The Inspiration of Scripture

[redleghunter]

So it seems I just have to trust them I guess with the most important thing in my life.

"The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God..." (Romans 8:16)

 

[Dave-W]

You believe many of them are - that doesn't make it so

Our Lord said there were some “to whom it was given” to be single. I think that settles the issue.

That doesn't mean they HAVE to be married; if it did, then they would also HAVE to have children, be able to control them, be sober, not have a temper etc etc.

Of course it means they have to be married. And yes - have obedient children.

How can one meet the requirement of husband of one wife if one is not married?

 

[Chriliman]

It is what he says. When he says in 1 Corinthians 5-7 "The Lord says", he is referring to explicit Old Testament teachings. But when he says: "I, not the Lord" he is saying that the OT doesn't say anything about it, but he is giving his apostolic judgment.

How do you know he means the OT when he says "The Lord"?

Also, do you consider his apostolic judgement to be God's word?

So the only parts of the Bible that are authoritative are the red words of Jesus and quotes from Yahweh in the OT?

I think anything in the Bible can be considered authoritative if convicts/inspires us to seek and follow God to a greater degree.

 

[FireDragon76]

The problem is:
How do you know what the bible says?

And endless Protestant schisms show that they agree the words , but they cannot agree what it says, i.e. Meaning.

The only ones that have the word of God are those that have the right meaning: every one else just has words,

true meaning is carried by authority ( power to bind and loose) and tradition ( the faith handed down by succession) which is why the church is the foundation of truth.

All of which: scripture, history even simple logic show sola scriptura is bunk which is the source of your problem.

Just because we don't agree doesn't mean Rome has a definitive answer. That's simply bad logic.

 

[Tree of Life]

How do you know he means the OT when he says "The Lord"?

It's the explanation that makes the most sense and it was a common manner of speech to refer to OT writings.

Also, do you consider his apostolic judgement to be God's word?

Yes!

I think anything in the Bible can be considered authoritative if convicts/inspires us to seek and follow God to a greater degree.

So what's authoritative depends on how we feel about it? There are some things in the Bible that don't "do it" for me. Can I safely ignore these things because I'm uninspired by them?

 

[redleghunter]

Who agrees/disagrees with the following? (FYI for the OP @Tree of Life)

God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit."​

God inspired the human authors of the sacred books. "To compose the books, God chose certain men who, all the while he employed them in this task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though he acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more."

The inspired books teach the truth. "Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Holy Scriptures."

Still, the Christian faith is not a "religion of the book." Christianity is the religion of the "Word" of God, a word which is "not a written and mute word, but the Word which is incarnate and living". If the Scriptures are not to remain a dead letter, Christ, the eternal Word of the living God, must, through the Holy Spirit, "open [our] minds to understand the Scriptures."​

 

[Chriliman]

It's the explanation that makes the most sense and it was a common manner of speech to refer to OT writings.

I'd like to learn more about this. Can you link to a commentary on the subject?

So what's authoritative depends on how we feel about it? There are some things in the Bible that don't "do it" for me. Can I safely ignore these things because I'm uninspired by them?

No, I don't think so. I think we should be able to discern what God is saying from what man is saying, even in the Bible. The story where Job is consulted by his friends is a good example of discerning man's wisdom from God's, within scripture. Now, do I think God intended/was ok with man's wisdom being in there? Yes, but that doesn't mean it was His wisdom.

 

[redleghunter]

Did you know that over 33% of the NT is the OT inferred or directly quoted? The "Word of God" (when speaking of the written word) or "Scripture" when mentioned in the NT, is NOT a reference to the NT. Everything messiah did was foretold either directly in prophecy or indirectly through the pictures presented in the Feasts and sacrifices. So when the Apostles, who didn't add or take from what was already Scripture, proclaimed whatever was in the Word of God (again, speaking of that which was written) they were NOT referring to themselves and their own work. Paul did not write a letter to Ephesus thinking we might one day see his work alongside the rest of the canon. He didn't know that, he had no way to know that... and if we remove our bias and just think about it for a minute... we'll find it doesn't change anything other than... it might add a little weight to the OT. But then that is really the issue here even if nobody will be willing to admit to it.

Blessings.
Ken

I invite you to read the verses again. As with the Prophets of old, the apostles were proclaiming the Word of God when they were preaching the Gospel.

 

[redleghunter]

Indeed we have manuscripts which differ from one another.

Please elaborate.

 

[Mountainmike]

This thread isn't about Sola Scriptura, Mike. So how do you vote?

But sola scriptura is totally implicit in it.
Because You assume you know what the bible says, ie has unique meaning.

So You cannot answer yes or no, because you do not know what the bible says , without addition of other authority.

When you have that other authority. You have the word of God. Which is why Catholics are sola dei verbum.

 

[redleghunter]

Those distinctions are still relevant in Lutheranism.

Do you speak for LCMS as well?

 

[Not David]

It was orally transmitted to the writer who wrote it down. Meaning when a "thus saith the Lord" was pronounced the prophet received inspiration from God, it was proclaimed publicly and then written down. This seems to be a trend in the Holy Scriptures.

Not everything was written down, like you guys imply.

 

[redleghunter]

But sola scriptura is totally implicit in it.
Because You assume you know what the bible says, ie has unique meaning.

So You cannot answer yes or no, because you do not know what the bible says , without addition of other authority.

When you have that other authority. You have the word of God. Which is why Catholics are sola dei verbum.

Your own catechism confirms Sacred Scriptures are not in error and are the inspired words of God.

 

[Calvin_1985]

Christ as I am speaking of is primarily understood in terms of the historical person of Jesus of Nazareth who went about inaugurating the Kingdom of God by preaching the forgiveness of sins and eternal life.

Is Jesus the I AM?

 

[redleghunter]

Not everything was written down, like you guys imply.

Why not and what exactly was not?

 

[bekkilyn]

Yet the instruction and words of God are infallible.

Only if they do not have a fallible human being as a mediator to corrupt them.

 

[Calvin_1985]

This thread isn't about Sola Scriptura, Mike. So how do you vote?

It's amazing the attacks we get from people for knowing that the Bible is Gods word.

 

[Not David]

Why not and what exactly was not?

Because the Bible does not say so? Because Paul had letters that were lost? Because Paul talks about traditions both "oral and written"?

 

[bekkilyn]

I've added a poll. I am alarmed that there are so few Christians who believe in the inspiration of Scripture. I am further alarmed that so few who say that the Bible is inspired are willing to say that the Bible is the very words of God. Anyways, if you could vote, that would better show how this all lays out.

Practically everyone here agrees the scriptures in the bible are inspired, but not all agree with your particular definition of inspired.

 

[bekkilyn]

I don't believe those two things can be meaningfully separated.

So we're back to bible idolatry again?