U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-11-2012, 07:46 PM
 
Location: Oregon
3,066 posts, read 1,423,274 times
Reputation: 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleroo View Post
Inspiration and dictation are not the same thing.
RESPONSE:

In this case they are.

" And the Church holds them as sacred and canonical, not because, having been composed by human industry, they were afterwards approved by her authority; nor only because they contain revelation without error; but because, having been written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author"

"Hence, because the Holy Ghost employed men as His instruments, we cannot therefore say that it was these inspired instruments who, perchance, have fallen into error, and not the primary author. For, by supernatural power, He so moved and impelled them to write-He was so present to them-that the things which He ordered, and those only, they, first, rightly understood, then willed faithfully to write down, and finally expressed in apt words and with infallible truth. Otherwise, it could not be said that He was the Author of the entire Scripture." (PD)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-11-2012, 07:50 PM
 
Location: Oregon
3,066 posts, read 1,423,274 times
Reputation: 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Not at all. In 1 Kings 18:1 the phrase 'many days' is used for the largest part of the three and a half year drought in the land of Samaria, in which Elijah spent probably about three years with the widow. 'Now it happened after many days (rab-bim yāmm) that the word of the LORD came to Elijah in the third year, saying, "Go, show yourself to Ahab, and I will send rain on the face of the earth."

If you had gone into the other commentaries that I provided in post #20 you would have seen the reference to 1 Kings.

And why do you ask 'where in Acts does it say that Paul went to Arabia for three years (or ''many days'')' when you know full well that a comparison is being done between Acts 9:23 and Gal 1:18? The many days are mentioned in Acts 9:23 as I have already shown. The fact that the many days refer to three years is confirmed in Gal 1:18.
RESPONSE:

On the contrary, by any rational standard, it demonstrates a contradiction. No trip to Arabia in Acts, and Paul goes to Jerusalem after a short time in Damascus.

>>"After many days the word of the Lord came to Elijah, in the third year of the drought,* saying, ‘Go, present yourself to Ahab; I will send rain on the earth.’ "<<

You are confusing the "many days" with "the third year of the drought."

Similiarly, "After many days I finished my term paper which I wrote in my third year of college." Two different time periods are obvious.

Last edited by ancient warrior; 04-11-2012 at 07:59 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2012, 08:28 PM
 
12,518 posts, read 6,310,681 times
Reputation: 2082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiloh1 View Post
Very good, now if that is the case then Acts 9:26-30 and Galatians 1:18-24 are in contradiction and furthermore the number of times within the 14-17 years of Paul's TWO visits in Galatians is recorded in Acts as being THREE.
There is no contradiction between Acts 9:26-30 and Galatians 1:18-24 either. The disciples mentioned in Acts 9:26 refers not to the other apostles, but to believers in general. In Acts 9:27 the apostles referred to are only Peter and James as mentioned in Gal 1:18-19.

As for Paul's visits to Jerusalem, I didn't spend much time on this, but you're perhaps referring to the omission in Gal 2:1 of a visit to Jerusalem mentioned in Acts 11:29,30-12:25

C. I. Scofield notes...

4(9:26) The Acts records four visits of Paul to Jerusalem after his conversion: (1) 9:23-30. This seems identical with the visit of Gal. 1:18-19. The apostles of Acts 9:27 were Peter and James, the Lord's brother. (2) 11:30. Paul may have been in Jerusalem during the events of 12:1-24. See v. 25. (3) 15:1-30; Gal. 2:2-10. And (4) 21:17-23:35.
New Scofield Reference Edition, 1967 edition, p. 1176



Barnes' Notes on the Bible states...
As the question which Paul was discussing in this Epistle was about the necessity of the observance of the laws of Moses in order to justification, it was exactly in point to refer to a journey when this very question had been submitted to the apostles. Paul indeed had made another journey to Jerusalem before this with the collection for the poor saints in Judea Acts 11:29-30; Acts 12:25, but he does not mention that here, probably because he did not then see the other apostles, or more probably because that journey furnished no illustration of the point now under debate. On the occasion here referred to Acts 15, the very point under discussion here constituted the main subject of inquiry, and it was definitely settled.
Galatians 2:1 Bible Commentary
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2012, 08:44 PM
 
22,738 posts, read 10,479,462 times
Reputation: 3817
Quote:
Originally Posted by ancient warrior View Post
RESPONSE:

That creates a bit of a problem. If one is referring to divine inspiration and admits an inspired writing contains errors, then God made those errors.

A pivotal Catholic teaching on is point found in the encyclical Providentissimus deus,20. It makes this point:

"For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical, are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true.

"This is the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church, solemnly defined in the Councils of Florence and of Trent, and finally confirmed and more expressly formulated by the Council of the Vatican."
And this is a teaching that belongs squarely in the "precepts and doctrines of men" category because there is absolutely no foundation for it whatsoever. The inconsistencies and contradictions in the Bible are there DELIBERATELY to provide clues to revise the earlier ancient ignorant interpretations and understandings ("carnal milk") in light of more knowledge as we evolved spiritually and intellectually. This has been the big mistake of religion . . . retaining the ancient ignorance instead of revising it with increased knowledge and understanding. The church and its leaders were supremely negligent and carry a heavy burden.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2012, 09:11 PM
 
644 posts, read 409,668 times
Reputation: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by jghorton View Post
....Nowhere in scripture does it even remotely suggest that the Holy Spirit is at odds with God's Word ... or enables us to determine which parts of God's written Word to accept as true and which to reject as false.

I have absolute confidence in God's Word and the Holy Spirit; and rely on God's power to keep both inspired and in one accord! I stand by my original contention that 'declaring the Bible full or errors and contradictions' is a very slippery slope ... which undermines one's credible basis for declaring ANY of it true.
Of course the Holy Spirit would not be at odds with God's Word. God's Word is Jesus. NOT the Bible.

You should certainly have absolute confidence in God and God's Word and the Holy Spirit - together, the Holy Trinity. The Bible is not part of the Trinity. The Bible is a book about the Holy Trinity.

You draw the distinction yourself above. Jesus is God's word. You call the Bible "God's written Word." The Bible is a testimony to God's Word, written by human witnesses. It is not the Word.

You need not be concerned that questioning the Bible or acknowledging errors or contradictions will undermine your credible basis for declaring God or Jesus or the Holy Spirit true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2012, 09:16 PM
 
12,518 posts, read 6,310,681 times
Reputation: 2082
Quote:
Originally Posted by ancient warrior View Post
RESPONSE:

On the contrary, by any rational standard, it demonstrates a contradiction. No trip to Arabia in Acts, and Paul goes to Jerusalem after a short time in Damascus.

>>"After many days the word of the Lord came to Elijah, in the third year of the drought,* saying, Go, present yourself to Ahab; I will send rain on the earth. "<<

You are confusing the "many days" with "the third year of the drought."

Similiarly, "After many days I finished my term paper which I wrote in my third year of college." Two different time periods are obvious.
The confusion is not mine. Elijah had predicted the drought in 1 Kings 17:1. He then spent a period of time by the brook Cherith, until it dried up after a while. He then was told by God to go to Zarephath, where he met the widow he would stay with for the remainder of the drought. Then 1 Kings 18:1 states that '...after many days the word of the LORD came to Elijah in the third year, saying, ''Go, show yourself to Ahab, and I will send rain on the face of the earth.''

***That the many days refers to all the time that Elijah spent with the widow is seen by comparing 1 Kings 17:10-13 when he first met the widow and told her to bring him some of the last of the bread cake she had left, with 1 Kings 17:14-15 in which the LORD promised that her bowl of flour would not be exhausted until the drought was over. 1 Kings 17:15 says, 'So she went and did according to the word of Elijah, and she and he and her household ate for many days. The many days included all the time between when Elijah met the widow until the end of the drought. The exact amount of time that Elijah was at the brook before it dried up (1 Kings 17:7) and he went to go live with the widow is not given, but the drought is said in Luke 4:25 and James 5:17 to have lasted for three and a half years. And the brook is said to have dried up 'after a while.' Therefore, the 'many days' were probably at least three years.

As shown in posts #20 and #30, the 'many days' mentioned in Acts 19:23 is the three years mentioned in Gal 1:18.

I understand that, and the commentators I linked to understand that, and whether you understand it or not changes nothing. You have devoted yourself to attempting to discredit the Bible and it seems that you likely will continue to do so. Your so called contradiction is non-existent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2012, 09:57 PM
 
Location: Florida
5,966 posts, read 2,783,718 times
Reputation: 1515
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmalltownKSgirl View Post
Don't be silly. Of course we have discernment for what is true. You have so little confidence in the Holy Spirit?
I was thinking the very same thing. I don't know why people feel the need to put the bible on a pedestal. It's a collection of books that was put together by a council of men long, long after Jesus walked the earth. There are many truths in the bible, imperfect as it is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2012, 09:58 PM
 
Location: Florida
5,966 posts, read 2,783,718 times
Reputation: 1515
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmalltownKSgirl View Post
Of course the Holy Spirit would not be at odds with God's Word. God's Word is Jesus. NOT the Bible.

You should certainly have absolute confidence in God and God's Word and the Holy Spirit - together, the Holy Trinity. The Bible is not part of the Trinity. The Bible is a book about the Holy Trinity.

You draw the distinction yourself above. Jesus is God's word. You call the Bible "God's written Word." The Bible is a testimony to God's Word, written by human witnesses. It is not the Word.

You need not be concerned that questioning the Bible or acknowledging errors or contradictions will undermine your credible basis for declaring God or Jesus or the Holy Spirit true.
Exactly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2012, 10:47 PM
 
12,518 posts, read 6,310,681 times
Reputation: 2082
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmalltownKSgirl View Post
Of course the Holy Spirit would not be at odds with God's Word. God's Word is Jesus. NOT the Bible.

You should certainly have absolute confidence in God and God's Word and the Holy Spirit - together, the Holy Trinity. The Bible is not part of the Trinity. The Bible is a book about the Holy Trinity.

You draw the distinction yourself above. Jesus is God's word. You call the Bible "God's written Word." The Bible is a testimony to God's Word, written by human witnesses. It is not the Word.

You need not be concerned that questioning the Bible or acknowledging errors or contradictions will undermine your credible basis for declaring God or Jesus or the Holy Spirit true.
To the contrary. As Jesus Christ is the Word of God because He is the revealed Person of the Trinity, so also the Bible is the word of God because it is God's message to man. All Scripture is God-breathed.

2 Tim 3:16 'All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;' The word which has been translated as 'inspired' is theopneustos and literally means God-breathed. All Scripture is from the ultimate source of God.

Inspiration (God-breathed) means that God's thoughts, His plan, His promises, His prophecies, were all communicated to the human writers of Scripture. In the power of the Holy Spirit, they recorded this revelation in writing. The human authors of Scripture recorded with perfect accuracy, using their own vocabulary and writing style God's complete message to man.

The Scriptures are not human viewpoint, but are the Holy Spirit's use of human agencies and language. 2 Peter 1:20 'But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation (from one's own disclosure), 21] for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved (carried along) by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

God's word can be spoken, and it can be written.

Acts 13:46 'Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly and said, "It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first; since you repudiate it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles.

1 Thess 2:13 'For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God, which also performs its work in you who believe.'

The word of God in these passages clearly refers to the message spoken by the apostles. The message is the word of God because it has its source in God. But the word of God is also recorded in writing so that it is permanently preserved from generation to generation.

When Jesus Christ (the Word of God) was tempted in the desert by Satan, He quoted Scripture. Jesus Christ (the Word of God) said, Matt 4:4 'But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God. (Every word which proceeds out of the mouth of God is the word of God. Spoken, it is the word of God. Written, it is the word of God.

That which God communicates is His word. The Bible is the communicated written word of God.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2012, 11:02 PM
 
644 posts, read 409,668 times
Reputation: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
To the contrary. As Jesus Christ is the Word of God because He is the revealed Person of the Trinity, so also the Bible is the word of God because it is God's message to man. All Scripture is God-breathed.
I take note that you used lower case w describing the Bible as word, not Word. I appreciate that distinction.

But we'll just have to disagree on this: "so also the Bible is the word of God because it is God's message to man" because that is not what the Bible is. It is a whole library of books, which, individually, contradict each other in places but, collectively, are a powerful testimony to God. These books have human authors and were selected for the canon by human editors. Inspired by God? You bet. Written by God? Nope. God is so much better and more than the Bible.

As much as I appreciate the handful of verses you cited, I simply do not agree that they mean what you think they mean.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
That which God communicates is His word. The Bible is the communicated written word of God.
That which God communicates is his Son. The Bible is the written testimony of human beings, believers, who were inspired by what they saw, heard, and was shown to them by God. Inspired? Yes. Perfect? Um, have you read it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top