The Bible: A Book of Confusion?

Doug Focht, Jr.

Many folks believe that the Bible is beyond the understanding of the average person. They believe this based upon the disagreement that can be observed among so-called scholars and the variance of teaching within Christendom itself. This disagreement and confusion, however, is just the symptom. The reasons for religious division go far beyond the so-called difficulty of Scripture. See for yourself:

The Bible and Bishops

1 Timothy 3:2:

“A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach…”

The quote is from the King James or Authorized version of the Bible. “Bishop” is the English word derived from Anglo-Saxon biscop, which came from the Greek word episkopos, which means to “oversee.” Now you may not have known that (I looked it up in a dictionary), but as you can see, the Bible says that a bishop must be, among other things, “the husband of one wife.” What do “scholars” and religious officials say?

• The Catholic church teaches that a bishop must NOT be married.

• Most Protestant denominations teach that a bishop may be married, but it is not necessary.

Is the Bible too difficult to understand on this point? Does the phrase, “The bishop must be…” mean, “The bishop must not be…” or, “The bishop may be…?” Well, here's an interesting quote from a Protestant scholar, Albert Barnes, regarding this passage: “This need not be understood as requiring that a bishop should be a married man…” and after referring to a fourth century scholar who held that position, Barnes continued, “…this interpretation is manifestly to be excluded as false…” (Barnes' Notes on the New Testament, pg. 1139). Why is one of the bishop's requirements “manifestly false” and the others not so? No reason is given, because there is no reason other than traditions that have arisen since the Bible was written.

The Bible, marriage and birth control.

Many have taught over the years that birth control is inappropriate or sinful in the marriage relationship. It is argued that marriage is for the purpose of procreation and that any attempts to circumvent this purpose violates God's command to “go forth and multiply.” (Gen. 1:28). Now read this:

1 Corinthians 7:2-3:

“…because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband.” (NKJ)

1 Timothy 4:1–3:

“Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, 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.” (NKJ)

Although church traditions may address the issues of birth control and celibacy, the Bible clearly teaches that procreation is not the only reason for marriage. In fact, in these passage, procreation is not even considered, is it? The failure to consider all that the Bible has to say on a given subject has resulted in a teaching which is against what it says. Those who prefer to place tradition above Scripture often argue that things have changed since the Bible was written, so we must change too. But what has changed? Have human beings no longer such desires as they once had? What conditions have changed that marriage should not be today as then for the purpose of lawfully fulfilling such desires? How can tradition or “scholarship” amend or annul that truth?

It isn't difficult to see (though it may be to admit) that many religions do not always follow the Bible. Is this because the Bible is too hard to understand? Have these examples been too difficult for you to understand? I think not. So now what? When one's beliefs are different than what the Bible teaches, there are only three things that can happen: The Scriptures must be accepted, altered, or denied. Since acceptance requires a change of life (and sometimes a radical change), the last two are the preferred option of most.

Those who wish to maintain a semblance of honor toward the Scripture choose to alter them by adding to them their “traditions” or “additional revelations.” This means, of course, that their beliefs are “subject to change with or without notice.”

Those who deny the Scriptures, affirm that the Bible is not God's word, and if it ever was, the original texts have become so corrupted that it no longer reflects accurately what was originally intended.

Finally, those who say they believe the Bible but ignore its teachings are the same as those who deny it. There is no difference except hypocrisy between one who denies Scripture with his mouth and one who ignores it with his life.

—Reprinted from Growing in Grace, Vol. 1 #2, May `12, 1996

Doug Focht, Jr.