Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Minimalist Bible
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 16 of 58 (708364)
10-09-2013 12:34 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by GDR
10-05-2013 12:53 PM


Thos Jefferson already did a version of a Minimalist Bible, in his case leaving out all the supernatural parts. Everybody wants to write their own Bible instead of submitting to the one God gave us.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by GDR, posted 10-05-2013 12:53 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by GDR, posted 10-09-2013 2:18 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 18 of 58 (708369)
10-09-2013 3:30 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by GDR
10-09-2013 2:18 AM


Christianity does require an inerrant Bible, and we have one in the King James, the others being corrupted in various ways unfortunately. Great men of the faith for the last two thousand years but certainly since the Reformation have defended the inerrant God-inspired Bible.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by GDR, posted 10-09-2013 2:18 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by GDR, posted 10-09-2013 9:11 AM Faith has replied
 Message 20 by frako, posted 10-09-2013 9:28 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 21 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-09-2013 9:53 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 47 by NoNukes, posted 10-12-2013 1:09 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 23 of 58 (708403)
10-09-2013 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by GDR
10-09-2013 9:11 AM


You trample on the history of those who died for the Bible, to bring the Bible to the common people when the Roman Church opposed it, persecuting and killing them for it. You trivialize their courage by comparing them with those who die for king and country. But I'm sure that's OK with you. They were all ignoramuses compared with you, who feel you have the right and the ability to choose what is true in the Bible and condemn the rest.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by GDR, posted 10-09-2013 9:11 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by GDR, posted 10-09-2013 3:08 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 25 of 58 (708405)
10-09-2013 3:56 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by GDR
10-09-2013 3:08 PM


Not dictated by God? Claims the Bible does not make about itself? What do they do with 2 Timothy 3:16:
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness
ALL scripture... GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD. Some translations say "God-breathed."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by GDR, posted 10-09-2013 3:08 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-09-2013 4:08 PM Faith has replied
 Message 32 by GDR, posted 10-10-2013 9:38 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 49 by herebedragons, posted 10-12-2013 9:05 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 27 of 58 (708411)
10-09-2013 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by New Cat's Eye
10-09-2013 4:08 PM


Being inspired by God is not being verbally dictated to by God.
You are using the word "inspired" in a casual sense; in the accurate sense it's the equivalent of God's dictating the original Greek and Hebrew. "The WORD of the Lord came to me" say the prophets. Not the concept of the Lord, the general idea of the Lord, but the WORD of the Lord.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-09-2013 4:08 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-10-2013 11:05 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 36 by GDR, posted 10-10-2013 2:11 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 30 of 58 (708418)
10-09-2013 8:44 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Phat
10-09-2013 6:34 PM


Re: Inspiration
Being inspired by God means that it comes from Him and not from our own vain imaginations.
Exactly, Phat. And if you get into the word "inspired" which is sometimes literally translated "God-breathed" you can find that scripture comments on itself as actually being alive. When God breathed into Adam He breathed LIFE into Him, His own supernatural life, so to say He breathed the Word is to say it came forth living with His own life. And believers feel this active life in the Word of God.
Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is quick [alive], and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Phat, posted 10-09-2013 6:34 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 38 of 58 (708494)
10-10-2013 2:56 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by GDR
10-10-2013 2:11 PM


Re: The Bible or Jesus?
Jesus, being God, is the Author of the Bible, you cannot choose one over the other. Jesus is both the God of peace and tne Warrior King. He came first as the meek Suffering Servant to save out a people for Himself; He will come again as the Warrior King to defeat His enemies.
(Jesus stopped short of the Day of Vengeance verse in the Isaiah text because He was declaring His current mission as the Suffering Servant who came to bring peace; the Pharisees hated Him for claiming to BE the Messiah, who they knew was also to be God in the flesh. There is no need for other speculations about why they wanted to kill Him. They SAY at one point that they wanted to kill Him because He "made Himself out to be God.")
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by GDR, posted 10-10-2013 2:11 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by GDR, posted 10-10-2013 7:13 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 41 of 58 (708532)
10-10-2013 7:32 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by GDR
10-10-2013 7:13 PM


Re: The Bible or Jesus?
What absolute rot. What I've said has NEVER supported any sort of "jihad," what utter stupidity, and it's THE STANDARD REFORMATION UNDERSTANDING. It's the OT READ THROUGH THE New for crying out loud.
Oh forget it. I don't need the ulcer.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by GDR, posted 10-10-2013 7:13 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by GDR, posted 10-10-2013 7:36 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 48 of 58 (708666)
10-12-2013 7:13 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by NoNukes
10-12-2013 1:09 AM


The KJV had its four hundredth birthday in 2011,
And the God-inspired Bible is the original Greek and Hebrew.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by NoNukes, posted 10-12-2013 1:09 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 55 of 58 (708714)
10-12-2013 4:28 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by herebedragons
10-12-2013 9:05 AM


Hi Faith ...
Not dictated by God? Claims the Bible does not make about itself? What do they do with 2 Timothy 3:16:
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness
ALL scripture... GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD. Some translations say "God-breathed."
"Inspired by God" is different than "Dictated by God". That difference allows the text to reflect the personalities and styles of the different authors.
OK in that technical sense, but to be dictated by God doesn't mean the personality of the prophet or scribe is eclipsed, at all, God doesn't use His instruments that way. They have God's Holy Spirit and they write through that Spirit as He works through their personalities. It's not like dictation on a Dictaphone.
If it was all dictated by God, so as to be God's exact words, thee would be much more consistency in style.
Yes if we're talking Dictaphone type dictation but we're not, we're talking God's Spirit working in harmony with God's prophet's personality, and we DO get God's exact words that way. God's sovereignty over all things guarantees that the words we read are His, as the prophet mediated them.
Even the Gospels have significant differences in content and style, so much so that it is clear they have different authors.
See above.
You are using the word "inspired" in a casual sense; in the accurate sense it's the equivalent of God's dictating the original Greek and Hebrew. "The WORD of the Lord came to me" say the prophets. Not the concept of the Lord, the general idea of the Lord, but the WORD of the Lord.
If the prophet says ""The WORD of the Lord came to me" then you can assume that the words he quotes are the words that God spoke to him, but otherwise how do you justify that God was dictating the rest of the narrative?
By His sovereignty over the work of the scribes who wrote it, and we have faith in this knowing that this IS His revelation to mankind as the Church has attested down the centuries. The idea that the exact words were dictated isn't as important as the message but there is no reason to think that the words weren't exactly dictated as well, in the sense I've been saying here.
Paul says in 1 Cor 7:12 - 14 "But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away..." (KJV, emphasis added)
He explicitly states that his instruction was not from the Lord, so how can it also be dictated by the Lord?
God is sovereign but we are independent nevertheless, He controlled what got said in His revelation to us but not the way you seem to be imagining it. If I acknowledge that this wasn't dictated by God in any sense that fits your idea of that, unbelievers will say then it's not God's word it's just the word of human beings, but that's not the case. Sorry if I can't get it said better than that. Probably Luther did or Calvin or Augustine or somebody back there.
There are also other places where Paul explicitly states that he is giving his opinion, his advice, rather than receiving a command directly from God. Should these "uninspired" bits have been left out of an "inspired" Bible?
Nope, we are to obey our superiors and that includes Paul, unless they show themselves to be in violation of God's will.
I also noted something else in your comment. When you typed "WORD" you used all caps, but when you typed "Lord" you only capitalized the first letter. The convention is to use all caps for LORD and only capitalize the first letter in Word. You probably only did this for emphasis, but I think it illustrates the problem I have with inerrantists. They seem to worship the Bible, the Bible goes on a pedestal and is regarded as being absolutely without error, which is an attribute that belongs only to God. We should not worship the Bible. I am not saying you worship the Bible, but it bothers me when people elevate the Bible to such a position that only God should occupy.
Yes, it was only for emphasis.
God Himself "magnifies His word above His name" as it says in Psalm 138:
Psa 138:2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.
The Bible is THE ONLY source of knowledge of God and His salvation through Christ. The idea that one "worships" the messenger instead of valuing it as this only source that cannot be lost or the knowledge of God will be lost, just misses the whole point.
I am not sure about this, but it seems as if you are a King James only believer. Maybe it was because of this:
Christianity does require an inerrant Bible, and we have one in the King James, the others being corrupted in various ways unfortunately0
.
This position is even more tenuous. The KJV was translated from the Vulgate (Latin) which was translated from the Septuagint (Greek OT) and 2nd or 3rd generation copies of the NT (ie. copies of copies, not the original documents). What is the Biblical support that all those translations were inerrantly copied?
I've been following the controversy about these things for years and have my own blog about it, The Great Bible Hoax of 1881 about how the supposedly oldest Greek manuscripts from which all the modern Bibles were translated to one degree or another, are in fact corrupt. I make it clear there that I am not "King James Only" in the usual sense of considering the KJV as inspired in itself, but am really more "Textus Receptus Only," believing that the underlying Greek texts for the KJV are the authentic ones. I also think the KJV itself IS a superior translation compared to all the new ones, although it needs some minor corrections plus some updatings by now.
The KJV was translated from Erasmus' Greek texts, not the Vulgate, although due to a lack of the original Greek in some places he did resort to back-translating the Vulgate. Overall his new Greek text was very different from the Vulgate. Luther used it and so did the KJV translators although they also had access to some newly available Greek mss as well and they compared their work with all the other translations in all the other languages they had access to.
NOBODY has the original documents, they long since perished, but there are thousands of copies and fragments of the Greek mss available nevertheless. People who are expert in sorting out minor differences work on these all the time.
More recently, texts have been found that are a hundred years older than the oldest texts used to translate the Vulgate and have given us significant insight into some confusing passages. Also we have used Sumerian and other Ancient Near Eastern texts to clarify the meanings of uncertain words and phrases, none of which was available to medieval translators.
The "new texts" that have been found are also questionable. I try to keep up with this but maybe I'm running too many blogs besides trying to bring down evolution at EvC, ha ha, so all I can say is that I'm following Chris Pinto who has been working on exposing a lot of fraud in the history of Bible manuscripts.
The KJV translators used 95% pf Tyndale's translation and he was no "medieval" translator, who based his work on Erasmus' Greek text. I don't know where this idea that the Vulgate underlies all this comes from but it's a fraudulent claim. They also used other translations including many Middle Eastern translations.
How can you be so sure that the KJV is inerrant and other, newer translations (such as NASB, my personal preference) are corrupted?
From what I've said above about what I've been following for some years. The NASB was recommended to me years ago as the most reliable, and apparently it is a good literal translation, but it uses the corrupted Greek texts. I hated it for some reason anyway without knowing that about it and just couldn't stick with it. Went to the New King James and liked it better but had problems with that too. Turns out that although it's based on the Textus Receptus it resorts to translation of some verses that are filtered through the Westcott and Hort revision of 1881. The problems I had with the old King James were also an interference but I finally got convinced it's the only really reliable one and am sticking to it.
If you prefer the KJV version, that is just fine. But it is not really justified to suggest that those that use other translations are not "true Christians". (Don't think that you suggest that ? "Christianity requires an inerrant Bible ... all translations are corrupt except KJV ... " thus the implication is that you can't be a "true Christian" unless you use the KJV)
I certainly DON'T suggest that those who use the other translations are not true Christians, just about everybody I know disagrees with me about the KJV and I don't regard them as any less Christians for that. Christians can be deceived, that's all. We are all vulnerable to deception. I was deceived about the new versions for years and I consider myself to have been a Christian all that time. We can all improve in many ways. True Christians are a motley bunch with many faults, that's the sort of people the Lord chose, you know.
AND most of the true text survives even in the corrupted versions, AND God will lead Christians to get the truth out of them in any case.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by herebedragons, posted 10-12-2013 9:05 AM herebedragons has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024