PDA

View Full Version : How do we know that all scripture is God-inspired?



Petey
Jul 27th 2009, 07:01 PM
I grew up in with the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod teaching that every word in the Bible is directly inspired by God.

I've got a couple questions regarding that.

First, let me quote the verses that brought this question to mind:

20Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. 21For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter, Ch. 1)

2We 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. 13This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. (1 Corinthians 2)

I don't have much doubt that the authors who put these words to pen were inspired and devout Christians. But even God-inspired Christians are sure to have some thoughts, opinions, beliefs, etc. that are not the direct product of God's inspiration, but rather their own human minds.

So- my question is: How can we be sure that these words proclaiming the rest of scripture to be God-inspired are themselves God-inspired? It seems that the validity of every word in the Bible not coming as a direct quote from God himself depends on whether these verses are in fact God-inspired- which is a pretty major deal, to put things lightly.

One more note: I couldn't seem to find any verses in which God himself stated that the rest of the books of the Bible were directly inspired by Him. There was this one by Jesus,

17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5)

but this verse seems to be referring to the Old Testament law which came from God himself. Does God anywhere tell us how literally to take the other minor books of the New Testament? Who decided that these other writings were to be part of the Bible, and at the same time, that other similar writings were not to go in? :hmm:

-SEEKING-
Jul 27th 2009, 07:10 PM
Question. Have you ever recieved a letter from the President of any organization? What are the chances that the President himself typed it up? Just my 2 cents.

blessedmommyuv3
Jul 27th 2009, 07:15 PM
I grew up in with the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod teaching that every word in the Bible is directly inspired by God.

I've got a couple questions regarding that.

First, let me quote the verses that brought this question to mind:

20Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. 21For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter, Ch. 1)

2We 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. 13This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. (1 Corinthians 2)

I don't have much doubt that the authors who put these words to pen were inspired and devout Christians. But even God-inspired Christians are sure to have some thoughts, opinions, beliefs, etc. that are not the direct product of God's inspiration, but rather their own human minds.

So- my question is: How can we be sure that these words proclaiming the rest of scripture to be God-inspired are themselves God-inspired? It seems that the validity of every word in the Bible not coming as a direct quote from God himself depends on whether these verses are in fact God-inspired- which is a pretty major deal, to put things lightly.

One more note: I couldn't seem to find any verses in which God himself stated that the rest of the books of the Bible were directly inspired by Him. There was this one by Jesus,

17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5)

but this verse seems to be referring to the Old Testament law which came from God himself. Does God anywhere tell us how literally to take the other minor books of the New Testament? Who decided that these other writings were to be part of the Bible, and at the same time, that other similar writings were not to go in? :hmm:

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work


In Christ,
Jen

Johnboy
Jul 27th 2009, 07:25 PM
I grew up in with the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod teaching that every word in the Bible is directly inspired by God.

I've got a couple questions regarding that.

First, let me quote the verses that brought this question to mind:

20Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. 21For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter, Ch. 1)

2We 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. 13This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. (1 Corinthians 2)

I don't have much doubt that the authors who put these words to pen were inspired and devout Christians. But even God-inspired Christians are sure to have some thoughts, opinions, beliefs, etc. that are not the direct product of God's inspiration, but rather their own human minds.

So- my question is: How can we be sure that these words proclaiming the rest of scripture to be God-inspired are themselves God-inspired? It seems that the validity of every word in the Bible not coming as a direct quote from God himself depends on whether these verses are in fact God-inspired- which is a pretty major deal, to put things lightly.

One more note: I couldn't seem to find any verses in which God himself stated that the rest of the books of the Bible were directly inspired by Him. There was this one by Jesus,

17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5)

but this verse seems to be referring to the Old Testament law which came from God himself. Does God anywhere tell us how literally to take the other minor books of the New Testament? Who decided that these other writings were to be part of the Bible, and at the same time, that other similar writings were not to go in? :hmm:
Though it says all scriptures is God inspired it also to prove everything as well. Translations have been tainted by men would had preconceived ideas but comparing scripture with scripture can help verify the validity of scripture. Also the bible as we have it now (not including the catholic bible) was made of books that the author could be validated by someone else in scripture i.e. Christ quotes isaiah and jeremiah.

Butch5
Jul 27th 2009, 08:08 PM
2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work


In Christ,
Jen

That would be the OT. The Nt Scriptures were not all done yet.

Butch5
Jul 27th 2009, 08:29 PM
I grew up in with the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod teaching that every word in the Bible is directly inspired by God.

I've got a couple questions regarding that.

First, let me quote the verses that brought this question to mind:

20Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. 21For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter, Ch. 1)

2We 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. 13This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. (1 Corinthians 2)

I don't have much doubt that the authors who put these words to pen were inspired and devout Christians. But even God-inspired Christians are sure to have some thoughts, opinions, beliefs, etc. that are not the direct product of God's inspiration, but rather their own human minds.

So- my question is: How can we be sure that these words proclaiming the rest of scripture to be God-inspired are themselves God-inspired? It seems that the validity of every word in the Bible not coming as a direct quote from God himself depends on whether these verses are in fact God-inspired- which is a pretty major deal, to put things lightly.

One more note: I couldn't seem to find any verses in which God himself stated that the rest of the books of the Bible were directly inspired by Him. There was this one by Jesus,

17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5)

but this verse seems to be referring to the Old Testament law which came from God himself. Does God anywhere tell us how literally to take the other minor books of the New Testament? Who decided that these other writings were to be part of the Bible, and at the same time, that other similar writings were not to go in? :hmm:

Hi Petey,

First, let me say that it was the early church fathers (who many disregard) who give us the authors of several of the books. It is a funny thing how many will say we cannot take the opinions of the early church fathers, yet they are the ones who tell us who authored the books we believe are inspired. I guess we can believe what they say about the authors of the gospels, yet we must not believe what they say the apostles taught them. As for all Scripture being inspired, consider Jesus words.


John 16:12-13 ( KJV )
I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come.

And Paul's,

Galatians 1:11-12 ( KJV )
But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.


Petey---2We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God,

Consider here that Paul is most like speaking of himself and the other apostles.

blessedmommyuv3
Jul 27th 2009, 08:36 PM
That would be the OT. The Nt Scriptures were not all done yet.

But they were God-breathed as well. ;)
The bible is the infallible word of God--in its original manuscripts, inerrant. :D

In Christ,
Jen

th1bill
Jul 27th 2009, 08:39 PM
Petey,
... I'm known as something of a stickler on what I'm about to say and that would be because I really am. There are many religions and religious factions and I will always teach that any of them are good for getting one into Hell. I am a Baptist by religion just as you were raised a Lutheran. The catch here is that there will be no Baptists and there'll be no Lutherans in Heaven. What we'll find in Heaven are Christians and a Christian, today, is a very convoluted term. A Christian, the ones that go to Heaven, are the few that have established an on going relationship with God.
... Why is that important to your question? The Christian is not only in an on going conversation with God but is indwelt with the Holy Spirit of God. (Jon 7:37-39) So you see, from the natural man's point of view, I must say that I do not know but from the Spirit driven man it is obvious to us that the words of the scriptures are the Word of God because the Spirit testifies of the truth of the Word to us.
... For the natural man, that has not completely surrendered his life to God, it would seem to me that there would be only one path to ever understanding the truth of God's Word, the same path that I took to get here. I first had to come to the understanding that God is. From that point forward God built my faith and has remained with me through everything.
... I am often confronted with the idea that the Bible has been translated and retranslated, over and over and for this reason can not be accurate. Being a person that has traveled the world I know the problems with languages and understand where this complaint comes from. There is just one problem with this idea and it is a monster problem. The God that inspired this book and the translation of it is the Immutable, Omnipotent God that spoke and the Universe sprung into being... from nothing. To believe that God can not keep His word secure from the secretaries He used to write it and from the translators He inspired to translate it into the languages is to believe in an impotent god that is no more powerful than the stone and wooden gods along the path in the gardens of Japan.
... I pray that this helps you to grow closer to God and that God will pour out a blessing you cannot contain because of your faith in Him.

theBelovedDisciple
Jul 27th 2009, 10:01 PM
That would be the OT. The Nt Scriptures were not all done yet.


So do yo believe any of the NT, those Words penned by Paul, John, Peter, James... do you believe those are God Inspired? Those who Wrote the Four Gospels? are those Inspired by God?

I want to see where your coming from here...

Zenas
Jul 27th 2009, 10:22 PM
_______________________________

Check out the life's work of Ivan Panin.

http://keruxreplies.blogspot.com/2008/11/ivan-panin-and-scripture-numerics.html

____

Butch5
Jul 27th 2009, 11:04 PM
So do yo believe any of the NT, those Words penned by Paul, John, Peter, James... do you believe those are God Inspired? Those who Wrote the Four Gospels? are those Inspired by God?

I want to see where your coming from here...

I addressed that in the second post. However Paul's statement about all Scripture being God breathed is speaking of the OT.

Johnboy
Jul 28th 2009, 08:14 AM
... I am often confronted with the idea that the Bible has been translated and retranslated, over and over and for this reason can not be accurate. Being a person that has traveled the world I know the problems with languages and understand where this complaint comes from. There is just one problem with this idea and it is a monster problem. The God that inspired this book and the translation of it is the Immutable, Omnipotent God that spoke and the Universe sprung into being... from nothing. To believe that God can not keep His word secure from the secretaries He used to write it and from the translators He inspired to translate it into the languages is to believe in an impotent god that is no more powerful than the stone and wooden gods along the path in the gardens of Japan.

Sorry to me that's a very naive view sure the words that were originally translated were inspired , but to say the translations are inspired is ridiculous because that would mean all translations are perfect and there has been changes in the translations since the time they were originally written.

Zack702
Jul 28th 2009, 08:41 AM
Does God anywhere tell us how literally to take the other minor books of the New Testament? Who decided that these other writings were to be part of the Bible, and at the same time, that other similar writings were not to go in? :hmm:


God brought about the scriptures. I'm sure you know this simple concept. But have no doubt that God completed the bible as intended.

There are parts of the bible which were meant for different parts of the world.

One piece of scripture that may hold no value to us right now. May in the future hold great value or in the past have held great value.

There are fill, which are elaborations of the word. But the word is within the bible. It can be found in even the smallest portions of the Bible.

Desperaux
Jul 28th 2009, 08:53 AM
Sorry to me that's a very naive view sure the words that were originally translated were inspired , but to say the translations are inspired is ridiculous because that would mean all translations are perfect and there has been changes in the translations since the time they were originally written.


That isn't naive--it is correct. Their work was overseen by God. Nothing has lost its meaning in translation. No major contextual errors have been made.

Yes, God is able to oversee and preserve His message. It is simply doubt in Him that says otherwise.

Johnboy
Jul 28th 2009, 10:33 AM
That isn't naive--it is correct. Their work was overseen by God. Nothing has lost its meaning in translation. No major contextual errors have been made.

Yes, God is able to oversee and preserve His message. It is simply doubt in Him that says otherwise.
I don't doubt God or those men who wrote the bible or that God made sure we have the bible but if the translations were inspired by God there would be no contextual errors.

nzyr
Jul 28th 2009, 12:38 PM
I addressed that in the second post. However Paul's statement about all Scripture being god breathed is speaking of the OT.
Paul was indwelt by the Holy Spirit so his words were inspired too.

Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope; -1 Timothy 1:1

RollTide21
Jul 28th 2009, 01:07 PM
It's a valid question.

My basic outlook on Scripture is that I read it in order to receive guidance from God. I have decided to place my Faith and Trust in the death and resurrection of Jesus as my pathway to God. Consequently, I believe with all that is in me that the Holy Spirit lives within me and lights the Way for me. There have been many instances where this Spirit has spoken to me through Scripture...be it a Psalm or something that Jesus himself said.

Does that mean that every single word in the Bible is directly Inspired by God himself? Technically, I don't know. I do know that the times I have been guided and uplifted in my Walk, a verse from the Bible has been the source of that guidance. I just trust in that and that's all I can do.

Desperaux
Jul 28th 2009, 05:00 PM
I don't doubt God or those men who wrote the bible or that God made sure we have the bible but if the translations were inspired by God there would be no contextual errors.

There are no contextual errors in Scripture.

Butch5
Jul 28th 2009, 06:38 PM
Paul was indwelt by the Holy Spirit so his words were inspired too.

Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope; -1 Timothy 1:1

Not all of His words were of God.

blessedmommyuv3
Jul 28th 2009, 07:41 PM
Not all of His words were of God.

:confused (15 characters)

Jen

MarleVVLL
Jul 28th 2009, 08:54 PM
Not all of His words were of God.

In 2 Tim 3, the understood context is the OT, but not limited only to the OT. Paul also quoted from Luke to make a doctrinal point and Peter calls Paul's letters, "Scripture".

The NT is also included in 2 Tim 3:16 - 17.

th1bill
Jul 28th 2009, 10:08 PM
Sorry to me that's a very naive view sure the words that were originally translated were inspired , but to say the translations are inspired is ridiculous because that would mean all translations are perfect and there has been changes in the translations since the time they were originally written.
Johnboy,
... Before one is indwelt by the Holy Spirit there is a certain measure of faith, the quantity of which is beyond my ability to define, and the total, not partial nor incremental, surrender of one's life to the will of God. I cannot pretend to know your spiritual condition but I can tell you that what I have said is of the Spirit of God and that there are Christians around the world that agree with me. I will never expect huge numbers of people to agree with what the Spirit lays on my heart to teach and the Bible, in the story of the narrow gate and the wide gate dictates the truth that most will never agree with what the Spirit teaches.
... Yahweh is no ordinary stone god without the power to see it's "will" done, He is the Omnipotent God that does not yield to human logic. It might not but I hope this helps.

Bick
Jul 28th 2009, 11:43 PM
So do yo believe any of the NT, those Words penned by Paul, John, Peter, James... do you believe those are God Inspired? Those who Wrote the Four Gospels? are those Inspired by God?

I want to see where your coming from here...

MY COMMENTS: I believe the original manuscripts were word for word inspired, just as God wanted.

However, it is true that the Greek Scriptures in particular, have been copied and recopied over the years.

Yet, based upon testimony of Christian Theologians, while there may be differences between the Greek Texts, they are minor, in that the great trues of God's plan of redemption and all that means, are in all the Texts.

To study this more, look up "Wescott & Hort vs.Textus Receptus".

Johnboy
Jul 30th 2009, 04:28 AM
There are no contextual errors in Scripture.
Are you saying the translations are perfect and translators never used there own views to translate??? Interesting

Johnboy
Jul 30th 2009, 04:32 AM
Johnboy,
... Before one is indwelt by the Holy Spirit there is a certain measure of faith, the quantity of which is beyond my ability to define, and the total, not partial nor incremental, surrender of one's life to the will of God. I cannot pretend to know your spiritual condition but I can tell you that what I have said is of the Spirit of God and that there are Christians around the world that agree with me. I will never expect huge numbers of people to agree with what the Spirit lays on my heart to teach and the Bible, in the story of the narrow gate and the wide gate dictates the truth that most will never agree with what the Spirit teaches.
... Yahweh is no ordinary stone god without the power to see it's "will" done, He is the Omnipotent God that does not yield to human logic. It might not but I hope this helps.

What has that got to do with whether the translations of the bible were perfect. I agree that God made sure we got the bible but not that the people translating were inspired.

Desperaux
Jul 30th 2009, 04:36 AM
Are you saying the translations are perfect and translators never used there own views to translate??? Interesting

I said there are no contextual errors in Scripture.

Petey
Jul 31st 2009, 01:03 AM
The Christian is not only in an on going conversation with God but is indwelt with the Holy Spirit of God. (Jon 7:37-39) So you see, from the natural man's point of view, I must say that I do not know but from the Spirit driven man it is obvious to us that the words of the scriptures are the Word of God because the Spirit testifies of the truth of the Word to us.

Great point. Thank you.

Petey
Jul 31st 2009, 01:24 AM
No one has really taken a direct shot at the original question I posed yet. In particular, how do we know which parts of the NT were directly inspired by God and which (if any) were thoughts from the readers own minds?

I know about the couple of verses, which I quoted, stating the validity of ALL scripture, not just the Old Testament. But like some of you have pointed out, some NT books were written and included after these verses were penned. Additionally, what if those verses themselves were the author's own thoughts as opposed to God's word?

And who decided what books went in and what books would not go in to the Bible? That's something I never learned in church and would be extremely interested in knowing.

Thanks,
Nick P.

Firefighter
Jul 31st 2009, 02:57 AM
God did not dictate the Bible. The Bible was supervised by the holy Spirit to keep it from error. If God had dictated the Bible word for word, then no single sentence should be in error, right??? Look...

I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.

Is this sentence completely true? Did God inspire every word of it? Why then is the scripture below correcting the one above this? The sentence above is not true, Paul DID IN FACT baptize more than 2 people putting this sentence in direct conflict with the one below.

And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.

Do you think that God temporarily forgot who Paul baptized? Of course not. What we see is Paul writing and when something untrue (even by accident) tried to sneak in, the Holy Spirit who was supervising, brought back to Paul's memory others that he had baptized keeping the scriptures without error.

th1bill
Jul 31st 2009, 06:03 AM
What has that got to do with whether the translations of the bible were perfect. I agree that God made sure we got the bible but not that the people translating were inspired.
... It has everything to do with everything. I serve the one true God that is immutable and omnipotent. The very position of everything in the universe is dependent upon His will. God is so in control that before the world and the universe ever were He already knew the day, the hour, the minute and the instant that Bill Taylor would believe. Now, any Christian knows that it is the Perfect Will of God that all should come to repentance and should not perish. (2Pet. 3:9) It is also true that they cannot know the truth except that one should come and to preach it to them. And what shall they preach if the Word is not the truth and if the Word is not the truth why would we send them? (Rom. 10:15)
... To serve the One True God, Whom you are seeking to rebuke, is to live without fear. To serve the god you now appear to be attempting to teach is to deny the very power of God and places the teaching at the feet of the god of this world, the very one that was cast down by our Father, God. To believe that God is powerless to keep His Revelation of Himself pure is to openly refute the very promises of God. And if you present the heresy that some parts of the Word are true but that some have been corrupted, then it follows that all must be called into question. Someone, other than God would need to assist God? in determining what is truth and with that event you have the finite man determining what and who is the Creator and that my friend is utter and stark heresy.
... In summary, God not only is, God always has been at the helm.

Firefighter
Jul 31st 2009, 12:20 PM
So it is a heresy to think that the translations of the Bible are not inspired!?!?!:o

Surely you are kidding.:pray:

If the translations of the Bible were in fact inspired by God, could you please provide me a list of which translations were inspired and which ones were not? Come to think of it, let's go back a step. Can you tell me which of the Greek texts are inspired?

How can one claim texts and translations are inspired and yet no two of them are exactly the same???

RollTide21
Jul 31st 2009, 04:11 PM
I think it's optimistic (to put it mildly) to think that EVERY translation down through the centuries is "God-inspired". That said, the textual variances between the current Bibles and the oldest manuscripts are VERY close (much moreso than any other ancient historical document), and, most importantly, the fundamentals of the Christian faith are consistently represented. Even instances where a passage was added later that doesn't appear in the original Gospels (one example is the adulterous woman and the "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" passage) don't misrepresent the message. If there is serious doubt about whether Jesus ever stopped the Pharisees from stoning an adulterous woman, what does that mean? To me, it just means that that incident might not have happened. It doesn't mean that Jesus didn't die and rise again for my sins because THAT part, along with every other fundamental Christian principle, is well-documented and confirmed with all of the historical resources we possess.

Firefighter
Jul 31st 2009, 04:20 PM
I agree, but to say that God inspired translations or even Greek texts word for word is an indefensible position.

th1bill
Jul 31st 2009, 08:46 PM
So it is a heresy to think that the translations of the Bible are not inspired!?!?!:o

Surely you are kidding.:pray:

If the translations of the Bible were in fact inspired by God, could you please provide me a list of which translations were inspired and which ones were not? Come to think of it, let's go back a step. Can you tell me which of the Greek texts are inspired?

How can one claim texts and translations are inspired and yet no two of them are exactly the same???
UM,
... As I have mentioned before to you, context is everything and once more you are coming at me on the attack. I cannot find any Christian love in your attacks. Your, "Surely you are kidding.:pray:" comment is very abrasive and very much a comment that a Christian would expect to hear from a lost man seeking to intimidate. You are completely out of line with these types of attacks. This is a Christian discussion forum and it is not one of the joints where I used to perform. If you disagree with me it is perfectly acceptable to disagree but to spit out comments one expects to hear in a barroom is, in no way, a Christian thing to do.
... Now, to answer your charge. No, I'm very serious. As we read the Bible, from Genesis through The Revelation we find that every one of these books are inspired by God and yet it is clearly seen that there are about forty different authors. It is clear because there are style differences. The same thing is true of the translations, except for the JW's New World translation, all of the translations say the same thing, they just say it in a different style or form. These style and form differences are the human influence that God has not prevented.
... About the heresy issue. God has revealed, in His Word that He is without fault and in being perfect there is no equal to Him. This is the description of the One Limitless God, there is nothing that He does not control, even Satan. (Read Job) Just the idea that God spoke and the universe leapt into existence but that He is so limited in His power to keep His Word true as He promised, yes, that is heresy. In Exodus 3:14 we find the I Am statement of God. He is very clear, He will do what He will and nothing will ever impede Him. To believe otherwise will forever be heresy. There neither man, nor beast nor angle that will ever thwart God and God has promised in Revelation to deliver the unimaginable upon anyone that changes the Bible and yes, I do, I carry that promise into the entire Word of God.
... Now, I don't doubt that you are a saved man and you might even be a ma called of God to the Mission field but that call is the Great Commission and it in no manor calls you and I into odds with one another. This juvenile attack attitude is prevalent in teen-age boys and is very popular in the joints on Friday and Saturday night but it is not a characteristic of a mature Christian. If you have remarkable comments to make to me, you have every right to use the PM system and I have made available my IM contacts for that purpose. For you to attack me publicly, putting me in the position of having to redress you is not a thing that Christ ever intended.
... Please, begin to try doing God's work in a manor that honors God and give this dis-unifying method a rest, ok?

th1bill
Jul 31st 2009, 09:02 PM
I agree, but to say that God inspired translations or even Greek texts word for word is an indefensible position.
UM,
... I just reread every word I posted in this string. I have tried my best to not answer you in the same tone that you are attacking me with and I will not fall to your level f worldly aggression but I will report you again if this continues. In the post quoted above you have placed a lie into my mouth once again. If you are smart enough to read what I have posted you will even find that I never said that the translations were word for word, spot on. In one, early post, I even mentioned that having been around the world that I knew the difficulties of translations and that my friend, for the learned man, indicates that there is ofter no word for word translation of languages. You are guilty of attempting to back me down a dead end rabbit trail but it is a child's error and you constant unholy twisting of my statements must stop, now. Your attacks are not of God.

JoeChristian
Jul 31st 2009, 09:17 PM
Petey, I don't think this will be the answer you are looking for but I thought I would offer it anyway since (IMHO) most people are not really addressing your question.

I believe the Bible is the inspired word of God because it was that word that brought me to my knees spiritually in recognition of my rebellion to my God and my creator. It is the same word that then lifted me up in revelation of Christs infinite love and grace for me. There is something more and there is something less but when it comes down to it this is all that remains.

th1bill
Jul 31st 2009, 11:09 PM
No one has really taken a direct shot at the original question I posed yet. In particular, how do we know which parts of the NT were directly inspired by God and which (if any) were thoughts from the readers own minds?

I know about the couple of verses, which I quoted, stating the validity of ALL scripture, not just the Old Testament. But like some of you have pointed out, some NT books were written and included after these verses were penned. Additionally, what if those verses themselves were the author's own thoughts as opposed to God's word?

And who decided what books went in and what books would not go in to the Bible? That's something I never learned in church and would be extremely interested in knowing.

Thanks,
Nick P.
Nick,
... First, allow me to apologize in behalf of the Urban Missionary. It is never a good thing to hijack someone's string for your own purposes.
... It is a popular teaching that the Council of Trent Canonized the scriptures, in other words the Catholics. This is, however, not true. The Old Testament was canonized by the Jewish men that God moved upon to do so before Jesus came into consideration. Now, much to the disbelief of Catholicism, the Roman Catholic Church was not the first, the second nor even the third Christian Church. The truth of the matter is that the New Testament was canonized by the Churches of Asia Minor, Israel and the rest of the known world before the Council of 325(?) was ever convened. What the Catholics did there was to ratify the work that had been previously performed by the inspiration of God as He once more used the faithful to complete His wishes. Later on the Catholics tried to flex their muscles (I believe) and add the books of the Apocrypha. None of the churches God had moved upon accepted their decision because while there is merit in studying the history of the Jewish people, these books are, in places, in contradiction to the scriptures that are canonized. The basis for this rejection by the church is that God never contradicts Himself.
... Now, Nick, I am not, by any means the end authority. What you have in Bill Taylor is a man that attended school through the eighth grade and then took the test for a military GED. I cannot show you a string of diplomas but what I have done, from the age of 17 is to go to the library and check out the books there that contained the knowledge that I did not have the privilidge to gain as a youth ad I have studied. So, you see, it follows that I am a lay-man of the Christia faith. My knowledge of God has been gained in the same manor as the rest of my education, through study and life experiance. If there is anything I can do or say to help you, it is my mission in life to help. If I still have missed the mark, please point me in the correct direction.
... I sometimes mistype and oft forget to proof read and for that I ask your forebearance. I have a very advanced case of RRMS and I must hunt and peck these days as my hands do not function properly. My hunt and peck is hazardous because this disease has also lessened my sense of touch. So when, not if, I mistype, please forgive but never hesitate to ask, please.

Petey
Aug 1st 2009, 12:59 AM
Thanks Bill that was quite helpful. Usually through reading other people's posts I seem to be able to come to my own conclusion. Here's what popped into my mind as I was reading over responses today:

Perhaps, even if some of the New Testament books were not directly inspired by God, they are still being used to God's intent. Everyone's heard the popular maxim that God doesn't make bad things happen but that he uses the bad things that do happen for good. Maybe it's a similar situation here (Note though that I'm not saying it's necessarily bad if the books weren't all directly inspired)- I'm sure that God could use these writings to convey his message as he wishes it to be conveyed regardless of whether or not he inspired it all word for word. He would have made sure we receive his word how he wants us to receive it so that we can be saved. Even different translations should convey the same meat of what we really need to know.

That's my thoughts. If anybody disagrees or knows any better I'd be interested to hear what you have to say.

-Nick P.

Athanasius
Aug 1st 2009, 02:26 AM
I agree, but to say that God inspired translations or even Greek texts word for word is an indefensible position.

I agree with this.

Firefighter
Aug 1st 2009, 04:11 AM
How do you account for entire passages left out of different translations?

How do you account for no two Greek texts being identical?


That does not allow for the belief of All translations or even Greek texts being inspired word for word.


If you are trying to say the GENERAL MESSAGE is the same I agree, but to say that every translation and text is word for word inspired is simply not being intellectually honest.

Desperaux
Aug 1st 2009, 04:33 AM
How do you account for entire passages left out of different translations?

How do you account for no two Greek texts being identical?


That does not allow for the belief of All translations or even Greek texts being inspired word for word.


If you are trying to say the GENERAL MESSAGE is the same I agree, but to say that every translation and text is word for word inspired is simply not being intellectually honest.


Wow! Why have I bothered over these last 47 years to have even opened the Word of God at all, then? This thread is teaching immature believers not to trust the scriptures or that God can preserve and conserve His very message--even through every meticulous step of copying as well as translation, making sure that every word that we read is His inspiration and His very thoughts toward us.

Firefighter
Aug 1st 2009, 04:36 AM
Nice rhetoric, but no response to the questions above or to the reference in 1 Corinthians 1...

Desperaux
Aug 1st 2009, 04:44 AM
Nice rhetoric, but no response to the questions above or to the reference in 1 Corinthians 1...

What about 1 Corinthians 1?

Paul saying he didn't baptize any of those within his hearing ("I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius")? He was totally truthful and above board, not lacking in any of the Holy Spirit's inspiration.

Firefighter
Aug 1st 2009, 04:57 AM
What does the very next verse say???

Desperaux
Aug 1st 2009, 05:05 AM
What does the very next verse say???

It doesn't refer to the ones who he was addressing, does it? They aren't a part of the "you"!

God wonderfully allows the humanness of His chosen writers to infuse the text yet, all agree, and none speak error.

Firefighter
Aug 1st 2009, 05:08 AM
Yes it is. The "you" was then church at Corinth...

th1bill
Aug 1st 2009, 05:11 AM
Thanks Bill that was quite helpful. Usually through reading other people's posts I seem to be able to come to my own conclusion. Here's what popped into my mind as I was reading over responses today:

Perhaps, even if some of the New Testament books were not directly inspired by God, they are still being used to God's intent. Everyone's heard the popular maxim that God doesn't make bad things happen but that he uses the bad things that do happen for good. Maybe it's a similar situation here (Note though that I'm not saying it's necessarily bad if the books weren't all directly inspired)- I'm sure that God could use these writings to convey his message as he wishes it to be conveyed regardless of whether or not he inspired it all word for word. He would have made sure we receive his word how he wants us to receive it so that we can be saved. Even different translations should convey the same meat of what we really need to know.

That's my thoughts. If anybody disagrees or knows any better I'd be interested to hear what you have to say.

-Nick P.
Nick,
I, for one, would term that a healthy attitude.

Desperaux
Aug 1st 2009, 05:13 AM
Yes it is. The "you" was then church at Corinth...

Yes, you are right. However, Paul's humanness and natural way of speaking in this instance is nothing to get up in arms about, and does not contradict the knowledge that all Scripture is inspired.

Firefighter
Aug 1st 2009, 05:25 AM
it does wreck a "word for word inspired" position... How can the first sentence be true since the second contradicts it?

th1bill
Aug 1st 2009, 05:26 AM
How do you account for entire passages left out of different translations?

How do you account for no two Greek texts being identical?


That does not allow for the belief of All translations or even Greek texts being inspired word for word.


If you are trying to say the GENERAL MESSAGE is the same I agree, but to say that every translation and text is word for word inspired is simply not being intellectually honest.
Shhhhhhhhhh!
... First of all, learn some manors. You, a Christian, are so inconsiderate that you cannot either quote the post your answering or at least type the name of the party being addressed? Now, I have already apologized to Nick for you being so rude as to attempt to hijack his string and here you go again, chasing rabbits.
... In the first place you put the words "word for word" into my mouth and tried to make me a liar. In the context of my messages to Johnboy and to Petey, I never inferred anything of the sort, let alone state that lie. I will not respond to you again in this string except it be in the context of what nick has desired to know.

XN,
... Be careful seconding another's statements without researching them.

Vhayes
Aug 1st 2009, 05:47 AM
Bill - wasn't one of your complaints to Urban that he should take differences he had with you up in a pm and NOT on the open board? Do you operate under different rules?

Desperaux
Aug 1st 2009, 06:06 AM
it does wreck a "word for word inspired" position... How can the first sentence be true since the second contradicts it?


Oh, my lands! I suppose we must toss out the word of God because Paul wrote colloquially. I see no contradiction.

th1bill
Aug 1st 2009, 07:42 AM
Oh, my lands! I suppose we must toss out the word of God because Paul wrote colloquially. I see no contradiction.
... You are of course correct. The one thing that the lost man and the man naming the name of Christ but never submitting to his or her called for status is the aid of the Holy Spirit in the reading of scripture. Before I was saved the Bible, every time I tried to read it, was filed with contradictions. That was the reading of the natural man. The very moment I accepted the Christ as my Savior everything changed. When I walked down the street the trees had a glow to them that had never been there before. Everyone I encountered had a different feel about them than they had exuded before. And when I read the Bible it said the most amazing things, things that I had never understood before and when I searched for the conflicting passages of my previous readings, they were there and the same words were on the page but I gained a new understanding and an insight that I had never owned before, there was no conflict to be found.
... In our society today it is easy to be a Christian. Over eighty per cent of Americans are listed as being Christians, even though the vast majority have never even been a member of the local church. The hard part of this situatin is that God will not be mocked. We can go to the church building every time the doors open, teach Sunday School and sing in the choir and tell everyone that we are a Christian but it can still not be the truth, according to God. A Christian (a member of the Bride of Christ), male or female, is a purchased Bond Servant of the King.
... I have never witnessed the presence of the Holy Spirit of God in anyone that is not surrendered to their position in Christ. I often teach lessons that the Spirit has lain on my heart and I am often rebuked by several and blessed by a few. To the world this situation is cause for great concern, not pleasing the masses. For the Christian it is a matter for great concern also, it is very hard to watch folks that you care about amble off into Hell, but just as Jesus taught, wide is the path that leads to destruction and narrow is the path to righteousness and few there are that will find the narrow path.

RevLogos
Aug 1st 2009, 05:09 PM
It seems that the validity of every word in the Bible not coming as a direct quote from God himself depends on whether these verses are in fact God-inspired- which is a pretty major deal, to put things lightly.


I am not sure what you mean by the Bible being "direct quotes from God". But perhaps a contrast here may illustrate.

Muslims believe the Koran contains direct quotes from Allah. The Koran was transcribed by Muhammad but he wrote down words dictated to him by an angel.

We believe, OTOH that the Bible contains the experiences and revelations of men, thus divinely inspired, but still the text written by men.

Because the Muslims see the Koran as the direct word of their god, they hold it to the same esteem that we hold Jesus. If you ever wonder why Muslims get so wrapped around the axle when someone defaces the Koran, it is because to them, it is god. Roughly equivalent to someone disparaging Jesus.

Muslims also claim Allah gave his word in Arabic and Arabic is the only language in which it can be truly understood. They would say a translated Koran is not really a Koran.

Muslims use that belief as an apologetic excuse form time to time. When someone points out the thousands of hateful verses in the Koran, they will say well, you misinterpret it - you must understand the original Arabic. Of course the most violent Muslims tend to be Arabic. What does that say?

To a Christian the idea that God would give His word in only one language is laughable. The Word of God was meant for all of Mankind. Translations are works of men and not themselves necessarily divinely inspired. We often debate about which translations are the best. A few are "only KJV" people. Many of us use multiple translations, and Strongs. I have 10 translations at my fingertips right now though I routinely use only 4. All of these are useful for teaching, reproof, correction and training.

RevLogos
Aug 1st 2009, 05:20 PM
I grew up in with the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod teaching that every word in the Bible is directly inspired by God.

So- my question is: How can we be sure that these words proclaiming the rest of scripture to be God-inspired are themselves God-inspired? It seems that the validity of every word in the Bible not coming as a direct quote from God himself depends on whether these verses are in fact God-inspired- which is a pretty major deal, to put things lightly.



I think all Christians believe the Bible to be inspired by God. Luther was especially big on sola scriptura because so much false teaching had crept into the RCC, but it is one of the foundations of protestantism.

As to your question I would first give the short answer. We believe it because the Holy Spirit tells us it is so. When I was born again the very first thing the Holy Spirit said to me was "Read the Bible! It contains truth." And I have, and it does.

People who are not Christian see the Bible as just a collection of stories and mythology. They cannot see further into it. The Bible tells us it is a work for insiders; those without faith will not understand it. This is consistent with my experience before I was saved. The bible tells us this too:

1Co 2:14 [NIV] The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

1Co 1:18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
1Co 1:19 For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."

th1bill
Aug 1st 2009, 05:21 PM
Bill - wasn't one of your complaints to Urban that he should take differences he had with you up in a pm and NOT on the open board? Do you operate under different rules?
... No, but when attaked in public I respond.

RevLogos
Aug 1st 2009, 06:01 PM
How do you account for entire passages left out of different translations?

How do you account for no two Greek texts being identical?


That does not allow for the belief of All translations or even Greek texts being inspired word for word.


If you are trying to say the GENERAL MESSAGE is the same I agree, but to say that every translation and text is word for word inspired is simply not being intellectually honest.
Sounds like you have been reading “Misquoting Jesus” by Bart Ehrman. His criticism is that there are so many variants in the earliest manuscripts, that there must be equal problems with core Christian faith. He said:

“With the abundance of evidence, what can we say about the total number of variants known today? Scholars differ significantly in their estimates -- some say there are 200,000 variants known, some say 300,000, some say 400,000 or more!”

And he goes on and on about all of these “problems”. I have looked into many of these and the fact is that these variations are all in word order, proper name spellings, variants in articles or conjunctions, and so on. None of them make any difference in understanding core beliefs. Bart is using these raw numbers to say the Bible is false; but this exaggerates the truth because he does not account for the insignificance of these variants. Another atheist technique Th1Bill can add to his list.

If you have e-sword, I recommend downloading the New English Translation (NET) Bible. It isn’t the best translation but it has the most copious footnotes – over 30,000 - identifying these variants. I have not seen a single one that would impact core beliefs.

There are a couple of larger differences that have been debated by Bible scholars for centuries. For example, some early manuscripts end Mark at 16:8 while others continue to 16:20. But even these few larger differences have no impact on our faith. You are correct that it would be disingenuous not to acknowledge these, but it also has no impact on the truth of God's Word.

When we say the Bible is “inerrant”, it is not meant that there are no variations. What is meant is that the scripture we have is exactly what God wants us to have.

Firefighter
Aug 1st 2009, 06:19 PM
Not at all. I have never read that book. I believe that the Bible is sufficient for all of our needs, including salvation and it is the final authority of all matters of faith and conduct.

However, when one Bible leaves out a scripture, and one does not, one HAS to be in error, right? Either one has left something out, or one has added something. THAT is where my problem comes in when people say that all translations and Greek texts are without corruption of any kind. That is my only point. Unless we can answer these questions in an intelligent way, why should the world believe us?

I believe that the Holy Spirit SUPERVISED the writing of men and kept the original autographs without error. But to try and say that things have not been added to the scriptures is simply an indefensible position leaving us to look like fools before the world. That very thing is what the entire discipline of textual criticism is all about. It is a search for truth, not a denial of it.

Vhayes
Aug 1st 2009, 06:27 PM
I would also add like to add that when someone says all translations are word for word accurate, it makes no sense to me. The King James does not read word for word like The Message - the New American Standard does not read word for word like the Revised Standard.

Do I believe the bible is the inerrant word of God? Yes, I do. Do I believe each and every word in all English translations were dictated by God? No - sorry, I just don't.

Does each and every bible contain all that is needed to come to a saving knowledge of Jesus? I think so. Does each and every bible give us the information we need to grow in the Lord? I think so. It's up to the Holy Spirit to USE those words in each of our individual hearts and minds. He is a much better teacher than just the words on a page.
V