Just to Clarify

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Rev. Joshua, Feb 12, 2003.

  1. Rev. Joshua

    Rev. Joshua
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/cjv.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2001
    Messages:
    2,859
    Likes Received:
    0
    A couple of things that I didn't get a chance to answer before a news thread was locked:

    - the execution of rape victims (or forcing them to marry their rapists if they don't meet the requirements for execution) - comes straight out of the Torah (Deut. 22:23-29). Likewise raping a female slave didn't carry the death penalty (Lev 19:20-22), and women not being worth as much as men (Lev 27:1-7). See also women as property (Ex 22:16-17).

    These are not examples of behavior that is condemned in the Bible (as one poster claimed). This is the Law of the LORD - which some claim was written, word by word, by the very hand of God. You then claim that God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow (ignoring perhaps God changing God's mind in the inerrant Ex 31:14 ?), and that God would never teach something that was false.

    Even if we are no longer under the Law (which we are not), if you believe that every word of the Law was God's command then you believe that - at one time - God believed these things were good. Perhaps God was simply accomodating the culture of the time, or perhaps God's view on these things have changed?

    I sometimes wonder if any of you actually read carefully the entirety of the Bible that you claim speaks with one voice on all issues.

    - Regarding Paul's views of his own writings, look at I Corinthians 7:12 where he clearly states that his advice on marriage/divorce comes from him and not "from the Lord." He also phrases his advice on women in I Timothy 2 in terms of what he does ("I desire...").

    Joshua
     
  2. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    And likewise, we wonder if you read the Bible much at all. You condone things that Scripturally unequivocally condemns. YOu fail to recognize vital and significant distinctions (such as Law [which is at the heart of your problem here], salvation by imputed righteousness, same sex relationships, role of women in the church, etc.). These things are obvious to people who have no precommitments to a non-biblical worldview.

    This is the same Paul who said that "All Scripture is God-breathed." It is obvious that 1 cor 7:12 was not a direct statement of Jesus as his other comments were. Again, this is a such a simple explanation, especially for someone with your level of training. It is amazing that you are so confused by these things.

    Joshua [/QB][/QUOTE]
     
  3. Doubting Thomas

    Doubting Thomas
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,615
    Likes Received:
    6
    It seems that some things were included in the
    Law of Moses because of the "hardness of (the people's) hearts" (Matt 19:8-9).

    Since the NT is the fulfillment of the Old, then we can expect to see the moral principles from the OT reiterated there (NT) that we are expected to observe today. So while we are under no obligation to wear garments made of only one type of fiber, we are still told that homosexuality is a sin before God.
     
  4. rufus

    rufus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Messages:
    730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Pastor Larry, Rufus dittoes your REMARKS. AMEN!

    rufus [​IMG]
     
  5. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    II Peter 2 reminds us that even within the spectrum of "christianity" (much less "baptist") there will be some who are faithful and true to the Bible and some that are not.
    Now, we all like to see ourselves as the "good guys" and someone who disagrees with us as the "false teacher". So how do we judge?

    Isaiah 8:20
     
  6. John Wells

    John Wells
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2001
    Messages:
    2,568
    Likes Received:
    0
    As Dr. Bob states, I’m surprised that a man of your supposed biblical training is so far astray concerning the OT and the Law.

    Deut. 22:23-29 describes no such thing as rape in the first case. The woman, in a town who does not cry out for help, when help would surely respond, implys she participates willingly. This understanding is reinforced when the passage goes out of the way to state “force” is used with a woman in the “field” (where no one would hear whether she cries out or not), then the man is to die and the woman is innocent. Sounds perfectly righteous to me!

    I’ll cover your other two examples together. So great was the difference between “bond” and “free,” and so “superior” was the man to the woman in Hebrew culture when the Law was given, that God “permitted” certain things to stand. In the NT we find out how God really feels about some things He “permitted” under OT Law. Examples:

    Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. – Matt 19:8

    Here there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all. – Colossians 3:11

    Husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself – Ephesians 5:28 This says a woman is even better than equal, she is “same.” The two shall become one flesh.

    When you get right down to it, God is still "permitting" a lot of things within the body of Christ today that grieve Him and are contrary to who He is! If this were not so, we would see many smoldering churches on Sunday afternoons! :D So Joshua, as hard as you try to create a morality problem with God in the OT, to justify your pragmatic, relativistic interpretations of the NT, it just doesn’t wash!
     
  7. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,348
    Likes Received:
    14
    I sometimes wonder if any of you actually read carefully the entirety of the Bible that you claim speaks with one voice on all issues\

    Maybe some people are educated beyond their intelligence level. Huh Josh?
     
  8. David A Bayliss

    David A Bayliss
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2003
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you. This is the best laugh I had all day. Did you actually read those verses before you cited them?

    I suspect you heard a sermon on this one time and didn't think about what you heard.

    Verse 23: If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;

    Notice this does not talk about rape. It talks about an engaged women who is found sleeping with another man.

    Verse 24: Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

    In the vernacular "they shall both die because you know it was consensual because she did not resist".

    Verse 25: But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die

    but if it is in the country you cannot stone her because it might not have been consensual.

    Put very simply these three verses exist to protect women. The default behaviour having found the sexual union would be to stone both because you would assume consensuality. But if they are found in the country then you may not assume consensuality because she may have screamed and not been heard.

    Boy oh boy its amazing what people can miss when they put their minds to it.

    DAB
     
  9. donnA

    donnA
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    23,354
    Likes Received:
    0
    Depends on if you believe the Bible is God inspired, authored by Him. If so then everything in the bible is God approved. HIS written word, you know the word of God. Either it's God written word, or it isn't. You don't really think God would have allowed Paul to put anyting in the bible He did not approve of, that was not directly from Him do you?
     
  10. Daniel Dunivan

    Daniel Dunivan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2002
    Messages:
    374
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why must the Bible be the very words that God dictated to persons in order for it to be inspired? I have never understood this assumption. What Joshua is pointing out is that the scriptures don't speak with one voice on all issues and this is a clear indication of their human quality (there are much better examples than the one Joshua quoted above).

    The bigger questions that we are here raising are how exactly is the Bible inspired and how does it function as a source of revelation. These are very complicated questions no quipped responses can answer. They involve issues of historicity, scientific viability, development of a cannon, and a host of philosophical presuppositions.

    Grace and Peace, Danny [​IMG]

    Oh, and by the way: Grasshopper, some people are educated at exactly their intellegence level. :rolleyes:
     
  11. donnA

    donnA
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    23,354
    Likes Received:
    0
    DANIEL, I did not say exact words, I think when comparing one book to another(like the gospels) that it is not God's exact words otherwise He spoke differently to different people, but I do belive it when it says the scriptures are God inspired, meaning it's the written word of God, and that all scripture is good for teaching us. If God was at all in control of what went into the scriptures then it is all His word,a nd all approved by Him. Meaning the verses peoople don't like, are the word of God. The bible needs nothing more for us to be able to read and understand it, all we need to know is it's God's word to us. The Holy Spirit on His own will help us to understand it, and He leaves nothing out just becasue we do not like it. You take the whole bible, or none of it.
     
  12. John Wells

    John Wells
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2001
    Messages:
    2,568
    Likes Received:
    0
    Does this mean if we "flush" Genesis chapters 1-11 as myth (as Joshua suggests), that the vital link between the "first Adam" and the "Second Adam" looses all meaning and purpose? :eek:

    By the way, I agree with you Kate! :D
    I don't think God went to the trouble to inspire 40 men to inscribe His revelation to man, and this same God who created all that there is, was not omnipotent enough to preserve it through the cannonization and translation processes. That doesn't mean that I think ALL translations are thought for thought perfect. But I do think that any serious believer and student of the Bible who avails themselves of several of the acclaimed major translations will not be lacking in God's revelation, but only in complete understanding!
     
  13. I Am Blessed 24

    I Am Blessed 24
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    44,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think the problem with Joshua is that he has torn so many pages out of his Bible because he didn't agree with them; that he has trouble finding verses he can read in context. :rolleyes:

    Sue
     
  14. Rev. Joshua

    Rev. Joshua
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/cjv.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2001
    Messages:
    2,859
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm sure it's fun to say things like I'm "flushing" chapters of the Bible or tearing out pages, but that's not what I'm doing. I am pointing out that fundamentalists have an inconsistant hermeneutic. They claim to believe that the Bible is literally the words of God, but then go on to explain that they don't really mean that because in some places it offeres the perspectives of different human beings and in others it gives commands that no longer need to be followed and still other passages require lengthy interpretation (even though they are the plain words of God)...

    After a while, I start to wonder if fundamentalists even know what they mean when they call the Bible "the Word of God."

    I prefer taking the approach of Occam's Razor - the simplest approach is most likely the correct one. The books of the Bible are just what they appear to be, the collected writings which the faithful children of God recognized as accurately describing their experience with God.

    Joshua
     
  15. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,348
    Likes Received:
    14
    I prefer taking the approach of Occam's Razor - the simplest approach is most likely the correct one. The books of the Bible are just what they appear to be, the collected writings which the faithful children of God recognized as accurately describing their experience with God.

    Isn't that nice. Story time in church. I can just hear it:
    Teacher: "Now just because Paul believed it was wrong doesn't mean it's wrong for us little Johnny, so you might grow up to have "certain" feelings for little Bob, and those will be just fine."
     
  16. Rev. Joshua

    Rev. Joshua
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/cjv.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2001
    Messages:
    2,859
    Likes Received:
    0
    More like,

    "Johnny, we don't just open the Bible and do whatever it says. Otherwise you might end up sacrificing your daughter to God like Jepthah or you might become convinced that you can't be a Christian and wear cotton-poly. Instead, we take Paul's writings to the churches of his time and place them in their historical context as well as the larger context of the gospel and the other canonical writings."

    Joshua
     
  17. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Inspiration does not speak of "dictation." That would be your first misunderstanding. Inspiration speaks of the divine origin and divine nature of the product. The result is that the words Paul, or Peter, who [insert biblical author] are the words that God intended for them to write. God worked through the historical context and peronsality of the writers, not overruling them, but "bearing them along so that they wrote from God (2 Peter 1:21). The connection of inspiration to inerrancy is a very simple one: If something came from God, it must be without error because it is impossible for God to lie (Titus 1:2)

    Actually this speaks to their historical context in which they are written. It has nothing to do with their human quality, as testified to by the nature of Scripture. You have the right phenomenon, but the wrong cause.
     
  18. Jim1999

    Jim1999
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Jim1999.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    Or, stoning your errant child because he refuses to behave.... that too is biblical

    Cheers,

    Jim
     
  19. C.S. Murphy

    C.S. Murphy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2002
    Messages:
    2,302
    Likes Received:
    0
    It has already been mentioned here by Joshua that we are no longer under the law therefor these silly references to stoning children and other OT commands are totally off topic. Now for a matter that I feel is more on topic, who should we more fully believe the Apostle Paul or Joshua?

    Murph
     
  20. David Cooke Jr

    David Cooke Jr
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Messages:
    516
    Likes Received:
    0
    That depends on who is right at the time...
     

Share This Page

Loading...