Refuting Protestant Argument on Word of God

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hiedi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Hiedi

Guest
Hi! Please help me. I am Catholic. I told a Baptist relative that the Church came before the Bible, because the Bible was put together by the Church. Then he cleverly responded that the Bible is God’s Word, and thus existed before the Church, because the book of John indicates: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Therefore, he says, the Bible came before the Church.

I already pointed him to the pillar of truth bible verse, but how do I refute this argument? (Besids pointing again to 1 Tim 3:15).

Thanks and God Bless you eternally.

Hiedi
 
Ok, easy. The “word” mentioned in John’s gospel refers to Jesus Christ, the word made flesh and not God’s written word.

The two are not synonymous! Would your friend get on his knees and worship the pages of the Bible? Probably not. Jesus is God and the Bible is not.
 
Let me see if I can remember the lecture I heard on this subject in one of my classes a while back…

There are two literary devices at work here. The first is that the Gospel parallels Genesis in that it starts with “In the beginning,” which would immediately get the attention of Jewish readers.

The second is that the word “Word” translates the Greek logos; unfortunately, we lose some meaning in this translation. In ancient Greek philosophy, the concept of logos referred to something along the lines of an overarching explanatory principle or natural law. Wikipedia claims, though I haven’t heard this otherwise, that Platonic philosophy held that it was this explanation that “connected” the divine with the human. In any event, the Greek readers would have recognized the term has having a particular philosophical significance. They certainly wouldn’t have thought of it as referring to Scripture.

The key is that ancient Greek mythology pits divine natures against human natures: To become more divine, one had to become less human. John thus begins by talking about this overarching principle, this logical connection, this supreme part of the universe, and then winds up putting down the real shocker in verse 14, saying that this logos was coeternal with God, but also took a completely human form. That’s a lot different from the more-divine-less-human paradigm.

At any rate, the important thing is that our rendering of logos as “the Word” loses a lot of the context and significance that would have been immediately obvious to a Greek audience. That significance far transcends the idea of “Scripture.”

Wikipedia has an article entitled, appropriately, “Christ the Logos” that scratches the surface of the use of the term in Jn 1.

Hope that helps!
 
To quote Father John Corapi:The Word of God is not a “something”,Its a “Somebody”,His name is Jesus Christ.🙂
 
Hiedi said:
Hi! Please help me. I am Catholic. I told a Baptist relative that the Church came before the Bible, because the Bible was put together by the Church. Then he cleverly responded that the Bible is God’s Word, and thus existed before the Church, because the book of John indicates: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Therefore, he says, the Bible came before the Church.

I already pointed him to the pillar of truth bible verse, but how do I refute this argument? (Besids pointing again to 1 Tim 3:15).

Thanks and God Bless you eternally.

Hiedi
Click to expand...
He is horribly mislead. The Word is Christ Himself, not a mere man-made book, no matter how sacred it is held. The bible that he relies on is a Catholic document, written and assembled under the power of the Holy Spirit by the early Catholic Church and presented to the world. Ask him where the “Holy Table of Contents” came from. Who decided which books were canonical and which were not? If the bible really came before the church, why didn’t Christ write it? Search the bible: You find the word “church” in Matthew 16:18. You will not find the word “bible”. Enough said, but don’t expect his hardened heart to accept the truth - just yet.

I note that Christ never taught from, wrote, commanded the writing of, or authorized a “bible” I am most certainly joyful that we have Sacred Scripture, but there is far more to God than just the incomplete book written about Him. Witness:

Luke 3:18 And with many other words John exhorted the people and preached the good news to them.

John 20:30 Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.

John 21:25 Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.

Acts 2:40 With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.”

Study up! And. may Christ’s peace always be with you.
 
Ask him to prove that the Bible is indeed the Word of God. If he tries to quote Bible verses to you, that’s circular reasoning, trying to prove the Bible from the Bible.

He must prove first of all that the Bible is God’s word. Why should we take his word for it?

Get back to us with his answer.
 
Thank you very much all, for your help. Thank you especially for the Bible verses. I have not mentioned that this relative is my Dad. So I must be careful to very respectful and sensitive. I cannot treat him like a friend. Out of his love for me he is very concerned that being in the Catholic Church is bad for my soul. I am greatful for his concern, and I pray that God may deliver Him into to mercy and peace of the fullness of the faith in the Catholic Church.

I have several questions related to all your responses:

How can I say without error that the Bible is incomplete? In one way, I do not believe this, for the Chatechism of the Catholic Church says in Part One, Article Three, Section 2: Inspiration and Truth of Sacred Scripture, number 106: "To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while he employed them in this task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though he acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more."

But of course I believe that we need also the Sacred Tradition. In ths way I agree that the Bible is incomplete.

Thank you and God Bless you Eternally,
Hiedi
 
The “and no more” in that sentence refers just to the Bible, not to the totality of God’s teaching. The Catechism is trying to say that the authors of Scripture wrote what God wanted them to write without adding any additional uninspired commentary.

If we didn’t have that qualifier, we would conceivably be able to say that all of God’s written Word is in the Bible, but not all of the Bible is God’s written Word. Then we would be left to determine which parts are which. Imagine the how the sola scriptura debates would go if it were legitimate to say, “That verse isn’t one of the inspired verses in the Bible!”

So: Everything God wanted written down is in the Bible, and everything that’s in the Bible is something God wanted written down. That doesn’t mean that everything God wanted to teach us is in the Bible – just the parts He wanted to be written.
 
Dear GJx86,

I see! I get it! It’s plainly obvious that’s why is meant: “Written word”! Thanks! You guys are fantastic! I just replied to my Dad with an email with all the bible quotes, and your wonderful arguments, as well as the basic teaching about Sacred Tradition from the Catechism. I am sure he will be impressed.

Praise God for His generosity through you. I reverted to the Catholic Church from the Baptist denomination when I was 19. I hope the same will happen to my Dad, who, like me, was also blessed to be raised Catholic, but converted when he married a Baptist woman.

Please say a little prayer for him.

God Bless you eternally,

Your Friend,
Hiedi
 
Thank you all, not just GJx86. Just wanted to make that clear. You are all a blessing.👍
 
Then he cleverly responded that the Bible is God’s Word, and thus existed before the Church, because the book of John indicates: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Therefore, he says, the Bible came before the Church.
Click to expand...
That is Bibliolatry at the worst!
The Word of God in the Bible is Jesus.
If fact I do feel unconfortable when I heard in the Mass the Bible say “Word of God”.
The Bible is not the Koran. A book that existed perfectly in the mind of God only to be dictated to a person. Vervatim.
In Christianity the Word Incarnated of God is Jesus.
 
inthecloud said:
That is Bibliolatry at the worst!
The Word of God in the Bible is Jesus. In Christianity the Word Incarnated of God is Jesus.
Click to expand...
As it is with the bible worshippers, knowledge trudges along slowly while ignorance flashes like lightning.
 
porthos11 said:
Ask him to prove that the Bible is indeed the Word of God. If he tries to quote Bible verses to you, that’s circular reasoning, trying to prove the Bible from the Bible.

He must prove first of all that the Bible is God’s word. Why should we take his word for it?

Get back to us with his answer.
Click to expand...
While I have no trouble referring to the Bible as “God’s Word” it seems evident to me that when the New Testament refers to “the word” or “the word of God”, if it does not mean specifically Jesus Christ, the second person of the Holy Trinity, then it is referring to the good news of salvation preached by the church.

“Now these Jews (of Beroea) were more noble than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with all eagerness, examining the scriptures daily to if these things were so.” Acts 17:11

“And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.” I Thess 2:13 I don’t think that what the Thessalonians received from Paul was a crate full of Bibles, as helpful as that might have been. They received the gospel. The letter to the Thessalonians is generally understood to be among the earliest written, or the earliest, of the books that now comprise the New Testament.
 
germangreek said:
While I have no trouble referring to the Bible as “God’s Word” it seems evident to me that when the New Testament refers to “the word” or “the word of God”, if it does not mean specifically Jesus Christ, the second person of the Holy Trinity, then it is referring to the good news of salvation preached by the church.

“Now these Jews (of Beroea) were more noble than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with all eagerness, examining the scriptures daily to if these things were so.” Acts 17:11

“And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.” I Thess 2:13 I don’t think that what the Thessalonians received from Paul was a crate full of Bibles, as helpful as that might have been. They received the gospel. The letter to the Thessalonians is generally understood to be among the earliest written, or the earliest, of the books that now comprise the New Testament.
Click to expand...
Yes, but the challenge the OP should posit to his Protestant relative is basically, “How do you know that the Bible is God’s word?” since the aforementioned Protestant came in with that assumption.

Catholics should not immediately admit that the Bible is God’s word when confronted by Protestants because it establishes the grounds for authority. Rather, they should throw back the question, e.g.

Protestant: Your practices are unbiblical!
Catholic: First of all why should we believe the Bible?
Protestant: Because it is the Word of God!
Catholic: Really? What is the basis for such a statement?
or
Catholic: What proof can you present for the Bible’s inspiration/authority?

Most likely the Protestant will quote 2 Tim 3:16 or some similar passage, but at this point, the Catholic has essentially gone into neutral ground by placing the burden of proof on the Protestant. Citing Scripture to prove Scripture is circular reasoning and has no validity in any argument.

So for the OP, do not agree yet that the Bible is God’s word. I know it, you know it, and we both know why we know it. But the Protestant expects us to swallow it on his own word.

It only shows how self-refuting Sola Scriptura is, because it cannot be proven from reason, only from assumption.
 
Hiedi said:
Hi! Please help me. I am Catholic. I told a Baptist relative that the Church came before the Bible, because the Bible was put together by the Church. Then he cleverly responded that the Bible is God’s Word, and thus existed before the Church, because the book of John indicates: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Therefore, he says, the Bible came before the Church.

I already pointed him to the pillar of truth bible verse, but how do I refute this argument? (Besids pointing again to 1 Tim 3:15).

Thanks and God Bless you eternally.

Hiedi
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter which came first, it really doesn’t prove anything.

For example. John came before Jesus, John pointed towards Jesus. Does that mean that John is over Jesus?

Of course not.

JJ
 
porthos11 said:
Yes, but the challenge the OP should posit to his Protestant relative is basically, “How do you know that the Bible is God’s word?” since the aforementioned Protestant came in with that assumption…

Protestant: Your practices are unbiblical!
Catholic: First of all why should we believe the Bible?
Protestant: Because it is the Word of God!
Catholic: Really? What is the basis for such a statement?
or
Catholic: What proof can you present for the Bible’s inspiration/authority?

…Citing Scripture to prove Scripture is circular reasoning and has no validity in any argument.

So for the OP, do not agree yet that the Bible is God’s word. I know it, you know it, and we both know why we know it. But the Protestant expects us to swallow it on his own word.

It only shows how self-refuting Sola Scriptura is, because it cannot be proven from reason, only from assumption.
Click to expand...
Now I see what you mean. Did you guys go to law school or something? I see I have a lot to learn when it comes to logic. Can you recommend me any books on logical reasoning/arguments?

Anyway, What do I do Mr. Porthos if right away he comes back to me and says, “Gee, I don’t know. You just accept it on faith. It’s undeniable, because there is too much truth and it all fits together so well. I mean, it would be impossible not to be God’s word simply based on how accurately all the prophesies come true!” What would you say to him if he asks me, “How do you know it then, Hiedi?”

Thanks.
 
Dear Jolly Joe,

I agree with you. It’s like the chicken or the egg question - who cares!! Only, I don’t think I understand fully what you mean when it comes to the Bible and the Church. Please be patient with my lack of intelligence, but would you mind going into that a bit further?

God Bless,

Hiedi
 
Hiedi said:
Anyway, What do I do Mr. Porthos if right away he comes back to me and says, “Gee, I don’t know. You just accept it on faith. It’s undeniable, because there is too much truth and it all fits together so well. I mean, it would be impossible not to be God’s word simply based on how accurately all the prophesies come true!” What would you say to him if he asks me, “How do you know it then, Hiedi?”
Click to expand...
You could respond that if the only test for being God’s Word is accurate predictions, then there are probably a great many scientists and economists who are prophets, since they write down predictions that sometimes end up being correct.

The reason you might go down this road is that as Catholics, we have an extrascriptural reason to believe that Scripture is the Word of God. By looking at the historical record, we can discover, to a reasonable degree of certainty, that there was a man named Jesus who had some followers who ended up founding a church. It was this church that produced the canon of Scripture by deciding which books were divinely inspired and which books were not. Because the people who put the Bible together were commissioned by bishops, who were commissioned by the Apostles, who were commissioned by Christ, we believe, as Catholics, that these people had the authority to decide what belonged in the Bible. By exercising that authority, they created a book which we know to contain the Word of God.

Your relative, on the other hand, won’t accept that these men had this authority, because he believes the Bible is the only authority. So the question then becomes: How does he know that Scripture is the Word of God? (His answer may be that he takes it “on faith,” which isn’t a bad answer, since we do too, in a sense – but that’s beside the point.) Beyond that, you might ask: How does he know which books are in the Bible? Who decided which ones should be there? The Table of Contents certainly wasn’t divinely inspired, and the books themselves offer few clues as to which are canonical and which are not. By what authority does he know that his Bible should have 66 books in it?

I hope that helps you out a little bit. Keep us updated on how things are going.
 
Hiedi said:
Dear Jolly Joe,

I agree with you. It’s like the chicken or the egg question - who cares!! Only, I don’t think I understand fully what you mean when it comes to the Bible and the Church. Please be patient with my lack of intelligence, but would you mind going into that a bit further?

God Bless,

Hiedi
Click to expand...
Hiedi,

I wasn’t making any point concerning the Bible and the Church. I was just pointing out that the arguement based on timing doesn’t hold water.

JJ
 
Jolly_Joe said:
Hiedi,

I wasn’t making any point concerning the Bible and the Church. I was just pointing out that the arguement based on timing doesn’t hold water.

JJ
Click to expand...
JJ,

I know that’s what your point was. I think I understand it well enough now. Thank you JJ.

Hiedi
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top