The Classic Conversion Mistake

It has always amazed me how people can switch religious beliefs so easily, and accept everything taught to them on the other side as absolute truth, when they once believed they were absolute lies!!!  Why are we so fickle?  Why is it that we are so desperate to belong that we have to buy everything we are told, and drop our true convictions and our ability to reason?

I see it with all faiths, but I’m especially dumbfounded when I see it with Atheists, who insist upon evidence before they can proclaim anything to be true!  Funny how there is absolutely NO evidence for the theory of evolution (hence it is still called a theory), but everyone who moves to the other side of faith in God adopts this theory as golden and goes to great lengths to defend and promote it.

As Christians, we do the same thing.  I know why there’s a need to define statutes.  Not least so that we can know those who believe exactly what we believe, and label those who don’t accept everything we believe as heretics to be avoided.  We’ve been warned of the many false prophets and teachers teaching false doctrines, so we agreed on the truth, and are unable to tolerate alternative understanding of these beliefs or even new revelations!  This is why there are so many denominations, sects and cults, because we switch off our spiritual gauge and depend on others to tell us what to believe.

One of those things we have been taught to accept without question is the infallibility of the Bible, as the Word of God.  However, if the first Christians (Acts 11:26) didn’t have the Bible, and didn’t even have a holy Book, just the gospel that they received from the Apostles, do you think they would call what we now know to be the Bible as the complete inerrant word of God?  Consider also that when the converted Jews were trying to impose circumcision and other Jewish laws on the Gentiles who had believed the Gospel (and were now just as Christian as the converted Jews), the Believers had their very first meeting on the matter of what every Christian should hold dear, and what we should not be burdened with. This meeting is recorded in Acts 15.

At this meeting, this was what they concluded as applicable to all Believers:

“For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well” (Acts 15:28-29).

It is reasonable to say that even this list was reconsidered by the Church, as they grew in understanding of what was clean and unclean.  Consider Paul’s teaching in Romans 14 about strong and weak faith, and how we are free to eat anything (as long as we do not cause others, who believe they’ve been sacrificed to idols or are unclean, to stumble). But his teaching about sexual immortality should also show that that is not a weak or strong faith issue, but a fundamental principle to be upheld by all believers (1 Cor 6:18).

Christians were not compelled to abide by the Torah, as many of the converted Pharisees pushed for.  Paul’s ministry to the Gentiles saw him continually fighting this battle of renewing the minds of his Jewish brothers and sisters (Read Galatians 3).  But he did say to Timothy that all scriptures are inspired by God and profitable for instruction (2 Tim 3:16), so he wasn’t advocating that it be disregarded…just understood in light of the Gospel and teachings of Jesus.  As you can imagine, Paul never dreamed that his writings would become part of a collection that would later be termed “the Word of God”.

Who does the Bible say the Word of God is?  JESUS and no other (1 John 1:1).  To say that the Bible is the infallible word of God is the heresy (but I won’t stone or reject you for believing that).  The Bible compiles the testimonies of others who were inspired by God to write for the edification of Believers, and to carry on and protect the Jewish history and tradition.  The Roman Catholic Church felt the need to seal the Bible’s authority to teach Christians our faith in Jesus by canonizing it (rejecting what they believed to be false testimonies).  I see the wisdom in this, and uphold the Bible as sacred.

The Bible’s authority is built on the authority of the Church.  But the Word of God is a living Being that once became flesh. This is the Biblically sound doctrine.

Believing that Jesus is the Word of God and not the Bible has never caused me to reject the Bible.  It has only allowed me to better understand it and allow the Holy Spirit to lead me into all truth as Jesus said He would (John 16:13).

This teaching about the Bible and several other teachings that have been passed on by tradition (and do not even have Biblical support) are accepted by Christians, depending on their particular denomination as the Gospel Truth! The Gospel Truth is the message that Jesus preached, that His disciples were sent forth to preach, so that all who believe may be filled with the Spirit of God – and would need no man to teach them (I John 2:27).

To all who believe the Gospel, which is that God sent His beloved Son to die on a Cross to save them from eternal death, this is what Jesus says:

“If ye love Me, keep My commandments. And I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of Truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth Him not, neither knoweth Him: but ye know Him; for He dwelleth with you, and shall be in you” (John 14:15).

Originally published on

Photo credit:

If you liked this post, you might like HOW I CAME TO SETTLE ON THE TRUTH


Categories: Atheism, Christianity, Contributors

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

18 replies

  1. “To say that the Bible is the infallible word of God is the heresy” might be the real heresy.

    The Bible claims to be infallible in 2 Peter 1:19, “We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable.” Peter continues with a description of how Scripture came to be: “No prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:20–21).

    Also, we see infallibility implied in 2 Timothy 3:16–17, “All Scripture is God-breathed” and has the effect of producing servants of God who are “thoroughly equipped for every good work.” The fact that God “breathed” Scripture insures that the Bible is infallible, for God cannot breathe out error. The fact that the Bible equips God’s servants “thoroughly” for service shows that it guides us into truth, not error.

    If God is infallible, then so will be His Word. The doctrine of Scripture’s infallibility is based on an understanding of God’s perfection of character. God’s Word is “perfect, refreshing the soul” (Psalm 19:7) because God Himself is perfect. Theologically, God is closely associated with His Word; the Lord Jesus is called “the Word” (John 1:14).

    It should be noted that the doctrine of infallibility concerns only the original documents. Mistranslations, printing errors, and typos are obvious human mistakes and are easily spotted, most of the time. However, what the biblical writers originally wrote was completely free from error or omission, as the Spirit superintended their task. God is truthful and perfectly reliable (John 14:6; 17:3), and so is His Word (John 17:17).

    The Bible claims complete (as opposed to partial) perfection in Psalm 12:6, Psalm 19:7, Proverbs 30:5, and many other places. It is factual throughout and, in fact, judges us (rather than vice-versa), “The word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12).

    The Bible is the sole objective source of all God has given us about Himself and His plan for humanity. As God’s infallible Word, the Bible is inerrant, authoritative, reliable, and sufficient to meet our needs.

    Recommended Resources: The Big Book of Bible Difficulties by Geisler & Howe and Logos Bible Software.
    Ufomaee, I’m hoping that you just don’t understand what the meaning of ‘infallibility’. It does not mean perfect from every possible transcription error. The original autographs were perfect, because men wrote as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. God not only authored the Bible using human means, he guided the assembling of the canon of scripture, not the Catholic church. The Holy Spirit leads us into all truth WITH the Bible, not apart from it in some extra-biblical way like voices in our heads and private revelations.


    • Hi Dan,

      Thanks for your comment. My belief is uncommon and naturally I expect opposition. All you have said concerning God’s Word is true. However, that doesn’t mean that the process of the Bible coming together was also infallible. In any case, I find the Bible to be a reliable, dynamic and inspired collection of writings about God and Jesus, profitable to teaching and building faith. Without the Bible, I wouldn’t know that Jesus lived or that He is the Word of God.

      Have a great day, Ufuoma.


      • Perhaps you should say that ‘you think’ some things rather than just assert things as if they are true because you think them. You sound like you don’t even consider the Bible to BE God’s word because there might be errors in translation or it’s passing down. I tried to suggest that infallibility does not mean it is as perfect as the original autographs. You sound as if you don’t believe the original autographs are the word of God. At least that is what I hear in your end of the discussion. You also say that what I have said about the Bible is true. Maybe you believe that the Bible IS the word of God, but it is not without error in translation, thus ‘infallible’ in your opinion (but not what infallible means).

        Having said that, attacks against the inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible are not new. There are many who today who hold that the Bible has good stuff in it, but we need and can have MORE than it contains for a full and complete life in Christ, prepared for EVERY good work. They mean that we should be expecting new private revelation, or that we need to learn God’s voice whispering in our ears as we empty our heads of other clutter like Eastern mystics.

        This a seriously important issue – having the correct opinion of God’s written word, and correct view of its infallibility and inerrancy. So I will stand by my opinion (and the opinion of orthodox Christianity for 2,000 years) that it is more likely ‘heresy’ is saying that “the Bible is the infallible word of God is heresy”.

        Have a good day!

        Liked by 1 person

  2. It’s heresy to claim the Bible is infallible? I don’t think you understand what infallibility and inerrancy mean. Did you even glance at the article links I sent you? I suspect not.


    • Yes, I read the articles you sent. There was no basis for the claims concerning the 66 books that make up the Bible. I thought there was much “jumping the gun” and misunderstanding of scripture. The reasoning behind the doctrine is simply “it must be so, therefore it is so”.

      I am working on a post, which I hope will shed more light to those are curious. Please forgive me if I become unresponsive. I don’t want to argue, just speak what I know to be true.

      Have a blessed day!


      • No basis for the claims? If the Bible is not the infallible word of God why really study it, believe it, preach it (exegete it) teach it. Why hold Christianity above other religions? Why attend church? If no man need teach us means what you seem to say it means (out of context), that we don’t need it but it’s just useful, why not sit at home and listen to the voices in our heads? I’m asking all these questions because I would really like you to answer them (the why’s).

        BTW, I spent some years believing that personal revelations were as authoritative as the Bible. The Bible and the Holy Spirit, who guides us into it’s truth convinced me otherwise.


  3. During my aftern 20 mile workout I’ve been re-reading your post again. At some previous point you told me to tell you if you had erred in something. I chose just one for themoment. In your ‘interesting’ interpretation of 1 John 2:27 you stated that the reason Jesus sent out the Apostle preaching was so that the hearers would believe, receive the Holy Spirit and would need no man teach them. I can’t find that in the great commission. Or anywhere else in the Bible. Can you fill me in? Please show me from scripture where in scripture we are told that we don’t need ‘the apostles doctrine’ which is teaching from men.


  4. Permit me to offer an alternative interpretation to yours:

    John 2:27 John is not denying the importance of gifted teachers in the church (1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11) but indicates that neither those teachers nor those believers are dependent on human wisdom or the opinions of men for the truth. God’s Holy Spirit guards and guides the true believer into the truth (see 1 John 2:20–21). If God is true (cf. 2 Chron. 15:3; Jer. 10:10; John 17:3; 1 Thess. 1:9) and Christ is the truth (cf. John 14:6), so is the Holy Spirit (cf. 1 John 5:6; John 15:26; 16:13). abide in him. In response to such deceivers (the context in which the passage is found), the task of the genuine believer is to “walk in truth,” i.e., persevere in faithfulness and sound doctrine (see 1 John 2:20–21; 2 John 4; 3 John 4).

    Liked by 1 person

    • That actually is not an alternative interpretation to mine. I wasn’t writing an epistle, so sorry for the short language in my post. I figured if anyone wanted clarification, they would check the scripture for themselves, which you have done, and know the context.


  5. Here is yours: “The Gospel Truth is the message that Jesus preached, that His disciples were sent forth to preach, ‘so that all who believe may be filled with the Spirit of God – and would need no man to teach them”(I John 2:27).

    It really sounds like it. At a minimum, you took it out of context and it doesn’t mean what you think it means.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: