I can not.
What is Open Theism position on inerrancy of scripture?
- Thread starter Cygnus
- Start date
Derf
Well-known member
That's what I'm asking you.
Derf
Well-known member
I use the KJV mostly, too. And I'm a strong proponent of open theism. So it seems that we agree your OP is a nothing-burger.
I did mention in that post regards Satan and Eve's encounter that his enquiry "...Yea, hath God said..." was to plant a seed of doubt in the negative sense - that is, with the intent to harm.
Do you agree that a seed of doubt can be planted in the mind of another in a positive sense - that is, with the intent to edify?
You have misunderstood the intent of the OP - it was not about which translation... see below
The OP was a general enquiry - regarding inerrancy and infallibility, to gauge the degree of acceptance of that doctrine, or the degree of rejection of that doctrine, within the open theist community.
Incidentally - In your opinion is God's word inerrant and infallible?
Derf
Well-known member
Sure. But if your intent is to disparage other translations, while you admit to using them, it's more of a seed of contention, which I don't see as edifying. Paul tells Timothy not to do that.
2 Timothy 2:23 KJV — But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.
Derf
Well-known member
My previous response "I can not" - was an acknowledgement that I lack the required skill and ability to either read or translate Hebrew.
The translation of one language into another is a complex undertaking - The translators of the KJV was an assembly of the highest quality experts in Hebrew and Greek ever assembled, and every one of them loved and worshiped the Lord in Spirit and Truth...that is a decisive factor.
If you ever have the chance to read the personal correspondence letters and diaries of the translators Westcott and Horn you will be disturbed, or rather, you ought to be disturbed...here is a few samples below
The following quotes from the diaries and letters of Westcott and Hort demonstrate their serious departures from orthodoxy, revealing their opposition to evangelical Protestantism and sympathies with Rome and ritualism. Many more could be given. Their views on Scripture and the Text are highlighted.
1846 Oct. 25th – Westcott: "Is there not that in the principles of the "Evangelical" school which must lead to the exaltation of the individual minister, and does not that help to prove their unsoundness? If preaching is the chief means of grace, it must emanate not from the church, but from the preacher, and besides placing him in a false position, it places him in a fearfully dangerous one." (Life, Vol.I, pp.44,45).
Oct., 22nd after Trinity Sunday – Westcott: "Do you not understand the meaning of Theological 'Development'? It is briefly this, that in an early time some doctrine is proposed in a simple or obscure form, or even but darkly hinted at, which in succeeding ages,as the wants of men's minds grow, grows with them – in fact, that Christianity is always progressive in its principles and doctrines" (Life, Vol.I, p.78).
Dec. 23rd – Westcott: "My faith is still wavering. I cannot determine how much we must believe; how much, in fact, is necessarily required of a member of the Church." (Life, Vol.I, p.46).
1847 Jan., 2nd Sunday after Epiphany – Westcott: "After leaving the monastery we shaped our course to a little oratory.....It is very small, with one kneeling-place; and behind a screen was a 'Pieta' the size of life (i.e., a Virgin and dead Christ).....I could not help thinking on the grandeur of the Romish Church, on her zeal even in error, on her earnestness and self-devotion, which we might, with nobler views and a purer end, strive to imitate. Had I been alone I could have knelt there for hours." (Life, Vol.I, p.81).
1848 July 6th – Hort: "One of the things, I think, which shows the falsity of the Evangelical notion of this subject (baptism), is that it is so trim and precise.....no deep spiritual truths of the Reason are thus logically harmonious and systematic.....the pure Romish view seems to me nearer, and more likely to lead to, the truth than the Evangelical.....the fanaticism of the bibliolaters, among whom reading so many 'chapters' seems exactly to correspond to the Romish superstition of telling so many dozen beads on a rosary.....still we dare not forsake the Sacraments, or God will forsake us.....I am inclined to think that no such state as 'Eden' (I mean the popular notion) ever existed, and that Adam's fall in no degree differed from the fall of each of his descendants" (Life, Vol.I, pp.76-78).
Aug. 11th – Westcott: "I never read an account of a miracle (in Scripture?) but I seem instinctively to feel its improbability, and discover some want of evidence in the account of it." (Life, Vol.I, p.52).
Nov., Advent Sunday – Westcott: "All stigmatise him (a Dr. Hampden) as a 'heretic,'.....I thought myself that he was grievously in error, but yesterday I read over the selections from his writings which his adversaries make, and in them I found systematically expressed the very strains of thought which I have been endeavouring to trace out for the last two or three years. If he be condemned, what will become of me?" (Life, Vol.I,p.94).
1850 May 12th – Hort: "You ask me about the liberty to be allowed to clergymen in their views of Baptism. For my own part, I would gladly admit to the ministry such as hold Gorham's view, much more such as hold the ordinary confused Evangelical notions" (Life, Vol.I, p.148).
July 31st – Hort: "I spoke of the gloomy prospect, should the Evangelicals carry on their present victory so as to alter the Services." (Life, Vol.I, p.160).
1851 Feb. 7th – Hort: "Westcott is just coming out with his Norrisian on 'The Elements of the Gospel Harmony.' I have seen the first sheet on Inspiration, which is a wonderful step in advance of common orthodox heresy." (Life, Vol.I, p.181).
1858 Oct. 21st – Westcott: Further I agree with them in condemning many leading specific doctrines of the popular theology as, to say the least, containing much superstition and immorality of a very pernmicious kind.....The positive doctrines even of the Evangelicals seem to me perverted rather than untrue.....There are, I fear, still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority, and especially the authority of the Bible" (Life, Vol.I, p.400).
1860 Apr. 3rd – Hort: "But the book which has most engaged me is Darwin. Whatever may be thought of it, it is a book that one is proud to be contemporary with. I must work out and examine the argument in more detail, but at present my feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable." (Life, Vol.I, p.416).
Oct. 15th – Hort: "I entirely agree – correcting one word – with what you there say on the Atonement, having for many years believed that "the absolute union of the Christian (or rather, of man) with Christ Himself" is the spiritual truth of which the popular doctrine of substitution is an immoral and material counterfeit.....Certainly nothing can be more unscriptural than the modern limiting of Christ's bearing our sins and sufferings to His death; but indeed that is only one aspect of an almost universal heresy." (Life, Vol.I, p.430).
1864 Sept. 23rd – Hort: "I believe Coleridge was quite right in saying that Christianity without a substantial Church is vanity and dissolution; and I remember shocking you and Lightfoot not so very long ago by expressing a belief that 'Protestantism' is only parenthetical and temporary. In short, the Irvingite creed (minus the belief in the superior claims of the Irvingite communion) seems to me unassailable in things ecclesiastical." (Life, Vol.II, p.30,31).
1865 Sept. 27th – Westcott: "I have been trying to recall my impressions of La Salette (a marian shrine). I wish I could see to what forgotten truth Mariolatry bears witness; and how we can practically set forth the teaching of the miracles" (Life, Vol.I, p.
Nov. 17th – Westcott: "As far as I could judge, the 'idea' of La Salette was that of God revealing Himself now, and not in one form but in many." (Life, Vol.I. pp.251,252).
Oct. 17th – Hort: "I have been persuaded for many years that Mary-worship and 'Jesus'-worship have very much in common in their causes and their results." (Life, Vol.II, p.50).
1867 Oct. 17th – Hort: "I wish we were more agreed on the doctrinal part; but you know I am a staunch sacerdotalist, and there is not much profit in arguing about first principles." (Life, Vol.II, p.86).
1890 Mar. 4th – Westcott: "No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history – I could never understand how any one reading them with open eyes could think they did – yet they disclose to us a Gospel. So it is probably elsewhere."
To gauge whether or not one person or another believes the words that God speaks such as Jesus words - "the scripture can not be broken"
What do you think he meant by that statement?
I was being kind in my choice of words to encourage you to at least acknowledge that.
And did not propose the more difficult enquiry - In your opinion is the bible inerrant and infallible?
So while I am glad that you think so highly of the words that God Himself speaks - I am disappointed that you think He lacks the power and ability to secure and keep unadulterated the words He inspired and caused to be recorded in written form.
It is not my intent to disparage other translations.
If it was my intent to disparage other translations I would have asked if you preferred translation was the NIV?
You know? … the Nearly Inspired Version.
In regards the bolded section - Your quoted scripture - Does that apply to textual criticism?
If that's what you think wrt the Bible, I wonder what you must think of the creation itself, being corrupted and adulterated by sin... How could God, being able to keep a book secure, not be able to keep His world secure?
Or maybe, just maybe, God wrote the book in such a way that even if errors creep in, the overarching message is (nearly) impossible to alter unwillingly. And maybe, just maybe, such an accomplishment resembles how He created the universe, in that it can still function, and stories will continue to be written, even in spite of the corruption of sin.
I prefer to use the term HIV. You know, like the disease?
It and a couple of others should just be thrown in the trash, that's how evil they are.
Derf
Well-known member
Maybe
Greetings JudgeRightly the righthand of fellowship I extend - let us proceed in a manner worthy of our calling.
To a Teacher
Song by Leonard Cohen
Hurt once and for all into silence
A long pain ending without a song to prove it
Who could stand beside you so close to Eden
When you glinted in every eye the held-high
Razor, shivering every ram and son?
And now the silent loony bin
Where the shadows live in the rafters
Like day-weary bats
Until the turning mind, a radar signal
Lures them to exaggerate mountain-size
On the white stone wall
Your tiny limp
How can I leave you in such a house?
Are there no more saints and wizards
To praise their ways with pupils
No more evil to stun with the slap
Of a wet red tongue?
Did you confuse the Messiah in a mirror
And rest because he had finally come?
Let me cry help beside you, Teacher
I have entered under this dark roof
As fearlessly as an honoured son
Enters his father's house
To a Teacher
Song by Leonard Cohen
Hurt once and for all into silence
A long pain ending without a song to prove it
Who could stand beside you so close to Eden
When you glinted in every eye the held-high
Razor, shivering every ram and son?
And now the silent loony bin
Where the shadows live in the rafters
Like day-weary bats
Until the turning mind, a radar signal
Lures them to exaggerate mountain-size
On the white stone wall
Your tiny limp
How can I leave you in such a house?
Are there no more saints and wizards
To praise their ways with pupils
No more evil to stun with the slap
Of a wet red tongue?
Did you confuse the Messiah in a mirror
And rest because he had finally come?
Let me cry help beside you, Teacher
I have entered under this dark roof
As fearlessly as an honoured son
Enters his father's house
A voice says, “Cry!”
And I said, “What shall I cry?”
All flesh is grass,
and all its beauty is like the flower of the field.
The grass withers, the flower fades
when the breath of the LORD blows on it;
surely the people are grass.
The grass withers, the flower fades,
but the word of our God will stand forever. (Isaiah 40:6-8 ESV)
In the scripture above consider this…
The bolded section is a reference to the God breathed scriptures…but not only…it is also a reference to the Lord Jesus Christ.
The plain section is a reference to the entire material creation.
Where the scripture reads - “when the breath of the LORD blows on it” - that is a reference to the corruption and adulteration as the consequence of sin...which is ongoing and increasing.
It would be a monumental contradiction to have the - “LORD blows” - corruption and adulteration upon the written word or the Word… that both the written word and the Word should wither.
That would be the classic case of the house divided against itself.
In support of the above thought... “For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption.” (Psalm 16:10 ESV)
If such concern for the physical body…how much more for the God breathed written word…that are able to make us wise unto salvation?
To be candid…
I have had similar thoughts in the past myself, because there is a degree of plausibility to that scenario, which has a degree of attraction…I thought along those lines when I first encountered the minefield of textual criticism, as a mechanism, to overcome my doubts, not so much doubts, more like concerns…slight tremors…as you wrestle in your mind with these issues you never encountered before…they can be disturbing and unsettling when first encountered…which is the reason I abandoned my research in that area…
I am fortunate in that when the LORD by grace alone, through faith alone, called me out of the tomb He gave me a precious gift.. great assurance and my bedrock scripture…blazing in by mind like the neon lights in Times Square…and I needed it…because I have walked a long and winding road filled with tears.
And we know that for those who love God all things work together or good, for those who are called according to his purpose. (Romans 8:28 ESV)
Moving on now… my little foray into textual criticism became somewhat more of a burden than a help…so I was a little anxious as I saw the challenge unfolding before me here on this thread…which is good…because I will benefit from my exposure…as I step out in faith.
In closing…where I am now in this moment…my opinion is that the scriptural references quoted above and my thought concerning them, are more substantive than any alternative proposal.
After I discovered the contents of their private correspondence...so I understand your sentiment.
The majority of the biblical language scholars and academics involved in the translation process...may be the best there is in an academic sense...but they are not indwell by the Spirit...and so, are incapable off translating in adherence with the Spirit who is the author of all God breathed scripture. Which means they are in the domain and dominion of Satan.
It's difficult to make that call...but I can sympathise with your sentiment
False. It is referring to the spoken words of the Lord, from the end of verse 5.
Remember, Isaiah 40 is poetry.
So you gave up?
Why? Did you get lazy? Were your beliefs being challenged in ways which didn't suit you?
Or perhaps you just lost interest...?
With a deft shift of weight, and sliding to the right of his opponents thrust, CalvinistGoblin closed the distance with blurring speed, and buried his blade deep into the left calf muscle of his stunned adversary...
What gives life is the Spirit: flesh is of no avail at all. The words I have uttered to you are spirit and life. (John 6:63 James Moffatt NT)
Are Jesus words only applicable to his immediate hearers?
I didn't give up...I said I abandoned my research in that area...and now the LORD would have me walk back to textual criticism to defend the truth of His inerrant and infallible word.
They were being challenged, like yours are being challenged now....there is a time for every purpose under heaven...I walked away because it was not my time, then...it is my time now, as we are both about to discover to our mutual surprise.
Oh no no no I never loose interest...that is impossible...because I know the LORD and we are one.
Last edited:
AMEN!
"The words I have uttered to you."
Who is He talking to? IOW Who is the "you" in that sentence?
You can't rip a verse out of context just because doing so makes it support your position.
That's called eisegesis.
Bad.. what did you call yourself? CalvinistGoblin?
Bad CalvinistGoblin, bad!
*thwack*
So you gave up, and now you're lashing out at those who didn't.
HA!
Is there a time for sin?
I think you were just being lazy.
Time for useless rhetoric, I suppose...
You seem to have lost interest in proper spelling though...
"We?"
Got a mouse in your pocket?
Or perhaps (and I sincerely hope this isn't the case, as it would be blasphemous), you are Legion, who, like the leftists of this day and age, refer to themselves as 'we/they'?