True Word Of God?

[D.C]

Is the bible the true word of God and Jesus or is it the word of men who want others to believe what they think is the word of God? I am asking this because I have read that portions of the Gospel of Mark where left out on orders from Bishop Clement of Alexandria. I have also  found, but not yet read other books that were left out of the Bible for reasons unknow to us now.

 

[Matthew]

Where exactly have you read these things?

 

[FOMWatts<><]

The Bible IS the true Word of God, and it too is backed only by faith that God protects His word. A key indicator to me in it's authenticity is its accuracy. It has no errors, and is very accurate in it's will for mankind and the way things will be played out. It is a divinly written book for a Divinely CHOSEN people.

FOMWatts<><

 

[The Thadman]

Originally posted by D.C
Is the bible the true word of God and Jesus or is it the word of men who want others to believe what they think is the word of God? I am asking this because I have read that portions of the Gospel of Mark where left out on orders from Bishop Clement of Alexandria. I have also &nbsp;found, but not yet read other books that were left out of the Bible for reasons unknow to us now.

&nbsp;

-- The Bible, as we know it now, has STRONG evidence that it is the word of God. Prophesy fulfillment alone is startling, the MSS evidence that we have allows us to track any potential changes to the script, and new studies on the Aramaic New Testament are revealing amazing things concerning the character of God and Jesus (would you believe that Jesus was a poet?).

-- There -are- other books that are outside of the Bible, but duing the council that brought the cannon together, those books were cited to be suspiscious due to (for the vasy majority) internal, geographical, and&nbsp;historical&nbsp;inconsistencies. There's nothing wrong with reading and using those books, in my opinion, so long as it's done with a grain of salt and a sprinkling of textual criticism (for example, I personally also use the Sayings Gospel of Thomas as part of my study&nbsp;cannon due to the high occurance of parallels of the sayings in other Gospels, but that does not mean that I believe everything in it's pages verbatim because some errors can be traced). Also in terms of practical life application and the sheer&nbsp;volume of&nbsp;coincidence (which I term "Godsicence" &nbsp there is NO parallel. Being a weekend-warrior statistician, there's only so much coincidence that I can take before I suspect something.

&nbsp;

Hope this helps!

Shlomo! (Peace!)

 

[seebs]

"Inerrancy" used to mean simply that the Bible could only lead you to Christ - not, say, to false worship. The idea that the Bible is 100% factual in every detail, even when two stories differ in details, is a modern invention.

I think the Bible is words God chose us to have, but that much of it is a record of our relationship with God, provided, not because every last word is the best possible guidance, but because studying it, and learning about the path people have taken as they've approached God, is very instructive.

I have no problem with the idea that there are occasional trivial errors in the Bible, such as the claim that the mustard seed is the smallest seed. Immense effort goes into explaining these away, but this misses the entire point; it turns into an attempt to make the Bible into a proxy for God, rather than a book that guides us.

It doesn't matter much, really - it turns out that, no matter how clear the Bible is, we'll introduce plenty of errors by simply not understanding it. The Bible is the story of God saying the same thing time and time again, and having people just not get it.

 

[Athlon4all]

I believe that the entire Word of God (every single word) is given by divine inspiration from God and that includes II Timothy 3:16 which says that All Scripture is god-breathed and profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction and instruction in righteousness.

 

[webboffin]

I found a website that was listing inconsistances with the Bible trouble it it was riddled with mistakes and took a lot of scripture out of context.

It wasted it's time in the end.

 

[slightlypuzzled]

I believe that the sixty-six books we have are a good starting point and guide in our faith and walk with God.

 

[filosofer]

seebs wrote
"Inerrancy" used to mean simply that the Bible could only lead you to Christ - not, say, to false worship. The idea that the Bible is 100% factual in every detail, even when two stories differ in details, is a modern invention.

Not quite. Inerrancy has always meant "true in everything it records." The use of inerrancy is a relatively modern term, although the concept precedes it by many centuries.

Until the end of the 19th century the primary focus was on the inspiration of Scripture (God breathed) and the efficacy of Scripture (the power to accomplish God's purpose - Isaiah 55:10-11).

 

[EPHRIAM777]

5th February 2003 at 10:13 PM D.C said this in Post #1 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=635210#post635210)

Is the bible the true word of God and Jesus or is it the word of men who want others to believe what they think is the word of God? I am asking this because I have read that portions of the Gospel of Mark where left out on orders from Bishop Clement of Alexandria. I have also &nbsp;found, but not yet read other books that were left out of the Bible for reasons unknow to us now.


Eph writes..

What WE do have in the Bible today is solid stuff.....The probelm is there ARE other books that are even mentioned IN the Bible that aren't there...So in my mind we have the word of God...but maybe not the entire word of God...!

Hows that for a diplomatic answer...?? Remember GOD wouldn't leave HIS word..his book to us....on such a number as 66...!

I see the tinkering of MAN'S fingers in the mix...leaving it on such a number...!

 

[EPHRIAM777]

For example..the Bible as we know it wasn't compiled till about the 4th century...WHAT did the people have prior to that..??

At times Bishops would ecommunicate each other and call each other Heritics..OR run off each other with armies..Once in total control they would BURN all the records that they considered NON scripture used by the other Bishop...Untill that deposed Bishop would raise an army and return and Excommunicate the first Bishop...

So in a kinda musical chairs type senario..Whoever was in control when the music stopped decided for ALL time what was and wasn't "scriptural"...Then banished or excommunicated everyone who disagreed with himself...!

A study of Nicea shows that only 1/3 of the Bishops were allowed to VOTE on what was and wasn't scripture...the other 2/3 having been banished or excommunicated..or killed...! ( All in Jesus name of course )...

Other church councils that came later....were even worse....!

 

[EPHRIAM777]

Yesterday at 02:26 AM slightlypuzzled said this in Post #8 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=645943#post645943)

I believe that the sixty-six books we have are a good starting point and guide in our faith and walk with God.


Eph writes..

I concur here ...!

.....but not with your closer.."God happens"...!

...disrespect is disrespect...!

 

[EPHRIAM777]

filosofer said

Not quite. Inerrancy has always meant "true in everything it records." The use of inerrancy is a relatively modern term, although the concept precedes it by many centuries.

Eph writes...

Inerrancy..is mostly used by "fire and brimstone" type Pastors...who need to rope their sheep into the fold with a fear type message...and keep them there with it...!

It's a ..."Believe it or else"....type message tactic..!

Most of those guys who DO use that tatic...use it because they have a very limited knowledge of Early Church History..!

.... WHY is that....?? Well it takes serious study time...and not a quick brush over....

It's easier and faster to go the quick route and use a rope...than to use a knock....A knock takes patience..!

 

[Tim]

I wonder what you want to do without an inerrant Bible. How could you prove one single doctrine you believe in? If you cite a verse for proof, the pivotal word might be a mistranslation -- or perhaps the entire verse. Who knows, if you have no final Authority to consult. Do you want to rely on the greatness of scholars or of God to read His preserved Word? Math 4:4 (KJV) says: "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." By EVERY WORD! Thus it's clear you need a word-by-word accurate version. I believe there's just one such version in the world, the KJV.

 

[Ioustinos]

12th February 2003 at 01:00 PM EPHRIAM777 said this in Post #13 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=648836#post648836)

filosofer said

Not quite. Inerrancy has always meant "true in everything it records." The use of inerrancy is a relatively modern term, although the concept precedes it by many centuries.

Eph writes...

Inerrancy..is mostly used by "fire and brimstone" type Pastors...who need to rope their sheep into the fold with a fear type message...and keep them there with it...!

It's a ..."Believe it or else"....type message tactic..!

Most of those guys who DO use that tatic...use it because they have a very limited knowledge of Early Church History..!

.... WHY is that....?? Well it takes serious study time...and not a quick brush over....

It's easier and faster to go the quick route and use a rope...than to use a knock....A knock takes patience..!

Eph,

I think Filosofer would know what he is talking about because he has been a Biblical professor for about 20+ years

 

[Jesusong]

Yes, the Bible is the true word of God. Through it He reveals His love, mercy, righteousness, judgement, compassion. In Heb 1:1-2 we read:

"In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe".

Through the preaching of the word of God, we can come to a saving faith in Jesus Christ. As it says in Romans 10:17,

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God".

If you stick with the Bible, you can't go wrong.

&nbsp;

 

[OldShepherd]

13th February 2003 at 02:52 AM EPHRIAM777 said this in Post #11 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=648818#post648818)

For example..the Bible as we know it wasn't compiled till about the 4th century...WHAT did the people have prior to that..??

At times Bishops would ecommunicate each other and call each other Heritics..OR run off each other with armies..Once in total control they would BURN all the records that they considered NON scripture used by the other Bishop...Untill that deposed Bishop would raise an army and return and Excommunicate the first Bishop...

So in a kinda musical chairs type senario..Whoever was in control when the music stopped decided for ALL time what was and wasn't "scriptural"...Then banished or excommunicated everyone who disagreed with himself...!

A study of Nicea shows that only 1/3 of the Bishops were allowed to VOTE on what was and wasn't scripture...the other 2/3 having been banished or excommunicated..or killed...! ( All in Jesus name of course )...

Other church councils that came later....were even worse....!

Can you cite any istorical sources for all of this? I own three church histories and they don't record anything like this. A History of Christianity, Kenneth Scott Latourette, Early Christian Doctrines, J.N. D. Kelly, The History of Doctrines, Reinhold Seeberg. And the Complete Works of Josephus.

 

[TWells]

EPHRIAM777, maybe your reffering to "Secret Mark"??

In a 1960 meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature Morton Smith, said he had discovered a unknown epistle by Clement of Alexandria. In 1973 the text and Smiths notes were published. He said he found it at&nbsp; the monastery of Mar Saba copied onto the back page and inside cover of a 17th century edition of the epistles of Ignatius. No one besides Smith has seen the letter and the monastery said its not available because its under repairs.

No one takes this seriously.

 

[Huldrych]

Here's a question--to provoke further thought and discussion--does the term "Word of God" refer exclusively to the Bible?

jth

 

[Alabare]

I believe that the Bible is the Word of God.
This is not to say that other books haven't been written under the anoining of God. One must study to show himself approved. One must seek the Holy Spirit to guide us in all things and to give us discernment to know in our spirits what is turely of God and what is not.