God's beautiful creation

[BCP1928]

I figure your offense is not ultimately with me, but with the Word of God. Your avoidance to engaging in discussing it is noted.

I am not avoiding the Scripture. But since you are not shy in expressing your contempt for me and my faith , I do not feel shy in telling you that I find the doctrine of literal inerrancy as you apply it a degenerate corruption of the inspired Word of God.

In His Word you would readily find answers to your confusion over: how God has always chosen a remnant, how faith in His Word was exercised before being written down (hint: through believing the prophets in the OT times and oral accounts of Jesus in the NT times), and that, yes, there are and have always been genuine Christians and fraudulent ones ("Not all who say to me, Lord, Lord..." - sound familiar?). I encourage you to study His Word for yourself, if you do not already do so. That does take a willingness, though.

One point of contention. This is purely my opinion, but I don't believe that anyone who isn't saved truly believes in their heart that they are - not via atonement - because they don't really believe God raised Jesus from the dead (Romans 10:8-10) - no matter how adamantly they identify as Christian. They preach a religion rather than a relationship.

Otherwise, they would receive His Spirit, they would believe what He says, they would proclaim it as written, and they would strive to obey His living commands - in gratitude for His grace, mercy and compassion.

No, they just don't use that vocabulary to express their direct experience of the Holy Spirit.

Jesus, and His Words, are a rock of offense to some. To others, they are Life. We each ultimately make our own choice...

John 6:65-70 NIV
"He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.”

From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.

“You do not want to leave too, do you?” Jesus asked the Twelve.
Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and to know that you are the Holy One of God.”

And Peter again:

1 Peter 2:4-10 ESV
"As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For it stands in Scripture:

“Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone,
a cornerstone chosen and precious,
and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”
So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe,

“The stone that the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone,” and
“A stone of stumbling,
and a rock of offense.”
They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do."

"But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. Once you were not a people, but now you are God's people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy."

God bless us all!

biblegateway.com

You forgot one:

I am the resurrection and the life, saith the Lord
He that believeth in me and the literal inerrancy of Scripture,
though he were dead yet shall he live
and he that liveth and believeth in me and the literal inerrancy of Scripture
shall never die.

(from the Gospel according to Joseph G.)

 

[AV1611VET]

Fundamentalists just love to try and set it up to where disagreeing with them is disagreeing with God.

If A = B

and B = C

then A = C

 

[BCP1928]

If A = B

and B = C

then A = C

Fundamentalists' opinions are always the same as God's?

 

[AV1611VET]

Fundamentalists' opinions are always the same as God's?

IF A = B ...

 

[BCP1928]

IF A = B ...

That's always presented as a given.

 

[Joseph G]

No. Believing that all of the Bible is 100% inspired and infallible is not a requirement for salvation.

Numbers 23:19 KJV
"God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?"

If it were, Christians would have to believe that the earth sits on pillars and doesn't move, and a host of other ridiculous things.

The Bible is a compilation of many different types of writings, so to demand that it all be read one single, simplistic way is not at all reasonable.

Inspired, infallible and inerrant does not always mean literal. Of course, God uses poetic language sometimes, along with metaphors, parables and all kinds of literary devices - and isn't it beautiful? He invented language(s) after all.

One excellent example is when Jesus directs His audience to eat His flesh and drink His blood. His meaning was clear to those well versed in the sacrificial system of the OT - and of OT prophecies concerning the expected atonement of the Perfect Lamb - the Messiah. The pharisees and scribes and priests should, of all people, have readily understood - but their hardened hearts and self-righteousness precluded them from understanding the meaning of Jesus' Words. Exactly Jesus' purpose in all His teachings - to confound the "wise" and enlighten the babes desiring mercy.

Another example... "I am the Bread of Life" is illumined by "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word which proceeds from the mouth of God" and "give us this day our daily bread".

As to those passages that are to be taken literally, the Holy Spirit leads the genuine seeker to interpret Scripture with Scripture.

For instance, 6 literal days of creation is supported very clearly elsewhere in Scripture. Sorry, but dems de facts.

The inspiration of the OT is attested to over and over by NT figures, especially by Jesus Himself.

The discoveries of the complexities and interwoveness of His entire Word are endless and exciting! Just like His creation around us.

 

[Joseph G]

Fundamentalists just love to try and set it up to where disagreeing with them is disagreeing with God.

When they make all kinds of declarations about Christians and Christianity, but won't address Scripture that refutes them? Yup. It ain't me, bra...

 

[Joseph G]

It's so easy to pretend that someone getting annoyed at you is them getting annoyed at God, isn't it? Makes it easy for you to deflect any criticism against you.

Gee... and we were just bonding over corn flakes. Ah well...

 

[BCP1928]

When they make all kinds of declarations about Christians and Christianity, but won't address Scripture that refutes them? Yup. It ain't me, bra...

Why don't you post some asd find out?

 

[Joseph G]

I am not avoiding the Scripture. But since you are not shy in expressing your contempt for me and my faith , I do not feel shy in telling you that I find the doctrine of literal inerrancy as you apply it a degenerate corruption of the inspired Word of God.

No, they just don't use that vocabulary to express their direct experience of the Holy Spirit.

You forgot one:

I am the resurrection and the life, saith the Lord
He that believeth in me and the literal inerrancy of Scripture,
though he were dead yet shall he live
and he that liveth and believeth in me and the literal inerrancy of Scripture
shall never die.

(from the Gospel according to Joseph G.)

No contempt for you, BCP. I quote Scripture, let the hearer decide if it is applicable to them. And prayerfully, if one is convicted that it does, the hope is that they too will find and receive eternal life.

I have to suggest, though, that it is puzzling to me as to why you would quote Scripture if you don't believe its inerrant.

Still no response to the Scriptures I quoted? The invitation remains to hear your interpretation.

 

[BCP1928]

No contempt for you, BCP. I quote Scripture, let the hearer decide if it is applicable to them. And prayerfully, if one is convicted that it does, the hope is that they too will find and receive eternal life.

I have to suggest, though, that it is puzzling to me as to why you would quote Scripture if you don't believe its inerrant.

It depends on what you mean by "inerrant," It is inerrant in that it is divinely inspired and thus it is exactly the book God wants us to have. The only possible error would be on our part.

Still no response to the Scriptures I quoted? The invitation remains to hear your interpretation.

Why would it be different than yours? Do you somehow find accurate literal history in those passages? A turn of phrase which would allow you to calculate the atomic weight of copper? There must be something, if the text is the product of plenary verbal inspiration then anything which may be logically deduced from it must be true, even if it is nothing to do with the actual topic of the passage.

 

[Joseph G]

It depends on what you mean by "inerrant,"

From: Merriam-Webster.com

inerrancy​

noun​

in·er·ran·cy (ˌ)i-ˈner-ən(t)-sē

: exemption from error : infallibility
the question of biblical inerrancy.

Do you believe the Bible is free from error?

It is inerrant in that it is divinely inspired and thus it is exactly the book God wants us to have.

Hard to understand your definition, considering your apparent derision of the clear Scriptural teaching of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ via the Holy Spirit, and His directive to go out and share the Gospel and make disciples (oh, that dirty word evangelism).

May I conclude that the plethora of Scriptures detailing as much are to you, therefore, to be all in error?

Has God ever been confused or inept in His communications with man? Then why would He allow errors in a Book He dictated that is so critical in leading man to His eternal destiny?

If not in error, to be taken seriously then? Again, how do you decide which Scripture to adhere to and which to ignore, or redefine?

The only possible error would be on our part.

Certainly. And considering all the doctrinal divisions between all movements purporting to be Christian, *someone* is in error. Whether on minor issues, or major core essentials.

Why would it be different than yours?

It's obvious that it is, isn't it?

Do you somehow find accurate literal history in those passages?

Absolutely. You don't?

A turn of phrase which would allow you to calculate the atomic weight of copper?

Why would I need the Bible for that? As I've stated, ALL knowledge comes from God - whether credited to Him as the Source or not. It is useful now, but will be irrelevant when we all stand before Him one day to give an account for ourselves.

Thus why I don't bow down to "science" as the ultimate source to provide meaning and purpose for our existence. It certainly assists in delighting over how brilliant God is - which as in all things - is His intended purpose to get us through the trials and tribulations of this temporal life.

If rather, my sole pursuit in life is to wow you with my superior intellect - or anything else about ME, I'm gonna be one unfulfilled sad-sack when I hit the grave one day. Any memory of me or my name will be forgotten within two generations.

I'd much rather devote my time here to encourage all to seek eternal life through Jesus - the Name above all names Who - like His Name - endures forever.

As Solomon says, "All is vanity and chasing after the wind." Only the Love that is lasting, between Him and us and by extension to each other, will not be in vain.

There must be something, if the text is the product of plenary verbal inspiration then anything which may be logically deduced from it must be true, even if it is nothing to do with the actual topic of the passage.

"Without faith, it is impossible to please God." Likewise, without faith, it is impossible to fully comprehend Scripture. Genuine saving faith is what enables one to hear the Holy Spirit and receive revelation from God.

God is clear about not "leaning on our own understanding" ie: logic. Isn't it obvious by now that mankind is incapable of coming to a consensus on just about anything on his own?

God bless.

biblegateway.com

 

[BCP1928]

Absolutely. You don't?

I am astonished. Literal and inerrant history? For goodness sake, Joseph, it's a letter. A letter written by Peter to Christians who are being persecuted. Some scholars think it may have been a sermon transcribed by his secretary, but no matter, it's a message of hope and encouragement to suffering Christians and it still offers us hope and encouragement to this day. There is nothing of history about it, literal and inerrant or otherwise. Really, your ideas about the Bible are just plain weird

 

[dlamberth]

Do you believe the Bible is free from error?

No. The Bible was written by Human Beings.

Hard to understand your definition, considering your apparent derision of the clear Scriptural teaching of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ via the Holy Spirit, and His directive to go out and share the Gospel and make disciples (oh, that dirty word evangelism).

If the followers are not "PREACHING" Love, there's no way that I can believe they are following His Directive.

If not in error, to be taken seriously then? Again, how do you decide which Scripture to adhere to and which to ignore, or redefine?

This is an important question and actually is what drew me to select a couple of question to reply to.

The Scripture of any religion that I adhere to are the ones that direct me in how to make God a reality in my life. All of the rest I pretty much ignore.

 

[Joseph G]

I am astonished. Literal and inerrant history? For goodness sake, Joseph, it's a letter. A letter written by Peter to Christians who are being persecuted. Some scholars think it may have been a sermon transcribed by his secretary, but no matter, it's a message of hope and encouragement to suffering Christians and it still offers us hope and encouragement to this day. There is nothing of history about it, literal and inerrant or otherwise. Really, your ideas about the Bible are just plain weird

Okey doke. If you wish to deflect from providing your interpretation on this (or any Scriptures), then we appear to be at an impasse.

Nothing weird about Peter reinforcing who his audience is in Christ - nor in God using it to reinforce the identity for subsequent believers through history. It's what written testimony is all about.

If one cannot appeal to the inerrancy of Scripture as their supreme source of Truth, then they are free to believe and preach just about anything they wish - or nothing at all - and place the stamp of "christian" on it. And on that, I will take a definite pass.

God bless!

 

[Joseph G]

No. The Bible was written by Human Beings.

Thanks for being honest. Unfortunately, we have nothing further to discuss if your impressions of the Christian faith and walk are confined to extra-biblical sources only.

God bless!

 

[BCP1928]

Okey doke. If you wish to deflect from providing your interpretation on this (or any Scriptures), then we appear to be at an impasse.

I just gave you my interpretation.

Nothing weird about Peter reinforcing who his audience is in Christ - nor in God using it to reinforce the identity for subsequent believers through history. It's what written testimony is all about.

You said it was literal and inerrant history, not testimony. In any case, the testimony is guaranteed by its authenticity, not it's "inerrancy." I'm not even sure what that would mean in this case. Do you think that unless you assert "inerrancy" for it, readers might conclude that Peter was actually trying to write a thank-you note to his auntie for the socks she knitted him and somehow messed up and wrote that instead so we shouldn't take it seriously as testimony?

If one cannot appeal to the inerrancy of Scripture as their supreme source of Truth, then they are free to believe and preach just about anything they wish - or nothing at all - and place the stamp of "christian" on it. And on that, I will take a definite pass.

It's a letter written by Peter himself inspired, as we believe, by God and that's not enough for you to trust it? Truly, I am sorry for you.

God bless!

It's you who truly needs the blessing.

 

[AV1611VET]

The Bible was written by Human Beings.

Wise men?

 

[Joseph G]

It's you who truly needs the blessing.

Well... that's mighty nice of you. Thanks! I am! *big grin*

 

[Zceptre]

So all this is in response to the OP giving God glory for the beauty of His engineering?

People really think cameras developed themselves by accident...

The word absurdity comes to mind.

What is that motto from Burger King... have it your way? lol

Accidentally engineered cameras with automatically adjusting aperture to boot and immersive color display with depth perception functionality...

The study of DNA and the molecular foundations of biological systems eradicates anything but a designer.

Some people are still stuck in that "accidents create" delusion who have not caught up in the information sciences world, but they are swimming in mud.

The only options you have anymore are 1) God done it... or 2) aliens done it.

This is where you can have it your way. But be careful, because someone... is lying to you. lol



Awesome video Joseph G.

We get to meet the creator of it face to face soon.

No nay-sayers are allowed at the pizza party. lol

All glory to King Jesus.