Scripture. What is considered Scripture?

[daqq]

Hello there 2003cobra and Zenn,

You two seem to be the most logical persons who are opposing the inerrant nature doctrine of Scripture. While I haven't been participating, I have been keeping up with the thread and trying as best I can to follow along with the various debates and discussions. From what I can infer, you two are coming in from an unchanging/closed idea of the Scriptures being errant (if I am wrong, please correct me), while, consistently, your opposition comes in with unchanging/closed idea of inerrant Scripture.

If I may, I would like to take a fresh approach to the discussion with one or both of you, as you two seem to be the most reasonable (and cobra is the OP after all). I will inform you upfront, as 2003cobra knows, that I do ascribe to the doctrine of the inerrant Scriptures. Yet, I am always open to logic and evidence. With that, I would just like a basic argument, as well as evidence/logic for your position. (For example, I noticed that the genealogy of Joseph was a particular piece of evidence)

I look forward to your response(s) and the discussion.

The portion in red is incorrect but it will be interesting to watch from the sidelines anyways.

opcorn:

Feel free to participate friend. And my bad on the incorrect OP; I was basing it off my poor memory of discussion on this thread some time back (most of my discussion was with 2003cobra then; hence my false attribution).

Sent from my iPhone using TOL

If he had not told you to essentially take a hike and go read Bart Ehrman's book before talking to him, I would have been more reluctant to jump back in, (moreover you thanked his post, which I'm sure was not for that but out of your politeness or some other reason, but I suppose I could be wrong).

Greetings and Facilitations !! (You are far too gracious.)

Well not to throw a spanner into the works, but...

I know of a third position where one would claim that the New Testament texts have errors in facts and discrepancies in presentation, but is inerrant in doctrine and spiritual teaching.

What does it matter if Jarius' daughter was dead or not? It doesn't. The error in fact is irrelevant. What matters is that Jesus can resurrect. This is a hard thing to do, and when I raised Walter from the dead, I was flat out exhausted in bed for two days.

But I am surprised to see myself characterized as "opposing the inerrant nature doctrine of Scripture." I'm not. Rather I am "promoting the sane doctrine of reading what is actually written," and I read the initial Greek manuscripts so I can avoid bad decisions made by other translators who for the most part have been indoctrinated into certain theologies beforehand and so see these doctrines already in the text. The real trouble is when one learns that God loves you and he provided this Book for you to follow that Has no Errors! (Which you really aren't expected to read or question anyway.) But then someone comes along and actually reads it, only to find the numerous issues that Cobra chomps on about. And the Baby Jesus gets thrown out with the bathwater.

If you have not yet read the book "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart Ehrman, I would highly encourage you to do so before we continue on. Bart makes some real blunders in his conclusions, but presents important facts regrading the transmission of New Testament scriptures from the ancient days. Yes, the book has destroyed the faith of many who were weak, but it hadn't destroyed mine. It just made me more aware. To a God fearing Christian, it will make his faith stronger.


When I find a discrepancy, I am not closed to the idea that such might be reconciled by a well presented argument. But when something in the text clearly shows that Jesus was crucified on Thursday, well... I will admit to being highly perplexed when I see all these morons attend Good Friday services. It's like they just don't care to spend the time and energy to be accurate in their beliefs. When a portion of scripture shows an error, I (personally) am not enthralled to "an unchanging/closed idea of the Scriptures being errant". Certitude within the Web of Belief should never be cemented into the unmovable rock.

Inerrant in both fact and spiritual truth? or just inerrant in spiritual matters? :AMR:

Cobra, more than I, has a "go to" list of his favorites, so I'll let him provide these, for which it would become your responsibility to be open and honest as to whether the specifics he provides actually do constitute an "error" (whatever that might mean). There are many Bibles out there that have errors, even amongst the corpus of Greek mss. (of course they are mostly spelling errors).

But God won't strike you down with lightning bolts if you realize that Matthew describes an event where Jesus is riding on two animals at the same time (one hopes sidesaddle). The author of Matthew just did not understand the doublet in Jewish poetry. Whoever the author of the gospel according to Matthew was, he most certainly wasn't a Jew, nor was he writing to Jews.

Personally, I'm more interested in hearing why you "ascribe to the doctrine of the inerrant Scriptures" and what that means.

But for any real discussion to take place, I would again recommend you read the book "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart Ehrman

Zenn

PS: I don't think Cobra is OP. That would be jacob. I, as usual, am late to the party.

PPS: Borrow Ehrman's book from the library so he doesn't get any more money. :jolly:

But as most probably already saw this, and have probably already noticed, he is not here to discuss or debate any of his assumptions and accusations. He is only here to tell us all how wrong we are: and he speaks in tongues and raises the dead to prove it, (or at least makes the claim). In their own minds there is no need for him or Cobra to prove that what they say is true: it is true because they say so.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Raising Walter from the dead? I should say so. How in the wide world could I say a THING after that? Game over, no?

I 'might' say something for posterity of the thread, but yeah, I'm done. :wave2: -Lon


Watchman, is this where you stand too?

How many time has Lon said goodbye to us now? I count 3 or 4 times. Go already. :wave:

 

[daqq]

God gives revelation!

This morning I was lead to watch a program I had recorded about Mary and learned that in the apocryphal gospel of James Mary's Mother Anna was a descendant of Levi, (her Father was a descendant of David). This (for me) confirms Jesus really was meant to be the true high priest after John the Baptist died!

Using the Talmud to refute the writings now? Try reading Apocalypse Yaakob, (aka "the Protoevangelium of James"), in that text Mariam is the daughter of Yoakim and Hannah. But of course you will not accept that as evidence will you? even though you will use the Talmud against the Bible. :chuckle:

See how in your quote you have [son] in brackets within the text, (which I highlighted in red)? That is the ellipsis which Lightfoot says should instead be "[Jesus, the son]"(of), but there is no justification for that other than that it allows him to pull the old switcheroo and turn the genealogy into that of Mariam. Moreover the holy seed line is father-to-son from the very beginning, all the way down to the Messiah, including the Matthew genealogy, (and although the Luke genealogy runs in reverse order it is still the same in this respect), so essentially you are saying that the holy seed line from Adam all the way down to Messiah is father-to-son and suddenly at the very end of the line you pull the ole switcheroo and destroy four thousand years of scripture teaching to fabricate a way to uphold a doctrine.

Moreover:

Originally Posted by daqq
Lol, I just did, moreover Elisheba, ("Elisabeth"), the sister of Nahshon the prince of tribe Yhudah is the mother of the Kohanim: all the sons of Ahron.

Every son and daughter of Ahron is 100% Leviy and 100% Yhudi . . . :chuckle:

Numbers 2:3
3 And those that encamp on the east side toward the sunrising shall be they of the standard of the camp of Yhudah, according to their hosts: and the prince of the children of Yhudah shall be Nahshon the son of Amminadab.

Exodus 6:23
23 And Ahron took him Elisheba, the daughter of Amminadab, the sister of Nahshon, to wife; and she bare him Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar.

Exodus 6:23 LXX
23 ελαβεν δε ααρων την ελισαβεθ θυγατερα αμιναδαβ αδελφην ναασσων αυτω γυναικα και ετεκεν αυτω τον τε ναδαβ και αβιουδ και ελεαζαρ και ιθαμαρ

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Boo Hoo.... I'm sure you deserve every single thing you get. If you feel you have been brutalized, the problem is yours and yours alone. Save your "righteous indignation" for the fools who might fall for your whining.

That is quite nasty again.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Note how he loves playing the victim.

Same with Sonnet. Same with Evil Eye. Same with all the sock puppet pretenders. "Oh woe is me", they whine. :baby:

I see these complaints of theirs as ways we test what they are made of. And we do see, don't we?

They are made of self-importance. They are made of self-pity. They are made of self-righteousness.

That makes YOU sound self important and void of any genuine intent to debate the topic.

 

[2003cobra]

Did you see him raise Walter from the dead? Or anybody for that matter?

If not Walter, can you describe what happened for whoever you saw?

No, but Zenn’s not the only report that I have seen of people being raised from the dead.

God’s power has not diminished.

 

[2003cobra]

The reality that God does not use signs and wonders in this age of Grace.

There is always a purpose for miracles and signs and wonders. There was a purpose they were used in the Old Testament. To show the power of God to the world. There was a purpose they were used by the hands of the Apostles. They were used to bring people to belief in Christ.

Acts 5:12 And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people; (and they were all with one accord in Solomon's porch.​

Now, in this age of Grace, we have the Gospel to preach, and it's by hearing and believing the Gospel that men are saved. It's by prayer and supplication that we are healed. We have direct access to God, and need not have any man "performing" any such acts.

When do you think God stopped?

This is an important question. Answer if you know what you beleive.

 

[2003cobra]

Boo Hoo.... I'm sure you deserve every single thing you get. If you feel you have been brutalized, the problem is yours and yours alone. Save your "righteous indignation" for the fools who might fall for your whining.

No, I wasn’t brutalized. I am not indignant. I repeated those points because of that they revealed about Lon.

 

[2003cobra]

This is all emotion. Where are your facts and citations? As I said it's the same kind of responses you make when critiquing scripture or replying to those trying to debate scripture with you.

For instance I still haven't seen you confirm whether you think Jesus asked for one animal or two? And we're well over a hundred pages in now!

If I recall correctly, Lon did try to explain the animals. I believe he said that Jesus sent them for one animal and that Jesus rode one animal.

He implicitly declared Matthew in error.

 

[2003cobra]

If he had not told you to essentially take a hike and go read Bart Ehrman's book before talking to him, I would have been more reluctant to jump back in, (moreover you thanked his post, which I'm sure was not for that but out of your politeness or some other reason, but I suppose I could be wrong).

But as most probably already saw this, and have probably already noticed, he is not here to discuss or debate any of his assumptions and accusations. He is only here to tell us all how wrong we are: and he speaks in tongues and raises the dead to prove it, (or at least makes the claim). In their own minds there is no need for him or Cobra to prove that what they say is true: it is true because they say so.

I have proved through several passages of scripture that the doctrine of inerrancy is false. Some of these minor, insignificant errors in scripture you will not even try to reconcile. The last set of passages had three errors in the story of Jairus, and you have not even attempted an explanation. No,one has.

So your statement in bold is false.

 

[2003cobra]

How many time has Lon said goodbye to us now? I count 3 or 4 times. Go already. :wave:

No! He needs to stay and recognize that he is teaching the wrong things.

He needs the help.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

No! He needs to stay and recognize that he is teaching the wrong things.

He needs the help.

Yes, I just think it's silly when I see someone say that as if it means anything or helps their argument, and also everyone knows they're not going anywhere. lain:

 

[2003cobra]

That is quite nasty again.

That makes YOU sound self important and void of any genuine intent to debate the topic.

Keep the high ground, Watchman.

Glory needs help. She is very angry and she thinks God abandoned His people.

She hasn’t responded yet, telling us when she think God stopped doing miracles. That will be interesting, if she even has an answer.

 

[daqq]

I have proved through several passages of scripture that the doctrine of inerrancy is false. Some of these minor, insignificant errors in scripture you will not even try to reconcile. The last set of passages had three errors in the story of Jairus, and you have not even attempted an explanation. No,one has.

So your statement in bold is false.

Nope, you have not proven anything: and as for the several accounts of Yair, they are of the same manner as what I already explained to you concerning the several accounts of the centurion, (including the nobleman's son). I do not care that you do not believe me: I do have an answer for them, and you freely admit that you do not, and therefore the only thing you have actually proven is that you do not understand the scripture, and especially not the Gospel accounts, including the Testimony of the Messiah containing the most critically important things for you to understand so that you may live.

 

[daqq]

Keep the high ground, Watchman.

Glory needs help. She is very angry and she thinks God abandoned His people.

She hasn’t responded yet, telling us when she think God stopped doing miracles. That will be interesting, if she even has an answer.

:rotfl: You cannot say twelve words without forking your tongue in the midst of your sentence and doing the exact opposite of what you imagine yourself to be doing! Do you truly imagine your condescension to be the "high ground"??? I suppose from where you think you stand you are pretty high up there. :chuckle:

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

To me this debate is a bit like left wing right politics and how people are spread out across the spectrum:

Inerrancy: John W - Lon - glorydaze - PJ - daqq - Watchman - Zenn - cobra :Non-Inerrancy

Apologies if I have misplaced or left anyone out and I did not know what the opposite of inerrancy is called. Feel free to amend.

 

[daqq]

How do you interpret these sentences?
________________________________

He went to an established school and a good one.

It was the best of times. It was the worst of times.

This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
This nurse, this teeming womb of royal kings...
This land of such dear souls, this dear dear land...

O LORD, rebuke me not in thine anger, neither chasten me in thy hot displeasure.

The team was high in the standings and the players were having fun.
________________________________

Is it necessary, in these examples, to separate the ideas presented to such an extent as to think that different things are being talked about or just different aspects of the same thing?

Example number one, for instance, does not have a comma: so I would read it as one school, an established and a good one. But if there was a comma after school, ("He went to an established school, and a good one"), I would be cautious and ask for clarification because the speaker/writer could be speaking of two different schools; for an established one does not necessarily mean a good one. That is another problem with Greek and Hebrew: no punctuation in the ancient texts. I can punctuate Gen 9:2-4 differently from how the meat-eaters have punctuated it and with the writings of Paul, (properly interpreted according to the Tanach), I can remove your right to eat meat, (lol), but I have no right to do that to you so I only concern myself with those things, (for the most part).

 

[2003cobra]

Nope, you have not proven anything: and as for the several accounts of Yair, they are of the same manner as what I already explained to you concerning the several accounts of the centurion, (including the nobleman's son). I do not care that you do not believe me: I do have an answer for them, and you freely admit that you do not, and therefore the only thing you have actually proven is that you do not understand the scripture, and especially not the Gospel accounts, including the Testimony of the Messiah containing the most critically important things for you to understand so that you may live.

Daqq, you don’t have an answer for the three errors listed in the story of Jairus, nor for the others.

But I understand that you can’t admit that.

 

[daqq]

Daqq, you don’t have an answer for the three errors listed in the story of Jairus, nor for the others.

But I understand that you can’t admit that.

One would first need to understand the locale and the story of Yair. The locale is Yhudah beyond Yarden: do you know where that is? It is the former cities which were called Havoth-Yair. They became territory of Yhudah because of what is written in 1Chr 2:21,22,23. Moreover there was a Yair, a Gileadi, who judged Yisrael twenty two years: and he had thirty sons that rode on thirty donkey colts, and they had thirty cities, which are called Havoth-Yair unto this day, which are in the land of Gilead. And Yair died, and was buried in Rise Again, (Kumon, from where also comes "Talitha Kumi"). I do not think I can explain any more of it to someone who does not want to believe the scripture. :chuckle:

 

[Lon]

No... I am not indignant. I repeated those points because of that they revealed about Lon.

But I understand that you can’t admit that.

Lon...
implicitly declared Matthew in error.

How many time has Lon said goodbye to us now? I count 3 or 4 times. Go already. :wave:

:think: Thanks for the help out the door?