good News about [en] Judas”
iv. Judas committed Suicide shortly after betraying the Lord; when would he have had time to write this Gospel?
v. The testimony of the other Apostles is in unanimous disagreement with the picture of the betrayal presented in the Gospel of Judas, as is all of ancient testimony from the early church. It is literally a lone voice silenced by the resounding evidence of history.
b. The book was not received by the early church
i. In fact, the earliest reference we have to the Gospel (which ironically was discovered long before we discovered the text of the “Gospel”) is that of Irenaeus of Lyons, who mentions it in his work, “Against Heresies”
1. The reference reads as follows: “And others say that Cain was from the superior realm of absolute power, and confess that Esau, Korah, the Sodomites, and all such persons are of the same people as themselves: for this reason they have been hated by their maker, although none of them has suffered harm. For Wisdom {Sophia} snatched up out of them whatever belonged to her. And Judas the betrayer was thoroughly acquainted with the truth as no others were, and so accomplished the mystery of the betrayal. By him, all things, both earthly and heavenly, were thrown into dissolution. And they bring forth a fabricated work to this effect, which they entitle the Gospel of Judas.”
c. The content is not only unusual; it is heretical. Some examples will suffice:
i. The introduction claims of Jesus, “Often he did not appear to his disciples as himself, but he was found among them as a child.” Also of interest, the word for “child” is uncertain and might alternately be translated (but with less probability) as “apparition”, which would deny the physical reality of Christ.
ii. Jesus accuses his disciples of leading people astray in their worship of God. The disciples claim to have had a vision of the temple, which they inquire about. In response to the disciples, “Jesus said to them, ‘Those you have seen receiving the offerings at the altar – that is who you are. That is the god you serve, and you are those twelve men you have seen. The cattle you have seen brought for sacrifice are the many people you lead astray before that altar…”
iii. Jesus promotes polytheism, “Adamas [another name for “Adam”] was the first luminous cloud that no angel has ever seen among all those called ‘God’”.
iv. Jesus rejects the clear Biblical teaching of the Old Testament that God created everything by Himself (Genesis 1:1; Isaiah 44:24, 45:18; John 1:3; Colossians 1:16), “So Nebro created six angles – as well as Saklas – to be assistants, and these produced twelve angles in the heavens, with each one receiving a portion in the heavens.”
v. According to the Jesus of the Gospel of Judas, God was not responsible for the creation of Adam and Eve, as Genesis clearly states and Jesus confirms in Mark 10:6, “Then Saklas said to his angels, ‘Let us create a human being after the likeness and after the image.’ They fashioned Adam and his wife Eve, who is called, in the cloud, Zoe.”
vi. The concept of original sin is flipped on it’s head, as it’s not the serpent who “deceives” Eve, but rather God “grants” Adam and Eve wisdom, “But God caused knowledge to be given to Adam and those with him, so that the kings of chaos and the underworld might not lord if over them.”
vii. Jesus denies His own humanity, [speaking to Judas] “But you will exceed all of them. For you will sacrifice the man that clothes me.”
1. See Luke 24:39; Philippians 2:5-8; Colossians 2:9; 1st Timothy 3:16; and 2nd John 7 regarding the humanity of Christ. Not only is the humanity of Christ clearly taught in Scripture, it is vitally important and to deny it is to actually to be branded “Anti – Christ”. How could Jesus (who is the Christ) be “Anti – Christ”?
viii. There are also numerous references to being “led by the stars”, and to Judas having his own “star”, which are not Biblical teachings.