The Sword of the Spirit part 1 - The Written Bible or Spoken Word of God?

Now, I'll be the first to admit that on one level, equating the sword of the spirit with the Bible does sound correct. It's straightforward, simple to teach, easy to digest, and best of all, anyone can use it. No critical thinking, spiritual maturity, discernment, or training required. Simply take your stand on some Bible verse or promise, and presto, instant spiritual warrior, faster than an angel in flight, more powerful than any principality or ruler of the darkness of this present age, and able to move mountains with a single word, or so many Bible teachers would have us believe. And virtually no one dares to question it. And let's get real here. One day, your spiritual well-being and destiny, or that of a family member or friend, may very well depend upon how well you can handle the real sword of the spirit. Not sitting in some cushy Bible study with a double latte, but in real hand-to-hand combat with an ancient, powerful, and invisible enemy whose stated goal is your eternal destruction. And when that day comes, you'd better have the right stuff. Welcome to Call to Glory, the cutting edge weekly podcast dedicated to helping you know Christ, the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings. If this is your first time tuning in, please be sure to like, share, comment, and subscribe. In this series, we're going to look at what the Apostle Paul described in his epistle to the Ephesians as the sword of the Spirit. If you've been a believer for any length of time, you'll know exactly what I mean. Almost everyone seems to assume that because Paul said the sword of the Spirit is the Word of God, he was referring to the Bible. And since the Bible is almost universally taught and understood to be the Word of God, according to this reasoning, it's also believed to be the sword of the Spirit. In other words, the sum total of what Paul meant in Ephesians six seventeen by taking up or wielding the sword of the Spirit is to read or quote scripture or perhaps stand on some biblical promise, and versely no one questions it. That's how it's almost universally been taught and understood for as long as I can remember. After all, how could so many well respected theologians, religious leaders, and Bible teachers be wrong? But is that really what Paul meant when he wrote about the sword of the Spirit? Well, your first reaction may very well be of course it is, and given how this is generally taught and understood in Christian and Messianic circles, that would be perfectly understandable. As we'll see, however, there are some major problems with this view. First is the fact that this popular teaching is a gross oversimplification of what the Bible itself says about the Word of God. It is at best a half truth. Second, it's not what Paul actually said and meant, and most importantly, it is nowhere near the full council of God. Let me explain. Now if Paul did in fact mean the Bible is the sword of the Spirit, well that begs the question, which version of the Bible was he referring to? Have you ever considered this? Now of course, when Ephesians was written, there wasn't a New Testament, no King James, NIV, ESV, or anything of the sort. The only Bible at that time was the Old Testament, and either the original Hebrew or its Greek translation known as the Septuagint. Those were the only versions of the Bible Paul knew and used, and of course, they were the same versions of the Bible used by John the Baptist, the other apostles, the New Testament writers, and Christ himself. And while it is certainly true that the Apostle Peter considered Paul's epistles to be inspired scripture, the complete canon of the Bible as we now know it wasn't formalized until at least the fourth century AD. And that's not even taking into account the differences between the Protestant version, the larger Roman Catholic and Orthodox versions, and other variations thereof. And it gets even more complicated when you consider that there are now literally hundreds, if not thousands, of versions of the Bible. Not to mention the fact that they're nowhere near equal in quality, accuracy, readability, and most importantly, faithfulness to the original biblical texts. Not by a long shot. So again, if Paul did in fact mean the Bible is the sword of the Spirit, don't you think he would have specified which version he meant? Well certainly he wouldn't have just left us guessing, would he? Well the fact is he didn't, and for very good reason. Maybe, just maybe, he meant something else. And if by chance that is the case, wouldn't you want to know exactly what he was talking about? And let's get real here. One day your spiritual well being and destiny, or that of a family member or friend, may very well depend upon how well you can handle the real sword of the spirit. Not sitting in some cushy Bible study with a double latte, but in real hand to hand combat with an ancient, powerful, and invisible enemy whose stated goal is your eternal destruction. And when that day comes, you'd better have the right stuff. Unfortunately, many sincere believers think they do, but the fact is they just don't. Why? Well, simply stated, the full counsel of God has been withheld from them, and the responsibility for this lies squarely at the feet of those who have been entrusted by the Lord to feed and care for the flock he purchased with his own blood. Let me explain. Rather than treating this vitally important matter with the skill, diligence, and precision it requires, many Bible teachers dodge the issue by simply referring to the Bible as a sword of the Spirit, and in most cases that's about as deep as it ever gets. No meaningful distinction, if any, is made between what was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and what is spoken or communicated by the living voice of God. And that's not all. In doing so, they not only confuse God's people, but they also compound the error by implicitly affirming any and all versions of the Bible equally as the inspired word of God. Now that cannot be what Paul intended, and as we'll see, it most certainly is not. Now hold on to your seats, because as we'll also see, the Greek language Paul used in Ephesians 6.17 clearly shows that he was not referring to the Bible, at least not directly, when he described the sword of the Spirit as the Word of God. Let me say it again. According to the original Greek text of Ephesians 6.17, Paul did not mean the Bible when he described the sword of the Spirit as the Word of God. Now at this point, you may still be thinking something like, Well, of course he was talking about the Bible. What else could he have possibly meant? Well, thankfully, God has not left us without clear guidance on this, and that's exactly what we're going to be looking at in this series. So let's start with the armor of God. Now it is, of course, true that Paul used metaphors in Ephesians 6 to describe the various elements of the armor of God, specifically the belt of truth, the breastplate of righteousness, the preparation of the gospel of peace, the shield of faith, the helmet of salvation, and of course, the sword of the Spirit. Many of us have heard these terms so often we hardly give it a second thought. Think about it. When's the last time you sat down and seriously considered what any of them actually represent? Now, granted, the shield of faith is pretty straightforward. That is, as long as we're talking about genuine, living biblical faith. That's another subject for another time. But when was the last time you sat down and really considered what the belt of truth actually is and how to put it on, or for that matter, the helmet of salvation or the breastplate of righteousness, or what it means to have your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. The fact is, it's much easier to simply think of these metaphors as cashy religious slogans or cliches than it is to take the time and effort to learn how to walk in the power, authority, and spiritual reality they represent. And that's no less true when it comes to the sword of the Spirit. So for that reason, we're going to take a very close look at what the Bible actually says about the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God, and the Scriptures themselves. Exactly what they are as well as what they are not. The results may very well surprise you. Now, as you might expect, this topic usually comes up in the context of the armor of God Paul described in chapter six of his epistle to the Ephesians. Let's look at this most remarkable and important passage. Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power of his might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore, take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand, therefore, having girded your waist with truth, having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace. Above all, taking the shield of faith with which you will be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked one, and take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God, praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, being watchful to the sand with all perseverance and supplication for all the saints. Again, the specific question we're addressing is whether Paul was in fact referring to the Bible when he exhorted the saints in verse 17 to take the sword of the spirit. Let's look closer at this verse. And take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the spirit, which is the word of God. Now I've seen more than a few sermons and teachings over the years where the speaker triumphantly held up or waved a Bible while referring to it as his or her sword of the Spirit, and there's a really good chance you have too. I've also seen this done in prayer meetings and Bible studies, and I'll admit, I've even done it myself, and if we're being honest, there's a good chance you have too. Every single time, the clear and unmistakable takeaway is that quoting scripture or standing on some Bible passage or promise, regardless of the level of one's spiritual maturity, sanctification, or relationship with the Lord, is the sum total of what Paul meant when he instructed the saints to take the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God. Now the reasoning behind this is pretty simple and goes something like this. Since one, the Bible, no matter which version, who's using it, how it's being used, or for what purpose, is presumed to be the word of God, and two, since Paul said the sword of the Spirit is the Word of God, well then of course he had to be referring to the scriptures when he exhorted the saints to take the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God. In other words, Paul was simply using the sword of the Spirit as a metaphor for the Bible. And that's about as deep as it ever gets. Apart from the Jehovah's Witnesses and King James only crowd, very few, at least in this context, seem to consider the fact that there are literally hundreds, if not thousands of versions of the Bible out there, all of them different. In many cases, very different from one another. Not to mention the fact they're not all equal in quality, accuracy, readability, and faithfulness to the original biblical texts, not by a country mile. Despite this, Bible teachers and commentators routinely do an end run around this theological minefield by simply referring to the Bible as the Word of God. As we stated earlier, no meaningful distinction, if any at all, is made between the inspired written word of God, the Bible itself, and the living voice of God we see all throughout that same Bible. Neither is any distinction made between the various versions of the Bible and how faithful they are, or as the case may be, are not to the original texts. And in doing so, these men and women implicitly endorse all of them equally as the inspired word of God. Now, of course, it certainly is easier to refer to all these different versions of the Bible collectively as the Word of God. After all, who wants to muddy the waters with complex, thorny issues like theological bias, accuracy, and faithfulness to the original texts or the dreaded D word doctrine. No, just play it safe. You see, it's pop theology for the masses. Never mind that God commanded us to love him, not only with all of our heart, soul, and strength, but also with all of our mind. And since modern Christian culture increasingly exalts entertainment and feelings over intellectual engagement, very few dare rock the boat. Just keep it simple, upbeat, and generically true. You not only give your audience the impression you're teaching the full counsel of God, but everyone feels they're growing spiritually, and best of all, they'll come back next week for more. How's that for a hat trick? Now I'll be the first to admit that on one level, equating the sword of the spirit with the Bible does sound correct. It's straightforward, simple to teach, easy to digest, and best of all, anyone can use it. No critical thinking, spiritual maturity, discernment, or training required. Simply take your stand on some Bible verse or promise, and presto, instant spiritual warrior, faster than an angel in flight, more powerful than any principality or ruler of the darkness of this present age, and able to move mountains with a single word, or so many Bible teachers would have us believe, and virtually no one dares to question it. Again, most everyone just seems to assume that when Paul spoke of the sword of the Spirit, he meant the Bible. Just like it's almost universally assumed that the writer of Hebrews meant the Bible when he spoke of the living and powerful word, or perhaps more accurately translated reckoning of God in Hebrews four twelve. After all, didn't Paul tell Timothy that all scripture is given by inspiration of God? Didn't he instruct him to be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth? Yes. Didn't he also write to the saints at Corinth about the simplicity that is in Christ? Yes, he did. And didn't Christ himself quote from Deuteronomy when Satan tempted him in the wilderness? Yes, he sure did. Three times, in fact. But is it really that simple? Well the answer is a resounding no, not by a country mile. You see, this is yet another example of how easily we can be deceived by false teachings, traditions, and teachers if we do not have the spiritual maturity, knowledge, discernment, and integrity to rigorously test them as God has commanded. So let's do just that. And we'll start by examining the assumptions upon which this idea has been built. Now, first up is the almost universal assumption that the Bible, no matter what version, is the sum total of what its writers meant whenever they referred to the living word of God. I've even heard Bible teachers go so far as to say that Christ, being the word capital W of God, is the scripture incarnate. Now on the surface, I'll admit this does seem to sound right, and if we're only looking at a translation of the Bible, well it can easily pass for truth, maybe even real biblical scholarship. There is, however, one problem with this line of thinking. It's simply not accurate, not by a long shot, and as such, it is very misleading, even flat out wrong. And for that very reason, it is not fit for either doctrinal instruction or genuine biblical discipleship, and most certainly not real spiritual warfare with an ancient, powerful, and invisible enemy whose goal is nothing less than your eternal destruction. Maybe a children's Sunday school class, but that's about it. And every single seminary or Bible school trained pastor and teacher knows or should know exactly what I'm talking about. You see, there's a very important caveat to this. Specifically, the fact that only the original biblical texts can legitimately claim to be the pure inspired word of God. Now, theologically, this is known as the doctrine of biblical inerrancy. It's one of the non-negotiable bedrocks of our faith, and there's a very good reason for this. Simply put, it is only what was written in the original biblical texts that came directly from God. Think about it. Those are the only words that were written under the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit. That's it. No translation and most certainly no paraphrase of the Bible can claim this pedigree. That is strictly reserved for what was written in the original texts. As the Apostle Paul wrote, all scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. So to be perfectly clear. If we mean the original biblical texts written under the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit, then yes, in that sense, the Bible is indeed and without qualification, the inspired word of God. That's exactly what Paul meant by all scripture being given by inspiration of God. No more, no less. Again, I'm not touching that, nor am I moving any ancient landmarks. Please, don't get me wrong. I am not in any way saying this only applies to the original manuscripts personally penned or in some cases dictated by the biblical authors. Not at all. For one thing, as far as we know, none of the original autographs are still in existence. What we do have, however, are thousands of ancient copies of the original texts, some dating back as early as the eleventh century BC. Some are fairly complete, while most are only fragments. Perhaps the most well known of these are the Dead Sea Scrolls, which is a collection of over nine hundred scrolls and fragments written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek dating from the third century BC to the first century AD. Among them are approximately two hundred copies, mostly fragments, of every book of the Hebrew Bible except Nehemiah and Esther. And moving forward to the New Testament, there are more than 5,700 manuscripts currently in existence. Many of these are fragments while others, such as the earliest known copies of Galatians and John's Gospel, are more complete and date back to approximately two hundred AD. Now, despite these seemingly overwhelming odds, biblical scholars have long documented the amazing accuracy and precision with which the original biblical texts have been copied, preserved, and transmitted over the centuries. Now for this, we owe a great debt to the Jewish scribes going all the way back to Ezra. And for all the bad rap they get, it is these men who have with remarkable precision and accuracy faithfully preserved the Hebrew scriptures as they were originally given by God, all the way down to the smallest john and title. Now this, of course, goes right to the heart of Israel's calling as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. As the apostle Paul wrote, what advantage then has the Jew, or what is the prophet of circumcision? Much in every way, chiefly because to them were committed the oracles of God. Now we also owe a similar debt to men like Jerome, Wycliffe, Erasmus of Rotterdam, Martin Luther, and Tyndale for their work in translating the original Hebrew and Greek texts. At the same time, however, the history of how the original manuscripts have been copied, translated, and compiled into what we now know as the Bible is incredibly complex, and we haven't even delved into why or how we now have so many different versions of the Bible. Now, this, of course, is well beyond the scope of this podcast. I'm only touching on it as a foundation for our study on the sword of the Spirit. For our purposes, suffice it to say that not all versions of the Bible are created equal. Far from it. Every single translation, paraphrase, or interpretation, every single one in some way bears the mark and imprint of imperfect men. We therefore have to proceed with great caution. So let's be clear. For a translation of the Bible to qualify as the inspired word of God, it has to be a faithful equivalent of the specific words used by the inspired authors. It must faithfully, accurately, completely, and impartially convey the sense and meaning of the original texts. It must not add to or subtract from the original words, nor can it change their meaning. And while a number of translations, such as the King James, New King James, and ESV are remarkably faithful to the original texts, none of them are without issues. Sometimes as a result of gaps and errors in the source material they used, sometimes because of differences between older and more modern languages, and other times due to theological or doctrinal bias on the part of the translators. And as a result, we cannot just uncritically or casually accept any of them in their entirety as the inspired Word of God, not even the venerable King James. Authoritative and profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness, to the extent they faithfully, accurately, completely, and impartially convey the sense and meaning of the original texts, by all means, yes. This is precisely why we should not rely on the world. Exclusively on one translation, not even the venerable King James. And this is also why we cannot just generically refer to anything that calls itself the Bible as the inspired word of God. We have to be much more accurate and precise. It's a very different matter, however, when it comes to paraphrases of the Bible. As opposed to proper translations, whether literal or what's known as a thought for thought translation, paraphrases such as the message and the passion quote unquote translation are just that paraphrases. They all take great liberties with the text in an effort to sound more modern, conversational, accessible, and even hip. Now this may sound like a good idea to some, but in doing so they all, in one way or another, rewrite the Bible. There's just no way around it. A paraphrase is exactly that. Something will always be lost in the translation. Words, ideas, concepts, thoughts, emphases, and nuances expressed in the original are going to be left out, obscured, glossed over, rephrased, or even outright changed to fit the author's concept of what the biblical writer meant or even how they think the text should read. That is by definition the nate the nature of a paraphrase. It's not only highly subjective, it is light years from the kind of accuracy and precision that's required when it comes to reading, teaching, and understanding the inspired word of God. As it is written, man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. Not to mention the apostle Peter's warning that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation. For prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. Think about it. Would you trust a medical doctor, architect, engineer, or airline pilot whose only knowledge and training came from paraphrases of highly detailed technical and scientific textbooks? Of course not. No one in their right mind would. Well why then would anyone think that we can entrust our eternal well being and destiny to paraphrases or other alterations of the words of eternal life given to us by God Himself, especially when He has expressly told us that man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that He has spoken? Don't you think we should make every effort to get that right? Despite this, some paraphrases of the Bible even go beyond rewriting the scriptures to actually reimagining them. Would you call this the inspired word of God, or for that matter, the sword of the Spirit? Now that's bad enough. We also see this when Bible translators take unwarranted liberties with the text to promote a certain theological agenda or otherwise attempt to make the language more palatable to modern readers. One example of this is what some modern translations have done to the text of John 316. Let's look at a few versions. The New King James renders this well-known passage faithfully and accurately. For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God so loved the world that he gave his only son that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life. Now let's look at the NIV. For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish, but have eternal life. And finally, the complete Jewish Bible. For God so loved the world that he gave his only and unique son, so that everyone who trusts in him may have eternal life, instead of being utterly destroyed. So which is it? Is Christ the only begotten Son of God? His only son, his one and only son, or his only and unique son? Now theologically, this is known as Christology, the doctrine of the person, nature, and work of Christ. It is the study of who Christ actually is and is not. And on that note, let me digress for a moment. This question of who Christ is and is not isn't just for theologians and Bible scholars. It is the question upon which everything else hangs. It's the exact same question he asked the apostles, and it is the same question he asks you and me. Who do you say that I am? The right answer is Christ is the only begotten Son of God. Change that, and you've opened the door to another Christ, another gospel, and another spirit. While that's not the focus of our study here, Lord willing, it will be the topic of an up and coming episode, or possibly even a series. Stay tuned, and please be sure to leave a comment below if that will be of interest. Now to complicate things even further, some versions of the Bible actually proclaim another Jesus and another gospel. And as incredible as that may sound, it's nothing new and it is not being done in a corner. One well known example of this is the New World Translation, which is the official Bible of the Jehovah's Witnesses. And despite what they would have you believe, the Jehovah's Witnesses are a cult, and like the Mormons, they follow another Jesus and preach another gospel. And while much of the New World Translation actually is faithful to the original texts, enough has been altered so that it effectively points to a very different Jesus and a very different kingdom. And I ask again, would you call this the inspired word of God? Or for that matter, the sword of the Spirit? By now, I hope you're getting a better sense of why we have to use great wisdom and discernment when it comes to the many different versions of the Bible. This is in fact not optional, as we are commanded to test all things and hold fast to what is good. Now this of course applies to any spoken or written teaching, prophetic word, utterance or revelation, whether delivered privately or publicly in a church gathering, conference, or websites such as the Elijah List, or for that matter, in a podcast like this. It also applies to translations and paraphrases of the Bible, and this is also why we cannot just take the easy way and simply accord all versions of the Bible equal status with the original texts as the inspired Word of God. There's just no way around it. Altered, rewritten, and most certainly reimagined versions of the Bible are not, and never will be the inspired word of God. Use them at your own eternal peril. It's just that simple. But we can't stop there. And let's talk about how God speaks to us. Not in the general sense that he's communicating things like faith, love, righteousness, holiness, sanctification, salvation, mercy, grace, and truth in the scriptures, but rather how he speaks to us individually, one on one. Just like he did to men and women all throughout the Bible, and still does today, uniquely personal, private, and unmistakably the voice of God, very rarely in an audible voice, but much more often in what we refer to as the still small voice. If you truly know God, you know exactly what I mean. Do you know him like that? Now hopefully, you're starting to get the sense that there's much more to the sword of the Spirit than you've been led to believe, and I assure you there most certainly is. I believe this will become more evident when we look at the original Greek text of Ephesians six seventeen and other similar New Testament passages. And by the time we get to the original Hebrew translated as the Word of God or the Word of the Lord in the Old Testament, I believe you'll be quite blown away, not just at the shallowness of the modern understanding of the sword of the Spirit, but also at the richness, power, and importance of what Paul and the other biblical writers actually said about Amen. We'll pick up right here in our next episode, as it is written, the entirety of your word is truth, and every one of your righteous judgments endures forever. If this is your first time tuning in, please be sure to like, share, comment, subscribe, and ring the bell so you can be notified whenever we post new episodes. If you like what you've heard today, please also leave a review wherever you're listening to this podcast. Tell us what you loved about this episode, how it may have helped or encouraged you, or you can simply leave a comment about any other topics you'd love to hear us cover in the future. Finally, remember to always keep your lamps trimmed, lit, and full of oil. Shalom, see you next time.