The Object of this recently-published book is to familiarize new readers with the Bible. It includes a synopsis of each book — Old and New Testaments. On the surface this appears to be a good plan — such a work would be helpful if properly presented. From the outset, however, serious problems appear. They are of special concern because the book is aimed at the most vulnerable students, those who are just becoming acquainted with the Bible.
The author, at one time a well-known Christadelphian, is now (as stated in the preface) a church warden and lay reader in the Anglican church. The book concerns us only because it is being advertised and distributed among our ecclesias. After a careful reading of the book, we believe ecclesias and Bible schools should be apprised of its content.
What is the inspiration of God?
We agree that the Bible’s books all reflect the individuality of the writers, but we must accept the Bible as the wholly-inspired word of God. Apostolic precept on this point could not be more explicit. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God…” (II Tim. 3:16 and II Peter 1:20,21).
Maps for the Journey disqualifies itself on this basis. Bible readers are advised by the author to use their own judgment as to what they can accept as literally true. But the questioning of the Bible’s authority goes deeper. The Old Testament is seen as an imperfect source of spiritual information — much of it dismissed or “reinterpreted in the New Testament.”
The God of the Old Testament
The Lord God as revealed to the Hebrews is seen by the author as very different from the God of the New Testament. This is the author’s comment on the plagues in Egypt: “Some of the plagues, and particularly the last one, are so cruel, that you cannot imagine that…`the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ’ was responsible for such horrors, though Israel thanked Him for it all. This is an example of the many moral dilemmas presented by the Bible…Conditioned by their times, the Israelites attributed it all to the direct activity of God.”
But the New Testament supports the Old and in fact offers an inspired commentary on it. On no occasion did Christ or the apostles question the acts of God as revealed in the Hebrew scriptures. In fact, we hear plain words from the apostle Paul: “Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off (Rom. 11:22). In another place the apostle says: “To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory…he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger” (Rom. 2:1-11 also Matt. 24:51; 13:40-42; II Peter 3:10-13).
The Bible message from Genesis to the Revelation is consistent and unified.
Did Moses really know God?
In commenting upon the Law of Moses, we have this under the heading, “Some Ruthless Laws.”
“We again see that God as presented here is not really the same in character as the one presented by Jesus. Moses insists that they must totally destroy the Canaanite inhabitants of the land. Genocide without pity, whatever the ways and practices of these nations, can never be justified by anyone who has listened to the teaching of Jesus…”
But the Bible presents Moses as one who knew God and who did His will. “And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face” (Deut. 34:10). Indeed Jesus was to be the “prophet like unto [Moses]” and, says the Lord, “whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him” (Deut. 18:18,19).
Was Joshua guilty of genocide?
In answer to the question, “Did God Authorize the Slaughter?,” there is this comment: “This history is based on the Israelites’ belief about God, which was later reinterpreted on the basis of the teaching of Jesus and the early Christian Church… In the New Testament Jesus directly overturns the idea of bloodshed and vengeance as being the will of God.” Of Joshua and other Old Testament leaders, the writer comments: “Their relationship with God was close, though their understanding of him left much to be desired.”
The author continues, “Many fundamentalist Christians justify Joshua’s ruthlessness on the grounds that the Canaanites were so terribly wicked that there was no other way for Israel to survive…I find it impossible to believe in such a cruel God, who required such murderous activity.”
Do we believe in a cruel God?
We believe in the God who has been revealed in all aspects of His character throughout the Bible. One revelation of Him cannot be separated from another without doing violence to His infallible word. Not everything Israel did was approved by the Lord, but their conquest of Canaan was done at His direct command. We are told in the New Testament that Joshua and others “by faith subdued kingdoms.” They also are commended in that they “enforced justice.. .became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight” (Heb. 11:33,34 RSV).
We know that the Lord prefers the repentance of men and women rather than their annihilation. But there are limits to God’s mercy, and those who oppose Him must ultimately suffer punishment. This message is clear and consistent throughout the Bible (Rom. 12:19; Acts. 17:30-31; Matt. 22:2-7).
How will Christ rule the world?
In his summary of the books of Samuel, the author reflects upon God’s promises to David. “The New Testament applies the promise ultimately to Jesus Christ, who will establish the Kingdom of God and reign on David’s throne. Its political and military aspects are to be reinterpreted in a spiritual, but none the less real, direction, associated with the death and resurrection of Jesus…”
How the Kingdom of God can be finally established on earth without “political and military aspects” is never plainly stated. The Bible, on the other hand, reveals God’s kingdom “shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms…” (Dan. 2:44).
Witness of the prophets
The prophet Jeremiah, this author accepts, taught that there is to be a new covenant with Israel (as with everyone). In the New Testament, however, Jeremiah’s prophecy is “extracted from its political, territorial basis.” Thus the literal restoration of Israel is passed over.
All the prophets are subjected to this kind of “spiritualizing” — which is taken to be the message of the New Testament. Thus we have the author’s comment on the last Old Testament prophecy: “Malachi has not had the benefit of the teaching of Jesus and so looks forward to treading the wicked under his feet like an ash footpath….Jesus has taught me otherwise.”
A final comment upon the prophetic writings includes this statement: “There are many factors in the Old Testament expectations of the kingdom that differ from those of Jesus in the New Testament…”
What did Jesus teach?
It is certainly true that Jesus taught his followers at this present time to be peaceable and non-violent. These and other such instructions are necessary so that we, as strangers and pilgrims living in a wide range of countries with differing political systems, might survive as peacefully as possible. Although peace will characterize the kingdom era when it is fully established, there will be much initial opposition which must be put down (Psa. 2). To what extent the saints will take part in warfare as the kingdom is set up, we can’t precisely say, but we have scriptural evidence that they will participate in the subjugation of the nations (Psa. 149:5-9; Rev. 2:26-27).
On the subject of the second coming of Christ, this book tells us that “nearly 2,000 years later it still has not happened and in later writings of the apostles it receives less emphasis than the immediate presence of Jesus by the Holy Spirit.” This statement is palpably incorrect. The later writings in the NT clearly teach of the second coming of Christ to give rest to his people and mete out punishment to the wicked. Both Peter and Jude, later NT writings, stress this teaching and the apostle Paul’s last words reflect his longing for the coming of Christ (II Tim. 4:6-8). Revelation 22 repeatedly emphasizes the coming of Christ to bestow immortality on his servants in a context rich with illusions to the original paradise, the garden of Eden.
The Revelation
The author’s approach to the Book of Revelation is characteristic of his view of the Old Testament prophecies. The most he can say for it is that “in spite of the difficulties the book creates, it has also contributed much to Christian hymns and worship.” The “difficulties” are seen, for instance, in the comments on chapters 15 and 16. “The picture of peace and harmony on the earth” is enjoyed, but then there is the pouring out of the bowls of wrath. These images are found to be “impossible to fit in with the teaching of Jesus that we should love our enemies.” So he concludes: “It is almost as if the writer had not caught up with the love of Christ.”
But, as is clearly stated in Revelation 1, the prophecy was given by Jesus Christ himself. The author thus continues his pattern of trying to force scripture into his own notion of what it should say, rather than accepting God’s word whether or not it fits with our personal preconceptions.
“Know Questions on The Bible” By Aquila and Priscilla