Discourse 125 – Fishing for donations with falsified biblical quotations.

The Christian responsibility. / Detlev Löhde, Parish Deacon, Hannover‒Laatzen 00, 2010-12-28

The inspiration of the Biblel.

(Texts in a black frame are quotations from visitors to this site or from other authors.)

(The Christian responsibility / Detlef Löhde, Parish Deacon of the Selbständig Evangelisch‒Lutherische Kirche [Independent Evangelical Lutheran Church] in Hannover‒Laatzen. 00, 2015-09-07)

In view of the great numbers of refugees, a look at the parable of the Good Samaritan will help remind us of our Christian responsibilities.

How should we behave, as Christians, in relation to the refugees issue? In personal encounters, we must come across to refugees as friendly and eager to help. We mustn’t try to limit love of our neighbor just to those who belong to our own people. Jesus gives us an impressive lesson to this effect in the story of the Good Samaritan. This means that in relating to foreigners and refugees, the individual Christian and the church should always act in accordance with the commandment of love, and no one should be turned away. Material spiritual help with the Gospel is indicated. Any act of violent aggression against refugees is profoundly unchristian.

Source: Biblisch Glauben, Denken, Leben [Believing, Thinking, Living in the Light of the Bible]

This parable of the Good Samaritan is repeatedly cited (above all in our day, in connection with the refugee crisis) and interpreted – erroneously. Correctly believing Christians, in particular, quite reasonably feel challenged by this kind of faulty interpretation, and have doubts about its correctness. If these doubts are not cleared up, there is a real danger that these brethren might begin to have doubts not just about the interpretation of this parable, but even about their faith as such.

So we would like here to demonstrate that this brand of incorrect interpretation is an old trick of the Catholic church, with a view to saddling church congregations with the financial costs of missionizing through aid given to "the poor of this world". Those of the poor worldwide (in Asia, Africa or South America), who then joined the Catholic church out of gratitude, themselves in the past then became a source of church taxes and other "contributions" (like the sale of indulgences, once the means for financing the building of St. Peter’s in Rome); and the money extracted from them enabled the church to amass financial sums amounting to something like 200 billion euros today. As a result the Pope has become the richest man in the world.

So let us just start with biblical love of our neighbor, which is also addressed in the comments above, and which the Catholic church has been drumming into people for centuries – in direct contradiction of the Lord’s actual statements.

Love of our neighbor.

The one who showed mercy on him, this is his neighbor, whom he should love as himself.

Lk 10,25 And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" 10,26 He said to him, "What is written in the law? How do you read?" 10,27 And he answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself." 10,28 And he said to him, "You have answered right; do this, and you will live."

10,29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?" 10,30 Jesus replied, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead.

10,31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 10,32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 10,33 But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was; and when he saw him, he had compassion, 10,34 and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 10,35 And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’

10,36 Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?" 10,37 He said, "The one who showed mercy on him." And Jesus said to him, "Go and do likewise." Lk 10,25-37;

Like the incorrect interpretation of the "least of my brothers" in Mat 25,40, the complete reversal of the biblical concept of "love of our neighbor" by churches, preachers and aid organizations is one of the biggest deceptions, practiced with a view to stimulating compassion in credulous contemporaries and accumulating funds from donations with minimum effort.

Based on the words of our Lord Jesus Christ in the parable of the Good Samaritan, the commandment to love ones neighbor does not amount to loving and supporting persons in need (as the hypocritical Catholic church keeps trying to persuade us), but means – on the contrary – showing love toward those people who have helped us.

In this biblical passage the Lord is asked by a listener who this "neighbor" is whom we are enjoined to love. And the Lord tells him this parable, in which a man is attacked and robbed and left lying injured on the road. Two Jewish clerics went past without paying him any attention, and only a man from Samaria, who was the third to come along, gave him help.

And from this parable the Lord now derives (in Luke 10,36-37) the answer to the question who is a persons neighbor:

"Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers’ hands?" And he said, "The one who showed mercy toward him." Then Jesus said to him, "Go and do the same."

The Samaritan, then, is the "neighbor" of the injured man. And so, too, this injured man must love the Samaritan – his neighbor (Mat 22,39) – because the latter has helped and looked after him. Consequently the commandment that we should love our neighbors means – Love those people who have helped you, and show them your love, in just the same way as they have shown their love to you in their helping you.

Love of our neighbor, then, is not a category of compassion but rather one of gratitude.

So that is what this parable of the Lord Jesus tells us. And it also says – if some one comes to you personally or you meet them personally and they ask you personally for your help or you see that they are personally in need of help, then, as a correctly believing Christian, you should personally help them. And they should then love you (based on Mt 22,39) personally out of gratitude, in the same way as they love themselves.

Anyone who doesn’t take this to heart is supporting the godless, idol worshipers, criminals and terrorists!
(2Cor 6:14)

Now this is something quite different from those charity campaigns for refugees whom we never get to know, and who do not have any idea who has helped them. And in this context most of the money is not spent on the refugees themselves, but goes to the salaries, logistical operations and other expenses of these "aid organizations".

In the past the Catholic church set itself up as a big helper of humanity, using third party funds (donations) for the purpose, and people accepted the idolatrous Catholic faith (cf."Mary" and the cult of the dead "saints") out of gratitude.

In future the Moslem refugees – and their numerous progeny! – will be more likely to do the opposite. Rather in the same way as the Catholic church in South America forced the indios to accept the Catholic faith on pain of death, having become the democratically legitimated majority in parliaments Moslems may well compel Catholics by law to convert to Islam.

But this trend is already making itself evident at the present day, when godless "do‒gooders" and politically correct persons try to force Christians by law to remove the symbol of Christianity – the cross – from their public environment.

So that is the real, correct commandment of biblical love of our neighbor, and not "donations to the poor of the whole world". But this falsification by the Catholic church continues to be put about by all kinds of NGOs and other "aid organizations" – to begin with, because these people have no idea of the Bible, and then too because it has never before been so easy to rake in massive funds with the help of just a few "admonitory words".

And as we see from the contribution by Parish Deacon Detlef Löhde, quoted earlier, these "admonitory words" are repeatedly pronounced, not only by the clergy of the Catholic church. But of course they are applied always to other people. The Catholic church certainly takes care to see that its Catholic faithful pay their church taxes on time, but doesn’t easily see itself as being obliged to donate.

And that is the case even though the Vatican has total financial assets amounting to 270 billion euros(!) – cf. Der geheime Milliardenschatz des katholischen Klerus’ [The secret billions of the clergy]). We could justifiably ask this parish deacon and all his professional colleagues all over Europe, who raise a monitory finger and urge that the general public lend assistance to refugees, why the Catholic church does not itself donate in ecumenical unison just one of its 270 billion euros for the refugees’ benefit?

The inspiration of the Bible.

Incidentally, this contribution by the parish deacon comes from the website "Bibelbund e.V." [Biblical Union, Regd. Assn.], which publishes the following confession of faith of its members:

"They believe in the complete reliability and objective correctness of all the statements of the Bible – in historical and scientific respects, as well as in their having unrestricted validity in their salvation history implications."

Yes, one would certainly suppose that these people have read the Bible thoroughly and are acquainted with the right meaning of love of one’s neighbor. But unfortunately this assumption would be incorrect – as is shown by another statement on this website. Here we find apostle Paul’s second letter to Timothy quoted:

"[The whole of Scripture is given by the Spirit of God and filled with Him. It thus offers us the following benefits: it teaches us to recognize the truth, it takes us away from sin, puts us on the right path and educates us for a life pleasing to God. With Scripture, the person who belongs to God and serves Him is adequate to all his or her tasks and equipped for every good work. 2Tim 3,16-17 (NEU)"

The NEÜ is the "Neue evangelistische Übersetzung" ["New Evangelistic Translation" of the Bible. – I have translated the passage fairly closely above.] This version contains the same mistaken translation as some older versions do. We are concerned here exclusively with the first sentence: "Die ganze Schrift ist von Gottes Geist gegeben und von ihm erfüllt." – "The whole of Scripture is given by the Spirit of God and filled with Him." For a better understanding of the background to this, here is the passage once again in the Luther translation of the Bible:

For all Scripture, being inspired by God, is beneficial for teaching.

2Tim 3,16 For all Scripture, being inspired by God, is beneficial for teaching, for admonition, for improvement, for education in righteousness, 3,17 so that the man of God may be perfect and equipped for every good work. 2Tim 3,16-17; (Luther 2017).

This is not so very different from the New American Standard Bible translation:

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness.

Tim 3,16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 3,17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. 2Tim 3,16-17; (NAS)

Quite apart from the completely superfluous interpolations in the "New Evangelical Translation" (e.g. "It thus offers us the following benefits", rather than simply describing Scripture as "beneficial" or "profitable", as the original Greek text does), we also note right away a difference in the very first words: the NEÜ writes "die ganze Schrift", "the whole of Scripture", whereas Luther (echoed by the NASB) has "alle Schrift", "all Scripture". Of course this is just a difference of one word, but unfortunately it gives rise to "confessions of faith" like these, which designate the Bible in its totality as "infallible".

If we now take a look at the Greek original, we find the following text:

pasa grafh deopneustoz kai vyelimoz proz didaskalian – (Greek Original text of the New Testament  – Nestle-Aland)

Every scripture inspired by God’s spirit is also useful for teaching.

Tim 3,16 Every scripture graphe) inspired by God’s spirit (theopneustos) is also useful (ophelimos) for teaching, for conviction, for correction, for training in righteousness, 3,17 that the man of God may be fully trained, equipped for every good work. 2Tim 3,16-17;

The incorrect translation ("the whole of Scripture" rather than "every Scripture/every writing") is followed – as was inevitably to be expected – by an incorrect interpretation. The passage is interpreted in such a way that Paul is understood to be speaking here about the entire Bible, and so these people proclaim that the whole Bible – word for word – is inspired by the Holy Spirit. But the attentive reader will have noticed already that nothing has been said here about the "Bible" at all. Paul is speaking here of a scripture/a writing (Greek graphe). As the Nestle – Aland correctly renders the Greek text, "Jede von Gottes Geist eingegebene Schrift" – every scripture inspired by God’s Spirit", or indeed, "every writing" inspired by God’s spirit is also useful for teaching (…)"

So we are not concerned here with the Bible exclusively, and certainly not with every word written in the Bible, but with every written work the author of which has been inspired by the Spirit of God to write down his ideas. The Greek word Paul uses here, "graphe", simply means "writing" or treatise" – and so is by no means to be referred exclusively to the statements of the Bible.

So we must assume first of all that not every word in the Bible is actually the word of God – e.g. the introductory and concluding passages in the New Testament letters – and, on the other hand, that there can be written works outside the Bible which have been inspired or suggested to the author by the Spirit of God. And here we also recognize one of the reasons why people – notwithstanding plain proofs to the contrary – have willfully insisted on an interpretation of this Pauline text as referring to "the whole Bible".

With this incorrect interpretation, those who advocate it are "let off the hook" in their biblical expositions: they no longer have to check, research, study, let alone think, because they can just assert quite simply that every word in the Bible is inspired by the Spirit of God. And anyone who ventures to doubt it will be slapped down with an appeal to the above biblical text, 2Tim 3,16, together with the argument which a commentator at Immanuel.at mentioned to me in an e‒mail:

"I have held discussions in the past with many ‘Christians’ about the infallibility of the Bible, only to be confronted always with the same cliché‒ridden arguments – for example the famous circular logic that states, ‘The Bible is the Word of God, because it says that it is the Word of God. And of course as it is the Word of God, it cannot possibly be wrong.’"

The Bible, and other written works as well, may contain the word of God, but they are not necessarily inspired in their entirety by the Holy Spirit. This is just something concocted by easygoing theologians, biblical interpreters and preachers as a way of silencing their critics without any need to argue at length. In this way they save themselves the lengthy business of thinking, studying and researching in the Bible. Nowadays, unfortunately, anyone at all – whatever their existing or non‒existing qualifications – feels obliged to interpret the Bible in their addresses and sermons, without any kind of in‒depth knowledge of it. And anyone who does not test the spirit that is behind such utterances is here again at risk of falling a prey to unscrupulous fraudsters.

(See also discourse 99: "Christmastime: who is "one of the least of these my brothers" in Mt 25,40?")

(See also discourse 1013: "Report from the camp of the "Israel movement".")

Last of all, the question how we can be expected to know what in the Bible is the word of God, and what is not, is relatively easy to answer. Every correctly believing Christian who is sincerely interested in the Bible, does not shirk the effort and is willing to pursue open questions with seriousness and zeal, can count on finding the support of the Holy Spirit (Luke 11:13), in the same way as testified by Paul in 2Tim 3,16 with reference to the authors of these writings, and will be shown, by references to other biblical passages on the same theme, how these statements are to be understood, and whether or not they are thematically relevant. Based on the old principle that "Scripture is its own interpretation", with this approach you will find scriptural proofs which either demonstrate the correctness of an interpretation or else indicate that it is irrelevant.

As examples of biblical content that is not the word of God we can point to passages in the letters that are concerned with greetings, communications, admonitions, praise, blame and other interhuman items of information (e.g. Rom 15:1-33; 1Cor 16:19-24; 2Cor 13:11-13; Phil 4:21-23; Col 4:7-18; 1The 5:23-28; 2Tim 4:9-22; etc. etc.). To involve the Holy Spirit here would show a completely wrong understanding of Him.