- Jul 19, 2012
- 15,312
- 14,321
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Judaism
- Marital Status
- Married
.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I agree with your "premise 4".
When reading Job, and also the New Testament, I see that Satan is limited by God's permission. So, if God doesn't want Satan corrupting our Bibles then He won't let him do it.
I’m sorry that you think I came here to argue with atheists, I did not. There is no last desperation attack. I am a Jew, a creature that is much more despised than atheists. I just go through the forums and occasionally post in interesting topics and try to get to know people. My curiosity got the best of me with this thread. I will leave your thread and not derail it further. Enjoy your time on the forums. (A belated welcome, nothing more)
So you are saying that the spirit of the letter is most important, and yet you present it ad hoc only because you were otherwise proven to be either wrong or lying. By all accounts you would've been perfectly content if I didn't call you out on that and instead walked away with the wrong literal understanding of the text. And let's not forget that the claim itself is completely fabricated and without basis.
The words of the Lord are indeed pure, but..."confused"...by His own doing. Genesis 11:71. Men accidentally corrupted the Bible despite trying not to (example: compare the list in Ezra 2 with the list in Nehemiah 7)
2. Satan is more intelligent and more powerful than any man
3. Satan is motivated to corrupt the Bible
4. ???
5. Satan cannot even corrupt the Bible to the same degree that man has
If you admit that Satan actually has corrupted the Bible, then boy are you in trouble. So premise 4 must be, "God manually prevents Satan from corrupting the Bible."
But then why doesn't God also manually prevent scribes from corrupting the Bible, especially if we can agree that they are probably praying for such divine intervention (John 14:13)? This would not be a vulgar miracle, nor would it be the overriding of free will. I know that some Bibles will be corrupted by man - I could easily type one up myself and change some things - but why has God allowed the corruption of the text to get so bad that there is not a single perfect copy on earth? And how does this reconcile with Psalms 12:6-7?
I was referring to your sentence: "So premise 4 must be, "God manually prevents Satan from corrupting the Bible."". But I think you realize that, so I think we understand each other.Nonsensical statement. Premise 4 is blank.
Hmm, an explanation that is "sensible" in whose eyes? In mine, yes, because I've pondered this and have done some reading on it. Sensible in your eyes? I doubt it, because I think you've shown a remarkable unwillingness to consider anyone's viewpoint other than your own.By that logic, if God doesn't want man corrupting his Bible then he won't let them do it. So can you please give me a sensible explanation as to why there is this semipermeable barrier which man is it allowed to penetrate and yet Satan is not.
I was referring to your sentence: "So premise 4 must be, "God manually prevents Satan from corrupting the Bible."". But I think you realize that, so I think we understand each other.
Hmm, an explanation that is "sensible" in whose eyes? In mine, yes, because I've pondered this and have done some reading on it. Sensible in your eyes? I doubt it, because I think you've shown a remarkable unwillingness to consider anyone's viewpoint other than your own.
But I'll give it a shot. First, can we agree that in the Bible, Satan is portrayed as being under the dominion of God, just as we men are?
The words of the Lord are indeed pure, but..."confused"...by His own doing. Genesis 11:7
The reason for the intentional confusion...is to prolong the times, until all have had equal opportunity to consider God in their own time, whether it was thousands of years ago or today.
So quick to accuse and judge. I truly wanted to have a mature conversation with you in good faith. However you really have no interest in getting any answers to any of your questions....do you? I think we are finished talking. I will be praying for you. Have fun arguing with yourself. You are really good at that. I assume you have been doing it for a long time now.
Not so. You cannot use scripture against scripture. That is confusion at work.1 Corinthians 14:33 disagrees.
1. Men accidentally corrupted the Bible despite trying not to (example: compare the list in Ezra 2 with the list in Nehemiah 7)
2. Satan is more intelligent and more powerful than any man
3. Satan is motivated to corrupt the Bible
4. ???
5. Satan cannot even corrupt the Bible to the same degree that man has
If you admit that Satan actually has corrupted the Bible, then boy are you in trouble. So premise 4 must be, "God manually prevents Satan from corrupting the Bible."
But then why doesn't God also manually prevent scribes from corrupting the Bible, especially if we can agree that they are probably praying for such divine intervention (John 14:13)? This would not be a vulgar miracle, nor would it be the overriding of free will. I know that some Bibles will be corrupted by man - I could easily type one up myself and change some things - but why has God allowed the corruption of the text to get so bad that there is not a single perfect copy on earth? And how does this reconcile with Psalms 12:6-7?
So here's what happens now. I'm not even looking at what you say unless someone else on your behalf says that you have found the post in which I said I was putting you on ignore to begin with. Then I will see if you can explain that I was being too harsh or if in fact I was using bad judgment altogether.
If one of these occurs, you get ONE post to answer this thread in a complete and clear manner either fully defending your position or else admitting defeat like Aryeh Jay. If your post says that you accept the terms and you're drafting your response, then you will have wasted your one response.
OK, then I'll begin with my explanation.Yes.
While Satan is under the dominion of God, who says that God doesn't let Satan mess, to some extent, with Bibles? As an example I put forth the New World Translation (NWT) of the Jehovah's Witnesses. It changes various verses in order to support their heretical Arian-like theology and imo is much more damaging to someone's faith than the odd discrepancy in an OT genealogy. Who is behind an effort such as the NWT? Is it men only, or was Satan involved?By that logic, if God doesn't want man corrupting his Bible then he won't let them do it. So can you please give me a sensible explanation as to why there is this semipermeable barrier which man is it allowed to penetrate and yet Satan is not.
I was not defeated; whatever gave you that idea?
I have been polite and civil with you, I posted a reminded about the rules that YOU agreed to in order to post here and you throw false accusation at me.
You keep insinuating that I came here to argue with atheists, but according to the forum rules I cannot; only Christian can defend the religion, again, in the rules that YOU agreed to abide by to post here.
You must not have read everything when you agreed. And as I try to leave peacefully, you just have to keep on going with your insults.
Now so. You cannot use scripture against scripture. That is confusion at work.
The would be contradiction that you site, is not a contradiction at all, but rather a clarification: that God is not the author of the ills of the world, but allows all things (even the ills of this world) to work together for good for those who love him.
OK, then I'll begin with my explanation.
While Satan is under the dominion of God, who says that God doesn't let Satan mess, to some extent, with Bibles? As an example I put forth the New World Translation (NWT) of the Jehovah's Witnesses. It changes various verses in order to support their heretical Arian-like theology and imo is much more damaging to someone's faith than the odd discrepancy in an OT genealogy. Who is behind an effort such as the NWT? Is it men only, or was Satan involved?
My answer is that I don't know, but I think Satan may well have been involved. So while I believe God is in ultimate control, I think he gives Satan some temporary leeway, just has he gives us some temporary leeway. Such leeway as Satan receives in the first chapters in the book of Job, or in the production of the NWT.
(As an aside, would you agree that while the Bible portrays Satan as under the dominion of God, it also portrays God as giving him some leeway here on earth?)
That doesn't mean the gospel has failed, because it's still here. But it means you can find a false gospel in a false Bible such as the NWT.
Regarding the odd discrepancy in an OT genealogy and other such things, I believe that God doesn't require perfection from us. He gives us some leeway and tolerates some errors, as long as the gospel message is maintained until the end of this age.
How tolerant is he of errors? That can be determined, I think, by studying the manuscripts we have.
But this post is already long enough.
Forgive me, but you seem to have a certain preoccupation with this issue, which is rooted in several misconceptions about Satan and the nature of the devil and angels, and the nature of the Church, although your concerns are in part a valid criticism of fundamentalist Christianity, particularly in its anti-ecclesiological forms.
First, let us consider the nature of Satan and the other fallen angels, from the perspective of the Orthodox Church:
- He is bound by God; he can act only according to the will of God, and requires God's permission to act (see Job, and the indeed the Gospels; the demons could not posess the swine without our Lord's permission).
- He is inferior to man in every respect.
- As an angel, a fallen angel, he is spiritual incorporeal and posesses certain abilities in terms of swift movement we lack (hence, the Apostles referred to him as the Prince of The Air), but can only use these abilities if God allows it.
- Christians can dispense Satan simply by making the sign of the cross or saying the Jesus Prayer; when we are baptized into the Church, we are exorcised and sealed with Chrism, and can only fall victim to demonic posession if we apostasize or dabble in the occult.
- Exorcism is a relatively simple matter for Orthodox clergy to deal with; in fact, in the early Church, Exorcists were among the lowest ranking persons in Holy Orders; I believe they were one cut above Doorkeepers.
- Thus, Satan is less spiritually intelligent and less spirituslly powerful than any pious, baptized Orthodox Christian; all he can do is tempt us, but we can brush him off like a fly. Satan becomes powerful only when we succumb to the passioms and thus empower him. The "intelligence" he posesses further is merely a cunning understanding of human weakness; he knows nothing of faith, love, charity, and humility; of the divine nature and of godliness he is ignorant.
- A baptized Christian who embraces piety will be deified, participating in the divine energies of God through faith in Jesus Christ, becoming by grace what He is by nature. Thus, pious Christian men and women, priests, bishops, laity and children, are like God, partakers of the divine nature, and as long as we faithfully participate in the Church, partsking of Her sacramental life and heeding Her counsels, we can resist the snares of Satan; on those occasions when due to our fallen nature we do sin, the Church provides the sacramental medicine of confession and communion to restore us to spiritual health.
This in turn takes us to the Church. The Christian Church, according to Matthew 16:18, is specifically protected from Satan; "The gates of Hell will not prevail [against it]." Thus, while individual portions of the church may succumb to diabolical influence and become heretical and schismatic, the Church as a whole is and always will be protected.
The Orthodox believe the Church to be a visible, Eucharistic communion of local churches which can trace their origins to Pentecost. We believe that, occasionally and tragically, some of these local churches have fallen into schism and heresy; it should be noted however that such local churches can also, aided by our prayers, emerge from heresy and schism and reunite withnus Eucharistically. Thus, Rome fell away from the Orthodox in 1054 but is now in the process of reconcilimg itself with us. Several smaller communities of Western Christians, and many Assyrian Christians, also reunited with us. On the other hand, all of the groups that, in ancient times, separated from us in heresies which were obviously gross departures from the faith, that can in my opinion only be attributed to demonic activity, became extinct, not due to persecution on our part; most were gone before the Edict of Milan and the conversiom of the Roman Empire to Christianity. I refer of course to the various Gnostic sects described by St. Irenaeus of Lyons in Against Heresies.
Now. the Orthodox Church as a whole is infallible. Our ecumenical councils are infallible instruments representing the will of the entire church. Consequently, any Orthodox bishop who acts in accordance with the Sacred Tradition of the Orthodox Church is infallible; when he celebrates the divine liturgy, and indeed when he preaches a homily during the divine liturgy, he id acting in the person of Christ; Christ himself is present, through the bishop. And Orthodox priests furthermore act in the person of the bishop, and thus in the person of Christ, when they in turn preach and serve the liturgy in their parishes.
So as long as everyone submits themselves with humility and obedience to the Church, there is no need to worry about possible demonic corruption of the Bible. Any errors and inconsistencies that actually exist are simply not relevant; Scripture, to quote St. Hilary of Poitiers, is not in the reading but the Interpretation.
Which in turn takes us to the specific issue of textual inconsistencies and indeed manuscript variations. Frankly, @Nihilist Virus; these are quibbles; they do not confuse or confound the Orthodox interpretation of the Bible. The Bible is not a sacrament, it is not an uncreated work of absolute perfection; we do not view it the way the Muslims view the Quran.
Rather, the "Bible," I think is better understood if we call it the "sacred Scriptures;" it is not a unified, coherent whole, but an anthology of diverse spiritual texts by a plethora of different authors composed over many centuries, which, collectively, like a Mosaic, foretell and then describe the Incarnation of Christ, and explain the economy of Salvation and God's wish to be united with us in a union of perfect love in the Parousia. They are allegorical and literal, prescriptive and descriptive. Collectively, they are an icon of the Word of God; the actual Word of God is Jesus Christ, but the Sacred Scriptures iconographically describe Him, from Genesis through Revelation.
The Church, promised infallibility in Matthew 16:18 and elsewhere,
has the ultimate responsobility for editing this anthology of Scriptures; the fathers of the early Church wrote the books of the New Testament, assembled them together with the old, and then in the fourth century, several saints vetted the accumulated deposit of spiritual writings to determine what was most valuable, and for the New Testament, this was definitively settled by the Athanasian Canon composed by St. Athanasius the Great in his 39th Paschal encyclical. There are a few different canons of Old Testament literature in use among the apostokic churches, but none of this has really posed a problem during the process of ecumenical reconciliation, because the disputed works are generally regarded as secondary.
Ultimately, these Sacred Scriptures portray an icon of Christ, the incarnate Word of God. Thus, they are the written word of God. And from this written word of God, we can find and extract the central message from God to humanity: the Gospel. The four canonical Gospels and indeed the Bible as a whole tell this Good News, and this Good News is simply that the only begotten Son of God emptied Himself and became incarnate as Jesus Christ, taking our fallen human nature onto Himself; thus, God died for our sins in the flesh, and on the third day rose again as was foretold in the Old Testsment, trampling down death by death. If we believe in Him, we shall not taste death, and in believing in Him, we will perform His commandments, loving God above all else, and loving our neighbours as ourselves; we receive the strength to do these things through the life-giving sacraments ordained by God in His Holy Church; through Baptism, our sins and the corruptions of Satan are washed away, through Chrismation, we are sealed into the Body of Christ by receiving God the Holy Spirit, through the Eucharist, we partake of the true life-giving body and blood of our Lord, for the remission of sins and life everlasting, through Holy Unction, we are strengthened in the face of physical, mental, spiritual and noetic infirmity, through Holy Matrimony, men and women are united as one flesh to reproduce and nurture children and to enjoy a foretaste of the sublime, all-uniting love that awaits us in the world to come, and in Ordination, those called to serve in the Church receive a blessing to perform the duties of their office in proclaiming the Gospel, including for priests and bishops, a blessing to celebrate the mysteries themselves.
That message is what Sacred Scripture exists to convey. It does so in a much more eloquent, detailed, and edifying manner than the brief summary I provided; every book is a uniquely beautiful and instructive treasure, a love letter from God to man, written by the hands of His prophets, apostles and evangelists, amd indeed reflecting their own unique understanding of God and their own unique literary style and personality. The Scriptures were written by men, appointed by God, and as every human is unique and special, so too is every book unique and special.
Thus, any minor inconsistencies that may exist between the books of the Bible are frankly irrelevant. They have not prevented the Christian Church from becoming the world's greatest religion both in size and in philanthropic accomplishments; they did not stop us from ending gladiatorial combat and dramatically reducing e amount of human and animal sacrifice in the world, from pioneering social justice in the Roman Empire, and inventing the hospital, among other philanthropic breakthroughs.
So, the brutal reality is that if the devil did try to corrupt the Bible, he failed spectacularly and in every conceivable way. Which is typical; failure is integral to the demonic nature.
Of course they are...because you have no other form of reference.I have given you a contradiction in another thread and your bizarre answer was that there is no contradiction because there is no timeline. As if you think that's what the theory of relativity means. Your answers to all of my questions are always nonsensical. In this case, you are not mentioning Satan so you are not even attempting to answer the question whatsoever. So please stop derailing my threads.