ANY Posting ON BB NOT Viewing the Bible As Being Inerrant/Infallible?

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by JesusFan, Jun 20, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    If yes, why do you believe in that?
     
  2. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,642
    Likes Received:
    158
    Tell us what you mean when you use the words;

    inherent
    infallible

    I have heard various definitions of these words. Therefore I need to know what you mean by these words else it is impossible to address the question.
     
  3. convicted1

    convicted1
    Expand Collapse
    Retired Staff

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2007
    Messages:
    9,011
    Likes Received:
    3
    Well, this one is a "toughie" to answer. The Word, which was written by men who were inspired by the Holy Ghost is infallable. But these were written in Hebrew, Greek, Aramiac, etc. I can not read in those languages, so I have to read bibles that men translated from those languages into english. These can be fallable, seeing that a man translated it from the original to the english. So the bible can be fallable(not saying that it is, but it could be), whereas those parchments that have their original writtings(prophets, Apostles, etc.) is infallable.

    IOW, all the different translations could be fallable(not saying they are definitely fallable), but the true Word of God is not.
     
  4. stilllearning

    stilllearning
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hello convicted1 and JesusFan

    First lets define “fallible”........
    fal-li-ble
    adj.
    1. Capable of making an error: Humans are only fallible.
    2. Tending or likely to be erroneous: fallible hypotheses.
    [Middle English, from Medieval Latin fallibilis, from Latin fallere, to deceive.]

    ----------------------
    For sure, humans are capable of making errors(this is something we are good at);
    But I question the hypotheses that our heavenly Father, would have left His Word totally in man’s hands.

    If you accept this premise, than you would have to question why God would have given His Word to mankind in the first place; If it would be lost in such a short period of time.

    As for the issue of God’s Word, losing it’s inspiration by being “translated”;
    There was a popular “translation” of the Bible around in our Lord’s time; Why didn’t He give even one word of warning, about it.
    -------------------------
    We must accept something more than a “fallible” Bible but less than “double inspiration”.

    I believe what our fathers in the faith came to, was called “God’s providential protection”.

    providence
    n
    1. (Christian Religious Writings / Theology)
    a. Christianity God's foreseeing protection and care of his creatures
    b. such protection and care as manifest by some other force
    2. (Christian Religious Writings / Theology) a supposed manifestation of such care and guidance
    3. the foresight or care exercised by a person in the management of his affairs or resources

    --------------------------
    God “arranged” for “us” to have access to a perfectly preserved Bible.

    This doesn’t mean that there will not be English Bibles on the market, that are “less perfect”;
    But God gives each of us a choice.........depending upon our faith in Him.

    {Snip - Keep the discussions regarding versions in that forum. It has its own forum for a reason. Plus, it is a violation of the rules to degrade others has having "lesser faith" because they are not KJVO}

    Those “weaker” Christians are no less saved or loved by God then the “stronger” ones;
    It’s just a matter of “faith”!
     
    #4 stilllearning, Jun 21, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 21, 2011
  5. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    My understanding would that in the original manuscripts...
    God so moved on /worked with authors that they wrote exactly what God intended them to write, inerrancy, and everything written was fully accurate and reliable, infallibility!
     
  6. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0

    That's the biggest piece of hogwash I have seen on BB since I have been here since 2003!..

    YOU have absolutely no right, or ability to judge other Christians based on the bible they use.

    Sorry, but you owe every Christian that uses another bible other than the KJV an apology.

    the NIV is more faithfully translated than the KJV.. and is closer to the originals than the KJV. Why? Because I said so.

    See, that is about as stupid a comment as you made.

    I have no way to prove what I said, and you have no way to prove what you said.. blindly following KJVO lemmings is not faith.. it is stupidity.
     
  7. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    I never can get an answer from someone who thinks that way...

    Why NOT see the geneva and Tynsdale versions as being "Gods Word" also, as they were in use before KJV, and the translators for KJV used Geneva/Tynsdale much in their work!
     
  8. stilllearning

    stilllearning
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    I don’t owe anyone an apology;
    Here is what the Bible tells us to do.............
    Romans 14:1-3
    V.1 ¶ Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, [but] not to doubtful disputations.
    V.2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
    V.3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.


    I do not “despise” anyone, regardless of the Bible they use.
    Nor should I be judged, for the Bible I use.
     
  9. annsni

    annsni
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,196
    Likes Received:
    374
    Umm - bologna!! Actually, I've seen that about 98% of those who stand against the modern versions are very spiritually immature and lacking the study behind a maturing Christian. They tend to be those who parrot what they hear even when it's wrong - and refuse to listen when clear evidence to the contrary is shown. Their faith is misplaced into a man-made version rather than the God of the Word.
     
  10. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,642
    Likes Received:
    158
    That is a definition I have heard and it makes sense. Now on to an answer for what my opinion is worth. My opinion and 40 Kc will get you a good cup of espresso in Prague. :laugh:

    1. We do not have original manuscripts and even if we did I do not understand how we could prove they were inerrant and infallible. That might be a good topic for another thread.

    2. As we do not have the original manuscripts it is an article of faith and unprovable that they were inerrant and infallible. Note I did not say they were with error or fallible, but that it is an article of faith.

    3. I cannot understand why so many want to use this issue as a litmus test of other being Christian or not. Let's say they were inerrant and infallible ... that does not mean our interpretation is inerrant and infallible.

    4. I believe that the evil one has used this topic very effectively in pitting Christian against Christian.

    Now I will duck the :tonofbricks:
     
  11. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Think the main point here is IF one holds that the originals were such from God...

    And that God preserved for us in the Greek/Hebrew texts used today essentially "100 %" copies...

    That we indeed have a completely trustworthy Bible in all that if teaches and affirms!
     
  12. stilllearning

    stilllearning
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hello Crabtownboy

    You said.......
    Since when, does a “Christian” have to “prove” the Bible to be “inerrant and infallible”?
    Isn’t that something, we accept by FAITH?
    ------------------------
    You next said..........
    So you agree; The entire issue of the Bible, is a question of FAITH!
    ------------------------
    You continued...........
    I don’t either. Acceptance of the Gospel, should be the only litmus test, of a person being a Christian!
    ------------------------
    Also you said........
    Now this is an interesting point. You are almost saying that coming to a correct interpretation, is not an exact science.
    The Bible tells us that there is only ONE WAY to come to the correct interpretation.....
    1 Corinthians 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.”


    The “Spiritual things”, that we are to compare a passage to, in order to get a correct interpretation, is the rest of the Bible.

    Therefore, if someone doesn’t honestly “compar Scripture with Scripture”, they will not come to a correct interpretation
    But....an honest study of God’s Word, will give a 100% correct interpretation!
    ------------------------
    Finally you said........
    This point, is why I responded to your response.
    It seems as though this may be aimed at me.

    I would never go about to “sow discord among the brethren”: God hates that!
    But I would, encourage my brothers and sisters in Christ, to take a step of faith and start “expecting more” of our heavenly Father.
     
  13. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,247
    Likes Received:
    617
    This is known as the "I'm a better Christian than you" hypothesis.

    I've heard enough out of StillLearning. Into the kill file for thee!
     
  14. SBCPreacher

    SBCPreacher
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    0
    This junk sound like a kid on a playground, "My bible can beat up your bible." :BangHead:

    Listen, my faith isn't in the KJV, NIV, NKJV, or any other printed copy of God's Word. My faith is in the God of the Bible. The Spirit of God is fully capable of taking the Word of God (yes! even in modern English) and reveal the Father to us.
     
  15. SBCPreacher

    SBCPreacher
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    0
    *Using my best pirate voice...* Arrr, what say ye that we vote him off the island?
     
  16. glazer1972

    glazer1972
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2010
    Messages:
    261
    Likes Received:
    0
    I believe that the Bible is the Inspired, Inerrant and Infalible Word of God.
     
  17. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,348
    Likes Received:
    14
    Since KJVonlyists can refer to me as "less faith", then I am free to refer to the KJVonlyists as less [Snip - no you're not. Two wrongs don't make a right.] . Example:

    http://av1611.com/kjbp/faq/errors.html

    QUESTION: What if there really ARE mistakes in the King James Bible?

    ANSWER: Then it's up to YOU to find the Book that God was talking about in Psalm 12:6,7 and Jesus was talking about in Matthew 24:35.


    So apparently God was talking about the KJV of the Bible centuries before it became available. Sorry, but you cannot have an intelligent conversation with people like this even when you can clearly show them errors made by scribes.
     
    #17 Grasshopper, Jun 21, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 21, 2011
  18. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    So you believe in "Name it and Claim it" bibliology.

    God never promised to preserve or inspire translations. Not even the KJV.
     
  19. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh boy. :rolleyes:

    Says the one who just clearly not only judged, but condemned others as lesser, who don't use the KJV.

    Then you pull Romans on them to slap them again, and this passage was never intended for them. This from a guy who hears about Sarah Palin on the radio, then immediately compares her to the KJV and makes a thread.

    No wonder I ditched these KJVO folks. [snip - don't make it personal]
     
    #19 preacher4truth, Jun 21, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 21, 2011
  20. jbh28

    jbh28
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    Totally uncalled for. telling people they are weak in faith because they don't use the KJV. The KJV isn't perfect. It is a translation made by fallible men. Is the Bible preserved? sure it is, just like it was before the KJV came out. Did those people have less faith?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...