The Bible is the inspired and only infallible and authoritative Word of God

Calypsis4 · May 17, 2010

Frank Moore Cross is in error if he thinks that some of scripture originated in Egypt. Copies yes....originals no.

Polycarp1 · May 17, 2010

Calypsis4 said:
Frank Moore Cross is in error if he thinks that some of scripture originated in Egypt. Copies yes....originals no.

It's not a "where Scripture originated" classification but a "where early manuscripts were generated/found" classification.

E.g.: The Septuagint was produced in Egypt under the Ptolemies. Its source manuscripts were presumably available there. The Masoretic Text is what the Babylonian Talmud (produced by Jews living in Mesopotamia) used as source material -- so presumably the MT was available there. The Samaritan Torah is only found in the Holy Land.

As for some of the other comments -- I find it truly insulting that people on this board equate disgreeing with themselves on the mode of inspiration God used and the degree of freedom He allowed the human authors in composing their manuscript, to equal presence or absence of faith in Him. It's also arguably a violation of CF rules when aimed at a particular Christian member.

simplysaved · May 18, 2010

So you believe 2 Timothy wrote that Scripture is infallible, including the portions what weren't written and long before canon was established? The word translated "Godbreathed" or some other variant occurs nowhere else in scripture. How do you read Jeremiah (chapter 8 I believe) where God says that scribes have handled his word falsely with a lying pen? Did that only occur in OT times?

Do you believe women shouldn't be pastors, that women are only saved through childbearing, that those born in slavery should not demand freedom? These all occur rarely in the NT, but they nonetheless are present.

Paul's opinions, which he clearly says are not commandments from the Lord: I Corinthians 7:25 and II Corinthians 8:8:

As for the birth accounts, I was referring to Matthew and Luke, both of which have completely different characters, events, movements, and dates. I posted earlier about this, no one responded.

As for the great commandment, read each of them and notice the many differences. The most important one in my opinion: In Luke, the lawyer/scribe is the one who delivers the great commandment, not Jesus. Above that, it is presented as one commandment, not two.

As for those crucified with Jesus, Mark simply neglects to mention the change of heart of the criminal? If that's the case, would the salvation of someone who's only read Mark be any different from that of someone who has read all four gospels? Of course not, because salvation doesn't come through reading a book.

As for the Gerasene demoniac, Matthew has two people being healed, whereas Mark and Luke have one. That's not an expansion of the story, it's a very different story. When was the centurion's servant healed, in relation to the healing of Peter's mother-in-law and the cleansing of the leper, according to Matthew and Luke?

As for the apostles, in Matthew 10 they are told to not take sandals or a staff. In Mark 6 they are specifically told to take a staff and wear sandals.

It's an error to assume that I don't believe that Christ's message, ministry and sacrifice were preserved in the Bible. The only way I know about Christ is through the Bible and the Holy Spirit. I and those who you wantonly label heretics are no less saved than any of those who support Biblical infallibility, nor are we any less committed to living as Christ has called us.

mwood30 · May 18, 2010

Calypsis4 said:
Frank Moore Cross is in error if he thinks that some of scripture originated in Egypt. Copies yes....originals no.

Just because archaeology documents that a doctrine you believe is false, doesn't make the archaeology wrong. I've personally looked into the matter because I used to believe the same things you do.

In the fourth Dead Sea Scroll cave, archaeologists found Hebrew texts that match the Septuagint over the Masoretic. They found the Egyptian Hebrew texts match the Septuagint, and the Babylonian Hebrew texts match the Masoretic. I'm sorry to say there really were different versions of the Old Testament. And God allowed the version Jesus used to be swapped out with entirely different one.

Right now, every quote of the Old Testament has been disconnected from it's original source (the Egyptian Old Testament). And the church has embraced doctrinal error because of the disconnection.

I personally read from a Bible that uses the Septuagint which was translated from the Egyptian version of the Old Testament. I encourage you to look into doing the same.

Your doctrine of perfect word for word preservation simply doesn't square with what actually happened in the real world, my friend. I will repeat again: the original version of the entire Old Testament was swapped out for a different one in the fifth century; archaeological fact.

Also, you should read Jerome's letters on the matter. The fifth century Christians were angry at him for changing the Old Testament. We have their complaints and his defense documented in writing, in his letters. And even more so, the Christians were so angry that Jerome wrote a book (called Apology II) defending his replacement of the Old Testament.

For whatever reason, God let Jerome swap out the entire Old Testament with a different one. The Bible is not only "not preserved," it had a radical wholesale change made to it; a change that persisted for 1,500 years.

Below is a list where New Testament quotes match the Septuagtint (which was based on the Egyptian scriptures) over Jerome's Masoretic text (which was based on the Babylonian scriptures).

Places in the Bible where a quote from Jesus and his apostles matches the Septuagint and also differs from Jerome’s Hebrew manuscript:

Matthew 1:23a matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 7:14 – and not Jerome’s
Matthew 1:23b matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 8:8,10 – and not Jerome’s
Matthew 3:3 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 40:3 – and not Jerome’s
Matthew 4:10 matches the Septuagint’s version of Deuteronomy 6:13 – and not Jerome’s
Matthew 9:13 matches the Septuagint’s version of Hosea 6:6 – and not Jerome’s
Matthew 12:7 matches the Septuagint’s version of Hosea 6:6 – and not Jerome’s
Matthew 12:21 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 42:4 – and not Jerome’s
Matthew 13:14-15 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 6:9-10 – and not Jerome’s
Matthew 15:8-9 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 29:13 – and not Jerome’s
Matthew 21:16 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 8:2 – and not Jerome’s
Mark 1:3 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 40:3 – and not Jerome’s
Mark 4:12 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 6:9-10 – and not Jerome’s
Mark 7:6-7 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 29:13 – and not Jerome’s
Luke 3:4-6 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 40:3-5 – and not Jerome’s
Luke 4:8 matches the Septuagint’s version of Deuteronomy 6:13 – and not Jerome’s
Luke 4:18-19 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 61:1-2 – and not Jerome’s
Luke 4:18 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 58:6 – and not Jerome’s
Luke 8:10 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 6:9 – and not Jerome’s
John 1:23 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 40:3 – and not Jerome’s
John 6:31 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 78:24 – and not Jerome’s
John 12:38 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 53:1 – and not Jerome’s
John 12:40 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 6:10 – and not Jerome’s
Acts 2:17-21 matches the Septuagint’s version of Joel 2:28-32 – and not Jerome’s
Acts 2:25-28 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 16:8-11 – and not Jerome’s
Acts 4:25-26 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 2:1-2 – and not Jerome’s
Acts 7:27-28 matches the Septuagint’s version of Exodus 2:14 – and not Jerome’s
Acts 7:42-43 matches the Septuagint’s version of Amos 5:25-27 – and not Jerome’s
Acts 8:32-33 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 53:7-8 – and not Jerome’s
Acts 13:34 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 55:3 – and not Jerome’s
Acts 13:35 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 16:10 – and not Jerome’s
Acts 13:41 matches the Septuagint’s version of Habakkuk 1:5 – and not Jerome’s
Acts 15:16-17 matches the Septuagint’s version of Amos 9:11-12 – and not Jerome’s
Acts 28:26-27 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 6:9-10 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 2:24 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 52:5 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 3:4 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 51:4 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 3:10-12 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 14:1-3 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 3:10-12 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 53:1-3 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 3:13a matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 5:9 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 3:13b matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 140:3 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 3:14 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 10:7 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 9:17 matches the Septuagint’s version of Exodus 9:16 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 9:25 matches the Septuagint’s version of Hosea 2:23 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 9:27-28 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 10:22-23 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 9:29 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 1:9 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 9:33 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 9:33 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 10:11 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 28:16 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 10:16 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 53:1 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 10:18 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 19:4 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 10:20 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 65:1 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 10:21 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 65:2 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 11:9-10 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 69:22-23 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 11:26-27a matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 59:20-21 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 11:27b matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 27:9 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 11:34 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 40:13 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 12:20 matches the Septuagint’s version of Proverbs 25:21-22 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 14:11b matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 45:23 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 15:12 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 11:10 – and not Jerome’s
Romans 15:21 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 52:15 – and not Jerome’s
1 Corinthians 1:19 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 29:14 – and not Jerome’s
1 Corinthians 2:16 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 40:13 – and not Jerome’s
1 Corinthians 5:13 matches the Septuagint’s version of Deuteronomy 17:7 – and not Jerome’s
1 Corinthians 15:55 matches the Septuagint’s version of Hosea 13:14 – and not Jerome’s
2 Corinthians 4:13 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 116:10 – and not Jerome’s
2 Corinthians 6:2 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 49:8 – and not Jerome’s
Galatians 3:10 matches the Septuagint’s version of Deuteronomy 27:26 – and not Jerome’s
Galatians 3:13 matches the Septuagint’s version of Deuteronomy 21:23 – and not Jerome’s
Galatians 3:16 matches the Septuagint’s version of Genesis 12:7 – and not Jerome’s
Galatians 4:27 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 54:1 – and not Jerome’s
Ephesians 4:26 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 4:4 – and not Jerome’s
2 Timothy 2:19 matches the Septuagint’s version of Numbers 16:5 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 1:6 matches the Septuagint’s version of Deuteronomy 32:43 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 1:7 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 104:4 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 1:10-12 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 102:25-27 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 2:6-8 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 8:4-6 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 2:12 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 22:22 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 2:13a matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 8:17 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 3:7-11 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 95:7-11 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 3:15 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 95:7-8 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 4:7 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 95:7-8 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 8:8-12 matches the Septuagint’s version of Jeremiah 31:31-34 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 10:5-7 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 40:6-8 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 10:16-17 matches the Septuagint’s version of Jeremiah 31:33-34 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 10:37-38 matches the Septuagint’s version of Habakkuk 2:3-4 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 11:5 matches the Septuagint’s version of Genesis 5:24 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 11:21 matches the Septuagint’s version of Genesis 47:31 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 12:5-6 matches the Septuagint’s version of Proverbs 3:11-12 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 12:26 matches the Septuagint’s version of Haggai 2:6 – and not Jerome’s
Hebrews 13:6 matches the Septuagint’s version of Psalm 118:6 – and not Jerome’s
James 4:6 matches the Septuagint’s version of Proverbs 3:34 – and not Jerome’s
1 Peter 1:24-25 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 40:6-8 – and not Jerome’s
1 Peter 2:6 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 28:16 – and not Jerome’s
1 Peter 2:9b matches the Septuagint’s version of Exodus 19:6 – and not Jerome’s
1 Peter 2:9c matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 43:21 – and not Jerome’s
1 Peter 2:22 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 53:9 – and not Jerome’s
1 Peter 4:18 matches the Septuagint’s version of Proverbs 11:31 – and not Jerome’s
1 Peter 5:5 matches the Septuagint’s version of Proverbs 3:34 – and not Jerome’s

The above information is taken from The Jerome Conspiracy

Calypsis4 · May 18, 2010

mwood30 said:
Just because archaeology documents that a doctrine you believe is false, doesn't make the archaeology wrong. I've personally looked into the matter because I used to believe the same things you do.

It didn't prove anything. We're talking here about God's inspired Word, not the writings of Homer, Cicero, or the gnostic Marcion. We are promised by the Psalmist that God would preserve His Word and it is clear that that word is in written form.

Mt 2:5 And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet,
Mt 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Mt 4:6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
Mt 4:7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
Mt 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
Mr 1:2 As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.
Mr 7:6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
Mr 9:12 And he answered and told them, Elias verily cometh first, and restoreth all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought.
Mr 9:13 But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.
Mr 14:21 The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had never been born.
Mr 14:27 And Jesus saith unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered.
Lu 2:23 (As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord

Lu 4:8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
Lu 4:10 For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee:
Lu 7:27 This is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.
Lu 19:46 Saying unto them, It is written, My house is the house of prayer: but ye have made it a den of thieves.
Lu 24:46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
Joh 6:31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.
Joh 6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
Joh 12:14 And Jesus, when he had found a young ass, sat thereon; as it is written...

Shall I go on? The truth is that YOU and those like YOU do not believe what is written...except perhaps those passages do not differ with your personal prejudices and preferences; a heresy of great magnitude to be sure.

In the fourth Dead Sea Scroll cave, archaeologists found Hebrew texts that match the Septuagint over the Masoretic. They found the Egyptian Hebrew texts match the Septuagint, and the Babylonian Hebrew texts match the Masoretic. I'm sorry to say there really were different versions of the Old Testament. And God allowed the version Jesus used to be swapped out with entirely different one.

You gave no evidence of this and furthermore you can't because no one knows for certain just what manuscript Jesus used nor what it was dated from.

Right now, every quote of the Old Testament has been disconnected from it's original source (the Egyptian Old Testament). And the church has embraced doctrinal error because of the disconnection.

Which means what? That we should trust in YOUR word more than in God's?

Again, you refuse to accept what king David wrote: "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times."

The original words of God, corrupted by man's handling and/or misuse, can yet still be known by a careful, honest, and prayerful consideration of the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts that are available to us. The Lord has not failed to communicate His truth and which manuscripts are accurate and faithful as opposed to those which are corrupt; it is just that you and those who think like you do...fail to believe Him.

Holy Spirit filled translators know by God's leading what is faithful and accurate and what is not. But faithless scholars don't.

I personally read from a Bible that uses the Septuagint which was translated from the Egyptian version of the Old Testament. I encourage you to look into doing the same.

I already have. The perfect word is found in those texts and those who love the Lord and are familiar with His leading know true doctrine from the false. Their work in attempting to preserve that eternal truth is all part of the outworking of the Holy Spirit in David's statement, 'purified seven times'. We can know with great confidence what God has said and what has been added or subtracted by the servants of Satan. In the English speaking world the King James Version is the most accurate of all and God has put his seal of blessing upon it for over four hundred yrs.

Your doctrine of perfect word for word preservation simply doesn't square with what actually happened in the real world, my friend. I will repeat again: the original version of the entire Old Testament was swapped out for a different one in the fifth century; archaeological fact.

It is not my doctrine, it is the Word of the Lord. Don't try to detract from the issue by making such a foolish charge. God preserved the pure Word but He didn't preserve it in your brain...nor in mine. He preserved it in that which was written and if we are honest before God His Spirit will lead us to that pure text which is faithful to what was originally given.

1 Corinth. 2:9 "But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him."

Since you doubt the inspired text and you therefore do not know exactly what is or is not God's Word then how can you rightfully claim this promise for yourself? Do you think you have the right to expect this eternal blessing since you doubt His written word?

Also, you should read Jerome's letters on the matter. The fifth century Christians were angry at him for changing the Old Testament. We have their complaints and his defense documented in writing, in his letters. And even more so, the Christians were so angry that Jerome wrote a book (called Apology II) defending his replacement of the Old Testament.

Jerome allowed corruptions into the text of the Roman version of the scriptures (Vaticanus) so I do not look to that strain of manuscripts to find God's truth.

For whatever reason, God let Jerome swap out the entire Old Testament with a different one. The Bible is not only "not preserved," it had a radical wholesale change made to it; a change that persisted for 1,500 years.

That was his problem. Not mine. The faithful texts survived the period in the form of the Syrian versions and eventually the Byzantine versions.

Below is a list where New Testament quotes match the Septuagtint (which was based on the Egyptian scriptures) over Jerome's Masoretic text (which was based on the Babylonian scriptures).

Places in the Bible where a quote from Jesus and his apostles matches the Septuagint and also differs from Jerome’s Hebrew manuscript:

Matthew 1:23a matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 7:14 – and not Jerome’s
John 12:40 matches the Septuagint’s version of Isaiah 6:10 – and not Jerome’s

etc. etc.

1 Peter 5:5 matches the Septuagint’s version of Proverbs 3:34 – and not Jerome’s

The above information is taken from The Jerome Conspiracy

So? I've already stated that I do not look to Jerome.

The great error here is that because of the position you take you and those of your persuasion expect other Christians to trust in YOUR word rather than that which is written.

Guess what? I don't.

mwood30 · May 18, 2010

Calypsis4 said:
You gave no evidence of this and furthermore you can't because no one knows for certain just what manuscript Jesus used nor what it was dated from.

If evidence is what you want, then evidence is what you'll get. The Dead Sea Scroll fragments are named after the caves they were found in. Fragments beginnin with '4Q' are those found 'in the fourth cave in Qumran'. Below is a list of all the places where a Dead Sea Scroll Egyptian fragment matches the Septuagint over the Masoretic. (Lots and lots of evidence. Your belief in word for word preservation is documentably false.)

Book of Moses, Chapter, Verse, Dead Sea Scroll Reference ID

Genesis 1 9 4QGenh1
Genesis 1 9 4QGenk
Genesis 1 14 4QGenk
Genesis 35 23 4QGen-Exoda
Genesis 41 7 4QGenc
Genesis 41 16 4QGenj
Genesis 41 24 4QGenj
Exodus 1 1 4QExodb
Exodus 1 5 4QExodb
Exodus 2 3 4QExodb
Exodus 2 6 4QExodb
Exodus 2 6 4QExodb
Exodus 2 11 4QExodb
Exodus 2 16 4QExodb
Exodus 3 8 4QGen-Exoda
Exodus 3 15 4QGen-Exoda
Exodus 3 16 4QExodb
Exodus 3 16 4QExodb
Exodus 3 19 4QExodb
Exodus 4 6 4QGen-Exoda
Exodus 5 4 4QExodb
Exodus 5 8 4QGen-Exoda
Exodus 5 8 4QExodb
Exodus 5 9 4QExodb
Exodus 5 13 4QGen-Exoda
Exodus 7 10 4QGen-Exodm
Exodus 7 10 4QGen-Exoda
Exodus 8 16 4QExodc
Exodus 9 6 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 9 7 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 9 8 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 10 15 4QExodc
Exodus 10 17 4QExodc
Exodus 10 24 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 12 6 4QpaleoGen-Exodl
Exodus 12 36 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 13 3 4QExode
Exodus 13 5 4QExode
Exodus 14 10 4QExodc
Exodus 17 2 4QExodc
Exodus 17 2 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 17 12 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 17 12 4QExodc
Exodus 18 6 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 18 13 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 18 16 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 18 21 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 22 5 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 23 8 4QpaleoGen-Exodl
Exodus 23 9 4QpaleoGen-Exodl
Exodus 26 10 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 26 30 4QpaleoGen-Exodl
Exodus 32 7 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 32 13 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 32 27 4QpaleoExodm
Exodus 40 17 4QExod-Levf
Exodus 40 22 4QExod-Levf
Leviticus 1 17 4QLevb
Leviticus 2 1 4QExod-Levf
Leviticus 2 8 4QLevb
Leviticus 2 11 4QLevb
Leviticus 3 11 4QLevb
Leviticus 3 11 pap4QLXXLevb
Leviticus 4 4 pap4QLXXLevb
Leviticus 4 7 pap4QLXXLevb
Leviticus 4 27 pap4QLXXLevb
Leviticus 5 6 pap4QLXXLevb
Leviticus 5 9 pap4QLXXLevb
Leviticus 5 19 pap4QLXXLevb
Leviticus 14 51 4QLev-Numa
Leviticus 17 4 4QLevd
Leviticus 17 11 4QLevd
Leviticus 22 5 4QLeve
Leviticus 22 18 4QLevb
Leviticus 22 31 4QLevb
Leviticus 25 46 4QLevb
Numbers 3 3 4QLev-Numa
Numbers 4 6 4QLXXNum
Numbers 4 8 4QLXXNum
Numbers 11 32 4QNumb
Numbers 12 6 4QNumb
Numbers 13 23 4QNumb
Numbers 13 24 4QNumb
Numbers 16 1 4QNumb
Numbers 16 2 4QNumb
Numbers 16 5 4QNumb
Numbers 18 30 4QNumb
Numbers 18 31 4QNumb
Numbers 19 3 4QNumb
Numbers 20 24 4QNumb
Numbers 22 9 4QNumb
Numbers 22 10 4QNumb
Numbers 22 11 4QNumb
Numbers 22 13 4QNumb
Numbers 22 17 4QNumb
Numbers 22 18 4QNumb
Numbers 23 3 4QNumb
Numbers 24 1 4QNumb
Numbers 24 6 4QNumb
Numbers 25 16 4QNumb
Numbers 26 17 4QNumb
Numbers 26 21 4QNumb
Numbers 26 23 4QNumb
Numbers 26 30 4QNumb
Numbers 26 32 4QNumb
Numbers 26 33 4QNumb
Numbers 26 34 4QNumb
Numbers 27 1 4QNumb
Numbers 28 14 4QNumb
Numbers 30 7 4QNumb
Numbers 30 8 4QNumb
Numbers 31 30 4QNumb
Numbers 31 48 4QNumb
Numbers 31 50 4QNumb
Numbers 31 52 4QNumb
Numbers 32 30 4QNumb
Numbers 35 5 4QNumb
Numbers 35 21 4QNumb
Numbers 36 1 4QNumb
Deuteronomy 1 39 4QDeuth
Deuteronomy 3 20 4QDeutm
Deuteronomy 3 27 4QDeutd
Deuteronomy 5 1 4QDeutj
Deuteronomy 5 3 4QDeutn
Deuteronomy 5 5 4QDeutn
Deuteronomy 5 8 4QDeutn
Deuteronomy 5 9 4QDeutn
Deuteronomy 5 14 4QDeutn
Deuteronomy 5 15 4QDeutn
Deuteronomy 5 19 4QDeutn
Deuteronomy 5 20 4QDeutn
Deuteronomy 5 21 4QDeutn
Deuteronomy 5 24 4QDeutn
Deuteronomy 5 27 4QDeutj
Deuteronomy 5 29 4QDeutk1
Deuteronomy 7 4 4QpaleoDeutr
Deuteronomy 7 19 4QpaleoDeutr
Deuteronomy 7 23 4QDeute
Deuteronomy 8 2 4QDeutc
Deuteronomy 8 5 4QDeutj
Deuteronomy 8 7 4QDeutf
Deuteronomy 8 8 4QDeutn
Deuteronomy 8 9 4QDeutf
Deuteronomy 8 9 4QDeutn
Deuteronomy 11 7 4QDeutj
Deuteronomy 11 7 4QDeutk1
Deuteronomy 11 8 4QDeutk1
Deuteronomy 11 10 4QDeutk1
Deuteronomy 12 1 4QpaleoDeutr
Deuteronomy 12 19 4QDeutc
Deuteronomy 13 6 4QDeutc
Deuteronomy 13 18 4QpaleoDeutr
Deuteronomy 16 8 4QDeutc
Deuteronomy 20 1 4QDeutf
Deuteronomy 20 17 4QDeutk2
Deuteronomy 23 13 4QpaleoDeutr
Deuteronomy 24 2 4QDeuta
Deuteronomy 24 5 4QDeuta
Deuteronomy 26 19 4QDeutc
Deuteronomy 27 26 4QDeutc
Deuteronomy 30 11 4QDeutb
Deuteronomy 30 14 4QDeutb
Deuteronomy 31 9 4QDeuth
Deuteronomy 31 11 4QDeutb
Deuteronomy 31 16 4QDeutc
Deuteronomy 31 17 4QDeutc
Deuteronomy 31 18 4QDeutc
Deuteronomy 31 19 4QDeutc
Deuteronomy 31 28 4QDeutb
Deuteronomy 32 8 4QDeutj
Deuteronomy 32 37 4QDeutq
Deuteronomy 32 37 4QDeutq
Deuteronomy 32 43 4QDeutq
Deuteronomy 34 6 4QDeutl

mwood30 · May 18, 2010

Calypsis4 said:
Mt 2:5 And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet,
Mt 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Mt 4:6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
Mt 4:7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
Mt 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
Mr 1:2 As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.
Mr 7:6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
Mr 9:12 And he answered and told them, Elias verily cometh first, and restoreth all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought.
Mr 9:13 But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.
Mr 14:21 The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had never been born.
Mr 14:27 And Jesus saith unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered.
Lu 2:23 (As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord
Lu 4:8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
Lu 4:10 For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee:
Lu 7:27 This is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.
Lu 19:46 Saying unto them, It is written, My house is the house of prayer: but ye have made it a den of thieves.
Lu 24:46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
Joh 6:31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.
Joh 6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
Joh 12:14 And Jesus, when he had found a young ass, sat thereon; as it is written...

Shall I go on?

You're missing the point. I agree that all those places are discussing 'what is written' as they are discussing 'what is written in the Egyptian scriptures'; the scriptures that got removed from the Bible in the fifth century.

mwood30 · May 18, 2010

Calypsis4 said:
It didn't prove anything. We're talking here about God's inspired Word, not the writings of Homer, Cicero, or the gnostic Marcion. We are promised by the Psalmist that God would preserve His Word and it is clear that that word is in written form.

Mt 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

Thanks for providing Mt 4:10 as an example. I deal with this particular verse on my website. Below is a cut and paste of my website:

Allow me to introduce you to a Bible puzzle.

In Matthew chapter four, Jesus is being tempted by Satan. Satan wants Jesus to bow down and worship him. So Jesus says, “It is written, thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shall thou serve.” The word ‘only’ is absolutely crucial to Jesus’ rebuttal. For Jesus’ point was that scripture demands that God alone is to be worshipped – God only.

Now here is our quandary. According to the King James Version of the Bible, the all important word ‘only’ – the very word that Jesus’ rebuttal rests upon – isn’t even in the scripture that Jesus quoted.

Thou shalt fear the LORD thy God, and serve him – Deuteronomy 6:13

According to the King James Version, it is not written that “him only shall thou serve.” According to the King James Version, Jesus misquoted a scripture to make his point. This is where the puzzle begins.

For the next piece of the puzzle, we need to find out if the King James Version somehow missed the word ‘only’ when it translated Deuteronomy 6:13. How can we possibly do that? It’s actually very easy for anyone to do. All you need to do is to use a Hebrew Interlinear Bible – a Bible that lists each Hebrew word of a passage along with its English equivalent. (Even if the English translation of the Hebrew words are not perfectly accurate, you can still use them to find out if a specific Hebrew word was actually inside the text.)

To view the Hebrew Interlinear please click the following link: http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/deu6.pdf

Did you click on the link above? Good. Now tell me, is the word ‘only’ in Deuteronomy 6:13? If you clicked on the link, you can see for yourself that the word ‘only’ is not in Deuteronomy 6:13. You can see for yourself that the King James Version translated it correctly.

And now that you already know the word ‘only’ is not in the Hebrew, let me show you how the NIV translates Deuteronomy 6:13.

Fear the LORD your God, serve him only – Deuteronomy 6:13 NIV

Now isn’t that sweet. The NIV Bible adds a word that isn’t in the text in order to retrofit the passage to match Jesus’ quote. How honest is that? Do modern Bibles want to deceive their readers into thinking Jesus’ quote matches the passage – even though it really doesn’t? And people are told to place the very fate of their souls on such disingenuous translations?

So what is the answer to the puzzle? Did Jesus really misquote Deuteronomy 6:13? The surprising answer is … no, he did not. Confused? Don’t worry, the Dead Sea Scrolls found in Cave Number Four hold the answer to the puzzle; a very surprising answer at that.

The Dead Sea Scrolls found in Cave Number Four revealed that there were two distinct versions of the ancient Jewish Scriptures: one version from Babylon and another from Egypt. And modern Bibles use the Babylonian version. (Thus they contain the Babylonian version of Deuteronomy.) And as we have already seen, the all important word ‘only’ – the very word upon which Jesus’ rebuttal rests – isn’t in the Babylonian version.

But is the word ‘only’ found in the Egyptian version? Yes, absolutely yes.

You shall fear the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve – Deuteronomy 6:13 Egyptian Version

So the Dead Sea Scrolls found in Cave Number Four have solved the puzzle. Jesus didn’t misquote Deuteronomy 6:13. Rather Jesus quoted the Egyptian version of Deuteronomy 6:13.

But the answer to the puzzle only leaves modern Bible readers with an even bigger dilemma. If Jesus quoted the Egyptian version as scripture (as ‘what is written&#8217

, then why do modern Bibles use a different version – the Babylonian one? And why do some modern Bibles retrofit passages to conceal the fact they use a different version than Jesus?

At least readers of the King James Version can see that Jesus’ quote doesn’t match the Babylonian version of Deuteronomy 6:13; so they can at least see there’s something amiss. But think about what the NIV Bible does. It hides the fact that it contains a different version of the Jewish Scriptures. It retrofits the passage so the reader is completely unaware that the entire Old Testament section of their Bible is different from the version Jesus quoted from.

As you can see, the Dead Sea Scrolls – most notably those from Cave Number Four –reveal some big surprises about the contents of the original Christian Bible. And The Cave Four Mystery dutifully unveils those surprises for readers who want to know the actual contents of the original Christian Bible. (And by the time you have finished reading The Cave Four Mystery, you may be stunned at the number of retrofitted passages that exist in modern Bibles. And you might be even more stunned at what the ‘un-retrofitted Bible’ – the original Bible – actually teaches.) For those who want to know the uncensored truth, welcome to The Cave Four Mystery.

Note: The history of the Egyptian version found in Cave Four is detailed in The Jerome Conspiracy.

For the source ... please click here.

Whenever Jesus said, "It is written," he was referring to the Egyptian scriptures; the scriptures that have been removed from the Bible. God really hasn't been very concerned about preserving a Bible 'word for word'.

chingchang · May 18, 2010

Calypsis4 said:
And what would that accomplish?

The faith is that God told the truth about the written word, which you obviously have none. He told us plainly that He would preserve His Word and Jesus said that the scriptures would last forever and never be broken. You apparently don't believe that.

You are twisting things. Real faith is a child-like trust that God means what He says and if He said His Word is without error and infallible then it is without error and infallible.

I don't smoke.

The very fact that you have to ask tells me that you are a lost person. You don't even know what the Word of God is. But the Word of the Lord originated in the mind of the Lord who put it into the mind of the prophets and apostles who wrote scripture. They believed what they wrote was inspired and inerrant in its teachings and/or doctrinal content...and it is.

Yeshua's words are in the Bible. What about the rest of the text?

All of it is His Word, for Genesis to Revelation. The proof is found in Peter's words in 2 Peter 3:16 "As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction."

Peter was speaking of Paul's writings which were accepted by the early Christians as God's Word just like the other 26 books of the New Testament that were written well before the 1st century was over.

(Note to the other readers: this warning from Peter speaks of people like those of Chingchang's persuasion. Beware.)

Those aren't his words. BTW...his words won't pass away because they are truth...not because they appear in text. His truth ("I am the way...the truth.....")is universal...and God reveals it to whom he chooses.

Through whom? People like you? I have no trust in you. The only one in error on this matter is you, not the authors of scripture.

You aren't telling the truth. I quoted scripture word for word. AND not only so but doubting Thomas was corrected and received that correction. Unless you receive the same kind of correction you will never see the streets of gold. Revelation 21:21 " and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass."

Your opinion of me makes no difference to me. A person who doubts God's written word while claiming to be among the faithful is only fooling himself.

God's Word is not written in your imagination fella; it's the inspired text that God promised He would preserve and would last in a written form forever. There is nothing you can do to change that. There are over 5,000 extant manuscripts of the Greek alone and that is far more than any other historical source in the world. Oh, yes, the Holy Spirit did a miraculous job of preserving eternal truth in written form. You just don't believe Him.

Click to expand...

You are guilty of "Bibliolatry":

In the case of Christianity, the term bibliolatry is used in a derogatory sense toward those who either have an extreme devotion to the Bible itself, or hold to a high view of biblical inerrancy.[3]. Those who esteem Biblical inerrancy point to passages such as 2 Timothy 3:16-17, stating that the Scriptures, as received, are a perfect (and in some views, complete) source of what must be known about God. Critics of this view call the view a kind of idolatry, and point to verses such as John 5:39-40 to point out that Jesus was asking humanity to relate to God, not just seek God's rules and spurn a relationship with the God who created them.[4]
Historic Christianity has never endorsed worship of the Bible itself, as worship is explicitly reserved only for God. That is to say, Christians consider the Bible as a kind of signpost which points to God, rather than considering the Bible, as a book, itself as valuable as God himself. Some Christians believe that biblical authority is derived from God as the inspiration behind the text, not the text itself [5]. So the term is not a reference to an actual belief, but is often used as a pejorative term to negatively label perceived practices of theological opponents. The groups to whom the term is most often applied are Protestants of a fundamentalist evangelical background who hold to Biblical inerrancy and Scripture as the only divine authority. and

Oh...and BTW...are you familiar with Jeremiah 8:8?

CC

Click to expand...

Calypsis4 · May 18, 2010

simplysaved said:
So you believe 2 Timothy wrote that Scripture is infallible, including the portions what weren't written and long before canon was established? The word translated "Godbreathed" or some other variant occurs nowhere else in scripture. How do you read Jeremiah (chapter 8 I believe) where God says that scribes have handled his word falsely with a lying pen? Did that only occur in OT times?

Are you really that far from the truth? Those matters have been answered by faithful scholars of the past going back centuries. Have you never read Matthew Henry, A.T. Pierson, John Burgeon, or Keil & Delitzsch?

Yes, there were scribes in Jeremiah's day that corrupted God's Words. But where is your faith to believe that God preserved the pure Word in other manuscripts that were not handled by those heretics?

Do you believe women shouldn't be pastors, that women are only saved through childbearing, that those born in slavery should not demand freedom? These all occur rarely in the NT, but they nonetheless are present.

1. Right.
2. women are 'saved' in this sense: "Greek, "in (literally, 'through') (her, literally, 'the') child-bearing." Through, or by, is often so used to express not the means of her salvation, but the circumstances AMIDST which it has place. Thus 1Co 3:15, "He ... shall be saved: yet so as by (literally, 'through,' that is, amidst) fire": in spite of the fiery ordeal which he has necessarily to pass through, he shall be saved. So here, "In spite of the trial of childbearing which she passes through (as her portion of the curse, Ge 3:16, 'in sorrow shalt thou bring forth children'), she shall be saved." Jamieson, Faucett, & Brown Commentary on the Bible.

The kind of shallow thinking you display on this amazes me.

3. Slavery. Why would they need to? Hebrew 'slavery' was more like family than servitude. Slaves were (a) not allowed to be mistreated (b) could sue their masters for freedom, (c) and often ended up adopted by the family.

But the fact that you think your opinion of this matter is superior to that of Paul's is appalling to me.

Paul's opinions, which he clearly says are not commandments from the Lord: I Corinthians 7:25 and II Corinthians 8:8:

Again the shallow thinking. Unreal! Paul merely gave the his views as led by the Holy Spirit concerning those things that Jesus had not specifically dealt with...uh (now catch this point and don't lose it)...those things Jesus said they would learn later, after He was gone.

example: "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now." John 16:12.

As for the birth accounts, I was referring to Matthew and Luke, both of which have completely different characters, events, movements, and dates. I posted earlier about this, no one responded.

Shallow again. My goodness! Matthews lineage of Jesus family tree came down through Solomon (vs 7 of Matthew) to Joseph's side of the family. But it also came down through Nathan (vs 31 of Luke) to Heli, Josephs father-in-law. So Jesus had a double lineage: one legal (Joseph's side) and the other biological (Mary's side). Remember that God's Word says that He would be of 'the seed of the woman' so her side of the family is the most important side. There is no contradiction in the lineage for there are TWO sides of the same family.

You have been so poorly taught. But you are responsible to God for this for even in the corrupt translations there is still enough truth for this to be known.

As for the great commandment, read each of them and notice the many differences. The most important one in my opinion: In Luke, the lawyer/scribe is the one who delivers the great commandment, not Jesus. Above that, it is presented as one commandment, not two.

verses please. Specify more accurately what you're talking about.

As for those crucified with Jesus, Mark simply neglects to mention the change of heart of the criminal?

He didn't 'neglect' anything. He wrote what the Holy Spirit told him to write. But we are given different views of the same account and therefore different details that must demands the discernment of time and circumstance. You haven't done that. It is your own fault.

If that's the case, would the salvation of someone who's only read Mark be any different from that of someone who has read all four gospels? Of course not, because salvation doesn't come through reading a book.

Salvation comes through the reading of God's Word about Jesus Christ. Both accounts are accurate and true...but one gives facts the other did not and vice versa.

As for the Gerasene demoniac, Matthew has two people being healed, whereas Mark and Luke have one. That's not an expansion of the story, it's a very different story. When was the centurion's servant healed, in relation to the healing of Peter's mother-in-law and the cleansing of the leper, according to Matthew and Luke?

No, it isn't a different story. One story included the two individuals and the other did not. So what?

Example: If I were to tell you that I went to town the other day to purchase some supplies for my office would I be negligent if my wife later tells you that she went along and bought some groceries? You see it was the same incident...yet different corresponding facts were only learned by you as my wife informs you of the full story. So it is with the gospels but you don't wish to give God's inspired writers the benefit of the doubt. It's a terrible thing especially in light of the fact that the Holy Spirit led them to tell the world that what they were writing was inspired teaching (II Timothy 3:16, Psalm 12:6-7, I Peter 1:21, etc.)

As for the apostles, in Matthew 10 they are told to not take sandals or a staff. In Mark 6 they are specifically told to take a staff and wear sandals.

No problem: "Sandals were pieces of strong leather or wood, tied under the sole of the foot by thongs, something resembling modern clogs. The shoes which they are in St. Matthew forbidden to take, were a kind of short boots, reaching a little above the mid-leg, which were then commonly used in journeys." John Wesley.

It's an error to assume that I don't believe that Christ's message, ministry and sacrifice were preserved in the Bible. The only way I know about Christ is through the Bible and the Holy Spirit.

A Holy Spirit which inspired the written Word and said so. II Tim. 3:16...Greek 'theopneustos' = God breathed. It is not your imagination which is 'God breathed' it is that which is written.

I and those who you wantonly label heretics are no less saved than any of those who support Biblical infallibility, nor are we any less committed to living as Christ has called us.

I don't believe you.

Jase · May 18, 2010

Calypsis4 said:
The Lord rebuke such an attitude.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God..." II Timothy 3:16.

I don't worship a 'book', I worship the author of the book.

Your problem is outright unbelief.

Timothy is not referring to all scripture in existence, because the NT didn't exist yet. And do you apply Timothy 3:16 to the non-canonized scripture? I doubt it, but that would just mean you're applying a double standard.

chingchang · May 18, 2010

Jase said:
Timothy is not referring to all scripture in existence, because the NT didn't exist yet. And do you apply Timothy 3:16 to the non-canonized scripture? I doubt it, but that would just mean you're applying a double standard.

Excellent points. Not to mention that a majority of Biblical Scholars question the authorship of II Timothy. Most of them agree that Paul did not author that text. Does that matter? It should and does to those of us who are not blinded by Bibliolatry.

CC

simplysaved · May 18, 2010

Calypsis,
Please don't use "scholars" or "theologians" to defend 2 Timothy as you've often insisted that such outside sources are not reliable. Thank you. Though I would certainly love to see what you've read that led you to think the servant/slaves were treated as family members and not abused and forced to work.

Also, I'm not talking about lineage. Please compare Matthew 1:18-2:23 and Luke 2. They are different stories that took place at different times. Account for the different dates.

For the great commandment in Mark and Matthew, Jesus is the one who states the great commandment in response to the lawyers question. In both cases the commandment is presented as two separate but like commandments. In Luke, Jesus asks the lawyer to interpret the law, which he does. The lawyer, not Jesus, in Luke presents the great commandment. The story is different.

And the staffs?

Salvation does not come through reading anything, it's through Christ.

So the Holy Spirit told the authors to write different things? Specifically the Holy Spirit told them to write contradictory things? For what purpose?

Thankfully you aren't our judge.

wayseer · May 18, 2010

Calypsis4 said:
The only blatant inconsistency in this debate is your insistence on being a Christian who thinks that God's Holy Spirit is in error in what He inspired His servants to write. You think you know better. You don't.

I know embarrassing questions uncover inconvenient truths which leads others into attacks upon one's beliefs but such strategy helps mask the issues and avoids answering the questions.

I wish to remain a child of God and remain humble and not be offended by your insults.

No insult - it was you who bought children into the debate.

And just how would you know that if it were not part of the written text to begin with?

Did not Jesus come for the lost?

If not you might expand on your reasons.

But then from your perspective you could doubt that even those words were spoken by Jesus also just like you did above. You arbitrarily decide what is or is notinspired by God by your own inventions and personal preferences.

But you are doing the same - selectively using scripture. The difference I am quite willing to admit that is what I am doing. You deny any such involvement.

Who is terrified? The Holy Spirit does not contradict Himself and He did not confuse the whole Christian world by inspiring SOME of the scriptures and not inspiring others. The truth is that you think that your own opinions are more important than what the Lord says in His Word.

Quite the contrary actually. While there are any number of contributors who are willing to claim they know exactly what the Bible says I am willing to admit I don't know.

You see, I'm one of the lost and don't mind admitting as much. But I also note that there are lots of others wandering around who claim they are actually inside the sheepfold. Funny that.

But you would have the readers believe that we should believe you rather than Peter. Your position seems to be, "Only scripture that I agree with is inspired of God." Isn't that the truth of the matter?

That is your interpretation. I have not said to anyone anything about 'believing me'. Please show where I have indicated anything to that effect? I think you are frightened of anyone who asks questions. But I have noticed that it is generally those who clam to know all the answers are terrified of questions.

What name did I call you?

You really have a problem with reading. Go back and read more carefully.

I was referring to your patronizing comments directed as Chingchang. I find it offensive when a Christian questions another on their faith in order to score some political point.

wayseer · May 18, 2010

Calypsis4 said:
<staff edit>

Again - you are resorting to the formula that one is not a Christian according to your personal ideology.

Fortunately the decision is not yours to make.

<staff edit>

What I don't believe is what some people tell me to believe.

Duckybill · May 22, 2010

chingchang said:
Duckybill,

Which English version do you believe is the infallible 'Word of God'?

CC

Considering that they are quite consistent in agreement I see no problem whatsoever.

Duckybill · May 22, 2010

wayseer said:
Then you concede that you are using the Bible in your way. I have no particular problem with anyone doing as much. The difficulty arises when those who interpret the Bible in one way then impose their particular theology on others.

Actually I concede that our English versions are quite consistent in the message they convey to us.

I would then claim that you don't follow through on your belief.

How so?

The Bible is not a novel. The Bible is a call to action.

If the Bible is the inerrant and authoritative word from God then I would have expected you to be following all the commandments laid out in the Bible, particularly the OT. Clearly you do not choose to do this, neither do I. The difference is that I am ready to acknowledge that I consciously make that decision.

But the "commandments" are quite different for Christians under the New Covenant and the Nation of Israel who was under the Law of Moses.

Duckybill · May 22, 2010

chingchang said:
Excellent points. Not to mention that a majority of Biblical Scholars question the authorship of II Timothy. Most of them agree that Paul did not author that text. Does that matter? It should and does to those of us who are not blinded by Bibliolatry.

CC

Doesn't matter. The Word of God is the Word of God, no matter the time it is given. The Law of Moses was to the Nation of Israel as the NT is to Christians, the Word of God.

Duckybill · May 22, 2010

Polycarp1 said:
Ah. That makes sense. FWIW, I accept the Bible as the inspired testimony of God's work among us -- but as written by good men, with their own understanding and culture coloring what is said. Marriage, for example, was not something the state licensed, but the contract between the individuals, made before the community and before God. A doulos or servus such as Onesimus was not the same thing as a black slave in the American South. An episkopos or a presbyteros was not the same thing as a modern bishop or elder, nor a diakonos a modern deacon. The Jews were fond of conveying important truths through story, so when we read what at first looks like a story-like history, we need to be careful whether to take it as straight history or account with moral point. And so on.

But over and above this, it is Jesus Christ who is God's Word incarnate (John 1:1-14) and any effort to transfer this accolade to the Bible is putting it in His place -- IMO equally wrong with putting Mary on a par with her Son.

So you believe our English translations are unreliable?

Duckybill · May 22, 2010

Jase said:
You most certainly pick and choose too. I know for a fact you don't follow all 613 mitzvahs.
You just stated to Polycarp above that you in part rest your eternal salvation on belief in the Bible. That's blasphemy.

Blasphemy to believe the Bible???

The Bible is the inspired and only infallible and authoritative Word of God

Well-Known Member

Born-again Liberal Episcopalian

Rawrr

Mickey

Well-Known Member

Mickey

Mickey

Mickey

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Rawrr

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads