Robert Higby’s Attack Against The Word Of God
“So to Calvin; every word enshrined in the books of Esther, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, and James are as sacred and certain as the person and work of Jesus Christ himself.”
(Robert Higby – 27th December 2005 – Calvin’s 66 book canon)
“The present writer does not believe the Christocentric hermeneutic supports Ecclesiastes or the Song of Songs as having canonical authority.”
(quote taken from – The Biblical Canon Study #3: Identifying the Old Testament Canon (study #2) – October 2005)
Here is what Higby says about “Song of Songs” in the same study.
“The Song of Songs is merely a discourse of human love and romance…It is simply the poetic view of two individuals on what constitutes great romance and sex; nothing more. It is not even a standard as to how all must view what constitutes great romance and sex.”
Now Higby moves on to attack Esther.
“The doctrine of revenge present in Esther is against the whole of Old Testament revelation, let alone New Testament revelation. Therefore, Esther is to be rejected as canonical.”
(Robert Higby – October 8th 2005 – From the thread titled: The multi level canon)
And…
“Esther 9 adds to the law, it is as simple as that. The Law of Moses, according to Christ himself, is not to be added to. Also, the feasts of Lev. 23 are the complete and inspired prophetic picture of Christ’s Messianic work. To institute new feasts AS JEWISH LAW, especially ones based on questionable historical acts, this is forbidden.”
(Robert Higby – October 19th 2005 – the Multi level canon.)
Robert Higby wrote:
“The main theological problems with Mark 16:9ff are two, as I see it:
1. The ’signs’ that are predicted to follow those that believe have not really been manifested as such, at least to some degree (the drinking of poison and avoiding death, etc.) and
2. Mark 16:16 teaches that ’he that believeth AND is baptized shall be saved,’ whereas Paul and John clearly teach that genuine belief with an AMEN (faith alone) evidences salvation. The water may be a testimony to the gospel but the lack of it does not negate eternal life! “
For a biblically accurate teaching of Baptism in Mark 16:16 please read the following article.
http://testallthings.wordpress.com/2008/03/12/what-baptism/
Robert Higby even has some issues he’d like to deal with regarding 2 Peter, 3 John and Jude.
Robert Higby wrote:
“There are some very minor issues with 2 Peter, 3 John, Jude, etc. but they are not worth a major argument and I would prefer to deal with the largest issue first.”
This third quote is further proof that he rejects Esther, Ecclesiastes and James and his reason why.
“My personal rejection of Esther, Ecclesiastes, and James is the false doctrine that they contain; the same reasons for rejecting other apocryphal works.”
(Robert Higby – January 4th 2006 – ‘Calvin’s 66 book Canon’)
And finally we finish with Higby’s “trouble” accepting 3 John as scripture along with 2 Peter and James.
“For me, the remaining 4 NT books that were originally antilegomena remain an open issue for study. I have the most trouble with 3 John, as it has no attestation of existence until the 3rd century (like James and 2 Peter) and gives no definite gospel testimony. Plus we do not know anything about who the characters mentioned in that book actually were historically.”
(Robert Higby – July 21st 2007 – From the thread ‘James Exposed’)
Here is what God has to say against such heresy.
Revelation 22:18-19
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Psalm 138:2
I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.
2 Peter 3:17-18
…Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.
Higby has rejected the Word of God and is promoting false concepts and false doctrine. Thanks for exposing him.
Larry Phillips
Excellent work, Chris!
Thank you for defending the whole counsel of God and not only your favourite parts in it.
John 12:48
‘He that rejecteth Me, and receiveth not My words, hath One that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.’
Good stuff Chris (o:
It is important that such blasphemous teachers and their teachings are exposed. I praise God for this website and others that contend for the faith and the integrity of God’s word. I find it astonishing that anyone could boldly refute and put God’s precious words to the test of MAN as we see above. There is just no fear of God before their eyes.
Holly is so right! Those who argue that the Bible was compiled by fallen men and is therefore open to whatever changes each person desires, expose themselves as unbelievers.
Nobody slanders such people, nobody wishes them ill, they themselves prove by their own words before the whole world that they despise the Word of God and therefore – by definition – cannot be belivers in the God of the Bible.
One cannot say: ‘I believe in God’, while rejecting the words of this same God. These two stances are incompatible by any stretch of imagination and good will. Trashing ‘some’ of the books of the Bible is not called ‘believing in God of the Bible’; it is called ‘mockery of God of the Bible’.
Why are the rejectors of ‘some books’ of the Bible upset when their own words are brought out into the open? What is so bad in it? Are they ashamed of their own pronouncements? And what if people who believe that all 66 books of the Bible are inspired by God do not agree with the rejectors’ position? Don’t people have right to disagree with what the rejectors believe and teach?
If it was a case of misunderstanding or misinterpretation, then the correction and apology would be in place. But in this case, Mr Higby and his followers are seen to esteem their gift of discernment so highly that they brazenly and openly take upon themselves the task of dismantling the Bible before the whole world! They don’t do it privately in secret; they bring their personal judgments into the open, habitually deriding those who dare to disagree with them. And then they get upset when their words written by themselves in public arena are brought to the attention of the wider audiences, making it possible for more readers to make up their own minds on the subject of rejecting some books of the Bible as ‘uninspired’ by private persons. Why the offence? Repent, you wicked mockers of God’s Word!
They claim to have been saved by God’s grace. But the words about grace which the rejectors happen to like in the Bible were also compiled by the same fallen men who put together the rejected as uninspired books and passages in the same Bible! Who decides which parts of the Bible (all of them being put together by fallen men) are inspired and which are not? It seems that Mr Higby, his mentors and followers are the ones allowing themselves to perform such a selection. But what if there are many such groups (and there are plenty of unbelievers around) who reject other parts of the Bible as uninspired according to their personal preferences – what will remain out of the 66 books of the Holy Bible? Nothing will remain of the Written Word of God. Is this the purpose and aim of Mr Higby and his followers? May the Lord open their eyes to what they are actually doing and achieving by their shameless tampering with the Word of God!
Christianity can only stand if all 66 books of the Bible are inviolate, revered and feared as the Inspired Word of God. Without this axiom, there is no Christianity, no grace, no Jesus Christ.