God's Truth
New member
Your test made no sense it is ridiculous. Your test just proves that you don't have understanding.
You are making up things about the Bible that are not true.
Scripture. What is considered Scripture?
- Thread starter Jacob
- Start date
Your test made no sense it is ridiculous. Your test just proves that you don't have understanding.
You are making up things about the Bible that are not true.
God's Truth
New member
Oh that is so pathetic.
No amount of education, or studies in other languages such as Greek or Hebrew will give you God’s Truth, not even going to those who are educated. In fact, the word of God says in 1 Corinthians 1:27 “But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong.
Isaiah 44:25 who foils the signs of false prophets and makes fools of diviners, who overthrows the learning of the wise and turns it into nonsense,
Jeremiah 8:9 The wise will be put to shame; they will be dismayed and trapped. Since they have rejected the word of the LORD, what kind of wisdom do they have?
1 Corinthians 1:20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?
1 Corinthians 1:21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.
1 Corinthians 2:12 We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us.
Luke 10:21 At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure.
Did you read that? God hid His Truth from the wise and learned so why do you go to them for knowledge about God?
God's Truth
New member
You are trying to cause distrust of the Bible and you have not proven anything you said.
I am not trying to cause distrust in the Bible. I am hoping you can come to see that the Bible does not have to be inerrant to be valuable. God has always used imperfect people and imperfect things to do His work.
What would you like proven? That one of the gospels misquotes Jesus in some insignificant way, because the writers were not infallible?
Here is an example:
Mark 6 7 He called the twelve and began to send them out two by two, and gave them authority over the unclean spirits. 8 He ordered them to take nothing for their journey except a staff; no bread, no bag, no money in their belts; 9 but to wear sandals and not to put on two tunics.
Luke 9 1 Then Jesus called the twelve together and gave them power and authority over all demons and to cure diseases, 2 and he sent them out to proclaim the kingdom of God and to heal. 3 He said to them, "Take nothing for your journey, no staff, nor bag, nor bread, nor money—not even an extra tunic.
In Luke, Jesus told them to take no staff. In Mark, Jesus told them to take a staff.
This is an unimportant difference for those of us who follow Jesus without demanding a perfect Bible. The difference, and the other few minor errors in the text, do disprove the doctrine of inerrancy.
If you consider the doctrine of imerrancy a core doctrine, ask yourself why the Bible never claims that it is inerrant.
Do you see the difference between the account in Mark and the account in Luke?
What
To the poster who goes by the name God’s Truth, I will provide a comment by Dr. Daniel Wallace of Dallas Theological Seminary warning against making inerrancy a prime doctrine:
What I tell my students every year is that it is imperative that they pursue truth rather than protect their presuppositions. And they need to have a doctrinal taxonomy that distinguishes core beliefs from peripheral beliefs. When they place more peripheral doctrines such as inerrancy and verbal inspiration at the core, then when belief in these doctrines start to erode, it creates a domino effect: One falls down, they all fall down. It strikes me that something like this may be what happened to Bart Ehrman. His testimony in Misquoting Jesus discussed inerrancy as the prime mover in his studies. But when a glib comment from one of his conservative professors at Princeton was scribbled on a term paper, to the effect that perhaps the Bible is not inerrant, Ehrman’s faith began to crumble. One domino crashed into another until eventually he became ‘a fairly happy agnostic.’ I may be wrong about Ehrman’s own spiritual journey, but I have known too many students who have gone in that direction. The irony is that those who frontload their critical investigation of the text of the Bible with bibliological presuppositions often speak of a ‘slippery slope’ on which all theological convictions are tied to inerrancy. Their view is that if inerrancy goes, everything else begins to erode. I would say that if inerrancy is elevated to the status of a prime doctrine, that’s when one gets on a slippery slope. But if a student views doctrines as concentric circles, with the cardinal doctrines occupying the center, then if the more peripheral doctrines are challenged, this does not have an effect on the core.
http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2006/03/interview-with-dan-wallace.html
I hope this helps. Follow Jesus, and do not cling to man-made traditions.
What I tell my students every year is that it is imperative that they pursue truth rather than protect their presuppositions. And they need to have a doctrinal taxonomy that distinguishes core beliefs from peripheral beliefs. When they place more peripheral doctrines such as inerrancy and verbal inspiration at the core, then when belief in these doctrines start to erode, it creates a domino effect: One falls down, they all fall down. It strikes me that something like this may be what happened to Bart Ehrman. His testimony in Misquoting Jesus discussed inerrancy as the prime mover in his studies. But when a glib comment from one of his conservative professors at Princeton was scribbled on a term paper, to the effect that perhaps the Bible is not inerrant, Ehrman’s faith began to crumble. One domino crashed into another until eventually he became ‘a fairly happy agnostic.’ I may be wrong about Ehrman’s own spiritual journey, but I have known too many students who have gone in that direction. The irony is that those who frontload their critical investigation of the text of the Bible with bibliological presuppositions often speak of a ‘slippery slope’ on which all theological convictions are tied to inerrancy. Their view is that if inerrancy goes, everything else begins to erode. I would say that if inerrancy is elevated to the status of a prime doctrine, that’s when one gets on a slippery slope. But if a student views doctrines as concentric circles, with the cardinal doctrines occupying the center, then if the more peripheral doctrines are challenged, this does not have an effect on the core.
http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2006/03/interview-with-dan-wallace.html
I hope this helps. Follow Jesus, and do not cling to man-made traditions.
God's Truth
New member
It is about not taking two staffs.
Matthew 10: take no bag for the road, or second tunic, or sandals, or staff; for the worker is worthy of his provisions.
I did not quote Matthew. I quoted Mark and Luke. Luke says:
Take nothing for your journey, no staff, ...
So you introduction of Matthew only compounds the error. It does nothing to eliminate it.
Luke says take no staff. Mark say take a staff.
I am sure you can see that in the text. Why deny the truth?
God's Truth
New member
I don't have any man made traditions.
You didn't even address why you bragged on that man's education.
I have heard unbelievers say they don't believe in God nor the Bible because of what they call "inconsistencies." The so-called "inconsistencies" in the Bible are not so that they change any doctrine, nor do they make for any extra doctrine. In fact, if someone refuses to believe in God and Jesus because of the so-called inconsistencies, then I say it is an excellent way for the less than interested people to be weeded out from entering the kingdom of heaven, the people who look for anything as a reason not to believe.
I really would like that this comment of mine to spark something in the one who doubts, to fight and never give up, searching for God, and to get forceful on searching for God instead of falling back for so called inconsistencies.
I don't have any man made traditions.
You declare the scriptures are inerrant. That is a man-made tradition. It is not an internal claim of the Bible.
Do you accept a 66-book canon or the 80-book canon of the 1611 KJV? Those are both man-made traditions.
It appears your dedication to the inerrancy doctrine is so strong that you are willing to deny the clear text of Luke which declares Jesus told the Apostles to take no staff on the missionary journey. I hope I am wrong about that — that you will not chose to deny what the Bible actually says in Luke 9.
You declare the scriptures are inerrant. That is a man-made tradition. It is not an internal claim of the Bible.
Do you accept a 66-book canon or the 80-book canon of the 1611 KJV? Those are both man-made traditions.
It appears your dedication to the inerrancy doctrine is so strong that you are willing to deny the clear text of Luke which declares Jesus told the Apostles to take no staff on the missionary journey. I hope I am wrong about that — that you will not chose to deny what the Bible actually says in Luke 9.
God's Truth
New member
You deny the truth that education means nothing while you exalt that man.
You also did not tell the truth when you said I say Matthew only.
I don't deny the truth. You need to be given wisdom from God and be able to be reasoned with.
Take nothing for the journey, but if a person needs a staff to help in walking then common sense tells you that it is not recommended to take an extra staff---just like no extra sandals and no extra tunics.
How do you ever get that you can prove that the written words of God are not to be trusted?
God's Truth
New member
As I told you before that you are not reasonable. Why if one needed a staff to help one walk would he be told not to take ANY instead of not an extra one? Read all of God's written words.
Once we have people such as yourself saying this is a mistake and that is, then the whole Bible is under question.
The Bible says scripture is God breathed, and God does not make mistakes.
Which quote is correct.
Did Jesus say “take no staff” as in Luke.
Or did Jesus say “Don’t take 2 staffs” as in Matthew.
Or did Jesus say “take nothing except a staff...”
Which one is what Jesus actually said?
Is your fear that the whole Bible will be in question if there is one error the reason that you will not recognize that the gospels differ on these quotes of Jesus?
If so, then your tradition of man, the doctrine of inerrancy, is causing you to deny what the Bible says.
This is why Dr. Wallace warned against making inerrancy a prime doctrine.
God's Truth
New member
Use the whole counsel of God.
What does a reasonable person who trusts God's written Word think?
I already told you what I believe.
If you are willing to claim that you have explained the differences, then there is no point in going further and we both know the truth.
God's Truth
New member
Notice that you will not address what I ask and say.
Tell me why you exalted that man for his education when many scriptures say not to.
Tell me why you would think God would say no staff at all when the other scriptures say to take one and not to take two?
Tell me why you would rather have people read the Bible and say they wonder now which is right and which scripture is error?
Tell me why you didn't address the fact that you have shown NOTHING that makes a false doctrine.
ANSWER THAT ONE. Is there a false doctrine about not taking a staff? Is there a doctrine that says don't read all the scriptures we have?
God's Truth
New member
No, you are a dishonest person. Stop accusing me of being dishonest. You are what you judged me to be.
The scripture SAYS to take a staff and not to take two.
Read all of the scriptures and use the whole counsel of God.
God's Truth
New member
Just read how evil you sound "...and we both know the truth."
I am in no way deceitful and am in no way like you.
You claimed “take no staff” actually said “don’t take two staffs.”
Don’t we both know that is a false statement?