|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is the Bible the inerrant word of God? Or is it the words of men? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
No way could I accept anything I regard as a myth on faith.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
The internal evidence given by the many authors of the many testimonies that make up the Bible is staggeringly sufficient for supporting faith in what it says.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
The reality is that honest God-fearing men who knew the Bible better than most had a fine sense of its truth and therefore of anything that contradicted its truth, argued for its truth against the false ideas, the truth became dogma and the false ideas were branded correctly as heresy.
The Roman Catholic Church, however, rose to power (which in itself shows it is not a Christian institution since worldly power is contrary to the spirit of Christ) without being challenged except by outsider groups, which the RCC periodically slaughtered, for about a millennium, and then the Reformers came along who eventually recognized its false doctrines and its character as Antichrist. It's unfortunate that in the last century their understanding was suppressed. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
It is a standard rule of Biblical exegesis to interpret Bible by Bible because you risk developing a false theology based on partial concepts taken out of context if you don't.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I'm sure you are right as far as human psychology goes, Phat, but in the case of Biblical Christianity we're talking about Truth, not subjective feelings.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
That's a fair list of factors that can serve as evidence for belief I think. But of course I think the Bible revelation itself is the foundational evidence for Christians.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
The diagram does a neat job of representing the actual facts of the Trinity as found in the Bible, Phat. Jar, Ringo, Mod, don't have a clue.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Yes I believe the Trinity comes straight from what is presented in the Bible and the fact that it is all there is the reason able men presented and defended it in the Councils against the Arians. The Arians' beliefs are not supported by the complete testimony of the Bible, and that is why they are understood to be heretics. If the Trinity were not supported by the Bible there is no reason the whole Church would not have become Arian. They had no reason to oppose it except what they found in the Bible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
There could not have been any motivation to look for the Trinity in the Bible unless it was actually there and it is.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I'm saying the Trinity is a counterintuitive concept that is based on consistent revelation of the character of God as Three Persons in the Bible and that kind of logic you presented is just the usual way people misunderstand it and impose human standards on it. Each of the three Persons IS God, and each is a separate independent Person, and one standard mistake is to confuse the Persons with each other. The concept is One God in Three Persons, not three gods.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
That would be very odd of the King James Bible, which was created four hundred years ago in the time of King James whose life was constantly threatened by the Jesuits because he was a Protestant*, just as Queen Elizabeth I's life had been threatened before him. Dozens of times. They both had to have nearly a battalion of soldiers with them at all times for protection against the Antichrist Pope.
ABE: The Trinity predated the Bible? What absolute ahistorical nonsense. All the books of the Bible were available to all the churches by the time of the Council of Nicea, all of them many times copied and distributed among the hundreds of churches represented at the Council. *ABE2: The Gunpowder Plot, whose failure was celebrated for four hundred years in England as Guy Fawkes Day, was a plot by the Jesuits to blow up the King and Parliament and destroy the Government of England. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
There was no need to "remove" anything in the Bible that specifically called the Roman Catholic Church Antichrist, because nothing of the sort exists in the Bible. Perhaps there were marginal notes to that effect but I am not aware of that if so. And the idea that there were political motivations for the translation is idiotic anyway; it was an honest translation from the scriptures.
King James did ask the translators to remove the marginal note -- marginal note, mind you, not anything in the text of scripture itself -- from the Geneva Bible that denounced the idea of the divine right of kings. And just as a sideline, although we disagree with the idea of the divine right of kings now, there was very good historical reason for King James' concern in his day as the Pope constantly claimed to have the right to tell kings what to do, and taking the divine prerogative away from the Pope was but one of many moves necessary to curtail the presumption of the Pope. Otherwise there was no political motivation to the translation at all, it was done by the best Biblical scholars of the day who were also honest God-fearing men. There is absolutely no evidence that James had a problem with any supposed "religious intolerance" in the time of Elizabeth, who was more of a nominal Protestant herself anyway, but a very able Queen. She had treasonous Catholics executed but for their treason, not their religion. Whereas Bloody Mary executed Protestants for being Protestants, and THAT was the religious intolerance that England had to cope with time after time when they had a Catholic monarch. Eventually they had to enact a law that no Catholic could sit on the throne of England, because every time they did they had bloody persecutions of Protestants and the papacy breathing down their necks. Unfortunately England has lost their historical perspective, now they seem to think the papal wolf has become a little lamb who wouldn't hurt a fly, so they are modifying and will probably eventually reverse those laws against Catholicism, because the Duchess of Cambridge is a Catholic. And if the world survives long enough (I do have my doubts the way things are going) I think as the papacy regains power in the west we could see a revived Inquisition with bloody fangs and claws. (ABE: Of course Islam may have done away with all of us before that anyway /ABE) Concerning the canon, the Bible doesn't need to be physically bound together to be inspired scripture, and that is how all the separated books were judged long before Nicea. There were some disputed books, yes, but all those (with an exception or two?) we regard as inspired today were regarded as inspired then too, and the disputes were not as big a deal as you try to make it out to be, and we have a fixed Protestant canon today. ABE: The Gunpowder Plot was well known as a Jesuit plot until modernday revisionists began doing their best to muddy up the historical facts. The article at Wikipedia is a joke for leaving out the Jesuits and including paragraphs full of incidental information which only distracts from the historical importance of the event. It mentions that the Pope was often targeted in connection with the celebrations without saying one thing about why, just vaguely implying something about religious intolerance and emphasizing George Washington's bad decision to outlaw Pope's Day in the US. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
A Bible does not exist until after a Canon list the books to be included. Absolute nonsense. The scriptures already existed in which the Trinity is demonstrated and it is from those those scripture references that the Trinity was made dogma by the Nicene Council
There is still no universally accepted Canon. Not accepted by heretics and others but there is a canon accepted by Protestants. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
No, God is not a Person, God is God in Three Persons. And "person" simply means independent will or action or maybe even consciousness in a sense, not human being. Keep telling y'all the Trinity is not easy to grasp, but you do have to make a teensy bit of effort to avoid all these typical mistakes.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Then I'll say it more clearly: The Trinity is not logical, it is revealed truth however.
ABE: However, it's not all that illogical either. Consider the analogy I mentioned earlier: One God in Three Persons can be represented by the burning sun: its orb representing God the Father, its light representing God the Son, its heat representing God the Holy Ghost, all together One God in Three Persons. /ABE Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024