The Bible—Is It True or Is It Truth? (And Does It Matter?)
I just had to sigh and shake my head when I read a recent article titled “Is the Bible True? Or Is It Truth?” The article pokes fun at those who read the Bible “literally,” specifically calling out the global flood account as “pretty farfetched.” But the reasons he gives for why “the story of Noah is a tough nut to crack” are the same skeptical objections we’ve addressed for years!
Here are the objections author Scott Pinsker brings up, followed by a short answer with links to articles we’ve written on these topics (you can also find answers to nearly all these questions at the life-size Noah’s Ark at the Ark Encounter).
Objection: How could Noah bring “every animal on earth” onto the ark, including “1.05 million insect species, 11,000 birds, 11,000 reptiles, and 6,000 mammals”?
Answer: He didn’t need to! Follow the link to the full story, but the short answer is he only needed land-dwelling, air-breathing animal KINDS (not species)—less than 7,000 animals total!
Objection: The fossil record proves there couldn’t have been a worldwide flood.
Answer: Actually, it shows the opposite!
Objection: Regionalized flora and fauna prove there couldn’t have been a worldwide flood.
Answer: To answer this objection you need to understand the biblical concept of kinds.
Objection: Noah would’ve had to bring freshwater fish into an onboard aquarium or they would’ve died out.
Answer: This fails to understand the differences between the preflood world and our world and, again, the concept of kinds. Besides, the account in Scripture states only land animal kinds were on the ark.
Objection: Noah would’ve been required to take 2,000 species of termites on the ark, and surely the wooden vessel wouldn’t survive that.
Answer: But Noah perhaps didn’t need to bring insects on the ark, and even if he did, he wouldn’t need all those species!
Objection: Noah could never have cared for so many animals.
Answer: Well, he didn’t bring tens of thousands of animals onboard the ark! He easily could have cared for the few thousand he needed to bring.
Objection: Why didn’t Noah bring innocent babies onto the ark instead of having them perish in the flood?
Answer: God offered a means of salvation, and everyone except Noah and his family rejected it and therefore kept their children from receiving it as well. Besides, only God determines what is right and wrong. How can a human being determine morality without a basis in an absolute authority?
It’s rather frustrating to see skeptics—Christian or otherwise—mock the Bible for so-called “petty flaws” that thoughtful Christians have addressed for years! Just a few minutes of research on our site would’ve shown that there are plausible answers to these questions (and he does know our site exists—he links to the Ark Encounter page!). And yet he just repeats the same tired objections he’s heard from equally uninformed skeptics.
Why does he raise all these objections? Well, it’s to supposedly bolster his main point:
There are infinite ways to interpret the Bible. The Bible is about God, after all, and everyone’s image of God is different: My mental image of God differs from yours. And if we can’t even agree on the starting point, it’s gonna be next to impossible to agree on all the twists and turns in the Scriptures.
The historicity of the Bible is a tricky topic—one that’s rife with recriminations, allegations, and declarations of faith. . . . Couldn’t an all-powerful, all-knowing God just as easily create a Holy Book that’s historical AND moral? Then why must it be one or the other? Why not both?
Only God Himself knows for sure.
If only God himself knows, wouldn’t it behoove us to look at what God has said about his own Word in his Word and take it as written? One verse in particular immediately comes to mind:
For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. (John 5:46)
Jesus tells his skeptical audience that they would believe his words if they believed the history written in the Old Testament, because it all points to him. God recorded history, not just to teach us some “special wisdom . . . that can transform your soul,” but to point us to the Lord of history, Jesus Christ.
And he also gave us his Word—history—for our instruction, so we can know what is right and wrong and know how to think biblically. Consider that, after refreshing his audience on some Old Testament history, Paul writes:
Now these things took place as examples for us, that we might not desire evil as they did. (1 Corinthians 10:6)
And,
Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come. (1 Corinthians 10:11)
God’s Word is both historical and filled with spiritual truths—not because I say so, but because God himself says so! (And he would know—he authored it after all! See 2 Timothy 3:16). And besides, Genesis is written as typical historical narrative and is treated as such in the New Testament.
In the end, the author asks the question: “Do you believe the Bible is true—that every word and every claim should be taken 100% literally? Or do you believe the Bible is truth—that there’s a special wisdom within the Scriptures that can transform your soul, but truth comes in many forms, and you’ll have to work at uncovering the meaning for yourself?” (emphasis original)
I’ll simply let the Scriptures answer that question for themselves:
Your word is truth. (John 17:17)
The sum of your word is truth. (Psalm 119:160)
Let God be true though every one were a liar. (Romans 3:4)
God’s Word is truth because it is true—if it isn’t true, then God is a liar and therefore the Bible is not truth. You can’t have one without the other!
Oh, and to clear up yet another misconception—we don’t take the Bible “100% literally.” We read the Bible naturally, according to genre, as it was meant to be read!
by Ken Ham on October 21, 2024
Featured in Ken Ham Blog
There's only one interpretation of God's Word, and that belongs to God and whoever He decides to share it with.
Here are the objections author Scott Pinsker brings up, followed by a short answer with links to articles we’ve written on these topics (you can also find answers to nearly all these questions at the life-size Noah’s Ark at the Ark Encounter).
Objection: How could Noah bring “every animal on earth” onto the ark, including “1.05 million insect species, 11,000 birds, 11,000 reptiles, and 6,000 mammals”?
Answer: He didn’t need to! Follow the link to the full story, but the short answer is he only needed land-dwelling, air-breathing animal KINDS (not species)—less than 7,000 animals total!
Objection: The fossil record proves there couldn’t have been a worldwide flood.
Answer: Actually, it shows the opposite!
Objection: Regionalized flora and fauna prove there couldn’t have been a worldwide flood.
Answer: To answer this objection you need to understand the biblical concept of kinds.
Objection: Noah would’ve had to bring freshwater fish into an onboard aquarium or they would’ve died out.
Answer: This fails to understand the differences between the preflood world and our world and, again, the concept of kinds. Besides, the account in Scripture states only land animal kinds were on the ark.
Objection: Noah would’ve been required to take 2,000 species of termites on the ark, and surely the wooden vessel wouldn’t survive that.
Answer: But Noah perhaps didn’t need to bring insects on the ark, and even if he did, he wouldn’t need all those species!
Objection: Noah could never have cared for so many animals.
Answer: Well, he didn’t bring tens of thousands of animals onboard the ark! He easily could have cared for the few thousand he needed to bring.
Objection: Why didn’t Noah bring innocent babies onto the ark instead of having them perish in the flood?
Answer: God offered a means of salvation, and everyone except Noah and his family rejected it and therefore kept their children from receiving it as well. Besides, only God determines what is right and wrong. How can a human being determine morality without a basis in an absolute authority?
It’s rather frustrating to see skeptics—Christian or otherwise—mock the Bible for so-called “petty flaws” that thoughtful Christians have addressed for years! Just a few minutes of research on our site would’ve shown that there are plausible answers to these questions (and he does know our site exists—he links to the Ark Encounter page!). And yet he just repeats the same tired objections he’s heard from equally uninformed skeptics.
Why does he raise all these objections? Well, it’s to supposedly bolster his main point:
There are infinite ways to interpret the Bible. The Bible is about God, after all, and everyone’s image of God is different: My mental image of God differs from yours. And if we can’t even agree on the starting point, it’s gonna be next to impossible to agree on all the twists and turns in the Scriptures.
The historicity of the Bible is a tricky topic—one that’s rife with recriminations, allegations, and declarations of faith. . . . Couldn’t an all-powerful, all-knowing God just as easily create a Holy Book that’s historical AND moral? Then why must it be one or the other? Why not both?
Only God Himself knows for sure.
If only God himself knows, wouldn’t it behoove us to look at what God has said about his own Word in his Word and take it as written? One verse in particular immediately comes to mind:
For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. (John 5:46)
Jesus tells his skeptical audience that they would believe his words if they believed the history written in the Old Testament, because it all points to him. God recorded history, not just to teach us some “special wisdom . . . that can transform your soul,” but to point us to the Lord of history, Jesus Christ.
And he also gave us his Word—history—for our instruction, so we can know what is right and wrong and know how to think biblically. Consider that, after refreshing his audience on some Old Testament history, Paul writes:
Now these things took place as examples for us, that we might not desire evil as they did. (1 Corinthians 10:6)
And,
Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come. (1 Corinthians 10:11)
God’s Word is both historical and filled with spiritual truths—not because I say so, but because God himself says so! (And he would know—he authored it after all! See 2 Timothy 3:16). And besides, Genesis is written as typical historical narrative and is treated as such in the New Testament.
In the end, the author asks the question: “Do you believe the Bible is true—that every word and every claim should be taken 100% literally? Or do you believe the Bible is truth—that there’s a special wisdom within the Scriptures that can transform your soul, but truth comes in many forms, and you’ll have to work at uncovering the meaning for yourself?” (emphasis original)
I’ll simply let the Scriptures answer that question for themselves:
Your word is truth. (John 17:17)
The sum of your word is truth. (Psalm 119:160)
Let God be true though every one were a liar. (Romans 3:4)
God’s Word is truth because it is true—if it isn’t true, then God is a liar and therefore the Bible is not truth. You can’t have one without the other!
Oh, and to clear up yet another misconception—we don’t take the Bible “100% literally.” We read the Bible naturally, according to genre, as it was meant to be read!
by Ken Ham on October 21, 2024
Featured in Ken Ham Blog
There's only one interpretation of God's Word, and that belongs to God and whoever He decides to share it with.
61-69, M
