A Poster's 4 Questions

Below I quote JOJ from another thread (which I did not want to derail). I thought these four questions might deserve some further discussion.

But before answering the questions, I want to define our terms. Notice that John of Japan changes terms along the way. First, he uses "Bible", "Biblical", and then "Bible" again (from the portion quoted above). He introduces the quiz as "if you really know the Bible on preservation". But then he switches to a different term in four of the next five references: "Word of God" three times; and "NT" for the last question (using "Bible" only once). He returns to the previous term following the quiz with "the answers are all there in the Bible".

I'm not accusing John of doing this consciously or deliberately for any effect. My point is that John uses the two terms synonymously. I think I can demonstrate that the "Word of God" (sometimes just the "word" or other variations) is not the same thing as the "Bible" (the collected 66 books). I'm not trying to be 'picky'; I think there is an important distinction.

We know that the English word spelt b-i-b-l-e itself does not occur in the text of the KJV. Within its own pages, how then does the sacred written text refer to itself? Usually as the "scriptures"; sometimes with terms like "law of Moses" or "his commandments". It is doubtful the term "Word of God" is ever used to refer to 1st century apostolic Greek writings (New Testament) alone, or in combination with Hebrew scriptures (Old Testament) which is commonly called the 'Bible'.

Foremost, "The Word of God" is Jesus Christ (Revelation 19:13, John 1:1-8, Hebrews 11:3, 2 Peter 3:5). But when the "Word" is not referring to the Son of God, it is also not referring to written documents. In the Old Testament the term "word of God" usually means a prophetic revelation (see 1 Samuel 9:27, 1 Kings 12:22, 1 Chronicles 17:3). The phrase "word of the Lord" is more prevalent in the OT. And here are just a few NT examples (from KJV) --

So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed. (Acts 19:20)​

Historically speaking, there was no Protestant 66-book 'Bible' at the time of the acts of the apostles; nor does this seem to be a description of the expansion of the Hebrew canon that God had closed 400 years earlier.

And it came to pass, that, as the people pressed upon him to hear the word of God, he stood by the lake of Gennesaret, (Luke 5:1)​

Again, the books of the New Testament were not yet written during the time of Christ on Earth; the earliest NT books appearing no sooner than 20 to 30 years after Christ's ascension. At best, this could only refer to the ancient Hebrew writings; it is doubtful that Jesus had a scroll with Him at this occasion (a few verses later the statement "when he had left speaking" is given, that is, He was not reading, although He may have quoted from memory). The people could listen to the scrolls being read at the Temple; they were present to hear something else.

And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost,
and they spake the word of God with boldness. (Acts 4:31)​

The recitation of Hebrew scriptures does not really fit the context here; boldness was not required to proclaim the Hebrew scriptures. I believe they were proclaiming the Gospel as they had lived it firsthand.

And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.
And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.
Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. (John 5:37-39)​

Jesus told the Jewish leaders that although they had searched their "scriptures", they had not received the Father's "word" (two different things).

Now, if John's first three questions are asked of "scriptures" rather than the "Word of God" there may be a different results.

 

John, please specify the verses where exact phrase "word of God" clearly refers to written revelation. Thanks

 

My mistake. When I read --

I guess I thought that you meant that the "word of God" usually means "revelation", and "this" (not just any) revelation was sometimes in "written" form.

 

I don't understand how your comment above applies to this verse below. Are you saying that readers might never have heard a prophetic "word" proclaimed aloud? I do not see a necessity for the "word of God" to take only the written form here to make it true. Please elaborate.

Every word of God [is] pure: he [is] a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. (Proverbs 30:5-6, KJV)​

As you said, "near" to Scripture but not precisely. Just prior to getting specific about honoring parents (verses 7-9), Jesus uses the terminology "commandment of God" (entole Strong's #1785 meaning an order, command, charge, precept, injunction; not nomos Strong's #3551 indicating the Mosiac law, or Pentateuch) in contrast to the "commandments of men" and "tradition of men". Then Jesus states "For Moses said" (verse 10, eipon Strong's #2036 meaning to speak, say) in contrast to "But ye say" (verse 11). Notice Jesus did not respond with "Moses wrote", "It is written", or similar verbiage. So again we have the term "word of God" referring to that which is verbal given, not the graphically recorded.

For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: (Mark 7:10, KJV)​

You have said it yourself, the "word of God" here probably refers to spoken words; that is how those first Hebrew hearers would likely have received the message. It is doubtful that Moses had written much (if any) of the Pentateuch by the time that these words were originally spoken; only later would they be enscripturated. Notice that the Luke citation only gets "word" directly next to "of God" by ignoring the phrase "that proceedeth out of the mouth".

... that man doth not live by bread only, but by every [word] that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live. (Deuteronomy 8:3b)

But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. (Matthew 4:4)

And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. (Luke 4:4, KJV) ​

 

I disagree that they being used as synonyms. Please look carefully at what is recorded here (John 10:34-35, KJV) --

Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;​

The phrase "unto whom" (the word of God came) more fully describes "them" (patriarchs and prophets). I believe the antecedent of "scripture" is "your law". Jesus confirmed the law (Torah) as being scripture. The first edition NLT renderd it thus --

Jesus replied, "It is written in your own law that God said to certain leaders of the people, `I say, you are gods!'
And you know that the Scriptures cannot be altered. So if those people, who received God's message, were called `gods,'​

In fact, this is the recurring theme: our spiritual forefathers had the prophets and apostles to speak God's words to them, while we have God's words written down to speak to us.

 

Me too. (I'm also a TTU grad)

 

Quite simply, since discovering that the exact phrase "word of God" in our Bible (both Old & New Testaments) never explicitly refers to scripture (written revelation) I have become bound to that truth. The Holy Spirit seemingly has made a distinction; He could have easily given us passages where "word of God" clearly stood for "scripture" or its synonyms. I have been making a conscious effort to not use the term 'Word of God' to refer to the Holy Scriptures for some time now.

If the term 'Word of God' is used interchangeably with 'Bible' it could be confusing to some weaker minds when they notice that the "word of God" was being proclaimed (as described in Acts and the Gospels) before the canonical apostolic writings (NT) were ever actually completed. The theologically undertrained might also think that if 'Word of God' is synonymous with 'Bible' then that should include apocryphal books (as found in RC and Eastern Orthodox versions). These are stumblingblocks that I am trying to avoid placing in the path.

When defending the faith against skeptics it becomes a matter of precise communication (since words have meaning). Another facet of this salient point follows in my next post.

 

Your point here is one that I have made on several occasions: that not all of God's words have been inscripturated for us. Some folks get upset when it is stated that we do not have all of God's communication recorded in the Bible. Using the term "word of God" to properly specify only the verbal form revelation can help make the distinction from other methods of revelation during discourse.

 

There you go again, switching your terms midstream . Our discussion to this point had been strictly about "word of God".
No, I would not lose the opportunity to say "... it is God's Word to you". The construction "God's word" does not occur at all in the KJV text. The single closest English structure is a plural form found John 8:37 --

He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God. (KJV)​

As you know, Greek expresses the possesive case by inflection not by apostrophe ('s). So anyway, in Greek it would literally be
"the words" + "(belonging to the) God".

He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear {them,} because you are not of God. (NASB)

Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God. (Young's)​

I do use the term "God's word" occasionally (I prefer to see it written without the cap W). I could also say "these are words from God to you" or similar phrases. With so many other options, I don't believe that I should ever give anyone the impression that "maybe" the Bible isn't God's revelation; I only forfeit my privilege to frame the notion as "its the word of God to you".