What does God think about the Bible? Does that seem to be an out-of-place question? There is much debate among modern-day theologians about the authority and authenticity of Scripture. Inerrancy is another word that is frequently used. Billy Graham made this statement about the subject in his book Storm Warning:
In numerous churches the Bible is treated as a collection of fairy tales and fables written by half-educated men of an ancient time. While it offers challenging spiritual myths and wholesome encouragement, some "modern" churches seem to feel that no one should go to the Bible expecting to find absolute truth. Such teaching is an abomination before God. Nothing could be more destructive to true faith and peace on earth. In the face of such a growing storm, the world desperately needs moorings, and God has given us that anchor in His Word, the Bible (pp. 78-79).
As we listen to so many different voices critically dissect these ancient writings, does it not make sense to consider what Christ Himself had to say on the subject? Over the centuries, the Church has maintained an exalted view of Scripture, believing it to be the very word of God. However, when men's hearts are examined, and trapped, by the bright convicting searchlight of Scripture, some invent ways to discredit its authority. Some of these are quite creative and clever, and given that "the heart is more deceitful than all else" (Jeremiah 17:9), these degradations of God's word are presented apparently with utmost sincerity. This treatise is written for the Christian who desires to know the truth but is confused or disturbed by the persuasive arguments of some modern day theologians. That many are confused is not surprising. There are multitudes of mind-stretching and intellectually challenging arguments on the subject. Pondering these will likely cause one to ask questions about the authority of Scripture. Some cast doubt on the authority of Scripture by claiming that significant portions of the Old Testament Scriptures are the combined efforts of many different editors who over the centuries added their own perspectives and themes to the evolving texts. This theory, known as the "Documentary Hypothesis" was originated in modern times because, for a while, some "learned" scholars had concluded that no written form of a language existed at the time of Moses. As they hypothesized how the Mosaic writings might then have come into being, they conjectured, based on no currently standing historical or archaeological evidence, that multiple editors constructed these writings from the folklore and partial manuscripts handed down in later generations. These hypothesized and anonymous editors go by the names of J (for the Jehovah perspective), E (for the Elohim perspective), etc. Since the initial fabrication of this hypothesis, its premise has been proved false by the discovery of the "black stele" on which the detailed laws of Hammurabi were written at least three centuries prior to the time of Moses. However, instead of recanting this "Documentary Hypothesis," those minds that imagined it were unwilling to do so; so it continues to be taught today. Only now the case for the existence and contribution of these multiple editors is based primarily on the diversity of style and theme in Scripture. My personal response to those who advocate this theory of multiple editors is that, aside from ignoring history as well as the strict ritual religiously used by the ancient Jews to copy and preserve Scripture in its original form, they have apparently failed to recognize that the diversity