I ITim 3:16 and infallibility

J.B. Phillips, in his introduction to his translation of the New Testament, talked about the "essential meaning" of the scriptures in the mind of the original author.

In Timothy, the word scripture is referring to the Old Testament, but if Phillips concept of "essential meaning" is applied to "all scripture is given by inspiration, then we can consider infallibility of all scripture. At least in my mind. I could never accept that every single word is so "infallible" else God did not authorize men to write, but rather dictated the words.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Would it not require as much a perfect understanding of the "Subject" as was required by the Author to write it, in order to point out the authors "ERRORS"???

Accusing/implying the author of being in "Error" when you don't posses the same "perfect understanding" of the subject as the author,

is a challenge by the "Prideful Ignorance" of the "Carnal mind" against "SPIRITUAL INSPIRATION".

As pointed out, it's not based on "perfect understanding", but "ignorance".

 

If you don't agree that scripture written by whomever, while under the control of the Holy Spirit, (the True Author) is infallible, how can you accept any of it? A little error (leven) makes it all questionable (levens the whole lump.) To deny infallibility is to say the writers were NOT under the Holy Spirit's inspiration, or at best, disobeyed His leading, thus corrupting the Word. The Word is not corrupt in any way.

 

I sure wouldn't want to promte teaching a lie. Teaching is not about using language without any figures of speech. However, inaccurate materials cannot teach accurate knowledge. Nothing is accurate taken out of context and lifted from its literary genre.

 

Matt, if scripture does not guarantee infallibility, how can you tell which parts are true and which are not? For instance, the scriptures say "Christ died for sinners." How do you know if that statement is true or not?

 

The Greek word in question is θεοπνευστος (theopneustos), lit. "God-breathed." The English term "inspired" can carry different meaning at times.

I personally believe that θεοπνευστος essentially requires infallibility.

 

Matt, there is no verse of scripture that declares that the bible is infallible or inerrant. Given that, we HAVE to look at the implications of our decision. It is interesting that you insist on bringing this topic up repeatedly but you shy away from the implications of your conclusion.

 

Then I ask you again, how do you know that the statement "Christ died for sinners" is accurate?

 

How does the church know that the statement is true?

 

But Matt, anyone can make a faith claim about anything real or imagined and by your own standard thier claim is as valid as yours.

The doctrine of infallibility is a logical, reasonable, defensible, and inescapable extension of the doctrine of inspiration. It is far preferable to the leap of faith you are taking.

 

Jesus said,

"The Scriptures cannot be broken."

That is a claim of infallibility.

David said that the Holy Spirit spake by him, that God's words were in his tongue. That makes his Psalms infallible.

Peter said that the Scriptures were given to the prophets as they were moved by the Holy Spirit, not their own personal opinions. That is a claim of infallibility.

John said that Jesus dictated the Revelation to him, the law was dictated to Moses by God through an angel, and the prophets prefaced their writings with "Thus saith the Lord" and then gave lengthy first perwon quotes from God. So why do some spit on the concept that God dictated the Scriptures.

God deliver us from these men who think that your word if fallible!

God, give your people grace and courage to drive these infidels out of their midst and to come out from among them and be separate!

Mark Osgatharp

 

If we know Scripture is God-breathed how can it be anything but infallible?

[ December 12, 2005, 01:46 PM: Message edited by: padredurand ]