The Inspiration of Scripture

[mark kennedy]

They were in the company but they are not Jesus. They are not perfect as we’ve seen through scripture. And it’s nkt even that big a deal that they weren’t. They were human and humans make mistakes which means they are not infallible.

You don't seem to understand how the word is used in Scripture:

To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God. (Acts 1:3)
​

The emphasis is on the nature of the proof, not the perfections of the witness.

 

[redleghunter]

Just like Wesley, he's talking about the necessity and sufficiency of scripture alone for the purpose of Salvation. Not about God using someone as an automated medium so that every single statement is written by the very person of God himself and is thus perfect and infallible without any error or contradiction.

Yeah I didn’t indicate Wesley was doing such. Other than show Wesley believe in the infallibility of Holy Scriptures. He was in agreement with the Reformers on that as well.

 

[redleghunter]

And thinking about it, if the apostles themselves were infallible (or any human being other than Jesus), it would mean that we wouldn't really have had any need for Jesus as Christ since we would have been either infallible ourselves from the very beginning, or capable of becoming infallible through our own efforts.

I think the argument is those things from God are infallible. Is there any question the apostles taught the doctrines of Christ?

Luke 24: NASB

44Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” 45Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46and He said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, 47and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem.

 

[redleghunter]

Scripture itself is the evidence for the contradictions as anyone can go into scripture and see them for themselves vs. pretending they don't exist.

If you have confidence in this statement then a thread supporting it should be pretty easy to set up. I welcome the discussion.

Assertion noted so we can move on.

 

[redleghunter]

That's not answering the question. Which one came first, Adam or the animals? Genesis 1 states the order and Genesis 2 also states the order, and they are astoundingly different. I wonder which one is correct?

Sure it is. I stated a fact. That is what you start with. Both animals and humans were made on the 6th day. Chapter 2 is focused on Eden.

Chapter 1-Macro

Chapter 2-Micro

 

[mark kennedy]

I think the argument is those things from God are infallible. Is there any question the apostles taught the doctrines of Christ?

Luke 24: NASB

44Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” 45Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46and He said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, 47and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem.

I wonder how that was missed for so long in this discussion. The fulfillment of Messianic prophecy was one of the infallible proofs Luke promised in his opening.

 

[redleghunter]

Good thing for me that Jesus Christ is my foundation and not dependent on the accuracy of the created order of Adam and animals, but if you *were* witnessing to an atheist, particularly an atheist of reasonable intelligence, and tried to pretend that there was no difference when anyone can easily see that there is, then they are unlikely to take you very seriously about the gospel either.

What’s interesting is intelligent atheists deal in statements of plausibility. So when they try to use a different standard of evidence I call them on it and ask them to show me what they are arguing against is implausible. They can’t.

Your question on Genesis 1 day 6 vs Genesis 2 day 6 is not the real issue.

The question should be “why did God reveal the information the way He did?”

That’s how we Christians should approach the text.

 

[mark kennedy]

That's not answering the question. Which one came first, Adam or the animals? Genesis 1 states the order and Genesis 2 also states the order, and they are astoundingly different. I wonder which one is correct?

Good thing for me that Jesus Christ is my foundation and not dependent on the accuracy of the created order of Adam and animals, but if you *were* witnessing to an atheist, particularly an atheist of reasonable intelligence, and tried to pretend that there was no difference when anyone can easily see that there is, then they are unlikely to take you very seriously about the gospel either.

No, the Lord had already formed the beasts of the field (Gen 2:19), it starts the chapter off with creation complete in it's vast array. The emphasis is that God had created life, seen again in the Psalms, Job, Isaiah and elsewhere. Gid is simply being praised for creation.

 

[redleghunter]

I consider that God inspired them but the authors wrote them in ways they understood and "Thus says the Lord" was put there for special emphasis. Now that does not mean that they are not important at all. In fact I believe many parts that some of you evangelicals only call symbols. If you some of evangelicals believed that the whole Bible is the exact words of God than you all would have to change some of your beliefs. The fact that some of you evangelicals do not and regard some parts as symbolic tells me that you do not believe that the Bible is the exact word of God.

Ok let’s just call it what it is. A mystery.

I learned that from the Eastern Orthodox.

 

[redleghunter]

Yes or No to the question is too simplistic.

Regarding all the Gospel Doctrine, and all other related doctrines, are clearly authored by God through His inspired writers. And the inspired writings are harmonious throughout regarding all these doctrines.

However, regarding times, details of events, places, and persons involved, the inspired writers wrote from the their understanding and vantage point based on the knowledge each had, or gathered, of such peripheral details. Regarding the Four Gospels, only Matthew and John were actually witnesses of most of these events described.

So the peripheral details are not precise, and there is discrepancy between inspired accounts on those peripherals. This discrepancy is most clearly seen in the four Gospel accounts when comparing them. And, while some discrepancy can be explained away, other discrepancies have no such recourse.

The peripheral discrepancies are not an issue and is to be expected among persons describing any situation, and how they choose to describe it. Detailed knowledge of events and how, when or where they occurred definitely varies between the inspired authors.

I will not take up space here to describe all the peripheral discrepancies, but for those interested, do a search on the internet.

Blessings.

That’s a good run down. What’s interesting is if all the Gospels lined up perfectly I would be skeptical. They don’t because there were different eyewitness from different vantage points.

 

[bekkilyn]

Sure it is. I stated a fact. That is what you start with. Both animals and humans were made on the 6th day. Chapter 2 is focused on Eden.

Chapter 1-Macro

Chapter 2-Micro

Except that chapter one specifically states the order that they were created and chapter 2 specifically states an order that they were created and the two are very, very different. I've heard your argument before and it is not convincing, and certainly not convincing to an intelligent unbeliever who may believe the gospel message, but not giant leaps of imagination to pretend that there is nothing contradictory in the first two chapters of Genesis when it is very clear and obvious that there is.

It's no more convincing if I told you that yesterday I cleaned the house and then I had supper and then a few moments later I told you that yesterday I had supper and then I cleaned the house. Yes, both events happened yesterday but I contradicted myself on the order the events happened. One clearly happened before the other and only one ordering of the two events is correct.

 

[redleghunter]

You don't seem to understand how the word is used in Scripture:

To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God. (Acts 1:3)
​

The emphasis is on the nature of the proof, not the perfections of the witness.

That’s the best answer thus far

 

[redleghunter]

Except that chapter one specifically states the order that they were created and chapter 2 specifically states an order that they were created and the two are very, very different. I've heard your argument before and it is not convincing, and certainly not convincing to an intelligent unbeliever who may believe the gospel message, but not giant leaps of imagination to pretend that there is nothing contradictory in the first two chapters of Genesis when it is very clear and obvious that there is.

It's no more convincing if I told you that yesterday I cleaned the house and then I had supper and then a few moments later I told you that yesterday I had supper and then I cleaned the house. Yes, both events happened yesterday but I contradicted myself on the order the events happened. One clearly happened before the other and only one ordering of the two events is correct.

I believe you are still asking the wrong question.

Why were humans mentioned last on Day 6 in Genesis 1?

Why were they mentioned first in Genesis 2?

No need to answer as I was demonstrating how to approach the texts from the Creator’s position and not our human position.

 

[bekkilyn]

What’s interesting is intelligent atheists deal in statements of plausibility. So when they try to use a different standard of evidence I call them on it and ask them to show me what they are arguing against is implausible. They can’t.

Your question on Genesis 1 day 6 vs Genesis 2 day 6 is not the real issue.

The question should be “why did God reveal the information the way He did?”

That’s how we Christians should approach the text.

Or perhaps the Documentary Hypothesis is correct.

Or perhaps the two accounts weren't meant to be taken literally.

Or perhaps only one of them is correct and the other is just poetry.

Or the human(s) writing the scripture got confused because they hadn't eaten that day and neither account has the ordering correct.

Or God is absent-minded and just forgot what he wrote in the first chapter.

Or God wrote the first chapter and the human he told to write the second chapter got it wrong, or vice versa.

Or any other number of things.

And yet regardless of the multitude of reasons why it might be the case, there is still the contradiction.

Of course the ordering of creation isn't a real issue at all when it comes to matters of salvation because it's really just setting up that it was God who created everything (regardless of the specifics of how it happened), but if one is going to claim that scriptures are infallible in the sense of being perfect without error or contradiction even up to the point of being equal or even above God himself, then creation order is only the first out of many that refutes that claim.

 

[bekkilyn]

I believe you are still asking the wrong question.

Why were humans mentioned last on Day 6 in Genesis 1?

Why were they mentioned first in Genesis 2?

No need to answer as I was demonstrating how to approach the texts from the Creator’s position and not our human position.

So now you are claiming to have the mind of God himself to know exactly how he would approach these texts?

Basically, since there is apparently no good reason for the contradiction on the human side of things, we just have to fall back on the "it's beyond human understanding" cop out that convinces no one who isn't already pretending the first two chapters have the exact same order of creation.

 

[JacksBratt]

Do you realize that you are "God-breathed" as well, as are all of the living beings he created? Does that mean you are God and/or that everything you say, God says?

Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? Really.... in response to actual scripture about God's word..
Do you realize that the Word of God existed before creation?
"In the beginning... was the Word"... remember that verse.

Also, I was not "God breathed" Adam was formed by God's hands and the breath of life was breathed into him.. Now, every human is still breathing from that breath.. right from Eve... But we were not spoke into existence.. Adam was formed and given a life and a soul with God's own breath.

I am not "God breathed".. I am human and I can repeat what God says.. but what I say is not profitable for much.

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

I believe you are still asking the wrong question.

Why were humans mentioned last on Day 6 in Genesis 1?

Why were they mentioned first in Genesis 2?

No need to answer as I was demonstrating how to approach the texts from the Creator’s position and not our human position.

I mean this with all respect because I really quo’s like an answer because these are the types of statements that I don’t quite understand. How is it that you can you explain to anybody how to look at something from the creators position?

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

So now you are claiming to have the mind of God himself to know exactly how he would approach these texts?

Basically, since there is apparently no good reason for the contradiction on the human side of things, we just have to fall back on the "it's beyond human understanding" cop out that convinces no one who isn't already pretending the first two chapters have the exact same order of creation.

I literally just asked the same question lol. These are those of statements that confuse me. If this individual can explain to me how to look at things from the creators position that is absolutely amazing. This right here is where the non believers stay non believers. We think we know too much

 

[JacksBratt]

My Christianity is based on knowing God and prayer and community and scripture and morals and ethics and ... isn't yours?

Yep, and the fact that the bible is the Word of God... and is what God says..

Tell me one thing that the bible says that is NOT what God said or wanted said or can be trusted to be solid truth?

 

[CodyFaith]

Would just like to say that this:

Spoiler

Makes me feel a bit better about this forum and even though I've gotten into some nasty tiffs with people here in the past, likely some on that list, it provides me with a sense of oneness in the faith.

Not that if you aren't on the list you aren't one... not at all, we can't all agree on everything... I am just saying I'm genuinely happy to see so many people on the forum agree and in unity with an important topic for once, all sorts of denominations in there.

"Hippy" moment, sue me