Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Perhaps the idea of sola scriptura is a mistaken one?
Perhaps that idea prohibits the belief in any further divine revelation to humanity?
Perhaps the Reformation did irreversible damage to man's relationship to God?
The OP has a good point when he says that the "Book" has become an idol, wherein all ideas of God or Jesus are held up to the theological yardstick of sola scriptura. I wonder how believers, prior to the writing down of the individual books of the various "Testaments", were ever capable of understanding what was required of them? Somehow, I think it is the most vocal proponents of sola scriptura that tend to insist that the age of divine revelation has ceased - no more still, quiet voices from the whirlwind...
Its too bad that you are unhappy in your unbelief, but that's your choice. It might help if you learned from teachers who do believe in the Bible, rather than listening to all kinds of people who don't. There are many good sensible reasons to believe in the divine inspiration of the Bible, but a forum like this just will not work for teaching this.
I know how and why I believe it. I believe in intuition and in the power of a person that has a clean and sincere heart speaking spontaneously.
The dudes that wrote the bible did not know they were writing a bible. Dig that! they were writing personal letters to each other. These letters were full of truth.
I do believe in God, the ghost/spirit, the creator, that genius intelligence in the spiritual realm. I have an easy time of believing that He speaks through folks, to others.
I believe these letters were full of truth, the light of wisdom and that others saved these letters because they, too recognized the truths of them, and that sure, even God Himself had a hand in helping to preserve these and them being put together in books form, forming our Bible.
Its too bad that you are unhappy in your unbelief, but that's your choice. It might help if you learned from teachers who do believe in the Bible, rather than listening to all kinds of people who don't. There are many good sensible reasons to believe in the divine inspiration of the Bible, but a forum like this just will not work for teaching this.
I did exactly that for 30 years.
Its not that I think the bible can be thrown out and disregarded. The point is that I do not see the bible as being inerrant and infallible, but rather the visions, inspirations, and experiences of believers who lived in a different time.
Inerrancy of the book requires one to ignore many blatant contradictions not only in the words, but in the nature of God.
I grew up in southern baptist churches being taught the message of bible inerrancy and infallibility, and being taught that the bible was literally given by God. Since then, I have come to my own personal conclusion that this idea is completely illogical, and I personally do not understand why it has ever been taught that way.
I think that God would not give us something that is so divisive and contradictory, and that would end up being interpreted and translated dozens of times over so that the meaning of key passages could be taken different manners depending on the translation as well as what context the individual reading it takes in.
It seems that those who believe bible inerrancy always accuse those who question it of being deceived. The irony is that there are plenty of people who passionately believe in bible inerrancy and infalllibility, and are good people who follow Christ in their prayers and actions, yet they disagree about the meaning of different parts of the bible and often accuse each other of either being deceived or of wanting to deceive others.
Why would God give us a book that is so complex in order to teach us how to live?
Why does the bible itself contain glaring contradictions if we are supposed to view it as God's inerrant and infallible word? (example Exodus 33:11 states that "God spoke to Moses face to face, as one speaks to a friend, John 1:18 states "No one hath ever seen God".)
Why does being able to deeply understand the bible require a person to gain a deep understanding of different cultures over millenia, the language and practices of those cultures, as well as the writing styles of those cultures and the writer of the particular book being read?
Most importantly, why would God choose to use the bible as our source of revelation of His will and instruction for our lives, yet there are still many nations where the literacy rate is less than 50%?
My feeling is that the bible has been used as a tool by those who wish to keep religion in control. Christ came to destroy the hierarchy of religion. With his sacrifice, there is no priest, pastor, or religious figure that has a higher standing with God than any other person. Many churches seek to maintain the hierarchy with an established system of worship, even though Christ only references a body of believers as church, not a building.
Based on your thread title I will suggest that something being given to us in this life by God does not inherantly mean infallible. But then again, we often need to define the nature of that infallibility. The bible has never failed me.
Its not that I think the bible can be thrown out and disregarded. The point is that I do not see the bible as being inerrant and infallible, but rather the visions, inspirations, and experiences of believers who lived in a different time.
Inerrancy of the book requires one to ignore many blatant contradictions not only in the words, but in the nature of God.
There are no contradictions in the Bible or in the nature of God.
Give one example of each that you think is a contradiction.
They were referring to the writings of old 'Prophets'. They did not consider their letters as scripture.
Wrong!
1 Thess. 2:13
And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is at work in you who believe.
2 Peter
14 So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him. 15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
There are no contradictions in the Bible or in the nature of God.
Give one example of each that you think is a contradiction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmiej
Wrong!
1 Thess. 2:13
And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is at work in you who believe.
2 Peter
14 So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him. 15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
There are no contradictions in the Bible or in the nature of God.
Give one example of each that you think is a contradiction.
Blatant contradiction:
Matthew 27:3-9 states:
3 When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders. 4 “I have sinned,” he said, “for I have betrayed innocent blood.”
“What is that to us?” they replied. “That’s your responsibility.”
5 So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.
6 The chief priests picked up the coins and said, “It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money.” 7 So they decided to use the money to buy the potter’s field as a burial place for foreigners. 8 That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day. 9 Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: “They took the thirty pieces of silver, the price set on him by the people of Israel, 10 and they used them to buy the potter’s field, as the Lord commanded me.”[a]
Acts 1:15-19 says:
15 In those days Peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) 16 and said, “Brothers and sisters,[d] the Scripture had to be fulfilled in which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus. 17 He was one of our number and shared in our ministry.”
18 (With the payment he received for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 19 Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)
So in Matthew, Judas throws the silver down in the temple and goes to hang himself. The priests pick up the money and decide to buy a field to bury foreigners in.
In Acts, verse 18 clearly states JUDAS bought a field and fell headlong so that his body burst open.
So who bought the field? The priests to bury foreigners in it? Or Judas to fall headlong in it? BTW, falling headlong and bursting open is far different than hanging oneself.
As for the nature of God, in Exodus 32:11-14
11 Then Moses entreated the LORD his God, and said, “O LORD, why does Your anger burn against Your people whom You have brought out from the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand? 12 Why should the Egyptians speak, saying, ‘With evil intent He brought them out to kill them in the mountains and to destroy them from the face of the earth’? Turn from Your burning anger and change Your mind about doing harm to Your people. 13 Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, Your servants to whom You swore by Yourself, and said to them, ‘I will multiply your [f]descendants as the stars of the heavens, and all this land of which I have spoken I will give to your [g]descendants, and they shall inherit it forever.’” 14 So the LORD changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people.
If God never changes, why did he change here? Depending on which translation you look at, either God changed his mind which is something the bible says God doesn't do is change, or God repented of evil (thats the King James Version of verse 14). In any translation, God is angry at his people and wants to kill them all for worshiping a golden calf. Moses tells God to stop being angry and God agrees and either changes his mind by some translations, or repents in other translations.
3 When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders. 4 “I have sinned,” he said, “for I have betrayed innocent blood.”
“What is that to us?” they replied. “That’s your responsibility.”
5 So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.
6 The chief priests picked up the coins and said, “It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money.” 7 So they decided to use the money to buy the potter’s field as a burial place for foreigners. 8 That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day. 9 Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: “They took the thirty pieces of silver, the price set on him by the people of Israel, 10 and they used them to buy the potter’s field, as the Lord commanded me.”[a]
Acts 1:15-19 says:
15 In those days Peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) 16 and said, “Brothers and sisters,[d] the Scripture had to be fulfilled in which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus. 17 He was one of our number and shared in our ministry.”
18 (With the payment he received for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 19 Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)
So in Matthew, Judas throws the silver down in the temple and goes to hang himself. The priests pick up the money and decide to buy a field to bury foreigners in.
In Acts, verse 18 clearly states JUDAS bought a field and fell headlong so that his body burst open.
So who bought the field? The priests to bury foreigners in it? Or Judas to fall headlong in it? BTW, falling headlong and bursting open is far different than hanging oneself.
Judas had asked the chief priests what they would give him to betray Jesus (Matthew 26:14). They gave him 30 pieces of silver which he accepted. Afterwards, when he saw that Christ was condemned, Judas felt remorse and returned the money. Since he had accepted that silver and then returned it, although the chief priests actually bought the potter's field, it was Juda's money which bought it. So Judas can rightfully be said to have bought the field as it was his silver which paid for it. Though Judas himself did not personally buy the field, he did so indirectly. The priests used the betrayal money Judas had flung into the temple to make the purchase in Judas' name That should not be difficult to understand?
Also, ancient tradition says that Judas had hanged himself from a tree on the edge of a cliff above the Valley of Hinnom. The branch broke and Judas fell onto a rock at the bottom of the valley and his insides spilled out.
Quote:
As for the nature of God, in Exodus 32:11-14
11 Then Moses entreated the LORD his God, and said, “O LORD, why does Your anger burn against Your people whom You have brought out from the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand? 12 Why should the Egyptians speak, saying, ‘With evil intent He brought them out to kill them in the mountains and to destroy them from the face of the earth’? Turn from Your burning anger and change Your mind about doing harm to Your people. 13 Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, Your servants to whom You swore by Yourself, and said to them, ‘I will multiply your [f]descendants as the stars of the heavens, and all this land of which I have spoken I will give to your [g]descendants, and they shall inherit it forever.’” 14 So the LORD changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people.
If God never changes, why did he change here? Depending on which translation you look at, either God changed his mind which is something the bible says God doesn't do is change, or God repented of evil (thats the King James Version of verse 14). In any translation, God is angry at his people and wants to kill them all for worshiping a golden calf. Moses tells God to stop being angry and God agrees and either changes his mind by some translations, or repents in other translations.
Neither is there any contradiction here. God is not inflexible. God is indeed immutable which refers to His nature. He cannot change any of the attibutes of His nature or essence.
However, God can take a different course of action based upon human response to His offers of blessing or His threats of judgment. To demonstrate this simply refer to Jeremiah 18:5-10. 'Then the word of the LORD came to me saying, 6] ''Can I not, O house of Israel, deal with you as this potter does?'' declares the LORD. ''Behold, like the clay in the potter's hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel. 7] ''At one moment I might speak concerning a nation or concerning a kingdom to uproot, to pull down, or to destroy it; 8] if that nation against which I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent concerning the calamity I planned to bring on it. 9] ''Or at another moment I might speak concerning a kingdom to build up or to plant it; 10] if it does evil in My sight by not obeying My voice, then I will think better of the good with which I had promised to bless it.
Based on Moses entreaty, which by the way God had always known that Moses would make such an entreaty on behalf of the people, God relented from His threatened course of action.
Also, on a related note, God made both unconditional and conditional promises or covenants with Israel. An unconditional covenant depended only on what God Himself had promised to do. A conditional covenant depended on Israel's obedience to God.
Refer to Psalm 106 and see how God severely punished Israel for their rebelliousness but then relented when they cried out to Him.
Refer also to Amos 7:1-6 in which God relented from all the punishment He would have carried out except for Amos's prayer on behalf of Israel.
God responds to cries for mercy.
These two apparent but non-existent contradictions vanish in the light of understanding.
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
