1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Direct attacks on the Word of God

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by icthus, Apr 13, 2005.

Top Posters
Page 3 of 5
  1. icthus

    icthus New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who is the most Holy Spirit filled person you know? Can they overcome the infallibility of the Holy Spirit with their fallibility? Does the Holy Spirit make them infallible or everything they write infallible?

    As I said in my first statement, the bible is completely authoritative and trustworthy.     </font>[/QUOTE]When the writers of the original autographs penned what was written, yes they were at that time, and for that purpose, Infallable. The Holy Spirit was the Person who ensured what was written was what God wants us to know. Questions as to whether this was "dictation", or any other means, is of no importance. The fact is that the Holy Bible IS THE INFALLABLE, INERRANT (PLENARY) WORD OF ALMIGHT GOD. Any other view, is from the devil himself!
     
    #41 icthus, Apr 15, 2005
  2. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    5,143
    Likes Received:
    149
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    How indeed.

    How do you trust your daily newspaper when you know it contains errors? The bible being inspired and God-breathed is infinitely more trustworthy whether there are errors or not.

    I don't make it a point to find errors in the bible. I'm much more worried about obeying what I read in it since I believe that it is authoritative and trustworthy.

    I'm not trying to question God or prove the bible has fault. I'm just trying to get us to think about why we use these words like inerrant and infallible and why we feel the need to "catch in a profane statement" those who may be more hestitant to use those words for valid reasons.
     
    #42 Gold Dragon, Apr 15, 2005
  3. icthus

    icthus New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    How indeed.

    How do you trust your daily newspaper when you know it contains errors? The bible being inspired and God-breathed is infinitely more trustworthy whether there are errors or not.

    I don't make it a point to find errors in the bible. I'm much more worried about obeying what I read in it since I believe that it is authoritative and trustworthy.

    I'm not trying to question God or prove the bible has fault. I'm just trying to get us to think about why we use these words like inerrant and infallible and why we feel the need to "catch in a profane statement" those who may be more hestitant to use those words for valid reasons.     </font>[/QUOTE]What is you problem in accepting a Bible that is without any errors? Why this continued questioning of me using "infallible and inerrant" to describe the Word of God? Your reasoning and understanding shows when you compare the Bible to the daily newspapers, and say that you trust the Bible more? This sort of reasoning should not even enter the head of one who follows the Lord Jesus. The is NOTHING that you could EVER compare to the Holy Bible. There is only ONE Holy Bible (unique), which is the Word of Almighty God. EVERY other pubilcation is of man, and is therefore NOT Infallible or Inerrant. You have to have a great passion for the Word to God, to understand where I am coming from!
     
    #43 icthus, Apr 15, 2005
  4. icthus

    icthus New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    BTW, Gold Dragon, are you a team with Craigbythesea?
     
    #44 icthus, Apr 15, 2005
  5. Dr.Tim

    Dr.Tim New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2004
    Messages:
    253
    Likes Received:
    1
    Last post here for me.........

    In a nutshell, here is what we have. There are gazillions of posts stating why Baptists (majority) believe the Bible was inspired and infallible. Some are denying these proof texts, and it's their privilege to do so.
    Second, there has NEVER been a 27 book compilation of original manuscripts bound in one volume.. nobody has ever seen such a book as far as we know. Therefore, we are left with believing by faith what the word of God has said about the inspired writings if we truly interpret the proof texts that we believe supports infallible inspiration.
    Still, some deny the infallibility of the inspired scriptures. We are told "prove that the Bible itself is inerrant". No, you prove otherwise.
    And.. some of you are so neo-Catholic, I wonder if you are in fact just Catholics calling yourselves "Baptist" so you can post on here. The same folks who will fight with you about the infallibility of the Scriptures are the same ones that will defend the Catholic church and the Pope when he speaks ex-Cathedra and try to get Baptists to come together with Catholics. Look at the posts of those who have stood against the infallibility of the Scriptures.... always talking about the Catholic church and trying to deny the final authority of the Bible so the Holy Papa can tell us what to do from his ex-cathedra position.

    I surely hope that anyone calling themselves "Baptists" are pastoring the church that some of you "blokes" (haha, I love the quote the English folks and their crazy lingo) are members of would have the courage to kick you and your catholic-kissing selves to the curb.

    (light-hearted post.. just having some fun.. I used to watch WWF long ago, you know??) [​IMG]
     
    #45 Dr.Tim, Apr 15, 2005
  6. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    5,143
    Likes Received:
    149
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Nope. Never met the guy and I think I've only participated in one thread with him. As I recall, we weren't on opposite sides of that thread, but not exactly the same side either. [​IMG]
     
    #46 Gold Dragon, Apr 15, 2005
  7. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    5,143
    Likes Received:
    149
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    I don't have a problem. I've never stated in my life or on these boards that the Bible is not inerrant.

    I'm not saying you shouldn't use those words. I'm just asking you to look at why we do.

    I was addressing your question of why you would trust something you know has errors.

    "You are either with me or against the bible." Nice, I guess your interpretations are infallible.
     
    #47 Gold Dragon, Apr 15, 2005
  8. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    5,143
    Likes Received:
    149
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    I resent the implication of deceit. But in the spirit of the WWE, Dr. Tim, why don't we talk this out in the ring next Saturday. ;)

    Just an fyi that I have never
    1) fought against the infallibility of the scriptures.
    2) defended the Pope speaking ex-cathedra
    3) denied the authority of the bible

    Next Saturday. You and me, wannabe limey. ;)
     
    #48 Gold Dragon, Apr 15, 2005
  9. Scott J

    Scott J Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Who is the most Holy Spirit filled person you know?</font>[/QUOTE] I know Holy Spirit filled people... but that doesn't qualify them to write scripture. It isn't an issue of being Spirit filled but rather Spirit inspired.

    The Bible gives qualifications for that high calling... and the last of the Apostles died about 1900 years ago.
    Of course, you are operating in straw men here.

    The Bible is inspired or else it is neither authoritative nor trustworthy... but simply the fallible writings of men.

    The Bible does not declare "God-breathed" preservation, translation, or interpretation. It does say that God breathed His Word into existence... which precludes error unless you can establish that any direct act by God is ever flawed.
     
    #49 Scott J, Apr 15, 2005
  10. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    5,143
    Likes Received:
    149
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Agreed. So do we really know what Spirit inspired means? I would say that depending on your definition of Spirit inspired, the Holy Spirit still inspires. That doesn't mean we need to add to the canon (and I'm not referring to the end of Revelations).

    If you were to give me your definition of the Spirit inspiring, I would probably agree that He doesn't do that anymore, although I would probably wonder if He ever did that.

    Where are these qualifications?
    Were Mark and Luke apostles?

    I also stated that I believe the bible is God's inspired scripture.

    I think it is facinating how God breathed the scriptures and still used fallible and errant men to take part in it. That while He is perfect, he can still use imperfect people.

    No act of God is ever flawed.
     
    #50 Gold Dragon, Apr 15, 2005
  11. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,490
    Faith:
    Baptist
    This is an interesting discussion but I think we need to come to a consensus regarding terms.

    Inspiration is defined as that work of the Holy Spirit of God upon the minds, souls, and bodies of the Scripture writers which makes their writings the record of a progressive divine revelation. When God determined to give to His creation the Self-revelation that we today call the Bible, He selected the Prophets of the Old Testament, and the Apostles of the New Testament, and through the agency of His indwelling Holy Spirit so overcame the sin nature of these men that the words which He selected from the reservoir of the culture, education, experience, and personality of the man were His chosen words, and no others. This process of inspiration was two fold: Verbal, the very words that God selected were the very words that best revealed the mind and will of God to His creation. Thus, every word so inspired was in fact, the word of God. Plenary, the collection of words that we call the Bible is, in its whole, the complete word of God, without error or contradiction. The entire Bible, regardless of subject matter, is the infallible, unfailing, Revelation of God.

    Now let's look at some of the various theories of inspiration that have been common in historic Christendom.

    The Intuition or Natural Theory is held by the typical Modernist today, who believes that inspiration is merely a higher development of that natural insight into truth which all men posses to some degree. In other words, the Bible is merely a book by men with highly religious motivation, and is similar to a book about science written by men with highly scientific motivation. This theory, holding as it does that natural insight is the only source of religious truth, involves a serious self-contradiction; if the theory is true, then one man is inspired to utter that which another man is inspired to condemn. The Koran and the Bible cannot both be inspired Truth, as they contradict each other. This theory reduces moral and religious truth to the subjective - a matter of private opinion - having no objective reality apart from the opinions of men.

    The Illumination or Mystical Theory regards inspiration as merely an intensifying and elevating of the religious perceptions of the believer, the same in kind, though greater in degree, as the illumination of every believer by the Holy Spirit. This position holds that the Bible is not the word of God, but only contains the word of God, and that not the writings, but only the writers were inspired. Of course, we must admit that there is an illumination of the mind of the believer by the Holy Spirit as we look into the Word of God, but this illumination only allows us to understand that which has already been written, and cannot impart new truth.

    The Dictation or Mechanical Theory holds that inspiration consisted in such a possession of the minds and bodies of the Scripture writers by the Holy Spirit, that they became passive instruments, not participating in any way in the process of inspiration. This theory fails to explain the medical terms used by Luke, the military and sporting terms used by Paul, and the distinct differences between the books written by the various Old and New Testament writers. Of course, we must grant that there are instances when God's communications to mankind were in an audible voice, and took the form of spoken words, and that sometimes God commanded men to commit these words to writing for the edification of all men. However, the Dictation Theory would force this occasional event upon all of Scripture, quite apart from the evidence to the contrary.

    The Dynamic or Conceptual Theory states that inspiration is not simply a natural, but also a supernatural fact, and that it is the immediate work of a personal God in the soul of man. This theory holds that the Scriptures contain a human as well as a divine element, so that while they present a body of divinely revealed truth, this truth is shaped in human molds and adapted to ordinary human intelligence, and is thus conceptual (the idea, or thought, or concept is inspired) rather than verbal (the very words are inspired) in its view of inspiration.

    The Verbal and Formal Inspiration position believes that first of all the Holy Spirit worked in the Prophets of the Old Testament and the Apostles of the New Testament in such a way that the very words of God were selected from the vocabulary of the man, taking into account his culture, education, and experience, and that not only the very words, but also the forms of the words, such as noun, pronoun, verb, adverb, singular, plural, etc., were written at the prompting of the Holy Spirit.

    Before we can endeavor to have an intelligent discussion of the topic of inspiration we must first do two things.

    1. Decide where we stand.

    2. Understand where the other's involved in the discussion stand.

    Of we don't do that we will be using the same term to describe two very different positions and that will only lead to confusion and contention. [​IMG]
     
    #51 TCassidy, Apr 15, 2005
  12. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    5,143
    Likes Received:
    149
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Agreed

    While this may be true, I think the part about overcoming their sin nature and "no others" are debatable.

    Again, this may be true.

    While this is close to what I believe, I do believe that God did inspire specific words.

    Thanks for these great summaries TCassidy. [​IMG]
     
    #52 Gold Dragon, Apr 15, 2005
  13. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,535
    Likes Received:
    21
    Icthus wrote,

    One personal attack after another questioning the salvation of other Baptist Board members!

    :eek: :( [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    #53 Craigbythesea, Apr 15, 2005
  14. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,535
    Likes Received:
    21
    This thread would be more properly called “Personal Attacks Against Other Members of the Baptist Board and the Baptist Church at Large.”

    :eek:

    [​IMG]
     
    #54 Craigbythesea, Apr 15, 2005
  15. icthus

    icthus New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Craig, I am not attacking anyone, but the views that certain people like yourself hold, and then call themselves conservative, which the false impression that what you hold to is what Orthodox Christian believe. You would not have any trouble with what I write, as it is something that is expected of those who wish to call themselves Christians, and follow the Lord Jesus Christ.

    I am not the one questioning the Authority of the Bible, by saying that it contains errors in the original autographs. I am not the one who is questioning the Character of God, by implying by a false view of the Bible, that He is not Perfect, since He has given us His Word which cannot fully be Trusted.

    It is your, and some others posts on this board that are challenging to us who believe in a Perfect Word of God, and will defend it at all costs. If, by this some are considered as heretics, then it is not something that I will apologise for.
     
    #55 icthus, Apr 15, 2005
  16. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia Guest

    Did you or did you not say these things, Craig?
    Craigbythesea: No, it does not.

    Craigbythesea: No.

    This question is packed full of non-Biblical assumptions. Remove the non-Biblical assumptions from your question and I will answer it.     </font>[/QUOTE]:eek:
     
    #56 dianetavegia, Apr 15, 2005
  17. Bluefalcon

    Bluefalcon Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    15
    I also wish these ad hominem attacks would stop, especially Ichtus calling people "influenced by the devil," "heretics," etc.

    Yours, Bluefalcon
     
    #57 Bluefalcon, Apr 15, 2005
  18. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    1
    This is a straw man thread.

    No one here denies that the Bible is inspired and free of doctrinal error.

    Some of us here however believe that it is OK to try to find out as much as we can by studying the Bible academically. Obviously this sometimes leads to conclusions that are different than the fundamentalist party line. It is then that those who are afraid of any change begin to hurl insults like "humanist", "liberal", "heretic" and the like.

    Some areas of the Bible describe things in terms that middle eastern humans unacquainted with modern science would understand - Genesis 1 was not meant to be a scientific account. Thus to say that the earth is old is not to say that the BIBLE is wrong. It is only those who disrespect the Bible by refusing to study it are the ones who are wrong.

    I for one will continue to study original languages, read critical commentaries, and pray that the Spirit will show me more and more about God's word. And I don't care how many people feel threatened by that.

    [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
    #58 Charles Meadows, Apr 15, 2005
  19. icthus

    icthus New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is NOT a straw mans thread, but dealing with actual facts.

    How can you be so blind to suggest that, "No one here denies that the Bible is inspired and free of doctrinal error". If you were to read the posts here, especially by Craigbythesea, you will see the direct attacks on the Bible as the Infallable, Inerrant, Word of God. You CANNOT believe that the Bible is "Inspired" on the one hand, and then on the other hand reject that it is "Inerrant" If the Inspiration of the Bible is Plenary, as I believe it is, with the meaning: "full and complete, and not limited in any respect", then it can only follow that it HAS TO be also Infallable and Inerrant as touching "every jot and tittle". When Paul writes "ALL SCRIPTURE IN INSPIRED BY GOD"(2 Tim 3:16), he meant just that.

    BTW, I am NOT a "fundamentalist", and not afraid of anything. Nor do I hurl insults, but speak that truth in love. Thre is no doubt that the Holy Bible today, more than ever before, is coming under sustained attack, and NOT from the non-Christian world, but from within the Church, and by those who call themselves "Orthodox", "Evangelical" and "Conservative"
     
    #59 icthus, Apr 16, 2005
  20. icthus

    icthus New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why sould anyone who calls themselves a true follower of the Lord Jesus Christ, have problems when some are referred to as "heretics", or being "influenced by the devil", when they directly attack the Holy Word of God?

    When Dr Machen was writing in the 1930's against the then liberals in the Church who were also attacking that Holy Bible, it was far more heated. Maybe you do not see the danger there is by these constant attacks on the "Inerrancy" of the Holy Bible? But I see them as direct attacks on the very Character of our Perfect God. I ask this question again. How can a Perfect God, Who gave us His Plan and Will in the Holy Bible, have allowed the original autographs to contain error? Just how is this possible?

    If you yourself are on the side of Biblical Orthodoxy, then none of the terms that I use would refer to you. If you are not, then you ought to yourself consider your own position before the Lord. It is NOT my intention to attack anyone "personally", but rather address the "heresies" that are openly taught on this board. The Bible says that "by their fruits you shall know them", whether they are true born-again believers. The "fruit" of some I see on this board makes me question whether they are here as those "pretending" to be Christians, when in fact their main purpose is a sustained attack on the Holy Bible and other important doctrines.
     
    #60 icthus, Apr 16, 2005
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 3 of 5
Loading...