Is our Bible of 66 Books, the inerrant Word of God?

[Heb 13:8]

Jesus first, then bible. salvation first, then study.

 

[Stranger]

Jesus first, then bible. salvation first, then study.

Where did you learn about Jesus? Be honest.

Stranger

 

[junobet]

Matthew is alluding to the purchase of the field, found in Jeremiah, though he uses Zechariah's quote also. So though he didn't address the 17 shekels they become important to me. And here is the difference between me and you. You see this as a contradiction. I see this as a truth waiting to be learned. (Pro. 25:2) " It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Just because I or others don't have an answer yet, doesn't mean there isn't one. "Line upon line"

Scripture didn't say Judas died twice. It said he hung himself and it said all his bowels gushed out. This is not hard to imagine. No mention is given as to how long Judas hung there. Apparently he was not in plain sight of everyone to see. The human and animal bodies bloat up alot after death. He would probably be found due to the odor, bloating already taking place. Thus when cut down, he burst open.

We have been given the whole Bible for a reason also. And your view and Gods view of the written Word are not the same. "It is written"

You repeating the same argument over and over again, doesn’t make it less of a fabricated and unbiblical story in my eyes.

See Stranger: I’m quite fond of all these little contradictions that you seek to smooth over. One of the very reasons I believe in the resurrection is that the Bible doesn’t give us just one harmonized version of the event, but respects the fact that different witnesses remembered it in different ways. I don’t care whether the stone was still in front of the grave or already rolled away when the woman/the women arrived, I care that their testimony wasn’t fixed.

I'm curious as to why you wouldn't mention the existance of the Septuagint in Origens Hexapla? That is the oldest copy, isn't it?

Stranger

No, as I’ve already pointed out to you it is not the oldest copy. Origen could hardly have quoted the Septuagint next to other texts had there been no Septuagint for him to quote from. And we only know that Origen quoted from it, because his Hexapla (actual copies of which are lost) was quoted by other Church fathers, which – in your logic – should make you ask “Where is this Hexapla?”

 

[junobet]

I believe exactly what the Bible says in Matthew 1:20 and I also agree with what the original Nicene Creed stated.

No, you don’t agree with what the original Nicene Creed states Stan. If you think you do, it’s because you’ve never given much thought to what it means to be “begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father;” Also you obviously never thought about how our “one Lord Jesus Christ (…) came down and was incarnate and was made man”, if He did not even exist before He was made man.

Only to you and those that only accept man-made Creeds. I have no problem at all with the Bible's definition of God, which you seem to ignore all together. You show me exactly where the Bible states that Jesus existed before he was born?

You mean apart from John 1?

"But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity." (Micah 5:2)

“Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." (John 8:58)

“Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.” (John 17:5)

"Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.” (John 17:24)

“15 The Son is the image of the invisible God,
the firstborn over all creation.
16 For by him all things in heaven and on earth were created,
things visible and invisible,
whether they are kings,[r] lords, rulers, or powers.
All things have been created through him and for him.
17 He himself existed before anything else did,
and he holds all things together." (Colossians 1: 15-17)

…

Also I challenge you to show me where the vast majority of Christianity interprets the Bible differently than I do? You make a lot of sweeping claims but never provide anything as far as cooperation is concerned to support you denials.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-existence_of_Christ
http://www.theopedia.com/pre-existence-of-jesus

That much is clear, but nevertheless and regardless, since God's written word was established, there is no need for God to deal with us directly over and above his written word. That He does at times communicate directly with us, is solely at his discretion but it never has nor ever will contradict His written word.

So you don’t pray when you read Scripture that God may give you understanding? The bare letter is enough for you? Where does in Scripture does it say that God doesn’t contradict His written word? Why is it then that off hand I can recall a couple of verses in which Scripture depicts God as revoking Scripture: Matthew 5:38-39, Matthew 19:7-9, Acts 10:27-28, not to forget about the very many places in which Scripture contradicts itself. At the moment my favourite one is Proverbs 26:4-5. As of yet I haven’t quite solved the conundrum what God is telling me to do in this almost postmodern paradox. I suppose I must give it some more prayer.

As I've stated many times before, God's written word is his chosen way to communicate with us, not his only way to communicate with us. His written word is our sole arbiter when it comes to what God has to say to believers collectively and will never be contradicted by what God chooses to say to us by the Holy Spirit personally. It is clear you don't understand many things, but instead of asking questions you make sweeping statements that are clearly erroneous and then get upset when you're refuted. as far as Barth is concerned you should know by now that I am not a proponent of reformed theology. I do not accept most things that Calvin taught, so why would I accept anything Barth taught, as far as soteriology is concerned?
If properly Guided by the Holy Spirit, we all have the ability to learn from the word of God personally and not have to be guided by imperfect men.

How do you know that it is you rather than Calvin and Co. who is properly guided by the Holy Spirit when trying to make sense of Scripture?

 

[StanJ]

No, you don’t agree with what the original Nicene Creed states Stan. If you think you do, it’s because you’ve never given much thought to what it means to be “begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father;” Also you obviously never thought about how our “one Lord Jesus Christ (…) came down and was incarnate and was made man”, if He did not even exist before He was made man.

Matthew 1:20

You mean apart from John 1?

"But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity." (Micah 5:2)

“Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." (John 8:58)

“Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.” (John 17:5)

"Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.” (John 17:24)

“15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.16 For by him all things in heaven and on earth were created, things visible and invisible, whether they are kings,[r] lords, rulers, or powers.All things have been created through him and for him.17 He himself existed before anything else did, and he holds all things together." (Colossians 1: 15-17)

…

You manifest the same problem that the Pharisees manifested in their day...not recognizing who was addressing them. Equivocating about what scripture or the original Nicene Creed says doesn't really support your point of view. Jesus was indeed begotten of God as Matthew 1:20 states. The word that was incarnated in Jesus, and is in Him, is indeed what created the universe as Paul says in Colossians 1. If you try to understand the Bible by first accepting what the Nicene Creed says then you'll understand neither. It is only by recognizing what the Bible says and then filtering the Nicene Creed through it, that you'll understand the Nicene Creed and exactly where it fails. God's word is inspired, not the Nicene Creed.

So you don’t pray when you read Scripture that God may give you understanding? The bare letter is enough for you? Where does in Scripture does it say that God doesn’t contradict His written word? Why is it then that off hand I can recall a couple of verses in which Scripture depicts God as revoking Scripture: Matthew 5:38-39, Matthew 19:7-9, Acts 10:27-28, not to forget about the very many places in which Scripture contradicts itself. At the moment my favourite one is Proverbs 26:4-5. As of yet I haven’t quite solved the conundrum what God is telling me to do in this almost postmodern paradox. I suppose I must give it some more prayer.

1Timothy 3:16-17, 2 Peter 1:20-21, John 17:17, Hebrews 6:18-19, Titus 1:2. Just a few of many.
If you know how to read the Bible and understand it, you won't be confused by any Scripture. Confusion is a result of the lack of belief that God's word is fully inspired.

How do you know that it is you rather than Calvin and Co. who is properly guided by the Holy Spirit when trying to make sense of Scripture?

Because I have tested their dogmas and found them to be against what the Bible teaches. Plus I have a better education and I've been a Christian a lot longer than John Calvin ever was.

 

[mjrhealth]

Confusion is a result of the lack of belief that God's word is fully inspired

Confusion is a result of mankind trying to prove himself worthy yet denying the one who is the truth Jesus. Leaning on there own understanding .

1Co_2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

Prise its a real problem to men, cant humble themselves before God unwilling to declare themselves as fools so that He our Lord can teach them. And so we have this topic becasue men need to prove themseves. Crazy isnt it.

 

[junobet]

Matthew 1:20

Stan, traditional Trinitarians such as myself don’t doubt the incarnation, but to us the entire point of the incarnation is that God became man. And if Jesus Christ is God as Thomas proclaimed (John 20:28), it follows that He is eternal.

You manifest the same problem that the Pharisees manifested in their day...not recognizing who was addressing them. Equivocating about what scripture or the original Nicene Creed says doesn't really support your point of view. Jesus was indeed begotten of God as Matthew 1:20 states. The word that was incarnated in Jesus, and is in Him, is indeed what created the universe as Paul says in Colossians 1. If you try to understand the Bible by first accepting what the Nicene Creed says then you'll understand neither. It is only by recognizing what the Bible says and then filtering the Nicene Creed through it, that you'll understand the Nicene Creed and exactly where it fails. God's word is inspired, not the Nicene Creed.

Being eternally begotten by the Father is not the same as being conceived through the Holy Spirit. The first doesn’t have a point in time, the latter does. Undoubtedly the Pharisees did not realize that Jesus Christ was both fully God and fully man, two distinct natures in one Person, but here you go: that is what Christianity started to believe. You may want to disagree with this belief due to your different understanding of Scripture, but it’s not as if our predecessors did not read Scripture before formulating the doctrine of the Trinity/the Nicene Creed/the Athanasian Creed.

1Timothy 3:16-17, 2 Peter 1:20-21, John 17:17, Hebrews 6:18-19, Titus 1:2. Just a few of many.

This is not the first time I notice that a Christian who claims to read the Bible literally all of a sudden gets extremely free in his interpretation when he wants the Bible to say something that it just doesn’t literally say.

If you know how to read the Bible and understand it, you won't be confused by any Scripture. Confusion is a result of the lack of belief that God's word is fully inspired.

One thing that I do understand when reading the Bible is that it is those who seek that will find, not those who arrogantly think they’ve already got all the answers. Another thing I understand is that nobody can fathom God’s understanding (Isaiah 40:28). Seeing that you claim you can fathom it, please tell me what to do concerning Proverbs 26:4+5: should I answer a fool according to his folly or not?

Because I have tested their dogmas and found them to be against what the Bible teaches. Plus I have a better education and I've been a Christian a lot longer than John Calvin ever was.

What a shame that it took almost 2000 years for an educated and humble man such as yourself to come along, to finally explain to Christianity what the Bible really teaches. ;-)

 

[mjrhealth]

Because I have tested their dogmas and found them to be against what the Bible teaches. Plus I have a better education and I've been a Christian a lot longer than John Calvin ever was.

Thtas why we are saved vy grace through faith so none should boast, what was it Saul said about counting it all as loss and needing to know Christ crucified. Studying teh bible has never saved anyone but keeps man seperated from God.

 

[Heb 13:8]

Where did you learn about Jesus? Be honest.

Stranger

Underline: He was always there waiting for me to come home.

Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Rom 10:9-10 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.

 

[Stranger]

Underline: He was always there waiting for me to come home.

Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Rom 10:9-10 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.

I asked you where you learned about Jesus, and you give me Scripture. As you should.

Stranger

 

[mjrhealth]

I asked you where you learned about Jesus, and you give me Scripture. As you should.

But you see how it is, men have made God impotent. does God need teh bible to save anyone, does God need teh bible to reach anyone. it is mens pride and arrogance that asets there wisdon and knowledege above that of God, seeking to prove themselves by therer own widom and undestandin, not seeking the one who is the truth and in so doing denying teh only one who can save them. God saved men before the bible and He will contiually save men long after its gone.God didnt need teh bible to create why do you think He needs it now??