Transforming power of the Bible

Are you wondering why I'm still lingering on the concepts that we've been studying the past couple of weeks? Do you think that, as my grandma used to say, that I'm not only making a point, but I'm driving the nail into the board and breaking it off? (Grin)
I guess I really feel moved to post these studies because everything hangs on the truthfulness of our Bible. Many people who claim to be Christians don't believe that everything in the Bible is true. Many religions of the world are constantly challenging the Bible and our faith. And besides, if we really believe the Bible is true, we'll be telling other people its message, and living according to its words. (Ouch. Got my own toes there, too.)
So the Spirit must be correct, here, and we need to build up our faith and confidence in the Bible as accurate and true.
Quite frankly, one could point to a compilation of letters and writings of George Washington and verify the evidence. The writings could truly be penned by him. Ole Mr. Webster's dictionary has survived many copyings and has been transmitted correctly.

What makes the Bible God's book?

First, the Bible alone contains only accurate theology of God's ways.
Huh?
Let me back up a bit. If we wanted to find out information on someone, and we didn't have the option of talking to them personally, what would we do? Hmmmm. Check out their Facebook page? Maybe their Linked In page if we are a business type. Or look at something else that they had written themselves. Now, there's a problem here. How many people do we know that have posted on their Facebook page any of their flaws? Any character traits that they are trying to overcome? The outcome of their latest fight with the boss, their spouse, their kids, or with God?
No way!!
You only post the good stuff, right?
You want people to think well of you.....
So in every human writing, the author is going to show a certain amount of bias. We can't take it all at face value; the person might be fudging on the details.
As we have discussed, there was human involvement in writing the Bible. God wrote it all in the sense that it was all inspired by Him. But these peeps that wrote it down -- some of them showed some pretty bad character flaws!
Guess what? The writers were accurate about how they recorded the history and the precepts, even when it wasn't flattering to them. Think about it.....if you had been Moses, would you have recorded that you broke the first tablets of the Ten Commandments in a fit of anger? That you pounded on the rock with your staff because you were mad at the people? (I'm guessing anger management classes were not readily available in the Wilderness....) How about when Joshua made a military blunder by sending too few soldiers into the battle to capture Ai? How about when Balaam pounded his donkey with a stick and yelled at it, and lied, and more? What about David, when he lusted, committed adultery, and then arranged a murder?
The fact that all these things were recorded, both the good and the bad, gives us reason to trust the writings that they recorded about God. They are accurate in their depiction of God, and in the outlining of His words and the history of our faith.

There are a couple of other reasons, too.
The message that the Bible teaches about God, Himself, is unified.
How far-fetched is this?
Let's have a history project. Let's let people add to this history, and write down things for over one-thousand years. In fact, let's allow over forty generations to add to it, OK?  Oh, and let's have authors from all walks of life -- all occupations. Don't forget that we want to have lots of diversity; make sure some of it is written on several continents, and in several languages!
What kind of an outcome would we get?
Might we see some disunity, even contradictions, and errors? Yup.
The variety that was involved in the process of recording God's message to mankind is a positive thing and a potentially negative thing, all at the same time! It's good to have information from many sources and authors. But with all of these writers, there is the potential for disunity. For disagreement. Or for errors. The fact that all of the Bible authors are so unified gives another evidence that there was one Guide behind the whole process.
I expect you are like me; you have encountered people who will claim there are contradictions in the Bible. Most of them can't point to one if you hand them a text, but they still say it!
Without diving down too many rabbit holes, let's look at some areas where some of them say there's a problem.....
Each one of the four gospels records the sign over Jesus' head on the cross; the sign was to specify the charges, the crimes. Now, they all agree the sign was there, and they agree where it was placed. But check this out:
THIS IS JESUS, THE KING OF THE JEWS (Matthew 27:37)
THE KING OF THE JEWS (Mark 15:26)
THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS (Luke 23:38)
JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS (John 19:19)
The differences are not huge, but they are not in complete agreement, are they? Is there a contradiction here? Not really. Part of the answer could be in what John tells us about this sign:

Many of the Jews read this sign, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and the sign was written in Aramaic, Latin and Greek.  (John 19:20)

Have we experience with other languages than our own? Then we know that sometimes there is no exact way, no "one and only way" to translate the words of one language into another. Also, one gospel writer could have tried to translate one of the three languages, one a second, etc.

Here's another potential problem to consider: we all recall the story of the day on the hillside, when Jesus fed the 5,000, right? From five loaves, and two fish, and the food came from a small child's basket..... two of the gospels also tell of a time that Jesus multiplied food to feed 4,000 people. This time He utilized seven loaves and a few fish -- and the disciples provided the food. Is this a contradiction? I don't believe it is. Many Bible scholars concur that Jesus performed similar miracles with slightly different details, and fed the crowds twice.
If we ask four different people to describe a memorable event, each of them would bring forward certain details that were significant to them - this does not mean that they contradict each other, but that they complement each other.
Each of the gospels, too, were written for different audiences. I expect you have heard that before - what do we mean? Well, Matthew was written to the Jews, in order to give evidence that Jesus Christ was the King. Mark was written to show the humanity of Jesus. One of the reasons Luke was written was to show Jesus as a servant, and John was written to the Greeks, to show that Jesus was God.

The important thing is this: rather than contradicting each other, the gospels complement and fill in the details that the others left out. Like the people describing an event, they are all describing the same thing -- and the message of the four gospels is all the same. Jesus lived, died, and rose again in order to bring us salvation from our sins!

It is this powerful and transforming side of the Bible that we will study next time!