The Inspiration of Scripture

[redleghunter]

Hi Dave, good to see you. I was referring to killing sinners for sinning, and such laws. Not the 10 commandments. Sorry it was ambiguous.

Glad to see you back Devin.

I made the distinction between prophecy and poetry. There are some that can meet the two. Like this guy.

 

[bekkilyn]

I don’t even know how you are using the Oracle.

I think God is very explicit in revealing himself to mankind.


Word of the LORD

Word of God

Thus saith the LORD

Not to mention the Incarnation.

So a piece of paper, or page from the bible, floated down from the sky in all of those occasions of the verses you quoted? Then they were later collected into a binder with the label "the bible" on it?

Or perhaps the word of the Lord is something else besides words on paper.

 

[redleghunter]

I think it’s cool that you hold human beings in such high regard. I just have to leave room in my own mind to ponder if it’s possible such human beings either messed up something accidentally or on purpose. I’m not by any means saying they did I’m just saying if it’s possible I wanna take note.

What do you trust. Let’s start there.

 

[Ttalkkugjil]

One thing the Bible should definitely not be used as is a drink coaster.

 

[redleghunter]

So a piece of paper, or page from the bible, floated down from the sky in all of those occasions of the verses you quoted? Then they were later collected into a binder with the label "the bible" on it?

Or perhaps the word of the Lord is something else besides words on paper.

What do you trust then?

What did John Wesley trust as the infallible words of God?

 

[devin553344]

Glad to see you back Devin.

I made the distinction between prophecy and poetry. There are some that can meet the two. Like this guy.

Makes me want to store a cache of weapons and food, LOL

 

[bekkilyn]

How do we know the words spoken by Jesus? How did the Holy Spirit accomplish this? What does your personal canon look like?

We have witnesses, or people who knew the witnesses recording the events surrounding Jesus and statements they heard him say, but that still doesn't mean that those witnesses were infallible. Their personal accounts do not need to be infallible for the gospel message to be true.

 

[Tree of Life]

But the bible contains no text that claims that "what the bible says God says" and when you consider that Satan speaks in a few places and that men speak in many places and women in many places in the bible it is obvious that the idea that "what the bible says God says" is seriously flawed.

This has come up several times.

The Bible says that Satan told Adam and Eve that God is a liar. Does this mean if the Bible is the very words of God that God says that God is a liar? Of course not!

God says that Satan lied to Adam and Eve in telling them that God is a liar.

So did Satan really lie to Adam and Eve? Yes.
How do we know that? Because God says.
Where does God say this? Genesis 3.

Genesis 3 is very much the words of God, even though it is also an account of the words of Satan. In other words, just because the Bible says that Satan said something, does not mean that the Bible says what Satan says.

 

[redleghunter]

Makes me want to store a cache of weapons and food, LOL

Must have taken him years to put those concepts together in song. Not to mention the nice Walmart looking polo shirt.

 

[FireDragon76]

Now you're the one being nitpicky.

God can be said to be the author of all Scripture. But not necessarily the speaker.

I think its sort of like saying Hitler built the Autobahn: it claims much but potentially its grossly inaccurate.

But you know sometimes Protestantism is prone to these sorts of overwrought claims. Again, understanding the distinction between Law and Gospel is useful when it is applied to theology and ethics. The inspiration of the Bible is less about trying to turn the Bible into a cudgel to beat down people you disagree with in arguments, and more about having confidence in its message (which I believe is really about the salvation that Christ brings).

 

[Tree of Life]

We're back down to a C plus, CF. Get it together.

 

[redleghunter]

We have witnesses, or people who knew the witnesses recording the events surrounding Jesus and statements they heard him say, but that still doesn't mean that those witnesses were infallible. Their personal accounts do not need to be infallible for the gospel message to be true.

Their personal accounts is how we got the Gospel message.

God reveals Himself to people and sends them as messengers. He also uses people to write things down for future generations. YHWH wrote on the tablets of stone and handed them to Moses.

If God can’t communicate His infallible words to be recorded without error then He is not the God He proclaims to be.

 

[bekkilyn]

What do you trust then?

What did John Wesley trust as the infallible words of God?

It's not "what" I trust, but "who" I trust and who I trust is the *person* of Jesus Christ who is the living Word of God who is God.

As far as Wesley, his definition does not match yours. Per the Articles of Methodist doctrine (put into place by Wesley and originating from the Anglican Church)

The Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation; so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation (Articles of Religion, Article V).

Of course, you could always just pull short quotes from his sermons or other writings out of context just like people do with scripture to try to "prove" that Wesley believed the bible to be God vs. infallible to the purpose for which it was written, i.e. salvation.

P.S. Wesley was also not infallible and would not have claimed to be such. He as well would point people towards Christ.

 

[Tree of Life]

It's not "what" I trust, but "who" I trust and who I trust is the *person* of Jesus Christ who is the living Word of God who is God.

How do you know anything about Jesus?

As far as Wesley, his definition does not match yours. Per the Articles of Methodist doctrine (put into place by Wesley and originating from the Anglican Church)

The Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation; so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation (Articles of Religion, Article V).

Why do you think that Wesley thought the Bible was such a final authority on matters of faith and practice? Could it be that Wesley believed that what the Bible says, God says?

He said: "I want to know one thing, - the way to heaven; how to land safe on that happy shore. God himself has condescended to teach the way: For this very end he came from heaven. He hath written it down in a book. O give me that book! At any price, give me the book of God! I have it: Here is knowledge enough for me. Let me be homo unius libri (" a man of one book")."

- John Wesley, Preface to Standard Sermons

 

[Tone]

I believe that the only infallible human being was Jesus (and he didn't write any of the books in the bible) so if that's some sort of insult to the bible writers, then they'll just need to get over it since I don't believe them to be God. God is God and only God is infallible.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
All πᾶσα
(pasa) 3956: all, every a prim. word
Scripture γραφὴ
(graphē) 1124: a writing, scripture from graphó
is inspired by God θεόπνευστος
(theopneustos) 2315: God-breathed, i.e. inspired by God from theos and pneó
and profitable ὠφέλιμος
(ōphelimos) 5624: useful, profitable from ópheleó
for teaching, διδασκαλίαν
(didaskalian) 1319: instruction (the function or the information) from didaskalos
for reproof,
1649a: reproof from elegchó
for correction, ἐπανόρθωσιν
(epanorthōsin) 1882: correction from epi and anorthoó
for training παιδείαν
(paideian) 3809: the rearing of a child, training, discipline from paideuó
in righteousness; δικαιοσύνῃ
(dikaiosunē) 1343: righteousness, justice from dikaios
Bible Gateway passage: 2 Timothy 3:16-17 - New International Version

Are you familiar with the Hebrew Names for God - Ruach HaKodesh...the Ruach hakodesh (Ruach HaKodesh - The Holy Spirit - Segullah)....The Holy Breath of Yah.

Do you believe that Scripture is "God-Breathed" and, if so, do you believe that it is His (Yahshua's) Spirit? Do you know what you are saying when you say He didn't write the Bible? Oh, it is an insult, to the Bible writers, to us who believe Scripture, and most importantly, to He Who Breathed it.

*With that, I leave this thread.

 

[bekkilyn]

The apostles did not have the gifts and fruits of the Holy Spirit?

Obviously for them, one of these gifts was being an apostle, a messenger of the Gospel, but all who are in Christ are given gifts and should be producing some evidence of fruit of the Spirit.

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

What do you trust. Let’s start there.[/QUOT

What do you trust then?


What did John Wesley trust as the infallible words of God?

I trust that the Bible is inspired by God. I trust Jesus is the way. What I’m not sure about is to what extent God meant for me to follow other human beings and their ways. So I’m trying to seek the truth. Right now this type of confusion is what makes me so uncomfortable. Maybe I’m wrong or maybe someone else is wrong. I’m only interested in the absolute truth not so much what others may THINK the absolute truth is. I would rather say I don’t know then to give my opinion about things where my opinion doesn’t matter.

 

[FireDragon76]

It's not "what" I trust, but "who" I trust and who I trust is the *person* of Jesus Christ who is the living Word of God who is God.

As far as Wesley, his definition does not match yours. Per the Articles of Methodist doctrine (put into place by Wesley and originating from the Anglican Church)

The Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation; so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation (Articles of Religion, Article V).

Of course, you could always just pull short quotes from his sermons or other writings out of context just like people do with scripture to try to "prove" that Wesley believed the bible to be God vs. infallible to the purpose for which it was written, i.e. salvation.

P.S. Wesley was also not infallible and would not have claimed to be such. He as well would point people towards Christ.

He licensed women to preach, so clearly he did not subscribe to the relatively modern notion that every word was somehow God's own speech act. Otherwise he would have tripped up over certain verses like 1 Timothy 2:12.

 

[Tree of Life]

He licensed women to preach, so clearly he did not subscribe to the relatively modern notion that every word was somehow God's own speech act. Otherwise he would have tripped up over certain verses like 1 Timothy 2:12.

Wesley would not have made that argument. He did not ordain women because he believed that 1 Timothy 2:12 is not God's word, but because he had a different interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:12 in the broader context of Scripture.

While I do not agree with ordaining women, what the Bible says must always be considered on the whole. If one takes a singular verse out of context and misuses it, this is not what the Bible says.

 

[FireDragon76]

While I do not agree with ordaining women, what the Bible says must always be considered on the whole. If one takes a singular verse out of context and misuses it, this is not what the Bible says.

It seems to me you are just admitting that naive readings of Scriptures are not consistent with God's speech acts, which destroys the premise of most of the arguments we see on this forum. It is very much contrary to the typical meaning of the phrase, "The Bible says it. I believe it. That settles it."