The Bible

[trophy33]

When he said, "It is written," that was final.

Are you sure?

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

My friend, it is rare to find a phrase that has not been previously articulated, often in a more eloquent manner. My source was "Dei Verbum," with phrases woven together with my own. As my declared intention is to convey the Catholic perspective, including my own, on the sacred scriptures, what better sources could I employ than those crafted by the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church?

Pope:

4. Then, after speaking in many and varied ways through the prophets, "now at last in these days God has spoken to us in His Son" (Heb. 1:1-2). For He sent His Son, the eternal Word, who enlightens all men, so that He might dwell among men and tell them of the innermost being of God (see John 1:1-18). Jesus Christ, therefore, the Word made flesh, was sent as "a man to men." (3) He "speaks the words of God" (John 3;34), and completes the work of salvation which His Father gave Him to do (see John 5:36; John 17:4). To see Jesus is to see His Father (John 14:9). For this reason Jesus perfected revelation by fulfilling it through his whole work of making Himself present and manifesting Himself: through His words and deeds, His signs and wonders, but especially through His death and glorious resurrection from the dead and final sending of the Spirit of truth. Moreover He confirmed with divine testimony what revelation proclaimed, that God is with us to free us from the darkness of sin and death, and to raise us up to life eternal.​

You:

Then, after speaking in many and varied ways through the prophets, "now at last in these days God has spoken to us in His Son" (Heb. 1:1-2). For He sent His Son, the eternal Word, who enlightens all men, so that He might dwell among men and tell them of the innermost being of God (see John 1:1-18). Jesus Christ, therefore, the Word made flesh, was sent as "a man to men." He "speaks the words of God" (John 3;34), and completes the work of salvation which His Father gave Him to do (see John 5:36; John 17:4). To see Jesus is to see His Father (John 14:9). For this reason Jesus perfected revelation by fulfilling it through his whole work of making Himself present and manifesting Himself: through His words and deeds, His signs and wonders, but especially through His death and glorious resurrection from the dead and final sending of the Spirit of truth. Moreover He confirmed with divine testimony what revelation proclaimed, that God is with us to free us from the darkness of sin and death, and to raise us up to life eternal.​

Yes, I see what you're saying. You removed "4. " and "(3) " to make it your own. I don't think this meets the standard.

 

[concretecamper]

The NT cannon was arrived at the same way the OT canon was arrived at. . .by the people of God recognizing the Holy Spirit in the authorship of the texts.

And to read the apocrypha is to see its difference from the Protestant Canon.

So you recognize an authority of something outside of scripture. ie the leaders of His Chosen people and the Authority of His Church. Glad to hear it.

 

[Clare73]

Scripture is certainly God Breathed. But 2 Tim 3:16 doesn't say "only".

All that is God-breathed is in agreement with itself, not contradicting itself in light of all itself, for God does not contradict himself in his word written.

Any version not in agreement with itself is not inerrant.

Well, you are not answering my questions. I will try to make it easier - can you name one specific Bible that is inerrant, in your opinion? Preferably one of those you are using so that you might be familiar with it.

When I say Bible I am referring to the Greek texts of the NT, and the Hebrew texts of the OT.

 

[trophy33]

When I say Bible I am referring to the Greek texts of the NT, and the Hebrew texts of the OT.

Which Greek texts? We have plenty, no two manuscripts are the same. So we grouped those various manuscripts into broader families and modern scholars created critical editions which are used for Bible translations. Which specific Greek text is inerrant, in your opinion?

Do we need to learn Greek to actually have an access to the word of God? Or do you believe that some English translation is also the word of God?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Pope:

4. Then, after speaking in many and varied ways through the prophets, "now at last in these days God has spoken to us in His Son" (Heb. 1:1-2). For He sent His Son, the eternal Word, who enlightens all men, so that He might dwell among men and tell them of the innermost being of God (see John 1:1-18). Jesus Christ, therefore, the Word made flesh, was sent as "a man to men." (3) He "speaks the words of God" (John 3;34), and completes the work of salvation which His Father gave Him to do (see John 5:36; John 17:4). To see Jesus is to see His Father (John 14:9). For this reason Jesus perfected revelation by fulfilling it through his whole work of making Himself present and manifesting Himself: through His words and deeds, His signs and wonders, but especially through His death and glorious resurrection from the dead and final sending of the Spirit of truth. Moreover He confirmed with divine testimony what revelation proclaimed, that God is with us to free us from the darkness of sin and death, and to raise us up to life eternal.​

You:

Then, after speaking in many and varied ways through the prophets, "now at last in these days God has spoken to us in His Son" (Heb. 1:1-2). For He sent His Son, the eternal Word, who enlightens all men, so that He might dwell among men and tell them of the innermost being of God (see John 1:1-18). Jesus Christ, therefore, the Word made flesh, was sent as "a man to men." He "speaks the words of God" (John 3;34), and completes the work of salvation which His Father gave Him to do (see John 5:36; John 17:4). To see Jesus is to see His Father (John 14:9). For this reason Jesus perfected revelation by fulfilling it through his whole work of making Himself present and manifesting Himself: through His words and deeds, His signs and wonders, but especially through His death and glorious resurrection from the dead and final sending of the Spirit of truth. Moreover He confirmed with divine testimony what revelation proclaimed, that God is with us to free us from the darkness of sin and death, and to raise us up to life eternal.​

Yes, I see what you're saying. You removed "4. " and "(3) " to make it your own. I don't think this meets the standard.

Good sir, if the source is widely known and readily accessible, is it necessary to provide a link? Incidentally, Dei Verbum was not authored by a pope. Moreover, the source was already cited in post #3.

 

[Clare73]

So you recognize an authority of something outside of scripture. ie the leaders of His Chosen people and the Authority of His Church. Glad to hear it.

Actually, I acknowledge the ability of early Christians to recognize Holy Spirit-authored writing, just as they can do today.

And one of the objective criteria for Holy Spirit authored text, is that it all be in agreement with itself.

So whatever text is purported to be God-breathed Scripture must be in agreement with itself, understood in the light of all itself.

That would exclude some of the NT writings which some may accept.

 

[trophy33]

All that is God-breathed is in agreement with itself, not contradicting itself in light of all itself, for God does not contradict himself in his word written.

Any version not in agreement with itself is not inerrant.

Jesus said to the paralytic, “Take courage, son; your sins are forgiven.” (Mt 9:2)
Jesus seeing their faith said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.” (Mk 2:5)
Seeing their faith, He said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven you.” (Lk 5:20)

How do you deal with this? We have three different versions of what Jesus said. Which version is inerrant and inspired?

 

[Mark Quayle]

Which Greek texts? We have plenty, no two manuscripts are the same. So we grouped those various manuscripts into broader families and modern scholars created critical editions which are used for Bible translations. Which specific Greek text is inerrant, in your opinion?

Do we need to learn Greek to actually have an access to the word of God? Or do you believe that some English translation is also the word of God?

The originals, of which we have pretty good copies accumulated.

And no, no translation is without error, by bias or perverse purpose, by human limitations of language and by ignorance and lack of understanding the original language.

But even the worst translations have been unable to stamp out the truth of the Word of God.

 

[trophy33]

The originals, of which we have pretty good copies accumulated.

And no, no translation is without error, either by bias or perverse purpose and by ignorance and lack of understanding the original language.

But even the worst translations have been unable to stamp out the truth of the Word of God.

The originals what? I do not know what are your claims about the Bible.

 

[Clare73]

Which Greek texts? We have plenty, no two manuscripts are the same. So we grouped those various manuscripts into broader families and modern scholars created critical editions which are used for Bible translations. Which specific Greek text is inerrant, in your opinion?

I go with the Nestle Greek text.

It agrees in all its parts, understood in the light of all itself.

Do we need to learn Greek to actually have an access to the word of God? Or do you believe that some English translation is also the word of God?

We personally need to know neither Greek nor Latin to have access to the word of God today.

 

[trophy33]

I go with the Nestle Greek text. It agrees in all its parts, understood in the light of all itself.

Which version of Nestlé Aland agrees in all its parts?

 

[Clare73]

Jesus said to the paralytic, “Take courage, son; your sins are forgiven.” (Mt 9:2)
Jesus seeing their faith said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.” (Mk 2:5)
Seeing their faith, He said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven you.” (Lk 5:20)

How do you deal with this? We have three different versions of what Jesus said. Which version is inerrant and inspired?

Which Greek text or texts is being used?

Any substantive difference?

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

Good sir, if the source is widely known and readily accessible, is it necessary to provide a link? Incidentally, Dei Verbum was not authored by a pope. Moreover, the source was already cited in post #3.

Ok, I'll let it go.

It was promulgated by him, but not written by him?

DEI VERBUM​

SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED​

BY HIS HOLINESS​

POPE PAUL VI​

ON NOVEMBER 18, 1965​

Ok, I stand corrected.

But since you are using his promulgations as an explanation of what Catholics believe about the Bible, you must also know the pope wasn't promulgating ideas that specifically relate only to the Bible. Much of which you quoted had to do with God interracting directly with people, not interracting with them through the Bible. But I suppose those things may be considered anthropomorhic features of the Bible by some.

 

[trophy33]

Which Greek text or texts is being used?

You can check in your preferred one, how it reads.

Any substantive difference?

Why did we switch from "inerrant in all detail" to "substantive difference"? Define properly what you mean by your claims about inerrancy, from the beginning.

 

[Clare73]

Which version of Nestlé Aland agrees in all its parts?

Which does not?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I acknowledge the ability of early Christians to recognize Holy Spirit-authored writing, just as they can do today.

Today, changes to the canon of scripture have primarily been made by restorationist groups. The Protestants in the 16th century, the Mormons in the 19th century, and the Christian Scientists, among others, also in the 19th century, have altered the canon. In the 20th century, various ephemeral groups claimed additional revelations, including one in Australia known as "The Church of the Living God," which has a congregation named "Hebron" located in the Sydney suburb of Hurstville.

 

[trophy33]

Which does not?

No, you claim inerrancy, so you point me to the inerrant version.

 

[Clare73]

You can check in your preferred one, how it reads.


Why did we switch from "inerrant in all detail" to "substantive difference"? Define properly what you mean by your claims about inerrancy from the beginning.

At the time we switched to inerrant "in all detail."

 

[Clare73]

No, you claim inerrancy, so you point me to the inerrant version.

Strawman. . .