Stan W. Wallace, DMin Posts

Over the past few months I’ve outlined a robust argument showing the Bible is inerrant, due to it being written by those commissioned by God to communicate His Word (prophets for the Old Testament and apostles for the New Testament). However, some alleged writings of apostles didn’t “make the cut” and are not included in the New Testament (such as the Gospel of Thomas). Some cry “foul” and accuse the early church of picking and choosing what they wanted to include in the Bible. Is this true? How did the early church come to conclude which books should be included in the New Testament?

We now have good reason to believe all the New Testament books written by Jesus’ twelve disciples and Paul are God’s inspired, inerrant Word. However, two other books were penned by authors who do not have these credentials: James and Jude. Why should we accept their writings as authoritative?

What about Paul? We have good reason to believe Jesus commissioned his twelve disciples to write the New Testament, in the same way God commissioned Old Testament prophets to communicate God’s Word in their time, without error. But Paul was not one of Jesus’ disciples. Yet he wrote over half the New Testament. Are his writings to be included in the inerrant Word of God?

We now come to the fifth and final premise to establish in showing the Bible is without error: Jesus promised the New Testament would be written by God through the apostles and would be without error. A careful reading of the historical record in the gospels makes this clear.

Currently many views of the Bible clamor for our attention. But we now have good reason to believe Jesus is God and therefore is the authoritative source to consult on this issue. What did Jesus think of the Bible? Does he take a stand? If so, what is his position? And why should anyone think he or she is a greater authority than Jesus on this (or any other) question? In this article, I will begin exploring Jesus’ view of the Bible.

In order to trust Jesus’ view of the Old and New Testaments, we must first establish him as an authority on the subject. If it is true that he is who he claimed to be—God in flesh—he is the ultimate authority! There is a second line of evidence proving Jesus is the almighty, eternal God. From these proofs of Jesus’ divinity the third premise in the argument for inerrancy is validated. I’ll discuss both these points in this article.

Some object the evidence that Jesus is the Messiah, and thus God, is inadequate. Three specific concerns are often raised. If one or more of these objections can be sustained, this piece of evidence for the deity of Christ crumbles. So what are these objections, and do they have any validity?