| Vol. 55 | 12 May 2002 | No. 27 |
GOD’S HOLY FIRE III
The subtitle for God’s Holy Fire, the second volume in the “Heart of the Restoration Series” put out by Abilene Christian University, is “The Nature and Function of Scripture.” The writers, Kenneth L. Cukrowski, Mark W. Hamilton, and James W. Thompson, question the inerrancy of the Bible. They state:
In recent years, the “Battle
for the Bible” has been fought over the use of one such definition: inerrancy, a term that was not used
in the Bible and was not in common use to define the nature of inspiration for
many centuries after the writing of the New Testament. Although we appreciate the sentiments of
those who insist on this term and share their desire to maintain the highest
view of Scripture, for a variety of reasons this terminology is not
helpful. Human definitions simply
create more problems, for what constitutes an error remains unclear. One may ask whether or not the word applies
to matters involving every statement in the Bible on cosmology, botany,
and the other sciences. (p. 39.)
Inerrancy of the Bible means that the Bible is free from error, but the three professors question whether it is without error. Let it be clearly stated that the Bible, God’s word, is without error. Though the Bible is not a book on science, any scientific statement it makes is true. Over sixty years ago, Harry Rimmer, Sc.D., D.D., challenged the world to prove the Bible to be false. He wrote in 1940:
For fifteen years the
Research Science Bureau, a corporation of which I am the president, had been
broadcasting an offer of one hundred dollars to any person who would establish
a scientific mistake in the Bible. This
offer was published in the newspapers and magazines of twenty-seven different
countries. It was publicized in
platform meetings all over America, and was often repeated on the radio. In the fifteen years during which this offer
was in effect there was an enormous volume of correspondence concerning it, as
the reader may well imagine. Every
fantastic theory and wild imagining of unbelief was addressed to the committee
which decided the contest, and some weird letters were received. Every question from the capacity of Noah’s
ark to the suggestion that apples would not grow in the climate of Eden was handled
by this committee in that period of fifteen years, with the result that no
person was able in that span of time to establish a case of error in the Bible.
With one exception, every contender withdrew his demand when the answer of the committee had been received. To my mind, this is one of the great testimonies to the infallibility of the Bible we have ever seen….
(That
Lawsuit Against the Bible,
pp10-11.)
It is too bad the Abilene professors did not live in Harry Rimmer’s time or they could have split that one hundred dollars three ways. They give some examples that they believe show the Bible to be inaccurate regarding scientific statements. One does not have to be a Rimmer or hold a PhD. to answer these fellows.
The professors question the accuracy of the Bible on scientific matters by saying, “For example, when the Bible describes a `firmament’ that separates the waters above from the waters below, one may wonder if the Bible intends to make an accurate scientific statement.” (p.39.)
This is not the first criticism that has been leveled at the word “firmament” as used in Genesis 1:6-8. A few years ago a brother mentioned the mistranslation of it by the King James Version; but in pointing out the errors of the American Standard he failed to mentioned that it also uses the word firmament in Genesis 1:6-8.
The word “firmament” is translated from the Hebrew word,
raqiya` (raw-kee'-ah), which properly means “an expanse, i.e. the firmament or (apparently) visible arch of the sky” (Strong’s Greek-Hebrew Dictionary).
The Bible is its own best interpreter. Genesis 1:8 says, “And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.” Some Bibles have in their margins the word “expanse” for “firmament. The word can be traced back through Middle English to Old French to Late Latin. The word in Late Latin was “firmamentum” which meant “a strengthening, support, prop:… Fig., a support, prop, stay.” (Lewis, Charles T., Ph.D., An Elementary Latin Dictionary, Harper and Brothers, 1890, p.327.) The Hebrew word “rakia,” according to The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon says “1. (flat) expanse (as if of ice,…), as base, support….the vault of heaven, or ‘firmament,’ regarded by Hebrews as solid, and supporting ‘waters’ above it.” (p. 956.)
The translators of the King James Version and the American Standard Version used the word “firmament” because Moses, was describing that which separated the waters above it from the waters below it. The idea is of support because it restrains the water from flooding the earth as it did in the days of Noah (Gen. 8:2; Alfred M. Rehwinkel, Professor Emeritus of Concordia Seminary, wrote,
The atmosphere is a belt of
air surrounding the earth to a thickness of about 60 to 100 miles or possibly
even more, which consists chiefly of two gases, namely, 78% nitrogen and 20%
oxygen, with 2% other gases.
…
But there are other great
and wonderful features about the atmosphere which ordinarily escape the attention
of man. For example, though invisible,
the atmosphere is a material substance; it is tangible, it can be felt; it has
weight – 14 ½ pounds per square inch at the sea level – it is transparent
unless laden with fog, smog, dust, or some other foreign substance; it is
buoyant like water; …
The Wonders of Creation, pp.74-75.
The word “firmament” as found
in Genesis does not contradict science.
[To
be continued]