Apologetics – That… Which Matters Most

Apologetics: Anatomy of Attack

Originally published on August 15, 2021, but in the interest of the sodomy being celebrated this month, I’m republishing this again.

UPDATE: I replaced the words “gay” and “lesbian” with the word sodomites, because to use the language of these sinners, is to deny the reality of their sin, thereby suppressing the truth in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18ff). Yes, using the word Sodomy is offensive. But the act they perform upon each other, and cover it up with the word “gay” is far more offensive to the living and true God, than my use of the word “sodomite.” My goal is the edification of God’s people, and more importantly, to do that which honors God. If God calls something an abomination in His word, we need to do likewise. To cover it up, and make it “acceptable” is to make us guilty of the lie. For similar thoughts, read the following article about Doug Wilson. The author addresses this issue because Wilson point out the wickedness of two feminists a few years ago and called them what they justly deserved to be called. The article is here.

It all started with the simple meme on the first day of Pride Month. I figured since our country is set on celebrating something that God calls abominable, that I would respond with some truth. There were plenty of memes floating about, but it was the one below which drew some heat.

A 22-year-old woman, a member of my family, responded by saying such memes were an abuse of Scripture, and that in using it in such a manner was not Christlike. I asked her in what way?

Thankfully, she took the conversation to messenger and I tried to reason with her. I would like to walk through that conversation with you. Not to attack her, but to show how her arguments are false. My hope for her, is that she would repent of her views, and actually trust the Christ found in Scripture, not in her own mind (which we will see.) My other hope is that my readers would understand the attack the church is under, and that we can trust what Scripture has said concerning these issues.

To begin with, let me remind you that what the Bible says about human sexuality has not changed in 6,000 years, because God does not change. He has told us that marriage is between one man and one woman. He has told us that there are only two sexes, male and female. He has told us that any other combination is an abomination to Him. And this is what many fail to see in the argument. It is not what I think, or believe, but what is honoring to the Triune and Holy God. What is honoring to God, is what He has given us in His word. What He has given us in His word is to be our first and foremost concern.

Those who oppose biblical sexuality do so based on their belief that there is some new knowledge that has finally come to light which invalidates the orthodox position held for 6,000 years. Our opponents have been doing this for a long time. The battle doesn’t change, just the way they plan to attack God’s word. But in the end, our opponents have only come to the age-old method of sowing seeds of doubt used by the serpent some 6,000 years ago: “Has God indeed said…”

Now, the point of the meme is simple: it doesn’t matter what status you have at birth, rather real or imagined, you still must be born again to see the Kingdom of God (John 3). “You must be born again,” are the words of Christ. His words are for all who desire to be a part of His kingdom. Without this new birth, one is perishing and will perish. There is a present reality of judgment on those who are not. God’s wrath is not just displayed at the coming judgment, but rests on all those who reject Christ. This demarcation between believers and unbelievers is a clear line drawn by Christ. Repent and be saved, or perish. That is biblical.

So the use of the verse is quite appropriate given that many people believe Sodomites are born that way. It doesn’t matter if they are or they are not born that way, they still must repent of being “that way” and turn to Christ for salvation.

Now that you have the setting of the conversation, let’s look at it. Here is what the young woman writes:

When the Bible is put into a historical context and subsequently translated correctly, ALL of the verses commonly used to condemn homosexuality are actually speaking on pederasty and other forms of sexual ABUSE, that is sex without consent or sex that includes a power imbalance. Mistakes in translation become clear when thousands of people are ending their lives because of it. The Bible is obviously a very powerful book, and when it is misused, it will quite literally kill people. Your repetitive posts on homosexuality indicate to me that you either struggle with accepting your own sexuality or you enjoy judging and condemning others for things outside of their control, which is not under any circumstances Christ-like.

Notice, she starts out by presenting herself as the expert on biblical translation, and her premise is that that Bible hasn’t been translated properly for 2,000 years. She makes the assumption, that she fails to prove, that the translators have failed to put the Bible into the historical context. This shows she has never bothered to read a commentary on any of the books of the Bible. If you spend any time at all, and time dealing with the language itself, you can’t help but see the historical context of a passage.

Faithful pastors and translators are continually looking to understand the historical context, for in doing so, we get a deeper understanding of what the text is saying. Yet, we never come to the conclusion, as she has done, that this changes the clear teachings of Scripture.

She write: “ALL of the verses commonly used to condemn homosexuality are actually speaking on pederasty and other forms of sexual ABUSE, that is sex without consent or sex that includes a power imbalance.”

This is her bringing what she wants to the Bible, and not speaking to the historical context, for in saying this, she had imposed her 21st Century Woke views upon the text. In other words, one in power has taken advantage of a weaker and powerless victim (which is exactly how gays add to their numbers today. They are continually looking to groom their victims and persuade them to follow them in their debauchery. But those who support that community will never admit it.) Sodomy is always abusive, it is always one in power exerting will over another. It is all about power.

However, the verses she is referring to do not speak to a power imbalance. We see in Romans 1, that those who are given over to their vile passions, by God, do so willingly. There is no mention of power imbalances.

Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burning in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due (Romans 1:27).

Please note the “one another” part of the verse. There is no reference to power imbalance in the text. The same is true in the Old Testament as well.

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination (Leviticus 18:22).

Again, no reference here to power imbalances. Both text are absolute prohibitions against Sodomite relationships all together, whether they be couched in the false use of the word “love” or out-and-out abuse. They are all condemned.

She also goes on to make the case that the “mistakes in translation” become clear because thousands of people are ending their lives because of what Scripture says. In fact, she writes, this is what makes it clear that it’s mistranslated. I don’t know this, but I imagine the reasoning goes something like this: “God loves everyone unconditionally (He doesn’t), therefore, if something in His word is leading people to kill themselves, then it must be the translators fault, because God wouldn’t want anyone to kill themselves.” But that is just a guess.

Her next attack is an attempt to gaslight me. She is saying the reason I’m opposed to Sodomy is that I either struggle with it myself, or I love sitting in judgment of others.

This is a red herring. She wants me to state one way or another my personal preference. Of course, she knows I won’t say that I am, I’m only going to deny that I am, therefore she might respond: see, that proves that you are.

Let us move on to her next paragraph.

I don’t mean any disrespect by my message; apologies for the harsh words. These posts are just very harmful to a community of people that I know and love dearly. Religious trauma is a very real thing, and it can be detrimental to children’s and teens development. I know you’re a pastor, and I’m sure your statements are impactful to so many people. I just hope you can understand where I’m coming from.

Here, she actually shows some kindness. She realizes that she has been harsh in her response. But she excuses her apologies by continuing the lie that the text of Scripture, being used as Christ used them, is religious trauma.

In other words, declaring the truth of Scripture, as Christ did, and Paul, and Peter, and Stephen did, would be considered religious trauma. She is not only sitting in judgment of me, God’s people, but also Christ Himself. Remember, He called out Herod as fox, and the Pharisees as white-washed tombs, as well as a “brood of vipers,” (meaning they were the spawn of Satan).

Here was my response to her:

Thank you for your kind words. I’ve been thinking off and on about how to respond to your post. Just a couple of thoughts: a lot of people hold to the ‘mistranslation theory’ that you put forth, but textually, they don’t stand up. You noted the use of the word ALL concerning the verses dealing directly with homosexuality, and none of them are dealing with men taking advantage of boys. That could have been Paul’s focus had he wanted it to be, since Rome and Greece were saturated with the practice of men having sex with young boys during Paul’s day. But he doesn’t. He deals with men who have sex with men, in Romans 1:25-27, and 1 Corinthians 6:9 and following. He even creates a word “arsenokoitas” that is taken from the Greek translation of the OT, in Leviticus 18:22, 20:13, which means “a man who lies with a man, as one lies with a woman.” Serious scholars admit, even those who do not believe the Bible, that this is homosexual behavior between two grown men. My second concern is the one you stated, the friends (and family?) you know and love who are gay. That is a truth that hits all of us and my hopes and prayers are that those that I know who have fallen into such sinful lifestyles, would repent and embrace Christ for salvation and deliverance. That is the most loving thing we can do, is point them to Christ. This is why my original post was and is so important. It was Jesus who told us that we must be born again, and He never pulls punches when it comes to our sins. To those who held onto their sins, He proclaimed: “Woe to you scribes and Pharisees.” That was a pronouncement of doom. He even called them a “brood of vipers,” which means, sons of the serpent. He was serious about the need for repentance to the point that He said if your eye causes you to sin, cut it out. Sin destroys. Finally, and this really involves you. Out of respect for you, it was quite alarming that you said the very words of Christ, when applied to those who are flaunting their sin, was crap.

And I added:

Those words, “you must be born again,” are some of the most precious words in Scripture. Our LORD said them. He was telling us what we needed to be saved. He was not being discriminatory, but declaring to the world that everyone, including our gay family and friends, must be born again. This means we become new creations. We don’t remain what we are, but grow and mature spiritually to become more like Christ. This doesn’t happen when we identify ourselves as a particular type of sinner, and then try to claim Christ. That is having two masters, also what He condemned. This, again, is what the LGBTQ community is trying to do. They are identifying themselves with their sin, and demanding not equal rights, but exalted rights. Jesus will have none of it. We are to come to Him as a child, hands open, clinging to nothing but Him for salvation. The LGBTQ community wants nothing to do with this Christ. My hope is, that Christ will show them mercy, as He has shown me, and I hope you, and they will see the futility of their lives, repent, and turn to Him. I hope you understand.

In her final response, she played her hand. She declared that the Jesus I presented from Scripture was not who she thought Jesus to be. This is a sin that permeates the church, as well as the secular world. We don’t get to determine who Christ is. We can only declare who He is according to the word of God. If our feelings or thoughts enter the picture, we immediately begin to break the First Commandment, in having a god besides the true God of Scripture.

In other words, to portray the Triune God falsely is to break the first portion of the Law.

There are plenty of scholarly theories out there, some more rooted in cultural context than others, but my point in all of this is that my God given gift of discernment told me to listen to the people over here, because the folks over there are ripping families apart and ruining lives. That’s just not what God looks like to me.

You can also see that someone has put it in her head that she has “God given gift of discernment.” She is pulling the “authority card.” This gift of hers “told her” to listen to the people over here (instead of God’s word). The simple test of any such gift or utterance: is what being said in agreement with Scripture, or outside the bounds of Scripture? If what she says agrees with Scripture, then we can agree that she is right (and we really don’t need her utterances because we have God’s word). If what she says disagrees with Scripture, we reject her on that basis. Either way, her utterances are unnecessary and her gifting is false.

At this point, I told her that there was no more point in continuing the conversation since she was following a different god all together, and not the Triune God of Scripture. I let her have the last word: she declined, other than to block me.

“If you believe the Bible, then why do you eat shrimp?”

If you believe the Bible, then why do you eat shrimp?

Gotcha! That is usually the response of most atheists when they ask the above question because most Christians are hard pressed to answer it biblically. I confess, on the spot, I struggle answering it as well.

The implied accusation is that Christians don’t really believe the Bible because they eat shell fish, or shrimp, which the Old Testament dietary Laws prohibit.

Atheists love playing off our ignorance. Don’t get me wrong. They are ignorant too. But their ignorance is damnable. Ours is just sad and we need to work to clarify our understanding of the Law.

Please don’t think that I want you debating the atheists on this issues. That may not be your calling. But as a brother or sister in the LORD, I do want you to understand that that the dietary Laws have been set aside, by both Christ and the Apostles.

The Argument

Now, the argument with the atheist usually goes as follows: They ask if you believe in the Bible. Once you say yes, then they will say, “do you eat shellfish?” The implication is that if you do believe in the Bible, why do you eat shell fish? The command they are referring to is in Leviticus 11:10

‘These you may eat of all that are in the water: whatever in the water has fins and scales, whether in the seas or in the rivers—that you may eat. But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination to you. They shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination. …

Please note that the food itself wasn’t an abomination. But it was an abomination for the Jews to eat the food. The LORD was telling them that the food was off limits, just as He told Adam that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was off limits. The Jewish people are a type of Adam.

Separation

There is more to it than that. The laws were intended to separate the Jews from the Gentiles, reminding them that they were holy unto the LORD. This really helped keep the young Jewish boys from going after young Gentile girls. The laws were so drilled into their culture that when the young Gentile girl invited the young Jewish boy over for diner, the Jewish boy was suddenly faced with the reality that by eating the food of the Gentile, he would become unclean, and be cut off from the covenant-keeping community (also known as excommunication). This was a serious consequence for his disobedience.

The goal behind this was to help keep the covenant-keeping people inside the covenant, with God. When the young man goes after the Gentile woman, he will not only be tempted to eat that which has been declared an abomination for him, but also to worship the gods of the Gentiles, which is idolatry. The dietary laws were given to help prevent idolatry.

Just to be clear: idolatry is having a god other than the living and true God. We see this mostly today in people who don’t really worship the Triune God of Scripture, but a god of their own making.

The point to the dietary, or separation laws was to help the Jews remain true to YHWH. The laws were guard rails to keep them on the narrow path.

You may not like that reality, but it drives home the point: those who are of God’s covenant-keeping community are to be holy, they are to be clean, they are to be set apart. They are not to look or live like the world.

One might ask: what about the Gentile girl? Was she forever doomed? No, she and her family were to join the Israelites in their faith and practice, not the other way around.

That is the background for the dietary codes of the Mosaic covenant.

The Change

So what has changed?

The coming of Christ brought about the institution of the New Covenant, a more glorious covenant than the Mosaic covenant. Under the New Covenant, the signs and seals of the holy people of God have changed. For example, both the bloody signs of the covenant, known as Passover and circumcision, have been replaced by bloodless signs: the sacraments of baptism (replacing circumcision) and communion (replacing the Passover). Both the new signs are bloodless in that they point back to Christ’s fulfillment of the earlier signs showing that there is no longer a need for shed blood. The new signs signify the same as the old, but show forth a better covenant in Christ.

I hope you see that things have changed under the New Covenant. This doesn’t mean that God has set aside the Law, especially the moral component summarized in the Ten Commandments. Christ speaks to this issue of setting aside and shows us that the Law will not pass away.

And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than it is for one tittle of the law to fail, Luke 16:17.

The Law is still in play and still useful in three ways. First, it is used as a mirror in our own lives to show us our sinfulness before a holy and just God, driving us to Christ. Secondly, it is used as a restraint in society, warning mankind of a day of justice ahead. (This is why the removal of the Ten Commandments from the public square has been so pursued by the godless. They want no reminder of the coming day of judgment). Third, the Law is the Christians guide on how we are to live. The Law is a pleasing thing to the LORD, so we do not set it aside simply because we are in Christ.

With this we see the Law’s usefulness. But where exactly do we see the laying aside of the dietary codes? Or a better question might be: why do we have to know all this to answer the question about shellfish?

This is why so many Christians struggle with the answer to the question. It is complicated. It is meant to be. We are to work to give our full attention to understanding God’s word. It’s not easy to do so (and impossible without the Spirit opening our eyes to the truth).

Christ Changes the Law

That said, let’s get back to the setting aside of the dietary/separation laws.

We get the first glimpse that something might change when Christ declares that it’s not what a man puts in his mouth that defiles a man. He does this in Matthew 15, when the Pharisees confront Him about the disciples not washing their hands before they eat.

Jesus introduces a paradigm shift to the topic. He declares that what we eat, doesn’t defile us. NEWS FLASH: it’s not the pork that makes us unclean (bacon lovers everywhere are rejoicing).

In fact, He makes it clear that defilement comes from the heart, our hearts.

Do you not yet understand that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and is eliminated? ¹⁸But those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile a man. ¹⁹For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies (Matthew 15:17-19).

This was a paradigm shift for the Jews because so much of their religion was outward and observable. The problem with that is that it allows one to go through the motions of the sacrifices, the festivals, keeping the dietary/separation laws, but still not believe any of it.

Just before His statement above, He also declared:

‘These people ^[a]draw near to Me with their mouth,
And honor Me with their lips,
But their heart is far from Me.
⁹And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ ” Matthew 15:8-9

Jesus is removing much of what had become performance-based religion. Anyone can go through the motions of religion without actually dealing with the real issues of wicked desires found in the heart. This is where the focus of the Law was to be. It wasn’t just a guard rail to help us stay on the narrow path, but meant to be used to help us see how far we come from having any righteousness of our own.

If I boast in not eating shellfish, and keeping the Levitical law, I may seem pious and righteous. But I’m not. In keeping any of the Law, we cannot boast, for then we are doing only as we should have done.

For example, the famous golfer Bobby Jones reported tapping the ball during a major tournament, adding another stroke to his game and costing him the victory. No one else saw him tap the ball, and officials were reluctant to accept the penalty shot. But Jones insisted.

“You’re to be congratulated Mr. Jones,” the official said. Jones responded saying, “Sir, that is like congratulating a man for not robbing a bank. I don’t know how else to play the game.”

Whenever we keep God’s Law, we are simply doing as we should and there is no reason for boasting.

But given that the Laws cannot convert the heart, many of the Jews became proud in the areas of their obedience.

Christ Instructs Peter

We see this pride with Peter in Acts 10. There, Cornelius, who is a believing Gentile, has been told to seek out Peter for better understanding. Therefore, the LORD gives Peter a vision from heaven while in a trance.

(Peter) saw heaven opened and an object like a great sheet bound at the four corners, descending to him and let down to the earth. ¹²In it were all kinds of four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, creeping things, and birds of the air. ¹³And a voice came to him, “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.”

The list of animals clearly indicate those that are called “unclean.” The LORD is telling him to rise, kill and eat, even those things which are not considered clean. Peter’s response is one of pride.

“Not so, Lord! For I have never eaten anything common or unclean.”

His pride causes him to argue with the LORD. Instead of responding in humility, being obedient to the commands given, he declares his own righteousness. So the LORD tells him three times, in order to stress the point.

“What God has cleansed you must not call common.”

The main point of the passage is that Peter needed to learn that the gospel was going to the Gentiles. God was making them clean. But for this to take place, God needed to make it clear to the disciples that He was setting aside the dietary/separation Laws of the Old Testament, so that the disciples could take the gospel to the Gentiles in good conscience.

The LORD put the separation Laws in place so that the Jews would not mix with the Gentiles, and under the New Covenant, removes those same Laws so that they would mix with the Gentiles.

This was a monumental revelation to the first generation Christians. God was bringing about a mystery, which Paul tells us about in Ephesians 2-3. In that letter, he declares this mystery to us: Jews and Gentiles are made one new man in Christ.

For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation (this includes the dietary laws), ¹⁵having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, ¹⁶and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. ¹⁷And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near. ¹⁸For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.

But again, for this to happen, the dietary laws needed to be set aside. The LORD was no longer seeking to keep the people of God bound by such Laws, but was bringing them together through a much greater covenant, the New Covenant, through the gospel of Christ.

After all, where the Law was weak, the gospel was not. It is the power unto salvation for both the Jew and the Greek (Romans 1:16-17).

When We Shouldn’t Eat

But there is more to this. Paul does acknowledge that there are things we should not eat, not in conjunction with the dietary laws, which he could very well have restated in making his case, but he chooses not to. The reason that Paul gives that we should abstain from eating meat is if that meat has been dedicated to an idol, and by eating it we will cause another Christian to fall away from the faith and follow the idol. So the issue isn’t separation, as it was in the Old Testament, but a matter of conscience.

But if anyone says to you, “This was offered to idols,” do not eat it for the sake of the one who told you, and for conscience’ sake; for “the earth is the Lord’s, and all its fullness.” ²⁹“Conscience,” I say, not your own, but that of the other. For why is my liberty judged by another man’s conscience? (1 Corinthians 10:28-29).

The point here is that we do not eat if someone else might stumble and leave the faith. However, it does not apply to those who are merely offended that we eat meat. Abstaining from eating meat is only a gospel issue if the person might fall away because of it.

Paul has already given permission to eat meat freely from the market.

Eat whatever is sold in the meat market, asking no questions for conscience’ sake; ²⁶for “the earth is the Lord’s, and all its fullness.” (1 Corinthians 10:25-26).

So he isn’t giving the warning about eating meat to appease our modern vegans/vegetarians, etc. He is doing so for the sake of the Christian who might be tempted to return to idolatry over the use of meat that was sacrificed to that idol.

Paul even shows that we have the freedom to dine with those who are unbelievers, and eat what they eat. This too was a reversal of the dietary Laws, which prevented faithful Jews from eating with Gentiles at all.

If any of those who do not believe invites you to dinner, and you desire to go, eat whatever is set before you, asking no question for conscience’ sake (1 Corinthians 10:27).

Notice the focus is the non-believer in this verse. We are to go to their homes if invited, and if we desire to do so, and we are to eat whatever is set before us. The dietary Laws, if they were still to be kept, would prevent this freedom, a freedom we are to have in reaching the lost.

When We Can Eat

Finally, in a direct statement, Paul shows that every creature is good, and is not to be refused if we receive it with thanksgiving (bacon lovers everywhere are again rejoicing).

⁴For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; ⁵for it is ^[b]sanctified by the word of God and prayer (1 Timothy 4:4-5).

This is in the context of dealing with deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons… (who) were forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth.

So those who do call for us to abstain outside of what Paul has given us are actually under the influence of demons, not the Spirit of God. This should not surprise us. The Devil is always taking God’s word and applying it in the exact opposite way that it was intended to be applied. Both marriage and food have been given to us by the LORD to enjoy. For someone to claim that we should abstain as matters of religion are not following God’s word.

Conclusion

Hopefully you can see that when the atheists asks us the above question, that he does so out of ignorance. What it takes for us to have a proper understanding of our freedoms in Christ, is a continual study of God’s word. The atheist will not do so. They are merely looking for ways to attack believers and belittle them.

Don’t be fooled. The dietary Laws of the Old Testament have been set aside and we have perfect freedom to enjoy a good steak with some shrimp on the side. These things are a blessing from the LORD, given to us to enjoy. I don’t expect those who read this article to be able to reproduce it on the spot when an atheist attacks. But you can remember one or two of the above verses to go over with the atheist while you have him over for steak and shrimp. Better yet, let him invite you over for steak and shrimp and you provide the spiritual food.

“But the Bible was written by men!”

Often times we hear objections from non-believers that we cannot trust the Bible because it was written by men. The implication is that the Bible is fallible because men wrote it, men who were simply giving their opinion, or worse, conspiring to say something that God never said. It is the quickest way to stifle conversation or thought among non-believers. Never mind the fact that men are making this judgment that we cannot trust the Bible. Which means if men are so fallible that we cannot trust the Bible, then how can we trust their opinion that we cannot trust the Bible because men made it, and they are men, and men are making opinion statements… wow, that was confusing. But you get the idea.

There are several problems with this objection. The first is, who else is God going to use? The purpose of the Bible is showing God’s plan of redemption throughout history. He is out seeking to redeem a people to Himself, and in doing so, He has not only communicated man’s great problem, that of sin, but the solution to that problem, a redeemer in Jesus Christ. Therefore He uses fallen men in this process to reach and speak to those who are His. He uses fallen men because that is all that there is. There are no righteous people for Him to use in writing the Bible because there are none. This is why it is so important that we understand that the Holy Spirit was moving the prophets along as they were writing the Bible. Peter tells us in his second letter, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:21).

The men who wrote the Bible were not writing in a vacuum. They were writing in a specific time and place and the Holy Spirit was carrying them along as they did so. This doesn’t remove the men from their earthly setting or situation, it doesn’t remove their personality from them. God was using the fallen men, made holy by His calling on their lives and the righteousness of Christ to come, to pen what He wanted them to say. They were not robots, but men who were being redeemed telling others about the God who is and the redemption necessary and found only in Christ. All 66 books of the Bible either point to that reality, or say it specifically. So in this sense, the Bible has only one author: the Holy Spirit. The writers are in agreement with one another because the Holy Spirit is involved in giving what is written.

This leads to another proof that the Bible is God’s word. The Bible never candy-coats the men who wrote it. What I mean by that is that if the Bible were actually written by “just men” and not the Holy Spirit as well, we would never know that Moses murdered an Egyptian before becoming God’s mediator for the people. I’m quite certain that he would have glossed over that little bit in his history. But he doesn’t because he is being moved by the Holy Spirit to give an accurate and reliable account of what took place. It is for this reason we also know about King David’s transgression with Bathsheba, and Paul’s aid to those stoning the first Christians. So a majority of the Bible is written by three murderers showing God’s rich grace toward His people and showing that there are none He cannot reach with the righteousness of Christ.

Another aspect of this, which also helps us to see that we can invalidate other supposed holy books, is that there were those to testify to what was written. When Moses wrote about the fact that he murdered an Egyptian man, there were Jews there who knew this to be true. He wasn’t writing the first five books of the Bible in a vacuum. There were those who could testify to its truthfulness in that day. This is not true when it comes to the writings of cult leaders like Joseph Smith or Mary Baker Eddy. There was no one who could testify to the truthfulness of what they wrote. No events to prove the case. They were writing in a vacuum. The same is true for the writer of the Koran.

Finally, we also have hundreds of places in the Scripture where the writer was quoting directly from the LORD. For instance, when Moses gives the Ten Commandments, he does so by quoting the LORD directly. He gives in the preamble to the Ten Commandments what the LORD said: “I am the LORD your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage, you shall have no other gods before Me.”

This happens throughout Scripture, especially in the New Testament when Jesus is quoted as saying something. We are hearing directly from the LORD when He speaks.

I know my case here will not change the mind of the skeptic, atheist and spiritual ne’er do well. But hopefully my brothers and sisters in the LORD will be encouraged and know that the Bible we have been given was not done so in a vacuum, but given to us through time from God, using fallen sinful men, to reach a fallen and sinful people for His glory.