Because we do.
Is scripture the infallible Word Of God?
- Thread starter Bright Raven
- Start date
Fake
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Inerrancy, a failed hypothesis......
Inerrancy, a failed hypothesis......
~*~*~
Inerrancy, a failed hypothesis......
~*~*~
| Divine Inspiration & Biblical Inerrancy, a failed hypothesis | |
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Using your intelligence.......
Using your intelligence.......
First off, the Urantia Book (UB) has nothing to do with an honest objective researched estimation of the Bible, since these facts stand for themselves (the text, cultural-context itself) when understanding what the Bible is, without later attached sentiments or assumptions of it being totally 'inerrant' or 'infallible' which it isn't, unless you'd like to define those terms and provide proofs for them. Also, as I shared.....a religious work does not need to be such for it to have religious value or meaning, understanding that humans wrote it. Anything coming thru human channels is bound to be coloured by the mediums or authors producing the work (however inspired or enlightened), since these texts are being made for specific religious community, "serving" their faith-tradition. Consider their 'agendas'.
Using one's intelligent isn't necessarily a matter of pride but of logic and reason.
Some book may be more or less inspired, but this does not mean it is without error. Also that book passed off as Paul's writing is 'pseudographical'. Note, a letter or book represents the 'opinions' of its author(s).
Yes,...Jesus in the canonized gospels is presented as upholding the Jewish scriptures, Matthew going as far as to have Jesus maintaining the Torah and the prophets, NOT destroying or doing away with it. Jesus further instructs a person to 'keep the commandments' if he would live long and prosper. No doing away with the ''law" in these passages,...although Paul with 'his own gospel' does just that.
Also one claiming 'biblical inerrancy' has the problem of dealing with contradictions and inaccuracies in the OT. This is compounded with the claim of there needing to be a NT, which automatically discounts aspects of the OT, so its a complicated matter, beyond how the theology explains and 'apologizes' for itself (hence the 'need' for the whole business of 'apologetics').
Interestingly John has a somewhat anti-Jewish stance in some of his writing, yet conveniently quotes the OT when it serves his narrative. Btw,...this is an awesome passage showing that man can be seen as 'elohim' and that we are all children of God, but that's another topic.
If Jesus really upholds the law and the prophets, having not destroyed or done away with them, and the original apostles in Jerusalem upheld these Jewish laws and customs as encouraged by Jesus, then Paul's gospel and other different spin-offs from the Jewish root are 'innovations', 'deviations' or full on new denominations springing from such. From there you get the dilemma of whether Gentiles need to also follow Jewish laws/customs, which the Jerusalem Council attempted to resolve, but it still has some 'confusions' still, as the Jewish group seems to retain its customs while Gentiles are exempt but to follow a few rules. - from this we today have various groups trying to merge Jewish roots back into Christianity (messianic Jews, Hebrew roots movements) so its a kind of 'potpourri' of what Jewish customs you choose, and what you dispense with,....looks like 'cherry-picking' to me
The Jews don't have a monopoly on 'God', neither do Christians. - 'God' expresses his way uniquely/different within the various religious cults and traditions, like Light expressing thru the myriad colors of the rainbow,...but no single color-ray can claim to be the only representative or representation of Light. The 'Light' that is 'God' is omnipresent and within all sentient beings.
Using your intelligence.......
First off, the Urantia Book (UB) has nothing to do with an honest objective researched estimation of the Bible, since these facts stand for themselves (the text, cultural-context itself) when understanding what the Bible is, without later attached sentiments or assumptions of it being totally 'inerrant' or 'infallible' which it isn't, unless you'd like to define those terms and provide proofs for them. Also, as I shared.....a religious work does not need to be such for it to have religious value or meaning, understanding that humans wrote it. Anything coming thru human channels is bound to be coloured by the mediums or authors producing the work (however inspired or enlightened), since these texts are being made for specific religious community, "serving" their faith-tradition. Consider their 'agendas'.
Using one's intelligent isn't necessarily a matter of pride but of logic and reason.
Some book may be more or less inspired, but this does not mean it is without error. Also that book passed off as Paul's writing is 'pseudographical'. Note, a letter or book represents the 'opinions' of its author(s).
Yes,...Jesus in the canonized gospels is presented as upholding the Jewish scriptures, Matthew going as far as to have Jesus maintaining the Torah and the prophets, NOT destroying or doing away with it. Jesus further instructs a person to 'keep the commandments' if he would live long and prosper. No doing away with the ''law" in these passages,...although Paul with 'his own gospel' does just that.
Also one claiming 'biblical inerrancy' has the problem of dealing with contradictions and inaccuracies in the OT. This is compounded with the claim of there needing to be a NT, which automatically discounts aspects of the OT, so its a complicated matter, beyond how the theology explains and 'apologizes' for itself (hence the 'need' for the whole business of 'apologetics').
Interestingly John has a somewhat anti-Jewish stance in some of his writing, yet conveniently quotes the OT when it serves his narrative. Btw,...this is an awesome passage showing that man can be seen as 'elohim' and that we are all children of God, but that's another topic.
If Jesus really upholds the law and the prophets, having not destroyed or done away with them, and the original apostles in Jerusalem upheld these Jewish laws and customs as encouraged by Jesus, then Paul's gospel and other different spin-offs from the Jewish root are 'innovations', 'deviations' or full on new denominations springing from such. From there you get the dilemma of whether Gentiles need to also follow Jewish laws/customs, which the Jerusalem Council attempted to resolve, but it still has some 'confusions' still, as the Jewish group seems to retain its customs while Gentiles are exempt but to follow a few rules. - from this we today have various groups trying to merge Jewish roots back into Christianity (messianic Jews, Hebrew roots movements) so its a kind of 'potpourri' of what Jewish customs you choose, and what you dispense with,....looks like 'cherry-picking' to me
The Jews don't have a monopoly on 'God', neither do Christians. - 'God' expresses his way uniquely/different within the various religious cults and traditions, like Light expressing thru the myriad colors of the rainbow,...but no single color-ray can claim to be the only representative or representation of Light. The 'Light' that is 'God' is omnipresent and within all sentient beings.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Ah, about 'free will'........
Ah, about 'free will'........
My decision to respond to this is not 'fake',....its a response I've chosen to make; no personified 'god' outside of myself is necessarily making me to do this. Conditions, fators, influences are ever behind our actions movitating us to do this or that.
In the space provided, you still have 'choice'. That's good news really. It makes you 'responsible'. (note, there is no blaming 'God' for anything or assuming he is pulling all the strings, micro-managing everything). In order for there to be true 'self-responsiblity',...you have to have real freedom of choice in all circumstances and situations.
Ah, about 'free will'........
My decision to respond to this is not 'fake',....its a response I've chosen to make; no personified 'god' outside of myself is necessarily making me to do this. Conditions, fators, influences are ever behind our actions movitating us to do this or that.
In the space provided, you still have 'choice'. That's good news really. It makes you 'responsible'. (note, there is no blaming 'God' for anything or assuming he is pulling all the strings, micro-managing everything). In order for there to be true 'self-responsiblity',...you have to have real freedom of choice in all circumstances and situations.
Honesty is included in total depravityFirst off, the Urantia Book (UB) has nothing to do with an honest objective researched estimation of the Bible, since these facts stand for themselves (the text, cultural-context itself) when understanding what the Bible is, without later attached sentiments or assumptions of it being totally 'inerrant' or 'infallible' which it isn't, unless you'd like to define those terms and provide proofs for them. Also, as I shared.....a religious work does not need to be such for it to have religious value or meaning, understanding that humans wrote it. Anything coming thru human channels is bound to be coloured by the mediums or authors producing the work (however inspired or enlightened), since these texts are being made for specific religious community, "serving" their faith-tradition. Consider their 'agendas'.
Using one's intelligent isn't necessarily a matter of pride but of logic and reason.
Some book may be more or less inspired, but this does not mean it is without error. Also that book passed off as Paul's writing is 'pseudographical'. Note, a letter or book represents the 'opinions' of its author(s).
Yes,...Jesus in the canonized gospels is presented as upholding the Jewish scriptures, Matthew going as far as to have Jesus maintaining the Torah and the prophets, NOT destroying or doing away with it. Jesus further instructs a person to 'keep the commandments' if he would live long and prosper. No doing away with the ''law" in these passages,...although Paul with 'his own gospel' does just that.
Also one claiming 'biblical inerrancy' has the problem of dealing with contradictions and inaccuracies in the OT. This is compounded with the claim of there needing to be a NT, which automatically discounts aspects of the OT, so its a complicated matter, beyond how the theology explains and 'apologizes' for itself (hence the 'need' for the whole business of 'apologetics').
Interestingly John has a somewhat anti-Jewish stance in some of his writing, yet conveniently quotes the OT when it serves his narrative. Btw,...this is an awesome passage showing that man can be seen as 'elohim' and that we are all children of God, but that's another topic.
If Jesus really upholds the law and the prophets, having not destroyed or done away with them, and the original apostles in Jerusalem upheld these Jewish laws and customs as encouraged by Jesus, then Paul's gospel and other different spin-offs from the Jewish root are 'innovations', 'deviations' or full on new denominations springing from such. From there you get the dilemma of whether Gentiles need to also follow Jewish laws/customs, which the Jerusalem Council attempted to resolve, but it still has some 'confusions' still, as the Jewish group seems to retain its customs while Gentiles are exempt but to follow a few rules. - from this we today have various groups trying to merge Jewish roots back into Christianity (messianic Jews, Hebrew roots movements) so its a kind of 'potpourri' of what Jewish customs you choose, and what you dispense with,....looks like 'cherry-picking' to me
The Jews don't have a monopoly on 'God', neither do Christians. - 'God' expresses his way uniquely/different within the various religious cults and traditions, like Light expressing thru the myriad colors of the rainbow,...but no single color-ray can claim to be the only representative or representation of Light. The 'Light' that is 'God' is omnipresent and within all sentient beings.
Reformed never blames God.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
if we must tiptoe thru the tuips.......
if we must tiptoe thru the tuips.......
Oh TP,...I see we're diverting the subject to the good ole "TULIP" formula,...I'm sure there are other threads on that subject, or you can start your very own. We'd like to respect the thread subject without derailing it too far.
Funny, I dismantled 'TULIP' from a 'Divine Science' perspective on another thread and was banned for it. Those older posters here may know I used to have a Divine Science thread here, being a graduate student of that school of New Thought teaching. In any case, taking on 'TULIP' from a metaphysical perspective was fun.
Do note that the Jews do not hold to a 'theory' or 'doctrine' of 'total depravity' or 'original sin'....that was spin-doctored later by....well,...guess who.
if we must tiptoe thru the tuips.......
Oh TP,...I see we're diverting the subject to the good ole "TULIP" formula,...I'm sure there are other threads on that subject, or you can start your very own. We'd like to respect the thread subject without derailing it too far.
Funny, I dismantled 'TULIP' from a 'Divine Science' perspective on another thread and was banned for it. Those older posters here may know I used to have a Divine Science thread here, being a graduate student of that school of New Thought teaching. In any case, taking on 'TULIP' from a metaphysical perspective was fun.
Do note that the Jews do not hold to a 'theory' or 'doctrine' of 'total depravity' or 'original sin'....that was spin-doctored later by....well,...guess who.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Honesty includes recognizing the original innocence and goodness in man as well. That man is imperfect, prone to weakness and has the potential to choose wrongly, sin, make mistakes, etc.....is reasonable and logical, recognizing his human nature.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
I was making a contrasting statement to counter that thought, if any tendency towards it occurred. In any case, my statement of a soul having true responsibility for his actions and choices stands (and here I mean there being any degree of authentic freedom of choice existing at any moment). Also interwoven in these actions and consequences is the law of karma.
You say the bible isn't directly from God. It's expected as the bible claims.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
A book may be more or less inspired, but that doesn't mean it's error free or infallible. I thought we covered this. Men are capable of writing things claiming them to be from God, with their own spin.
Last edited:
The Gospel Matrix
New member
Hypothetical:
I write a book that I claim is divinely inspired by God.
You ask me what authority I have to say that.
I say because it says in the book itself that is God-breathed.
You rebut me as a false (whatever).
I claim that anyone who truly is led by the Spirit of God will accept it.
Where does that leave us?
66 books are 100% God spun. Witnessing God spun is a million times better than all the intellects put together on earth.
The bible was tested and that leaves you untested
Interplanner
Well-known member
If you actually read the Bible, ie, the NT since we are in the period to which the NT pertains, you would know that your hypothetical is not how it came about. The authority of the message or of the documents is not just the shear fact of their being written; there is something much more substantial and directly-delivered than that. Hint: the answer lies in how the NT uses the OT and how we know it is supposed to use it because of Christ's own explanation of it.
oatmeal
Well-known member
Don't know, but if you do not believe God's word own testimony regarding itself, then I would wonder how much of it you do really believe.
Don't you believe 2 Samuel 22:31 is true?
How about Psalm 12:6? Is that passage a forgery?
How about John 17:17? Were those Jesus' words or not recorded for all to learn from?
How about the record of Jesus' being tempted directly by the Devil himself? Jesus Christ clearly believed that scripture is God's word, other wise he would not replied with "it is written" If it was not God's word, but the works of man, the Devil would have known it and would have said so.
God's word spoke on lips that believe are powerful, powerful enough to back off the Devil himself.
Jesus Christ believe in that the record of Noah is true.
Matthew 24:38
For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
He believed that the record of the creation is God's word regarding God's activities
Mark 13:19
For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be.
Jesus Christ believed in the authenticity of scripture.
Interplanner
Well-known member
To Desert Reign,
It can seem like the authority of the church is crass about the NT books (not dealing with the OT list for now). But the reason is not one of human origins or one belonging to control-freaks. The reason is that the letters and accounts are true to the message which was preached and to the 40 days of training Christ gave the apostles before Paul from the Resurrection to Pentecost.
It is very important to understand an item from Rom 16:26 here, about the divine decree or command that has taken place. The message of the Christians was in the OT but hidden. It now is not hidden. The uncovering, the passage says, is not a 'list of books' or a voice from heaven etc., it is the fact of the number of believers who are Gentiles. Another translation here may be royal edict. The number of believers who are Gentiles (specifically at Rome, but that is a microcosm of the whole church) is the divine order which has taken place. The accounts and letters of the church merely show this taking place; you can't have an influx of Gentile believers without a message that is portable (transcultural) enough to do so. The Gospel is. So obviously, since this is what the whole OT was leading up to, the accounts and letters that show it happening step by step have its authority.
So the force of the authority of the NT comes down hardest on this message, not the 'list' of qualified books as though human leaders qualified them. The 'faith delivered once-for-all' was to the apostles, and was verbal yet was very extensive about how the OT was to be read. There are 2500 quotes or allusions! The accounts and letters we have are the transcript or receptacle of that message. When you leave these accounts and letters, you get into all kinds of strange directions that are way off this mark.
It can seem like the authority of the church is crass about the NT books (not dealing with the OT list for now). But the reason is not one of human origins or one belonging to control-freaks. The reason is that the letters and accounts are true to the message which was preached and to the 40 days of training Christ gave the apostles before Paul from the Resurrection to Pentecost.
It is very important to understand an item from Rom 16:26 here, about the divine decree or command that has taken place. The message of the Christians was in the OT but hidden. It now is not hidden. The uncovering, the passage says, is not a 'list of books' or a voice from heaven etc., it is the fact of the number of believers who are Gentiles. Another translation here may be royal edict. The number of believers who are Gentiles (specifically at Rome, but that is a microcosm of the whole church) is the divine order which has taken place. The accounts and letters of the church merely show this taking place; you can't have an influx of Gentile believers without a message that is portable (transcultural) enough to do so. The Gospel is. So obviously, since this is what the whole OT was leading up to, the accounts and letters that show it happening step by step have its authority.
So the force of the authority of the NT comes down hardest on this message, not the 'list' of qualified books as though human leaders qualified them. The 'faith delivered once-for-all' was to the apostles, and was verbal yet was very extensive about how the OT was to be read. There are 2500 quotes or allusions! The accounts and letters we have are the transcript or receptacle of that message. When you leave these accounts and letters, you get into all kinds of strange directions that are way off this mark.
OCTOBER23
New member
JESUS SAID THAT GOD'S WORD IS TRUTH, SPEAKING OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching,
for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
---------------------------------------------------------------
ps GEORGE AFFLECK IS A CANADIAN WHO IS LIVING IN LALA-LAND.
I AUTO KNOW. :car::car:
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching,
for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
---------------------------------------------------------------
ps GEORGE AFFLECK IS A CANADIAN WHO IS LIVING IN LALA-LAND.
I AUTO KNOW. :car::car:
Interplanner
Well-known member
JESUS SAID THAT GOD'S WORD IS TRUTH, SPEAKING OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching,
for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
---------------------------------------------------------------
ps GEORGE AFFLECK IS A CANADIAN WHO IS LIVING IN LALA-LAND.
I AUTO KNOW. :car::car:
True, and the NT shows what that OT message was supposed to be.