\n<\/p>\n
I suppose that title is a bit confusing. What I mean is this: what we think of God can be seen in what we expect of the Bible<\/a> as God\u2019s Word.<\/p>\n Here is one example.<\/p>\n If your vision of God is primarily (not exclusively) of a sovereign king, enthroned above, who communicates to his subjects through written decrees mediated to inspired men borne along by God\u2019s spirit to ensure the accuracy of the divine oracles, you will likely describe the Bible as necessarily<\/em>: historically accurate, logically consistent, self-evidently divine, inerrant, fully and absolutely authoritative in all it teaches.<\/p>\n Yes, certainly, people who tend toward this view also use other descriptors for God and the Bible, but the view above exhibits\u00a0functional\u00a0priority\u2013especially when doctrinal disagreements arise.<\/p>\n Data (either biblical or extra-biblical) that seem to challenge this description tend to be interpreted in such a way as to support the\u00a0description, regardless. After all, since<\/em> God is what he is, his word will<\/em> be consistent with that description. Contrary \u201cdata\u201d are contrary only because humans perceive them through their sinful minds and rebellious hearts.<\/p>\n Hence, disparate historical accounts and divergent theologies\u00a0are only alleged to be so, and so are harmonized. More compliant passages of Scripture are\u00a0given priority and assigned prescriptive value for determining the \u201cnature of Scripture.\u201d Other passages, such as 2 Tim 3:16,\u00a0are elevated as a super-authoritative\u00a0standard that trumps any alleged \u201cevidence\u201d to the contrary.<\/p>\n Particularly difficult challenges are either tabled until such a time as adequate counterarguments can be mustered or marginalized by means of rhetoric. The primary task in\u00a0such cases is to defend the biblical doctrine of Scripture.<\/p>\n Having said all this, my suspicion\u2013and this is only my suspicion\u2013is that it is not the view of God<\/a> that yields the expectation of Scripture. Rather, it is the theological need for a certain type of Scripture that produces a particular view of God.<\/p>\n I want to think about that a bit more, so in the meantime, I will simply say that our view of God and our view of the Bible go hand in hand\u2013paying attention to the one will always tell you something about the other.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n