What do you think?
Rate this book
God op Zijn Woord vertrouwen
KUNNEN WE DE BIJBEL VOLLEDIG VERTROUWEN?
Hebben we aan de Bijbel genoeg en is die duidelijk voor ons complexe leven? Kunnen we echt weten wat de Bijbel ons leert?
Met zijn karakteristieke humor en helderheid schreef Kevin DeYoung een toegankelijke inleiding tot de Bijbel, waarin hij antwoord geeft op belangrijke vragen die zowel christenen als niet-christenen stellen.
Dit boek helpt je om te begrijpen wat de Bijbel over zichzelf zegt en moedigt je aan om die te lezen en te geloven, in het vertrouwen dat het werkelijk om Gods Woord gaat.
'Uw woord is een lamp voor mijn voet en een licht op mijn pad'
(Psalm 119:105).
Hebben we aan de Bijbel genoeg en is die duidelijk voor ons complexe leven? Kunnen we echt weten wat de Bijbel ons leert?
Met zijn karakteristieke humor en helderheid schreef Kevin DeYoung een toegankelijke inleiding tot de Bijbel, waarin hij antwoord geeft op belangrijke vragen die zowel christenen als niet-christenen stellen.
Dit boek helpt je om te begrijpen wat de Bijbel over zichzelf zegt en moedigt je aan om die te lezen en te geloven, in het vertrouwen dat het werkelijk om Gods Woord gaat.
'Uw woord is een lamp voor mijn voet en een licht op mijn pad'
(Psalm 119:105).
Hardcover
First published April 7, 2014
374 people are currently reading
4171 people want to read
About the author
Kevin DeYoung
114 books1,254 followersKevin DeYoung is the Senior Pastor at University Reformed Church (RCA) in East Lansing, Michigan, right across the street from Michigan State University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 528 reviews
August 11, 2016
Great stuff, no complaints. I always profit from DeYoung. He succeeded in showing, from the Bible, that the Bible is Knowable, Necessary, and Enough.
He gets three stars only because I'm grading him against his own high standards. He's an expert popularizer, gifted to humbly and memorably teach the church from the Bible using good current scholarship. He makes me think of a children’s author I heard recently talking to the New York Times, who said that his great challenge was to be like Rocky and Bullwinkle: entertaining a fun for the kids but offering enough tidbits of interest for the parents that they are kept engaged and entertained as well. DeYoung is great at that. The Hole in Our Holiness was, in one sense, a fairly simple book expositing fairly basic passages on sanctification. The “kids” could get great profit. But he managed to zero in on a topic that a lot of advanced, mature Christians really needed to process theologically—the necessity of personal effort toward holiness despite the specter of legalism.
I just felt like this new book was a little too demanding for the “kids” and was on a topic that the “adults,” as it were, don’t really need to hear about. Mature Christians already know these things about their Bibles. Right? I sure hope so. And if I’m right, then I’m not sure who the audience for this book is, and I'm not sure DeYoung knows, either. His popularizing gifts didn't "sing" for me with the topic of bibliology, perhaps because he wasn't targeting a distinct need among Crossway's normal readership, the kind of need that brings out shining insights.
Instead I got a fairly standard conservative evangelical (I won't say "Reformed," except the annotated bibliography leans that way) treatment of bibliology which is not quite down to the popular level. Who in this book's likely audience, for example, is really tempted to a Barthian neo-orthodox bibliology? This book just seems like a slightly popularized and homileticized set of bibliology notes from a systematic theology class somewhere (maybe not Gordon-Conwell).
I did get some good points from the book. I liked this line: “All truth may be God’s truth, but all saving truth is revealed truth” (no page; audio version). And I’d never heard anyone else ask of the blind men and the elephant story, “What if the elephant talks?” Brilliant. And I immediately put to good use in a Sunday School lesson on the Bible’s clarity DeYoung’s insight that God expected his word to be clear enough [ed.: even to unregenerated people in the old covenant] that he held them responsible (see the prophets) for breaking it.
So do not read this review as a complaint. I'm glad I read (listened to, actually) this book. It was edifying. I’m not sure who needs it, but maybe you know someone. Give it to them with confidence in its doctrinal soundness and clarity.
Thanks to Christian Audio and Crossway for audio and Kindle review copies of this book, respectively.
He gets three stars only because I'm grading him against his own high standards. He's an expert popularizer, gifted to humbly and memorably teach the church from the Bible using good current scholarship. He makes me think of a children’s author I heard recently talking to the New York Times, who said that his great challenge was to be like Rocky and Bullwinkle: entertaining a fun for the kids but offering enough tidbits of interest for the parents that they are kept engaged and entertained as well. DeYoung is great at that. The Hole in Our Holiness was, in one sense, a fairly simple book expositing fairly basic passages on sanctification. The “kids” could get great profit. But he managed to zero in on a topic that a lot of advanced, mature Christians really needed to process theologically—the necessity of personal effort toward holiness despite the specter of legalism.
I just felt like this new book was a little too demanding for the “kids” and was on a topic that the “adults,” as it were, don’t really need to hear about. Mature Christians already know these things about their Bibles. Right? I sure hope so. And if I’m right, then I’m not sure who the audience for this book is, and I'm not sure DeYoung knows, either. His popularizing gifts didn't "sing" for me with the topic of bibliology, perhaps because he wasn't targeting a distinct need among Crossway's normal readership, the kind of need that brings out shining insights.
Instead I got a fairly standard conservative evangelical (I won't say "Reformed," except the annotated bibliography leans that way) treatment of bibliology which is not quite down to the popular level. Who in this book's likely audience, for example, is really tempted to a Barthian neo-orthodox bibliology? This book just seems like a slightly popularized and homileticized set of bibliology notes from a systematic theology class somewhere (maybe not Gordon-Conwell).
I did get some good points from the book. I liked this line: “All truth may be God’s truth, but all saving truth is revealed truth” (no page; audio version). And I’d never heard anyone else ask of the blind men and the elephant story, “What if the elephant talks?” Brilliant. And I immediately put to good use in a Sunday School lesson on the Bible’s clarity DeYoung’s insight that God expected his word to be clear enough [ed.: even to unregenerated people in the old covenant] that he held them responsible (see the prophets) for breaking it.
So do not read this review as a complaint. I'm glad I read (listened to, actually) this book. It was edifying. I’m not sure who needs it, but maybe you know someone. Give it to them with confidence in its doctrinal soundness and clarity.
Thanks to Christian Audio and Crossway for audio and Kindle review copies of this book, respectively.
August 17, 2023
Typical DeYoung. Bold, biblical, balanced - a real encouragement, especially in light of recent liberal attacks coming from emergent and postmodern corners of the church.
May 20, 2016
Clear and helpful, written for non-theologians to be able to understand. I feel like I have a stronger faith in the Bible now, and exactly what it says, translation aside. If you want to strengthen your faith in the Bible and why we put our whole trust in it, read this book!
December 31, 2022
Here’s my unedited draft of note-taking overkill:
Chapter 1
Deyoung starts with Psalm 119 and argues that it is a long and passionate poem about the Word of God. He then lays out his purpose, which is to get us feeling like the psalmist. He wants to do this by convincing us that the Bible *”makes no mistakes, can be understood, and cannot be overturned”*.
He then goes on to quote a part of Psalm 119 which says “the Word of God is true.” He immediately proceeds to calling out all other information sources as untrustworthy, because they can be faked and manipulated. Ironically, this ignores the fact that an ancient collection of books could include fake reports and misinformation (possibly even verifiably so in some places - I’m not saying the Bible *is* full of fake reports, just that it is also an information source in the category he’s mentioning) It’s interesting that he says our eyes can deceive us… because those are what I’m using to read the pages of scripture. Our brains can deceive us, yet I’m wholly reliant on it to interpret the Bible and… literally everything else.
Early on I can see some dangerous ideas creeping into a seemingly harmless book on loving the Bible. He makes the argument that we should experience a natural *extreme disgust* when encountering those who are not passionate about the Bible (pg 20). This seems like a good way to end up with a bad attitude toward unbelievers. It makes me worry that we have subconsciously developed these attitudes from constant absorption of books like this.
Deyoung says this is not a book on principles of interpretation, but a book unpacking what the Bible says about the Bible. Yet, I have a feeling the book is going to be packed with his principles of interpretation. I will say that I understand his argument that this is not an apologetics book, but I just get the impression he is going to be attempting a lot of Bible defense based on how much he has talked about skepticism already. Yet he has already dismissed common skeptic’s issues as something to be dealt with in other books. I guess we’ll see as I go on.
Chapter 2
(Page 30) He seemingly didn’t do his research here considering he is arguing that eyewitness testimony is incredibly important today in the court of law. It’s actually the opposite, one study showed it was used in about 6% of criminal cases and another showed that even when it is used, it leads to misidentification of criminals over half the time. Psychology has found eyewitness reliability to be majorly lacking and lawyers are aware of this. All these things could have been googled, but they would no doubt have hurt his argument. Also… what happened to not being able to “trust our eyes?”
Recommendation to DeYoung and anyone reading this: watch 12 Angry Men
Unsurprisingly it is already acting like an apologetics book, just as he promised it would not in the last chapter. He spends half of this chapter refuting “liberals.” I was particularly struck by how damaging his idea of “differing views on inerrancy” was. He said, “denying inerrancy is putting ourselves in judgment over God” and ultimately to “commit the sin of unbelief.” Yet he also doesn’t define his view of inerrancy beyond saying “it means the Bible is over us not the other way around.” How does that address the seriously nuanced argument that has been going on for centuries? If I read one story in the Bible that says something took 3 days and another says 7 have I committed the sin of unbelief? DeYoung’s reach is far, and I know personally that this line of thinking has influenced a lot of people. It has led to the hurt of many people I know who began to investigate the concept.
Chapter 3: The sufficiency of scripture
I really appreciated his clarification that the sufficiency of scripture means that “the Bible tells us enough about everything that matters most” rather than “everything about everything.” Although I would probably edit that to say “everything spiritual that matters most.” I don’t think the verse he chose really was the best foundational verse for the concept either, but I’m less concerned with diving into that.
Instead, I want to mention something I was reminded of that happened just this week where my friend sent a message to a member of a fundamentalist group we. He shared a book on the history of fundamentalism in America and was refused because the “Bible is enough.” I think DeYoung did touch (although very lightly) on this kind of thinking, this misplaced sense of the sufficiency of scripture that denies scholarly or scientific input on how to look at religious history, Bible history and genre etc. The Bible doesn’t teach us how to read genres. It doesn’t even announce what genre you’re about to read. It doesn’t have footnotes about how “this is cultural” or “the ancients were less concerned with chronology just fyi.” I just feel like he could have dove into what it meant by doing a bit more examples. I think this stuff could really help people. .
Chapter 4: The Clarity of Scripture
It was a bit ironic how DeYoung used a confusing scripture and aspect of scripture to say the Bible is clear. He admits it’s ironic on page 62. However, his answer to the puzzle is not itself one of the theological givens. According to DeYoung, Moses, the Law-bearer, was not talking about law-keeping as a way of justification. But… Leviticus says “You shall keep my statutes and my ordinances; by doing so one shall live.” I’m not a scholar, but having read the OT a few times, I did not get strong vibes from Moses of “Hey Israel, you’ve been saved by faith, now just follow this law as a standard.”
Appealing to Jesus and the apostles as evidence that the scriptures are plain and clear, because they treated it such is a bit problematic. For instance, Paul acts like it’s obvious that the law about “not muzzling an ox while it’s threshing” is about giving money to religious leaders, but I think the majority of us are extremely uncertain on how to apply the rest of the OT laws. So, what percentage of it is clear? Some of it? The majority of it? Only the essentials?
All that being said, he’s giving one of the best arguments you can here. Jesus and the apostles viewed the OT as being inspired by the Holy Spirit, not just personal reflections of humans of their culture. That argument is not entirely convincing for the reasons I’ve given above and I have some more reasons below. But credit where credit is due.
The Bible treats itself as spiritual revelation, not spiritual suggestions.
At one point DeYoung bashes the analogy of the six blind men and the elephant where they all feel a different part of the whole and have different conclusion about what it is. His first objection is that the narrator must be seeing the elephant… which seems to split at hairs and miss the entire point of the analogy. I could explain why but I’m not sure that objection is as much worth the time as his second point, which is “what if the elephant told them what each part was, is it humble to ignore the elephant’s word?” There are major flaws here. For one, we have a million different voices coming at us from every which way. If you grow up in a Muslim country then the elephant is saying “I’m the elephant trust me, you’re feeling xyz.” If you grow up in a Christian country the elephant tends to be saying something totally different. Even if you talk to an atheist, the elephant might talk a lot about empiricism. All analogies break down if you extend them too far and DeYoung fell victim to this here. Ironically, I’m going to do the same. The Bible isn’t a talking elephant that tells the blind men to trust them. The Bible, fitting with the analogy, would be more like people claiming to have their eyes opened people in the analogy, since all humanity is blind in the analogy, and since the Bible was written by and passed down by people.
I was surprised by the oversimplification and false dichotomy on page 69 in which he says “is God wise and good enough or does he give us commands we can’t understand and a self-revelation that reveals more questions than answers?” He can be wise and good and also be wildly above us to the point that we have enough answers, while also being left with unending questions and mystery. Some might even say that’s what you’d expect of God. I’m reminded of the verse “His thoughts are higher than our thoughts and his ways are higher than our ways.”
I think this chapter failed to discuss the nuance of the idea of the clarity of scripture. I have so many issues with it I’m not sure which to choose from, but I’ll just say it was extremely lacking in discussing *which* things are clear and which things aren’t. I think that would be the place to dig right? He mentioned the part of the Westminster Confession that says the things essential to salvation are what are clear, but then he goes on to seemingly ignore that and make sweeping statements about all of scripture rather than sticking to explaining what the “essential clear truths” are.
To be fair, I question the WC statement on this to begin with. If the essentials are abundantly clear then I’d ask, what saves us, faith alone or faith and baptism? There are verses in the New Testament that literally say that baptism saves you. There are verses that connect it directly to the forgiveness of sins. There are ones that say that it is a pledge of a good conscience toward God. While I myself think that those who claim that you must be baptized to be saved are wrong, they would say they are taking the *plain* reading of scripture on the matter of salvation.
Chapter 5: God’s Word is Final
The comparison of the Jews who were jealous of Paul to people who “dismiss the word because they knew a mean Christian once” doesn’t seem to be an apt comparison, and also seems to show a trivializing of a massive amount of individuals hurt by church hypocrisy.
It’s a welcome surprise that he has acknowledged that some people reject the Bible because of genuine intellectual concerns. This would seem to go against various past statements in the book, but I appreciate that he can say that. Many of his peers would not agree with him. I would be interested to hear a biblical basis for that idea though.
He says that we need to “believe in order to understand” but doesn’t explain how that would work or where in the Bible this idea comes from. He says “trusting the Bible means we trust God more than our own ability to reason.” I have to disagree with this. We can do nothing but trust our ability to reason *in order to* trust the Bible in the first place. If I didn’t trust that I could reason, then how could I trust any of my conclusions about what I read in the Bible or see in nature? Pitting these against each other in this way is a surefire way to stress out and confuse a lot of people.
Chapter 6: God’s Word is Necessary
Almost the entire chapter and his choice of the scripture on which it was based did not really follow a logical progression for why scripture is necessary. I would’ve chosen passages that refer to the Word as “bread” or that “faith comes from hearing.”
Unfortunately he once again decries human reason in one spot of this chapter and in another asks “why would we prostrate the word of God to even the smartest-sounding words of men?” The repetition in random parts of this book of his distaste with any scholarship and reason other than evangelical makes me feel like he must feel personally threatened or upset by it.
Chapter 7: Christ’s Unbreakable Bible
In one sense I think this is his best argument in the book. In another sense it only really works for someone who is already convinced the Bible is God’s Word, because the entire chapter is mainly focused on the historicity of the Old Testament and how Jesus accepts that. Jesus thought highly of the scriptures, it’s hard to argue against that. However, since Jesus admits to not being all-knowing (at least in regards to the exact date of the end times), was his knowledge of history unlimited at the time of his incarnation as well?
“This is not an apologetics book” he said in the beginning, but once again he finds himself arguing with “liberal scholars” in this chapter and specifically, without any prelude he bashes “German scholars.” It’s unfortunate that both sides of the issue try to use Germany and Hitler to make implications on whether an idea is good or bad.
He also makes reference to Jesus’ “you have heard it said in the Bible this, but I say to you” statements and argues that they don’t say what they sound like they say. I think if you read them yourself, this ultimately hurts his point, but he only references and dismisses the counterpoints. For instance, Jesus ends up saying that the divorce command was given because of hard hearts, begging the question of whether all OT law was the perfect standard. Jesus then says divorcing a wife is committing adultery. At least that’s how he says it in Mark. He says it with different qualifications in another chapter (one among many reasons we can’t be too literalistic in our Bible reading as fundamentalists and many evangelicals are).
Chapter 1
Deyoung starts with Psalm 119 and argues that it is a long and passionate poem about the Word of God. He then lays out his purpose, which is to get us feeling like the psalmist. He wants to do this by convincing us that the Bible *”makes no mistakes, can be understood, and cannot be overturned”*.
He then goes on to quote a part of Psalm 119 which says “the Word of God is true.” He immediately proceeds to calling out all other information sources as untrustworthy, because they can be faked and manipulated. Ironically, this ignores the fact that an ancient collection of books could include fake reports and misinformation (possibly even verifiably so in some places - I’m not saying the Bible *is* full of fake reports, just that it is also an information source in the category he’s mentioning) It’s interesting that he says our eyes can deceive us… because those are what I’m using to read the pages of scripture. Our brains can deceive us, yet I’m wholly reliant on it to interpret the Bible and… literally everything else.
Early on I can see some dangerous ideas creeping into a seemingly harmless book on loving the Bible. He makes the argument that we should experience a natural *extreme disgust* when encountering those who are not passionate about the Bible (pg 20). This seems like a good way to end up with a bad attitude toward unbelievers. It makes me worry that we have subconsciously developed these attitudes from constant absorption of books like this.
Deyoung says this is not a book on principles of interpretation, but a book unpacking what the Bible says about the Bible. Yet, I have a feeling the book is going to be packed with his principles of interpretation. I will say that I understand his argument that this is not an apologetics book, but I just get the impression he is going to be attempting a lot of Bible defense based on how much he has talked about skepticism already. Yet he has already dismissed common skeptic’s issues as something to be dealt with in other books. I guess we’ll see as I go on.
Chapter 2
(Page 30) He seemingly didn’t do his research here considering he is arguing that eyewitness testimony is incredibly important today in the court of law. It’s actually the opposite, one study showed it was used in about 6% of criminal cases and another showed that even when it is used, it leads to misidentification of criminals over half the time. Psychology has found eyewitness reliability to be majorly lacking and lawyers are aware of this. All these things could have been googled, but they would no doubt have hurt his argument. Also… what happened to not being able to “trust our eyes?”
Recommendation to DeYoung and anyone reading this: watch 12 Angry Men
Unsurprisingly it is already acting like an apologetics book, just as he promised it would not in the last chapter. He spends half of this chapter refuting “liberals.” I was particularly struck by how damaging his idea of “differing views on inerrancy” was. He said, “denying inerrancy is putting ourselves in judgment over God” and ultimately to “commit the sin of unbelief.” Yet he also doesn’t define his view of inerrancy beyond saying “it means the Bible is over us not the other way around.” How does that address the seriously nuanced argument that has been going on for centuries? If I read one story in the Bible that says something took 3 days and another says 7 have I committed the sin of unbelief? DeYoung’s reach is far, and I know personally that this line of thinking has influenced a lot of people. It has led to the hurt of many people I know who began to investigate the concept.
Chapter 3: The sufficiency of scripture
I really appreciated his clarification that the sufficiency of scripture means that “the Bible tells us enough about everything that matters most” rather than “everything about everything.” Although I would probably edit that to say “everything spiritual that matters most.” I don’t think the verse he chose really was the best foundational verse for the concept either, but I’m less concerned with diving into that.
Instead, I want to mention something I was reminded of that happened just this week where my friend sent a message to a member of a fundamentalist group we. He shared a book on the history of fundamentalism in America and was refused because the “Bible is enough.” I think DeYoung did touch (although very lightly) on this kind of thinking, this misplaced sense of the sufficiency of scripture that denies scholarly or scientific input on how to look at religious history, Bible history and genre etc. The Bible doesn’t teach us how to read genres. It doesn’t even announce what genre you’re about to read. It doesn’t have footnotes about how “this is cultural” or “the ancients were less concerned with chronology just fyi.” I just feel like he could have dove into what it meant by doing a bit more examples. I think this stuff could really help people. .
Chapter 4: The Clarity of Scripture
It was a bit ironic how DeYoung used a confusing scripture and aspect of scripture to say the Bible is clear. He admits it’s ironic on page 62. However, his answer to the puzzle is not itself one of the theological givens. According to DeYoung, Moses, the Law-bearer, was not talking about law-keeping as a way of justification. But… Leviticus says “You shall keep my statutes and my ordinances; by doing so one shall live.” I’m not a scholar, but having read the OT a few times, I did not get strong vibes from Moses of “Hey Israel, you’ve been saved by faith, now just follow this law as a standard.”
Appealing to Jesus and the apostles as evidence that the scriptures are plain and clear, because they treated it such is a bit problematic. For instance, Paul acts like it’s obvious that the law about “not muzzling an ox while it’s threshing” is about giving money to religious leaders, but I think the majority of us are extremely uncertain on how to apply the rest of the OT laws. So, what percentage of it is clear? Some of it? The majority of it? Only the essentials?
All that being said, he’s giving one of the best arguments you can here. Jesus and the apostles viewed the OT as being inspired by the Holy Spirit, not just personal reflections of humans of their culture. That argument is not entirely convincing for the reasons I’ve given above and I have some more reasons below. But credit where credit is due.
The Bible treats itself as spiritual revelation, not spiritual suggestions.
At one point DeYoung bashes the analogy of the six blind men and the elephant where they all feel a different part of the whole and have different conclusion about what it is. His first objection is that the narrator must be seeing the elephant… which seems to split at hairs and miss the entire point of the analogy. I could explain why but I’m not sure that objection is as much worth the time as his second point, which is “what if the elephant told them what each part was, is it humble to ignore the elephant’s word?” There are major flaws here. For one, we have a million different voices coming at us from every which way. If you grow up in a Muslim country then the elephant is saying “I’m the elephant trust me, you’re feeling xyz.” If you grow up in a Christian country the elephant tends to be saying something totally different. Even if you talk to an atheist, the elephant might talk a lot about empiricism. All analogies break down if you extend them too far and DeYoung fell victim to this here. Ironically, I’m going to do the same. The Bible isn’t a talking elephant that tells the blind men to trust them. The Bible, fitting with the analogy, would be more like people claiming to have their eyes opened people in the analogy, since all humanity is blind in the analogy, and since the Bible was written by and passed down by people.
I was surprised by the oversimplification and false dichotomy on page 69 in which he says “is God wise and good enough or does he give us commands we can’t understand and a self-revelation that reveals more questions than answers?” He can be wise and good and also be wildly above us to the point that we have enough answers, while also being left with unending questions and mystery. Some might even say that’s what you’d expect of God. I’m reminded of the verse “His thoughts are higher than our thoughts and his ways are higher than our ways.”
I think this chapter failed to discuss the nuance of the idea of the clarity of scripture. I have so many issues with it I’m not sure which to choose from, but I’ll just say it was extremely lacking in discussing *which* things are clear and which things aren’t. I think that would be the place to dig right? He mentioned the part of the Westminster Confession that says the things essential to salvation are what are clear, but then he goes on to seemingly ignore that and make sweeping statements about all of scripture rather than sticking to explaining what the “essential clear truths” are.
To be fair, I question the WC statement on this to begin with. If the essentials are abundantly clear then I’d ask, what saves us, faith alone or faith and baptism? There are verses in the New Testament that literally say that baptism saves you. There are verses that connect it directly to the forgiveness of sins. There are ones that say that it is a pledge of a good conscience toward God. While I myself think that those who claim that you must be baptized to be saved are wrong, they would say they are taking the *plain* reading of scripture on the matter of salvation.
Chapter 5: God’s Word is Final
The comparison of the Jews who were jealous of Paul to people who “dismiss the word because they knew a mean Christian once” doesn’t seem to be an apt comparison, and also seems to show a trivializing of a massive amount of individuals hurt by church hypocrisy.
It’s a welcome surprise that he has acknowledged that some people reject the Bible because of genuine intellectual concerns. This would seem to go against various past statements in the book, but I appreciate that he can say that. Many of his peers would not agree with him. I would be interested to hear a biblical basis for that idea though.
He says that we need to “believe in order to understand” but doesn’t explain how that would work or where in the Bible this idea comes from. He says “trusting the Bible means we trust God more than our own ability to reason.” I have to disagree with this. We can do nothing but trust our ability to reason *in order to* trust the Bible in the first place. If I didn’t trust that I could reason, then how could I trust any of my conclusions about what I read in the Bible or see in nature? Pitting these against each other in this way is a surefire way to stress out and confuse a lot of people.
Chapter 6: God’s Word is Necessary
Almost the entire chapter and his choice of the scripture on which it was based did not really follow a logical progression for why scripture is necessary. I would’ve chosen passages that refer to the Word as “bread” or that “faith comes from hearing.”
Unfortunately he once again decries human reason in one spot of this chapter and in another asks “why would we prostrate the word of God to even the smartest-sounding words of men?” The repetition in random parts of this book of his distaste with any scholarship and reason other than evangelical makes me feel like he must feel personally threatened or upset by it.
Chapter 7: Christ’s Unbreakable Bible
In one sense I think this is his best argument in the book. In another sense it only really works for someone who is already convinced the Bible is God’s Word, because the entire chapter is mainly focused on the historicity of the Old Testament and how Jesus accepts that. Jesus thought highly of the scriptures, it’s hard to argue against that. However, since Jesus admits to not being all-knowing (at least in regards to the exact date of the end times), was his knowledge of history unlimited at the time of his incarnation as well?
“This is not an apologetics book” he said in the beginning, but once again he finds himself arguing with “liberal scholars” in this chapter and specifically, without any prelude he bashes “German scholars.” It’s unfortunate that both sides of the issue try to use Germany and Hitler to make implications on whether an idea is good or bad.
He also makes reference to Jesus’ “you have heard it said in the Bible this, but I say to you” statements and argues that they don’t say what they sound like they say. I think if you read them yourself, this ultimately hurts his point, but he only references and dismisses the counterpoints. For instance, Jesus ends up saying that the divorce command was given because of hard hearts, begging the question of whether all OT law was the perfect standard. Jesus then says divorcing a wife is committing adultery. At least that’s how he says it in Mark. He says it with different qualifications in another chapter (one among many reasons we can’t be too literalistic in our Bible reading as fundamentalists and many evangelicals are).
March 26, 2014
Kevin DeYoung is easily one of my favorite writers to read. Since his book with Ted Kluck, “Why We’re Not Emergent,” I’ve enjoyed basically everything he’s written. With his newest, “Taking God at His Word,” DeYoung sets out to rebuild confidence in and love for the Bible, the Word of God, in a world that through various ways and means has sought to belittle and malign it. Beginning with the vision of the Psalmist in Psalm 119, basically a love poem about the Scriptures, and ending with the familiar 2 Timothy 3:16 summation of the doctrine of Scripture, DeYoung demonstrates the sufficiency, clarity, authority, and necessity of the Bible in a clear, winsome, and refreshing way.
The main part of the book is the 4 chapters dealing with these attributes of Scripture, but my favorite chapter was on Jesus’s understanding of Scripture. DeYoung simply asks, “What did Jesus believe about the Bible?” He then posits that whatever Jesus believed, we should believe as followers of Christ. From multiple places in the gospels, DeYoung goes on to show Christ’s high view of the Scriptures (for him, the OT), and how his answers to questions and statements of his illustrate his belief in all 4 of Scripture’s attributes. It is worth quoting his full conclusion to that chapter:
“This, then, can be the only acceptable answer to the question posed at the beginning of this chapter about Jesus’s doctrine of Scripture: it is impossible to revere the Scriptures more deeply or affirm them more completely than Jesus did. Jesus submitted his will to the Scriptures, committed his brain to studying the Scriptures, and humbled his heart to obey the Scriptures. The Lord Jesus, God’s Son and our Savior, believed his Bible was the word of God down to the sentences, to the phrases, to the words, to the smallest letter, to the tiniest specks—and that nothing in all those specks and in all those books in his Holy Bible could ever be broken."
Finally, DeYoung ends this brief, accessible book with some practical applications and a further exhortation to read, enjoy, obey, submit to, and above all, love the Scriptures as the Word of God and our means of access to the saving knowledge of God in Jesus Christ. In a world that seeks to discredit the Bible and where even many in the Church undermine confidence in the Bible by denying one of the attributes outlined, this short book is a breath of fresh air and an admirable defense of the sufficiency, clarity, authority, and necessity of Scripture. While it would be a good introduction for non-believers, I think this is even more important as a very needed word for many in the Church. I pray that many churches will use this to instill confidence in and love for the Bible among their people.
I quote from DeYoung again:
“So let us not weaken in our commitment to our unbreakable Bible. Let us not wander from this divinely exhaled truth. Let us not waver in our delight and desire. God has spoken, and through that revelation he still speaks. Ultimately we can believe the Bible because we believe in the power and wisdom and goodness and truthfulness of the God whose authority and veracity cannot be separated from the Bible. We trust the Bible because it is God’s Bible. And God being God, we have every reason to take him at his word.”
The main part of the book is the 4 chapters dealing with these attributes of Scripture, but my favorite chapter was on Jesus’s understanding of Scripture. DeYoung simply asks, “What did Jesus believe about the Bible?” He then posits that whatever Jesus believed, we should believe as followers of Christ. From multiple places in the gospels, DeYoung goes on to show Christ’s high view of the Scriptures (for him, the OT), and how his answers to questions and statements of his illustrate his belief in all 4 of Scripture’s attributes. It is worth quoting his full conclusion to that chapter:
“This, then, can be the only acceptable answer to the question posed at the beginning of this chapter about Jesus’s doctrine of Scripture: it is impossible to revere the Scriptures more deeply or affirm them more completely than Jesus did. Jesus submitted his will to the Scriptures, committed his brain to studying the Scriptures, and humbled his heart to obey the Scriptures. The Lord Jesus, God’s Son and our Savior, believed his Bible was the word of God down to the sentences, to the phrases, to the words, to the smallest letter, to the tiniest specks—and that nothing in all those specks and in all those books in his Holy Bible could ever be broken."
Finally, DeYoung ends this brief, accessible book with some practical applications and a further exhortation to read, enjoy, obey, submit to, and above all, love the Scriptures as the Word of God and our means of access to the saving knowledge of God in Jesus Christ. In a world that seeks to discredit the Bible and where even many in the Church undermine confidence in the Bible by denying one of the attributes outlined, this short book is a breath of fresh air and an admirable defense of the sufficiency, clarity, authority, and necessity of Scripture. While it would be a good introduction for non-believers, I think this is even more important as a very needed word for many in the Church. I pray that many churches will use this to instill confidence in and love for the Bible among their people.
I quote from DeYoung again:
“So let us not weaken in our commitment to our unbreakable Bible. Let us not wander from this divinely exhaled truth. Let us not waver in our delight and desire. God has spoken, and through that revelation he still speaks. Ultimately we can believe the Bible because we believe in the power and wisdom and goodness and truthfulness of the God whose authority and veracity cannot be separated from the Bible. We trust the Bible because it is God’s Bible. And God being God, we have every reason to take him at his word.”
January 4, 2015
An excellent little book, not scholarly, but a solid starting place for Christians on one of the most important battlefields of our day. We need to get back to Scripture, and *really* believe in the sufficiency, inerrancy, and perspicuity of the Word of God.
April 21, 2023
This book is nice to read if you’re interested in what the Bible says about the Bible.
If you’re looking for a deeper examination of the historical reliability of the Bible, this book is not what you're looking for. I personally think that this is not at all a bad way to address this topic if you already have a certain trust in the authenticity of the Scriptures.
DeYoung writes from the perspective that “every word is in the Bible because God wanted it there“ (and he gives some arguments throughout the book about why he does so).
He obviously argues almost everything He says with the Scriptures themselves (or with Sproul and Calvin quotes :)) and states that his (or every “good Christian's“) first principle is neither rationality nor reason, which gives away a lot about his position towards the Scriptures. (And with that, I don’t mean to say that his arguments are illogical or unreasonable, it just means that from his position, the authority of the Scriptures stands above his ability to understand/explain things rationally). He enters the subject of the inerrancy of the Scriptures rather superficially but makes his point clear.
What I really appreciate throughout the whole book is his reverence towards the Scriptures. I think it really is necessary for every Christian to stick to them in order to grow in faith and holiness. As DeYoung puts it, it’s important to realize that “God speaking through Scriptures is not at all an inferior way of communication“ (especially in these times of “phenomenalism“ where even in churches everything seems to be about emotions and experiences).
He goes on to describe four main attributes of the Bible in the following chapters:
1. God’s Word is enough
= “sufficient for the exposition of truth“
-> That takes away every excuse for disobedience
“Scripture is enough because the work of Christ is enough“
2. God’s Word is clear
DeYoung mentions the Pluralism Objection but states that while not everything can be understood perfectly, everything can be understood sufficiently (quotes WCF on that)
Also, he argues that “God is not gaggles“, and that we ought to believe that He is wise enough to make himself known
(-> This point can hardly be regarded without considering DeYoung’s soteriological beliefs/opinions)
3. God’s Word is final
The Scriptures are some kind of “untouchable authority“
“To trust completely in the Bible is to trust the character and assurance of God more than we trust in our own ability to reason and explain.“
-> We need “humble trust in His veracity“
4. God’s Word is necessary
The only being wise enough to reveal God is God himself
God must speak to us if we truly want to be wise
We need the Spirit to illuminate us to truly understand Scripture
The penultimate chapter address how Jesus treated the Scriptures, DeYoung says that “He treats biblical history as a straightforward record of facts“ and that He was meant to obey and fulfill them. Therefore, following Jesus’ example, it is not acceptable to contradict or to stand above the Scripture.
The last chapter is built around 2 Timothy 3:14-17, summarizes the main points, and is meant to motivate the reader to stick to the Scriptures. DeYoung calls the readers to “not weaken in our commitment to our unbreakable Bible.“
After all, I really enjoyed reading this book even though there were some points I can’t 100% agree with or which don't seem as clear to me as they seem for DeYoung.
I appreciate his attempt to address some arguments that could be used against his ones, besides that, he manages to explain complex issues in a more or less simple language.
All in a nice book that makes you think through your assumptions about the Bible and your trust in it.
If you’re looking for a deeper examination of the historical reliability of the Bible, this book is not what you're looking for. I personally think that this is not at all a bad way to address this topic if you already have a certain trust in the authenticity of the Scriptures.
DeYoung writes from the perspective that “every word is in the Bible because God wanted it there“ (and he gives some arguments throughout the book about why he does so).
He obviously argues almost everything He says with the Scriptures themselves (or with Sproul and Calvin quotes :)) and states that his (or every “good Christian's“) first principle is neither rationality nor reason, which gives away a lot about his position towards the Scriptures. (And with that, I don’t mean to say that his arguments are illogical or unreasonable, it just means that from his position, the authority of the Scriptures stands above his ability to understand/explain things rationally). He enters the subject of the inerrancy of the Scriptures rather superficially but makes his point clear.
What I really appreciate throughout the whole book is his reverence towards the Scriptures. I think it really is necessary for every Christian to stick to them in order to grow in faith and holiness. As DeYoung puts it, it’s important to realize that “God speaking through Scriptures is not at all an inferior way of communication“ (especially in these times of “phenomenalism“ where even in churches everything seems to be about emotions and experiences).
He goes on to describe four main attributes of the Bible in the following chapters:
1. God’s Word is enough
= “sufficient for the exposition of truth“
-> That takes away every excuse for disobedience
“Scripture is enough because the work of Christ is enough“
2. God’s Word is clear
DeYoung mentions the Pluralism Objection but states that while not everything can be understood perfectly, everything can be understood sufficiently (quotes WCF on that)
Also, he argues that “God is not gaggles“, and that we ought to believe that He is wise enough to make himself known
(-> This point can hardly be regarded without considering DeYoung’s soteriological beliefs/opinions)
3. God’s Word is final
The Scriptures are some kind of “untouchable authority“
“To trust completely in the Bible is to trust the character and assurance of God more than we trust in our own ability to reason and explain.“
-> We need “humble trust in His veracity“
4. God’s Word is necessary
The only being wise enough to reveal God is God himself
God must speak to us if we truly want to be wise
We need the Spirit to illuminate us to truly understand Scripture
The penultimate chapter address how Jesus treated the Scriptures, DeYoung says that “He treats biblical history as a straightforward record of facts“ and that He was meant to obey and fulfill them. Therefore, following Jesus’ example, it is not acceptable to contradict or to stand above the Scripture.
The last chapter is built around 2 Timothy 3:14-17, summarizes the main points, and is meant to motivate the reader to stick to the Scriptures. DeYoung calls the readers to “not weaken in our commitment to our unbreakable Bible.“
After all, I really enjoyed reading this book even though there were some points I can’t 100% agree with or which don't seem as clear to me as they seem for DeYoung.
I appreciate his attempt to address some arguments that could be used against his ones, besides that, he manages to explain complex issues in a more or less simple language.
All in a nice book that makes you think through your assumptions about the Bible and your trust in it.
January 5, 2022
It’s important to know beforehand that this book is specifically about what the Bible says about itself. It’s not necessarily breaking down how God’s Word is proven to be historically reliable. DeYoung reveals that because Scripture is true and infallible, what does that mean for our lives in Christ? Knowing this, I would highly recommend reading this short yet condensed book. You learn much about the characteristics of God’s Word (not necessarily God but many characteristics are similar and it’s quite interesting to compare) and this has increased my love and desire for my devotion to the Scriptures as the final authority over all. This book points you straight back to the Bible in a beautiful way.
July 7, 2021
A helpful book going through what the Bible says about itself.
I like his quick dismissal of the logical inconsistencies when deciding what is ultimate authority (e.g. Reason uses reason to make its claim that it should be ultimate authority, ultimate authority is always cyclical arguments) and then moves to clear explanation of what the Bible says about itself with the acronym SCAN:
Sufficiency (God's word is enough, nothing else needed)
Clarity (God's word is understandable, using normal means of learning)
Authority (God's word is final, don't look elsewhere for final confirmation, although still examine context, historical concerns, etc. )
Necessary (We cannot know God fully without the bible. General revelation is not enough)
I also like his beginning chapter on Psalm 119, saying we should love God's word, and his great finale with 2 Timothy 3:14-17 to continue loving the Bible. A helpful challenge to remember: "I simply will not mature as quickly, minister as effectively, or live as gloriously without immersing ourselves in the Scriptures.”
I like his quick dismissal of the logical inconsistencies when deciding what is ultimate authority (e.g. Reason uses reason to make its claim that it should be ultimate authority, ultimate authority is always cyclical arguments) and then moves to clear explanation of what the Bible says about itself with the acronym SCAN:
Sufficiency (God's word is enough, nothing else needed)
Clarity (God's word is understandable, using normal means of learning)
Authority (God's word is final, don't look elsewhere for final confirmation, although still examine context, historical concerns, etc. )
Necessary (We cannot know God fully without the bible. General revelation is not enough)
I also like his beginning chapter on Psalm 119, saying we should love God's word, and his great finale with 2 Timothy 3:14-17 to continue loving the Bible. A helpful challenge to remember: "I simply will not mature as quickly, minister as effectively, or live as gloriously without immersing ourselves in the Scriptures.”
July 3, 2022
Thorough, concise, and passionately written. DeYoung does a fantastic job of giving an overview of the orthodox view of Scripture’s authority, truth, clarity, and necessity, and does so in such a way that accomplishes his initial goal set out in Chapter One: to bring readers to rejoice in and appreciate the Word of God!
January 2, 2025
Really good! Accessible introduction to bibliology. DeYoung presents the sufficiency, clarity, authority, and necessity of the Bible in a readable and engaging style. This is the perfect book for high schoolers or college students who are wondering if they can trust the Bible.
March 27, 2018
An excellent introduction to the Doctrine of Scripture.
May 9, 2025
Really encouraging book about how God’s Word is enough, clear, final, and necessary. Chapter 7 walking through how Jesus treating scripture was great. The appendix with extra resources was neat as well.
November 5, 2023
Good read such a great reminder of how much we need scripture and the importance of it! Would recommend.
July 15, 2024
Kevin DeYoung is quickly becoming one of my favorite theological authors. He always simplifies complex topics and he did that with this book as well! He gives great reasons for why God’s word is important to the Christian life and the different reasons we can trust God’s word to do the work in and through us. If you are struggling to trust God’s word or to see the importance of his word in your day to day life. Pick up this book. This book made me want to spend more time in God’s word, may God continue to grow my love and desire to spend time soaking up his word and applying it to my life.
June 15, 2021
2021 reads: #18
Rating: 4.5 Stars
DeYoung's thoughtful explanation of the doctrine of Scripture remains a gem. It is very readable and therefore ideal for small group discussions. DeYoung has an eye toward not only formulating and orthodox doctrine, but worshiping the God of the Word as seen in Psalm 119.
Previous Review: October 2019
Rather than writing a book proving that the Bible is the Word of God, Kevin DeYoung has written a book on why Christians should assume the Bible is the Word of God.
With simple expositions from relevant passages on what the Bible says about itself, DeYoung has given us another gem. Clear explanations with his customary witty remarks made this little book a joy to read, even though at times he does "over-argue" his case.
DeYoung encourages us to trust the Bible as God's revelation to us for salvation and godliness. Where else are we to go, but to the Scriptures which cannot be broken.
The fact that the Scriptures are breathed out by God underscores the other truths discussed in the book. Inspiration is the foundation for the clarity, sufficiency, authority and the necessity of the Scriptures.
This is an ideal book for a new believer, but also for anyone who wants an introduction to the Bible. I will definitely be adding it to my recommended resources.
Rating: 4.5 Stars
DeYoung's thoughtful explanation of the doctrine of Scripture remains a gem. It is very readable and therefore ideal for small group discussions. DeYoung has an eye toward not only formulating and orthodox doctrine, but worshiping the God of the Word as seen in Psalm 119.
Previous Review: October 2019
Rather than writing a book proving that the Bible is the Word of God, Kevin DeYoung has written a book on why Christians should assume the Bible is the Word of God.
With simple expositions from relevant passages on what the Bible says about itself, DeYoung has given us another gem. Clear explanations with his customary witty remarks made this little book a joy to read, even though at times he does "over-argue" his case.
DeYoung encourages us to trust the Bible as God's revelation to us for salvation and godliness. Where else are we to go, but to the Scriptures which cannot be broken.
The fact that the Scriptures are breathed out by God underscores the other truths discussed in the book. Inspiration is the foundation for the clarity, sufficiency, authority and the necessity of the Scriptures.
This is an ideal book for a new believer, but also for anyone who wants an introduction to the Bible. I will definitely be adding it to my recommended resources.
August 2, 2017
This is a brief, but well-written defense of a high view of Scripture. He doesn't use the term innerrancy often, maybe only a couple of times. The subtitle of the book is a very good summation of his purpose in writing the book.
The Bible has come under increasing attack over the last two hundred years--especially in our own generation, so much so, that many "scholars" argue that there was no historical Adam, and so on.
DeYoung insists upon the Bible's authority and not putting reason over it, but under it's authority. His arguments are thoroughly and rigorously biblical.
In one of the best chapters, he examines Jesus' understand of the Old Testament, and demonstrates that Jesus accepted the Old Testament as historical truth--including accepting Adam as an historical man.
This is a great little book that offers a big punch.
The Bible has come under increasing attack over the last two hundred years--especially in our own generation, so much so, that many "scholars" argue that there was no historical Adam, and so on.
DeYoung insists upon the Bible's authority and not putting reason over it, but under it's authority. His arguments are thoroughly and rigorously biblical.
In one of the best chapters, he examines Jesus' understand of the Old Testament, and demonstrates that Jesus accepted the Old Testament as historical truth--including accepting Adam as an historical man.
This is a great little book that offers a big punch.
January 20, 2015
Classic DeYoung. He's great at writing on important theological topics in a winsome and clear manner.
June 17, 2024
Super accessible doctrine of Scripture. Most of it is really helpful, and worth the handful of odd idiosyncrasies that don’t distract too much from the value here.
April 5, 2021
Kevin DeYoung begins his book with his conclusion: “I want to convince you that the Bible makes no mistakes, can be understood, cannot be overturned, and is the most important word in your life, the most relevant thing you can read each day.” His desire is that we would all read our Bibles with the zeal of the Psalmist who wrote Psalm 119, i.e. “The unfolding of your words gives light; it imparts understanding to the simple. I open my mouth and pant, because I long for your commandments.”
Whether you’ve never read the Bible in your life, or you read it every day, this book will explain, why the Bible is clear, authoritative, relevant, and sufficient.
I grew up in a Christian home and attended a conservative Christian college. I was confronted with a lot of questions about the Bible there that I didn’t readily have answers for. After four years there, I had seen several friends, when asked hard questions or things they’d never thought about, just reject the Bible altogether or reject their faith entirely. I was disheartened by this because instead of throwing out a faith I couldn’t defend to a T, I sought the truth and I looked for answers.
Just because a question is hard or new to you, does not mean it’s never been asked before or that it doesn’t have an explanation.
This book is such a valuable resource to give you confidence in the very book that connects us with the truths of our Lord and Savior.
DeYoung is quick to clarify that ‘Taking God at His Word’ is not meant to be exhaustive— at just over 100 pages there is much more to be covered when regarding the authenticity and historicity of Scripture—and so he includes a list of 30 books in the appendix to provide you with resources to conduct a more in-depth study if you so desire.
He does not address the canonization of Scripture (how it was put together and organized) and does not discuss in detail the manuscripts, translations, authorship, or historical and archeological support for the Bible and its contents. Those can all be found within the appendixed (new word?) books.
Things he does cover include:
- What does the Bible say about itself?
- What does Jesus believe about the Bible?
- Is the Bible just myth or metaphor for a more general, abstract understanding of God’s power and how to relate to him?
- Doesn’t the Bible have discrepancies?
- What about different interpretations?
- How can we trust something written by sinful humans?
If this isn’t a reasonable and powerful passage of Scripture to defend Christianity and the Bible itself, I don’t know what is:
2 Peter 1:16-21 “For we do not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”
Many have claimed that conservative Christians believe the inspiration of Scripture means that God dictated each word to be written down and that that’s why we believe it’s infallible. However, this is not the case. “The phrase “concursive operation” is often used to describe the process of inspiration, meaning that God used the intellect, skills, and personality of fallible men to write down what was divine and infallible. The Bible is, in one sense, both a human and a divine book. But this in no way implies any fallibility in the Scriptures. The dual authorship of Scripture does not necessitate imperfection any more than the two natures of Christ mean our Savior must have sinned.”
The core of the book follows the nifty little acronym, SCAN, which is explained below (and subtitled above).
Sufficiency: The Scriptures contain everything we need for knowledge of salvation and godly living. We don’t need any new revelation from heaven.
Clarity: The saving message of Jesus Christ is plainly taught in the Scriptures and can be understood by all who have ears to hear it. We don’t need an official magisterium to tell us what the Bible means.
Authority: The last word always goes to the word of God. We must never allow the teachings of science, of human experience, or of church councils to take precedence over Scripture.
Necessity: General revelation is not enough to save us. We cannot know God savingly by means of personal experience and human reason. We need God’s word to tell us how to live, who Christ is, and how to be saved.
Or to put simply, the Bible is final, understandable, necessary, and enough.
Sufficiency keeps traditions from subverting God’s words, keeps us from adding to it, even with good intentions, and it means it’s always relevant.
Clarity doesn’t mean every single verse can be read once and instantly understood in every sense, but rather “ordinary people using ordinary means can accurately understand enough of what must be known.” DeYoung addresses some objections to clarity that propose: God is too mysterious to really understand and the Bible falls short; if the Bible was so clear, why do we still disagree on interpretations or use the Bible to justify wrong things; some parts need to be further supplemented or explained through tradition (per Catholics). He then imparts what is at stake if we compromise the clarity of Scripture.
Authority has to do with where we make our final appeal as to what is truth when it comes down to it? Tradition, our feelings, science, another book, our parents, our teachers, logic, culture, the government? Or is it the Bible?
Necessity speaks to the idea of spirituality. Many view spirituality as something within ourselves that we need to tap into, but true spirituality must be outside of ourselves. We need God’s revelation to know God and that can only be found in Scripture.
While I would still highly suggest a full reading of this short book, here are some quotes:
“The authority of God’s word resides in the written text—the words, the sentences, the paragraphs—of Scripture, not merely in our existential experience of the truth in our hearts… the inspiration of holy Scripture is an objective reality outside of us.”
“Inerrancy means the word of God always stands over us and we never stand over the word of God. When we reject inerrancy we put ourselves in judgment over God’s word. We claim the right to determine which parts of God’s revelation can be trusted and which cannot. When we deny the complete trustworthiness of the Scriptures—in its claims with regard to history; its teachings on the material world; its miracles; in the tiniest ‘jots and tittles’ of all that it affirms—then we are forced to accept one of two conclusions: either Scripture is not all from God, or God is not always dependable.”
“Scripture is enough because the work of Christ is enough. They stand or fall together.”
“No doubt, some people reject the gospel and the Bible because of genuine intellectual concerns, but just as often, I’m convinced, pride and personal prejudice are to blame. We don’t like the people teaching the Bible, and we don’t like what the Bible teaches.”
“God’s people should be testing everything against God’s word…[The Bereans (in Acts)] would accept something new—if it could be supported in the Scriptures. They would believe something controversial—if it was based in the Scripture. They were willing to follow Christ for the rest of their lives, provided they were, in the process, following the Scriptures.”
“When interpreted correctly—paying attention to the original context, considering the literary genre, thinking through authorial intent—the Bible is never wrong in what it affirms and must never be marginalized as anything less than the last word on everything it teaches.”
“We have no reason to be intimidated by difficulties and apparent discrepancies in the Bible. Many of them are easily explained. Most of the rest of them have good, plausible solutions. And for the few humdingers that are left, there are possible explanations, even if we aren’t sure that we’ve found the right one yet. Our confidence in the Bible is not an irrational confidence. The findings of history, archaeology, and textual criticism give us many reasons to trust the Old and New Testaments.”
And this gem of a quote from J.I. Packer:
“God, then, does not profess to answer in Scripture all the questions that we, in our boundless curiosity, would like to ask about Scripture. He tells us merely as much as He sees we need to know as a basis for our life of faith. And he leaves unsolved some of the problems raised by what He tells us, in order to teach us a humble trust in His veracity. The question, therefore, that we must ask ourselves when faced with these puzzles is not, is it reasonable to imagine that this is so? but, is it reasonable to accept God’s assurance that this is so? Is it reasonable to take God’s word and believe that He has spoken the truth, even though I cannot fully comprehend what He has said? The question carries its own answer. We should not abandon faith in anything God has taught us merely because we cannot solve all the problems which it raises. Our own intellectual competence is not the test and measure of divine truth. It is not for us to stop believing because we lack understanding, but to believe in order that we may understand.”
Don’t let hard questions cause you to trash your Bible and discard your faith. Christianity is not a blind, unreasonable faith. Search it out for yourself. Read this book. Read some others. Put in the work. It’s of utmost importance.
In addition to the books DeYoung lists in the back of ‘Taking God at His Word,’ here are a few additional (though not specifically about the trustworthiness of Scripture and probably less scholarly) options:
Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus by Nabeel Qureshi (seeking to defend Islam he studies the person of Jesus and comes to believe in Christianity)
The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism by Tim Keller
Confronting Christianity: 12 Hard Questions for the World’s Largest Religion by Rebecca McLaughlin
Read more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
Whether you’ve never read the Bible in your life, or you read it every day, this book will explain, why the Bible is clear, authoritative, relevant, and sufficient.
I grew up in a Christian home and attended a conservative Christian college. I was confronted with a lot of questions about the Bible there that I didn’t readily have answers for. After four years there, I had seen several friends, when asked hard questions or things they’d never thought about, just reject the Bible altogether or reject their faith entirely. I was disheartened by this because instead of throwing out a faith I couldn’t defend to a T, I sought the truth and I looked for answers.
Just because a question is hard or new to you, does not mean it’s never been asked before or that it doesn’t have an explanation.
This book is such a valuable resource to give you confidence in the very book that connects us with the truths of our Lord and Savior.
DeYoung is quick to clarify that ‘Taking God at His Word’ is not meant to be exhaustive— at just over 100 pages there is much more to be covered when regarding the authenticity and historicity of Scripture—and so he includes a list of 30 books in the appendix to provide you with resources to conduct a more in-depth study if you so desire.
He does not address the canonization of Scripture (how it was put together and organized) and does not discuss in detail the manuscripts, translations, authorship, or historical and archeological support for the Bible and its contents. Those can all be found within the appendixed (new word?) books.
Things he does cover include:
- What does the Bible say about itself?
- What does Jesus believe about the Bible?
- Is the Bible just myth or metaphor for a more general, abstract understanding of God’s power and how to relate to him?
- Doesn’t the Bible have discrepancies?
- What about different interpretations?
- How can we trust something written by sinful humans?
If this isn’t a reasonable and powerful passage of Scripture to defend Christianity and the Bible itself, I don’t know what is:
2 Peter 1:16-21 “For we do not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”
Many have claimed that conservative Christians believe the inspiration of Scripture means that God dictated each word to be written down and that that’s why we believe it’s infallible. However, this is not the case. “The phrase “concursive operation” is often used to describe the process of inspiration, meaning that God used the intellect, skills, and personality of fallible men to write down what was divine and infallible. The Bible is, in one sense, both a human and a divine book. But this in no way implies any fallibility in the Scriptures. The dual authorship of Scripture does not necessitate imperfection any more than the two natures of Christ mean our Savior must have sinned.”
The core of the book follows the nifty little acronym, SCAN, which is explained below (and subtitled above).
Sufficiency: The Scriptures contain everything we need for knowledge of salvation and godly living. We don’t need any new revelation from heaven.
Clarity: The saving message of Jesus Christ is plainly taught in the Scriptures and can be understood by all who have ears to hear it. We don’t need an official magisterium to tell us what the Bible means.
Authority: The last word always goes to the word of God. We must never allow the teachings of science, of human experience, or of church councils to take precedence over Scripture.
Necessity: General revelation is not enough to save us. We cannot know God savingly by means of personal experience and human reason. We need God’s word to tell us how to live, who Christ is, and how to be saved.
Or to put simply, the Bible is final, understandable, necessary, and enough.
Sufficiency keeps traditions from subverting God’s words, keeps us from adding to it, even with good intentions, and it means it’s always relevant.
Clarity doesn’t mean every single verse can be read once and instantly understood in every sense, but rather “ordinary people using ordinary means can accurately understand enough of what must be known.” DeYoung addresses some objections to clarity that propose: God is too mysterious to really understand and the Bible falls short; if the Bible was so clear, why do we still disagree on interpretations or use the Bible to justify wrong things; some parts need to be further supplemented or explained through tradition (per Catholics). He then imparts what is at stake if we compromise the clarity of Scripture.
Authority has to do with where we make our final appeal as to what is truth when it comes down to it? Tradition, our feelings, science, another book, our parents, our teachers, logic, culture, the government? Or is it the Bible?
Necessity speaks to the idea of spirituality. Many view spirituality as something within ourselves that we need to tap into, but true spirituality must be outside of ourselves. We need God’s revelation to know God and that can only be found in Scripture.
While I would still highly suggest a full reading of this short book, here are some quotes:
“The authority of God’s word resides in the written text—the words, the sentences, the paragraphs—of Scripture, not merely in our existential experience of the truth in our hearts… the inspiration of holy Scripture is an objective reality outside of us.”
“Inerrancy means the word of God always stands over us and we never stand over the word of God. When we reject inerrancy we put ourselves in judgment over God’s word. We claim the right to determine which parts of God’s revelation can be trusted and which cannot. When we deny the complete trustworthiness of the Scriptures—in its claims with regard to history; its teachings on the material world; its miracles; in the tiniest ‘jots and tittles’ of all that it affirms—then we are forced to accept one of two conclusions: either Scripture is not all from God, or God is not always dependable.”
“Scripture is enough because the work of Christ is enough. They stand or fall together.”
“No doubt, some people reject the gospel and the Bible because of genuine intellectual concerns, but just as often, I’m convinced, pride and personal prejudice are to blame. We don’t like the people teaching the Bible, and we don’t like what the Bible teaches.”
“God’s people should be testing everything against God’s word…[The Bereans (in Acts)] would accept something new—if it could be supported in the Scriptures. They would believe something controversial—if it was based in the Scripture. They were willing to follow Christ for the rest of their lives, provided they were, in the process, following the Scriptures.”
“When interpreted correctly—paying attention to the original context, considering the literary genre, thinking through authorial intent—the Bible is never wrong in what it affirms and must never be marginalized as anything less than the last word on everything it teaches.”
“We have no reason to be intimidated by difficulties and apparent discrepancies in the Bible. Many of them are easily explained. Most of the rest of them have good, plausible solutions. And for the few humdingers that are left, there are possible explanations, even if we aren’t sure that we’ve found the right one yet. Our confidence in the Bible is not an irrational confidence. The findings of history, archaeology, and textual criticism give us many reasons to trust the Old and New Testaments.”
And this gem of a quote from J.I. Packer:
“God, then, does not profess to answer in Scripture all the questions that we, in our boundless curiosity, would like to ask about Scripture. He tells us merely as much as He sees we need to know as a basis for our life of faith. And he leaves unsolved some of the problems raised by what He tells us, in order to teach us a humble trust in His veracity. The question, therefore, that we must ask ourselves when faced with these puzzles is not, is it reasonable to imagine that this is so? but, is it reasonable to accept God’s assurance that this is so? Is it reasonable to take God’s word and believe that He has spoken the truth, even though I cannot fully comprehend what He has said? The question carries its own answer. We should not abandon faith in anything God has taught us merely because we cannot solve all the problems which it raises. Our own intellectual competence is not the test and measure of divine truth. It is not for us to stop believing because we lack understanding, but to believe in order that we may understand.”
Don’t let hard questions cause you to trash your Bible and discard your faith. Christianity is not a blind, unreasonable faith. Search it out for yourself. Read this book. Read some others. Put in the work. It’s of utmost importance.
In addition to the books DeYoung lists in the back of ‘Taking God at His Word,’ here are a few additional (though not specifically about the trustworthiness of Scripture and probably less scholarly) options:
Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus by Nabeel Qureshi (seeking to defend Islam he studies the person of Jesus and comes to believe in Christianity)
The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism by Tim Keller
Confronting Christianity: 12 Hard Questions for the World’s Largest Religion by Rebecca McLaughlin
Read more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!
March 9, 2020
A helpful, concise book on the key biblical passages regarding God's word. My favorite chapter was on 1 Corinthians 2, a passage I was not expecting DeYoung to cover. I wish this book had aimed at a more broad audience with more support from extra-biblical sources and even commentators, but overall it gave me more confidence in the SCAN of the Bible. SCAN (sufficiency, clarity, authority, necessity). This book also got me asking this question: while this book is divine, how can we neglect the role of the Holy Spirit in how talk/think about it? In other words, is it accurate to say the word saves or must we always remember it is GOD who saves us through revealing his word to us and giving us ears to hear it?
January 18, 2024
“And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place…”
2 Peter 1:19
My favorite attribute out of the 4 he explained was #1:The Bible is Enough. We have hundreds and hundreds of pages of God’s Word for us. The Bible is enough to teach me about salvation. But it’s also enough to become a godly spouse, a godly friend, a godly neighbor, a godly decision maker. We fail to marvel in the fact that GOD HAS GIVEN US ALL WE EVER NEED TO LIVE a godly life.
DeYoung just kept hitting home on this point: If we want to hear God, open up your Bible. God’s Word is a referendum on himself. So let’s live by every word that comes from the mouth of God (Matthew 4:4).
2 Peter 1:19
My favorite attribute out of the 4 he explained was #1:The Bible is Enough. We have hundreds and hundreds of pages of God’s Word for us. The Bible is enough to teach me about salvation. But it’s also enough to become a godly spouse, a godly friend, a godly neighbor, a godly decision maker. We fail to marvel in the fact that GOD HAS GIVEN US ALL WE EVER NEED TO LIVE a godly life.
DeYoung just kept hitting home on this point: If we want to hear God, open up your Bible. God’s Word is a referendum on himself. So let’s live by every word that comes from the mouth of God (Matthew 4:4).
July 4, 2022
Overall I agreed with DeYoung's points about scripture. I wish I had read this in college when I struggled too see reading my Bible as more than part of my to do list. I think I'll come back to things from this book throughout my life when doubt and questions come up.
May 23, 2018
DeYoung's writing is always clear and engaging. This is my favorite of his books so far. After reading it, I am more hungry to read God's Word. This will be one that I will reread if I feel my zeal for the Bible diminish. Do yourself a favor and read this book!
May 26, 2022
Honestly, this book was hard to read through because it kept convincing me to put it down and go find the Bible to read. Overall, I enjoyed and benefited from the perspective and hard truths given.
August 23, 2022
Classic Kevin.
March 27, 2023
Good primer on the Protestant doctrine of Scripture.
December 12, 2025
A simple talk-through all the truths of Scripture and how this can change how we live as Christians. We did it as a book group and decided that reading the final paragraph or two of each chapter first and then reading from the start helps in understanding, as his arguments are sometimes a little convoluted and confusing, but otherwise a great read!
April 23, 2025
Short summary of a faithful doctrine of Scripture.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 528 reviews