SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : What are your thoughts?? For a mature faith does inerrancy matter?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( 1 | 2 | 3 Next Page )
PosterThread
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 What are your thoughts?? For a mature faith does inerrancy matter?

In the //Charisma House Announces 'Most Modern Version' of KJV// thread I defended my belief of the Superiority of the KJV for the english speaking people.
much of my fondation for my side of the disscussion was on the doctrine of inspiration, almost all of the books I quoted from where not written by KJV nor Textus Receptus people, one of the books even used the NIV for its quotes.

Threads have a tendency of running off on rabbit trails but for this thread, I would like to keep the discussion off of Bible translations, even though if personaly asked I will defend my belief but other than for a brief answers or to make a point that can only be made with the KJV I will make it, but not try to critize other translations that differ, I would like to keep this disscussion translation neutral. There is alot of good strong points in favor of inspiration and inerrancy believed and written by people whom are not KJV Only, acctually I have found much better points on inspiration from books that are not written by KJV onylist than by them who are.

I have a book in front of me that to me does not make since, it is written by a liberal southern baptist Clayton Sullivan. 'Toward a mature faith does biblical inerrancy make since?' In which clay makes an extreme case in opposition to inerrancy, that I do not believe any common posters to SI would agree with.

So What are your thoughts?? For a mature faith does biblical inerrancy matter?





 2013/2/9 20:45Profile









 Re: What are your thoughts?? For a mature faith does inerrancy matter?

Personally I have never made any real effort to look into the historical roots of English Bible translations. At the same time I realise that there is a reality to contend with so far as the question goes “does inerrancy matter?” To answer that question satisfactorily would clearly necessitate both an ability to read Hebrew and Greek as well as Aramaic in the case of the Book of Daniel, as well as Latin and Old English. That is all beyond myself and I guess it is beyond most other people as well. The second and seemingly lesser approach is to try to demonstrate from a non phonological position that error is as a result of changes of meaning intentionally or otherwise hidden within the new translation or translations. This perspective is essentially a seeking to prove occult (hidden) activity either by Satan or else “men” for a purpose of producing a “universal” bible which will be embraced in the end of the age.

The difficulty with either of these approaches, even if one had the knowledge and resources to undertake such an enquiry, is that even this itself could lead to error and the imputation of ideas into the scriptures which would amount to adding or else taking away from the word of God. Therefore it is understandable why some men emphasis being led of the Holy Spirit when reading scriptures, rather than an intellectual ability to understand by reason, which Bible translation is more accurate. Your other thread makes this point very well when a sister taking the second of the two approaches as briefly outlined above, is in finality “exposed” as a cook, somewhat in a poor spirit. Those who believe themselves to be linguistically gifted, whether they can read Hebrew or Greek or not, say that not being able to read Hebrew or Greek must of necessity disqualify a person from being able to speak into this difficult subject. This does of course completely neglect to take account of the fact that many of the translations which are “doubted” were made by men who could read Hebrew and Greek themselves.

Just to make my own position clear. I would gather up just about every translation from the 19th century onwards and burn the lot of them. This however has nothing to do with either of the positions stated in this thread. Although I have consistently seen that many translations have become biased with perceptions of life, more reflecting this age of gross deception in which we live, I have also seen that the linguistic emphasis and inevitable semantic expression of modern translations contradicts in many instances, what my spirit witnesses to by the Holy Spirit. To that end I place my own reliance on the leading of the Spirit to understand scriptures and anticipate that He will lead me into a fuller and more profitable understanding of Christ Himself. This had better be experiential of the truth as well as comprehending the truth, otherwise it is all vanity in any event.

This link is a pleasant look at English translation which gives an historical perspective on the subject.


http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/

 2013/2/10 4:49
wayneman
Member



Joined: 2009/1/24
Posts: 454
Michigan

 Re:

“For a mature faith does biblical inerrancy matter?”

Unfortunately, yes, it matters, because the doctrine of inerrancy is perhaps the deadliest man-trap the devil has ever devised for the people of God. Here is a shortened version of an old essay of mine titled “The Cult of Biblicism,” which is so well-written that the impartial reader will surely deem it Infallible:

The Reformers believed that Sola Scriptura (“only scripture”) would answer all questions, resolve all doctrinal disputes and provide a basis of unity for all believers.

Today there are over 32,000 warring denominations, all claiming the Bible as their Authority. Clearly, Sola Scriptura has not worked out the way it was supposed to.
The doctrine of biblical inerrancy, which was supposed to set Truth on objective grounds and guard against “subjectivism” has instead led to the most arbitrary kind of subjectivism: we can believe whatever we want to believe, and make the Bible tell us we are right.

The reason is that the Bible, by its very nature, has no authority. It is a helpless book, totally at the mercy of its interpreters. Consider the endless debates about freewill vs. predestination, pre-trib vs. post-trib and eternal security vs. reprobation. People can make the Bible say whatever they want it to say, and the Biblicist method of “exegesis” facilitates this: just hop-scotch thru the Bible stringing together proof-texts that support your pet doctrines and disregard the rest.

We can even use inerrancy to prove that the Bible is false, if that’s what we want to believe. We are told that "the Bible is the infallible, verbally inspired Word of God and there are no contradictions, inconsistencies or scientific inaccuracies in it. If there were a single error, that would prove it is not the Word of God, since God doesn’t make mistakes."

If that is the standard, then it is easy enough to discredit the Bible by listing all the contradictions (Deut. 24:16 - Josh. 7:19-26; 2 Chron. 25:4 - Is. 14:21), discrepancies (Matt. 28:10,16 - Luke 24:49; Matt. 27:5 - Acts 1:18; Acts 9:7 - Acts 22:9), misattributions (Zech. 11:12-13 - Matt. 27:9) and apparent misinterpretations (Hosea 11:1 - Matt. 2:15; Zech. 9:9 - Matt. 21:1-7).


The doctrine of inerrancy has destroyed the faith of millions by making the Bible the supreme authority over heaven and earth, and then basing its authority on a standard of journalistic perfection that it does not meet up to.

Inerrancy is one of the very few religious doctrines that can be proven wrong, but it remains the foundation of Industrial Religion.

Why then do we cling so stubbornly to the creed of Biblicism? Because “the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” Heb 4:12

This sort of divine communication was never to man’s taste, so we wave the Bible and say, “This is the Word of God!” Because the Bible is an object that we can control, whereas the Living Word of God, Jesus, is a Subject who acts upon and controls us.

We all know that false teachers can put the Bible to evil use. If the Bible is the Word of God, then God has lost sovereignty over His own Word. Was Satan speaking the Word of God when he quoted Scripture to Jesus?

The Word of God is not a static deposit of truth that God has handed over to men and devils to do with as they please. The Word of God is an ongoing event: the event of God speaking to us.

May He speak to us today and deliver us from the Bibleonian Captivity!


_________________
Wayne Kraus

 2013/2/10 6:05Profile
SkepticGuy
Member



Joined: 2012/8/8
Posts: 259


 Re:

you guys are talking over my head. can i just say that if what we hold in our hands has mistakes and mistranslations and may not be correct then we have nothing, and all the people who say the bible is a book of myths and fables may have a point after all. also, what duz it say about god that he could not preserve his word? what a weak and pathetic god who belongs in the same category as zues or joseph smith.

if we can not trust what is in our hands then we are wasting our time and lets go party and get drunk and be gluttons becuz what else is there 2 live for? eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die.

i am a natural born skeptic, but i am shocked 2 find a christian forum where believers call in2 question the very scriptures they say they believe. oh i know, every1 couches their words in very spiritual language and theological rhetoric but in essence for all the "intellect" being bantered about; all that is really being said is that u do not believe what u have in ur hands is true. it cant be counted on. if not then it brings into question EVERYTHING we say believe from creation to salvation to heaven.

and people are down on me becuz i am a skeptic? more amazing is that those who voice their opinions the loudest here readily admit that they have never studied the history of the english bible. think about how that sounds.

throw ur bibles away. they can not be trusted. the heathen are correct.

 2013/2/10 8:29Profile









 Re: What are your thoughts?? For a mature faith does inerrancy matter?


Quote:
more amazing is that those who voice their opinions the loudest here readily admit that they have never studied the history of the english bible. think about how that sounds. skepticguy



Having said that I personally have never studied the history of the English Bible I suppose I ought to ask.....how does it sound?

I would just like to say brother that I cherish the scriptures above all other texts and don’t regard the scriptures as though “a book” at all. Not even many books for that matter. I give less regard to historical relevance than I do to knowing the scriptures and so I haven’t seen a need to study the history of the English Bible. That is not to say that I said I was ignorant of the basic facts of history. I wrote what I did to create emphasis and not to facilitate or provoke a reaction amounting to seeming ignorance on my part. When all is said and done my trust is in God and His sovereign power to lead all men into the truth including myself. I hope that I would never actually just voice an opinion, especially the loudest one, but if I do no doubt there are brethren who will be swift to remind me of it!

Can I say brother that there is a huge difference in realising that some translations have interpretive errors in them or else omissions because of using different textual sources from the ancient world, and thinking that this amounts to God being impotent if it can be proven true. Adam was perfect in all his ways yet he sinned. He wasn’t even deceived as was Eve, yet he still sinned. So he must have acted wilfully. Was God, the One true and living God, who created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them before the fall, less than the One true living God after the fall? Adam’ actions did not diminish God. Neither do various bible translations which have errors and omissions because the men who served God in these various translations made mistakes or else in good conscience ignored minority texts in favour of majority texts. Paul said “if Christ be not raised from the dead....” If this is true then I will come to the public house with you and stop calling you brother. No contention over the scriptures and the validity of various translations is going to set my feet on the road to the public house. Praise God for that at least!

 2013/2/10 10:57
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Re: Many good thoughts!

amrkelly,wayneman,and SkepticGuy Many good thoughts!


Waymen wrote RE:
///Unfortunately, yes, it matters, because the doctrine of inerrancy is perhaps the deadliest man-trap the devil has ever devised for the people of God. Here is a shortened version of an old essay of mine titled “The Cult of Biblicism,” which is so well-written that the impartial reader will surely deem it Infallible:
The Reformers believed that Sola Scriptura (“only scripture”) would answer all questions, resolve all doctrinal disputes and provide a basis of unity for all believers.
Today there are over 32,000 warring denominations, all claiming the Bible as their Authority. Clearly, Sola Scriptura has not worked out the way it was supposed to.
The doctrine of biblical inerrancy, which was supposed to set Truth on objective grounds and guard against “subjectivism” has instead led to the most arbitrary kind of subjectivism: we can believe whatever we want to believe, and make the Bible tell us we are right.
The reason is that the Bible, by its very nature, has no authority. It is a helpless book, totally at the mercy of its interpreters. Consider the endless debates about freewill vs. predestination, pre-trib vs. post-trib and eternal security vs. reprobation. People can make the Bible say whatever they want it to say, and the Biblicist method of “exegesis” facilitates this: just hop-scotch thru the Bible stringing together proof-texts that support your pet doctrines and disregard the rest. ///



Waymen, I hold to a very solid conservative belief in inerrancy as demonstrated in the other thread.

But I will agree that you bring up some very important points that I agree with!
but also I feel that you take those same good points over the deep end.
In a similar way to what the denomination of the church that I attend is affliated with has.
Such a position has over the years destroyed an historicaly sound denomination.
There are many spirits and if the spirit contridicts the written Word than we need to question the spirit.
The denomination that I am speaking of Strongly promotes being led by the spirit and not being led by the dead letter , but their spirit has led them in complete opposition to the Written Logos, to such an extent that they have left the true inward Logos.

But having said that, I will agree with you that their is a "The Cult of Biblicism" We see it, You see it, I see it. People who fight tooth and nail for the doctrine of inerrancy, but deny that doctrine in personal practice.

And I will go as far as to say that most of the books written on KJV superiority have that feel to me personaly and sometimes almost leave me with a sick feel after reading them.
Yet when I am reading my Bible and Believe my Bible regardless of the supposed contridictions, I do not have that sick feel.
I go away very much with inward assurance of my position, and much (true) peace and that (peace is not the peace of hidden pride, as what one can go away with after reading KJVonly material.)

We know that "The Cult of Biblicism" is not a new cult, we know that it was a Jewish cult of Jesus day, he pointed it out, But he also pointed out that those of that cult actually did not believe the scripture, He pointed out to them if they actually believed the scripture than they would have reliezed whom He was.

So Jesus did not tell those of the "The Cult of Biblicism" of his day, that they put to much belief and trust into the scriptures, He never makes that arguement!!!(search the scriptures and see!) , but instead his approach was one of pointing out to them, as you have made aware that those whom are of the "The Cult of Biblicism" do not believe the scripture,, because if you truly believe the scripture than no, you do not make the scripture say what ever you want it to say. but instead you allow God to lead you to the true interpatation of scripture.
If you trully believe the scripture you do not allow systematic interpataions, Theology, and such traditions to make the ((Word of God of none effect)) Jesus referred to the written Word, as the Word of God, let us not refer to it as less.

edit: to be continued

Edit: PS: while reading over this again I found this statement a little odd at best: wayneman wrote ///Here is a shortened version of an old essay of mine titled “The Cult of Biblicism,” which is so well-written that the impartial reader will surely deem it Infallible:///

I do find the Bible Infallible, but I think in light of Scripture, waynemans essay regardless of how well written will surely be deemed as falliable.







 2013/2/10 11:47Profile
wayneman
Member



Joined: 2009/1/24
Posts: 454
Michigan

 Re:

proudpapa,

I had little hope that you would share my belief in Wayneman Infallibility.

But you do raise an important point: denominations that reject infallibility eventually drift into dead liberal theology or wild "charismatic" excesses. So I understand perfectly why so many believers feel that it is essential to uphold the doctrine of inerrancy. But the fact is that it has proved ineffective as a defense mechanism against doctrinal error and division.

I have a personal grudge against inerrancy and the field of Christian Apologetics as a whole. As a teenager I heard the Word of God and believed and was baptized. Two years later I walked away from the faith; religious rationalism was my downfall.

First, I was told that there could be no contradictions in the Bible, since God wrote it. But I soon discovered that there were hundreds if not thousands of contradictions and inconsistencies. So I turned to the Apologists for answers, but their explanations and "proofs" were so weak and specious that they talked me right out of believing.

I was smart enough to see that the doctrine of inerrancy did not hold up under scrutiny, but not smart enough to see that the fault lie with the church's doctrine of inspiration, not with the Bible itself.

The Lord could have given us the kind of flawless Bible that fundamentalism requires, but He didn't, probably because He doesn't want us to be fundamentalists.

Apologetics hands the victory to the enemy by meeting infidels on their own ground: fallen human reason vs. fallen human reason. Paul did nothing of the kind:

"For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect." (1 Cor. 1:17)

"And my speech and my preaching were not with persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God." (1 Cor. 2:4-5)

"For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God." (2 Cor. 10:4-5)

We don't need logical formulations to defend the Bible: we know the Bible is truth because the Spirit of Truth bears witness, not because some egghead reasoned us into believing.


_________________
Wayne Kraus

 2013/2/10 13:16Profile
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Re:

Hi wayneman,

I apperciate your reply because it better helps me to understand your position and where you are coming from on this topic.

wayneman wrote ///But you do raise an important point: denominations that reject infallibility eventually drift into dead liberal theology or wild "charismatic" excesses. So I understand perfectly why so many believers feel that it is essential to uphold the doctrine of inerrancy. But the fact is that it has proved ineffective as a defense mechanism against doctrinal error and division.///

I agree the doctrine of inerrancy has not preserved denominations from falling away from the truth. But I see this because denominations as a rule Bring the Bible into bondage by there treatise, councels, articals of faith, theologies and other such traditions, that make the Word of God of non effect.

They bring to bondage the freedom of conscience (the ears to hear) to there adherents, they in essence and all reality do not support the inerrancy of scripture they deny it.

wayneman wrote ///I have a personal grudge against inerrancy and the field of Christian Apologetics as a whole. As a teenager I heard the Word of God and believed and was baptized. Two years later I walked away from the faith; religious rationalism was my downfall.
First, I was told that there could be no contradictions in the Bible, since God wrote it. But I soon discovered that there were hundreds if not thousands of contradictions and inconsistencies. So I turned to the Apologists for answers, but their explanations and "proofs" were so weak and specious that they talked me right out of believing.///

Hi wayneman,
As I briefly alluded to in the other thread I had a simmaler experience as does many Christians. What is really bad is when those same ones that preach the scripture is infalible become the ones whom point out supposed contridictions.

For me It caused a Crisis of Belief, and caused me to lash out very much as skeptic alluded to as what would be reality if we did not believe that we can trust the Bible that we have.

You know what I was upset with God, because He would allow seeming contridictions in the scripture that were bound to throw off any rational mind from believing the Bible.

In absolute Spiritual agony I looked down two paths the one I could try to hang on to my faith and be bound by all these rules and stuff (As Paul says if 'if there be no resurrection' 'we are of all men most miserable' (Pascals Wager does not cut it!) the other path I could do as I wanted, live however I wanted, be as wicked as I wanted, pursue any thing I wanted. But you know what I seen in the end of this path, I seen myself in Hell mad at God because of allowing the seeming contridictions, In essence I still believed (Because of this, I doubt anyone deep down does not believe)

I do not know if this spirtual agony and all these things flashed before me hapened in minutes or hours.
It was the lowest point of my Life, I had no one and no where to turn but the moment I reliezed that I still believed, a since of Joy swept over me and I praised God that He did not let go of me even when I was so willing to let go. But shortly after that Joy came, fear swept my soul, like I had never felt before, fear that I blasphemed God and that there was nothing I could do to correct it.
I stayed stuggling in the Faith seeing myself as holding on to the edge of a cliff for years becoming more and more Christian in appearence outwardly but tormented with fear that I had stepped over the line.

Than I came across a man that was no pretender, He came in the Spirit and he was teaching from the Jot and tittle of scripture which was upseting the carnal christians in the study, I instantly recognized that he was in the Spirit but all of the other christians just wanted to argue with him.
as I wrote in the other thread :

//"I showed him this contridiction,
I thought, I would shake his faith when I showed him,
no instead he so calmly said I will find the answer the explanation to the seemingly contridiction.
His faith was grounded, he had already been through a terrible crises as I have to.
When you bounce back from a crises and God reveales himself to you in away that He never has before,
You become grounded and confident in your faith.
He found the answer for me and after he did I was still a little sceptical but very impressed of his faith.
Faith is passed onto faith not from good worded rational arguement.
I have Faith that the nature that the Bible speaks of its self, is reality, I hope others can see my unswearving faith in the Sovernity of God and embrace such faith.
The answer that he gave me I found was also believed by others it can be found in Edwin R. Thiele's 'The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings'
and also Floyd Nolen Jones 'The Chronology of the Old Testament' which is a defence of the Masoretic text
I learned something from finding the answer to this seemingly contridiction,
I learned how to read the Bible.
It is a much deeper book than many Christians realize,
Listen I have learned to love the seeming contridictions, Between kings, chronicals, the prophets, the new testament there are hundreds upoun hundreds of them.
We need to ask ourself why Did Sovern God inspire such minute detail in the original autographs, if He new that such details would not be preserved??
What a Joy beyond measure to look at a condridiction with no appearent solution and believe it any how,
and to totally give up on ever finding a solution and to trust Gods Sovern hand in it being that way.
Do you know what happens when you have pushed thru with faith and believed anyhow?
I find most often the minute I have trully given up and stop thinking, a sollution appears as clear as Crystle.
Once you have that answer the entire Bible becomes more real and more dimensional.
Sometimes it can be weeks or months or longer for in answer. (WE as Christians no how hard it is to let go) But the sollution comes when you are totally broken and have given up on finding the sollution,
and Willing to trust without sight."//
http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=48237&forum=48&start=20&viewmode=flat&order=1

hopefully to becontinued!







 2013/2/10 15:19Profile
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Re: wayneman

Hi wayneman

wayneman wrote///I was smart enough to see that the doctrine of inerrancy did not hold up under scrutiny, but not smart enough to see that the fault lie with the church's doctrine of inspiration, not with the Bible itself.
The Lord could have given us the kind of flawless Bible that fundamentalism requires, but He didn't, probably because He doesn't want us to be fundamentalists///

I agree that God does not want us to be pharisaical fundamentalist but He also does not want us to be liberal sadducees.

I will ask you a question that I asked in the other thread that I do not believe anyone answered.

What scripture did Jesus use to prove the resurrection of the dead with the Sadducees ??

The 'smart enough' is our down fall, the 'smart enough' is our carnal mind it is the flesh(sarx)rom 8:7 Gal 5:17

Faith in other hand, by biblical definition is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.(Heb 11:1)
That is faith is the (inward certainty) the evidence and substance of things that we know, but that we can not see or prove Solely by naturalistic means by our 'smart enough'.

scripture demonstrates to us That 'the trial of our faith, is much more precious than of gold that perisheth'

and we see God putting his people through such trials of faith through out history

Abraham 'was smart enough' to know that Sara was to old to produce children, because he 'was smart enough' he reconciled his smarts with Gods promise and created Ishmael,
We have Ishmaels being produced on all sides of the inerrancy doctrine.

The israelites spent 40 years woundering in the wilderness because they 'was smart enough' to know that they could not beat the giants in Canaan.

It was when Peter 'was smart enough' that he began to sink after walking on water.

The entire Bible could be summarized as Believing Gods Words when all of our 'smart enough' is opposed to believing.

Listen, I understand why many are taking an extreme position on inarrancy when we look at the pharisaical qualities that often accompany fundamentalists, But as the saying goes lets not throw the baby out with the bath water.

wayneman wrote ///The Lord could have given us the kind of flawless Bible that fundamentalism requires, but He didn't, probably because He doesn't want us to be fundamentalists.
Apologetics hands the victory to the enemy by meeting infidels on their own ground: fallen human reason vs. fallen human reason. Paul did nothing of the kind:///

But wayneman, you are using the same contradictory double talk that the fundamentalist use in there inerrancy doctrines.
You are using fallen human reason 'smart enough'
to deem the Bible as faliable but at the same time calling your own fallen human reasoned 'essay so well-written that the impartial reader will surely deem it Infallible'

I find obvious flaws through out the small amount of your essay that you posted

Wayneman your essay stated /// We all know that false teachers can put the Bible to evil use. If the Bible is the Word of God, then God has lost sovereignty over His own Word. Was Satan speaking the Word of God when he quoted Scripture to Jesus?///

Satans, strategy from the beginning was 'hath God said' which was in reffrence to a command that was given before Eve whom he asked, was even created, her understanding of the command most likely was taught translated to her by Adam.

Satans strategy has been to twist and turn and ommitt Gods Written Word.

wayneman you said /// If the Bible is the Word of God, then God has lost sovereignty over His own Word. Was Satan speaking the Word of God when he quoted Scripture to Jesus?///

I answered this in the other thread the context of the event demonstrates how much power is in the Written Word, this scripture in no way underminds the written Word. (we need to read our Bibles deeper, they are not just another novel)

First we must admitt that Jesus Christ 'God who was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory'

When tempted by the tempter on every single point relied not on what was going on in His head, but on The Written Logos.

on other hand when the tempter came he did not do as you mistakenly assumed in your (in)fallible essay, no, he did as always, he distorted the verse he ommitted part of the verse out of context.

I brought this point up in the other thread:

///psalms 91 from the Bible
11 For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways.
12 They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.

psalms 91 from the satans translation

11 He shall give his angels charge concerning thee:
12 and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

Do you notice any differences in the translations??

The different versions was between psalms 91 and Satans version of psalms 91, That he used with the temptation of Jesus in Matthew ch 4 v 6

What you should know about Inerrancy by Charles C. Ryrie moody press 1981
p77

"The second temptation also illustrates the importance of plenary inspiration. Satan tried to intice the Lord to throw Himself off the pinnacle of the Temple by assuring Him that he could claim the promise of psalms 91:11-12 that Gods angels would guard Him. But in quoting those verses Satan omitted part of verse 11: "to guard you in all your ways." The omission distorts the meaning of the promise, which is that God will keep the righteous on their journeys,not that He will preserve them when they take needless risks. A needless risk was exactly what Satan had proposed to Christ. The Lord replied that to bank on part of a verse would be to tempt God. Instead He would rely on every word that came from God,including every word of Psalms 91:11-12." ///

I here alot of unbiblical talk about believing in the Bible some how quinches the Spirit. but that is not what the Bible teaches nor is it my experience.

When reading John ch 5:39 do not stop reading untill Jesus is through making His point in v 47
if you have a bible with subject headings that break up this into different thoughts throw it away.

For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?









 2013/2/10 16:48Profile
wayneman
Member



Joined: 2009/1/24
Posts: 454
Michigan

 Re:

"What scripture did Jesus use to prove the resurrection of the dead with the Sadducees ??"

Exodus 3:6 - "'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.' God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.'" Matt. 22:32

BTW, I didn't expect anyone to take seriously my joke about Wayneman Infallibility.

Anyway, we are closer together than I first thought. I also experienced that agony of doubt. Ever since I first heard the Gospel I have known deep down inside that it is Truth, even when I was intellectually convinced that the Bible was legend and folklore. It was the Mystics - Boehme, Law, Grubb,and Theologia Germanica - who rescued me from Doubting Castle.

The Light began to dawn when I came across William Law's statement that, "He who relies on his Reason relies on that Faculty which is weakest and most unreliable in Man."

And from Boehme: "Reason must yield up its own Hearing and Life, and give itself up to God, that God may live in the Understanding of Man, else there is no Finding in the Divine Wisdom."

"As little as a piece of work can apprehend him that made it, so little also can man apprehend and know God his Creator, unless the Holy Ghost enlighten him; which happeneth only to those that rely not upon themselves, but set their hope, will and desires upon God alone, and move in the Holy Ghost, and these are one spirit with God."

"Not I, the I that I am, know these things; but God knows them in me."

"Science cannot abolish faith in the all-seeing God, without worshiping in His place the blind intellect."

I no longer rely reason, but on revelation.

And I realize now that doubt is the dialectical partner of faith; doubt overcome makes faith stronger, like when Sampson overcame the roaring lion and came home with handsful of honey.

"When you bounce back from a crises and God reveales himself to you in away that He never has before,
You become grounded and confident in your faith.
He found the answer for me and after he did I was still a little sceptical but very impressed of his faith.
Faith is passed onto faith not from good worded rational arguement.
I have Faith that the nature that the Bible speaks of its self, is reality, I hope others can see my unswearving faith in the Sovernity of God and embrace such faith."

Well, so do I.


_________________
Wayne Kraus

 2013/2/10 17:32Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy