Featured Important first questions

No.

 

Which Jesus Christ, if He is not the Son of God of the 66 Book Bible? (Luke 24:44; 2 Corinthians 11:4)

 

From 1963:

I. THE SCRIPTURES

The Holy Bible was written by men divinely inspired and is the record of Gods revelation of Himself to man. It is a perfect treasure of divine instruction. It has God for its author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter. It reveals the principles by which God judges us; and therefore is, and will remain to the end of the world, the true center of Christian union, and the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds, and religious opinions should be tried. The criterion by which the Bible is to be interpreted is Jesus Christ.

Ex 24:4; De 4:1-2; 17:19; Jos 8:34
Psa 19:7-10; 119:11, 89, 105, 140
Isa 34:16; 40:8; Jer 15:16; 36:1-32
Mat 5:17-18; 22:29; Lu 21:33; 24:44-46
Joh 5:39; 16:13-15; 17:17; Ac 2:16; 17:11
Rom 15:4; 16:25-26; 2Ti 3:15-17
Heb 1:1-2; 4:12; 1Pe 1:25; 2Pe 1:19-21

 

A little on the usefulness of "scripture." As we know, the "scripture" that is described in 2 Timothy 3:16 included many or all of our OT books, copied imperfectly over many years (hundreds and perhaps more than 1000 years.)

Many say the original autographs (handwritten by the author and /or scribe) are inerrant, and although what we have may contain errors, the message of God has not been corrupted, the gospel is true, and since all the things said in 2 Timothy 3:16 were true concerning the copies used in the 1st century, the whole bible remains trustworthy, reliable and we can base our lives on its message.

Anyway, that is what I believe.

 

...lol, don't let the snoots get you down...

 

If you're talking about an acrostic a single Baptist pastor came up with in the 60s - "inerrancy of scripture" would be the first B.

Denying scriptural inerrancy is the basis for Liberal Theology.

Liberal Christianity - Wikipedia

I apologize ahead of time to those who get upset by quoting Wikipedia. I'm lazy and don't want to look up the original sources.

InTheLight gave a good response to this. Just because I may recognize that a computer program has no errors doesn't mean that I'm deifying it.

And you were complaining about us and the barbs.

You misunderstand soul liberty. It doesn't mean that Baptists have to accept everyone or that churches have to accept those with errant beliefs. It means that we won't come to your house and beat you up, kill you, or banish you from the country for it like the Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Catholics, Orthodox, and others have done.

A lot of people have gone out of their way to take what you have written in good faith. It would be the appropriate thing to return the favor.

I would suggest reading first. You may find there are a lot of different opinions expressed here.

The only viable Christ-centered hermeneutic I know is by Greg Boyd but it doesn't seem like you've read any of his books. Can you explain further?

Fighting words? - Jesus?

Judgemental.

Really?! Ok, allow me to suggest that jumping on a forum for the first time and immediately attacking everyone on it will likely raise your blood pressure, especially if you are personally involve through a friend and have taken an event that happened to your friend personally. You might not want to do that if you don't want to raise your blood pressure.

 

I didn’t know you were a Maranatha man.

Decades ago, I taught with a few good graduates from that school. We all moved on and haven’t a clue what has become of them.

 

Here's a different perspective on 'inerrancy', a real blast from the past from SBTS men Al Mohler and David Dockery (both also on The Council of The Gospel Coalition):

http://media.sbhla.org.s3.amazonaws.com/7009,17-Aug-1990.PDF

“Southern Baptists must understand the Bible is truthful, authoritative and is both a divine and human book, said Dockery. 'A lot of us get quite hung up on terms like inerrant and infallible,’ he said. ‘I think it is very possible to move the discussion forward and still talk about the nature of Scripture without using those particular red flag terms’…’I would prefer that we talk about the Scripture as truthful, reliable and authoritative and see it having to be the normative guide for the church, for our lives and for the Christian community'”

“Another speaker, R. Albert Mohler Jr., editor of the Christian Index, newsjournal for Georgia Baptists…described inerrancy as ‘an important issue’ but it ‘isn’t the most important word about Scripture.'”

 

What one means by the term makes a difference. I hold the view that inspiration of Scripture refers to those writings being "God-breathed." The implication is that those writings are inerrant in God being inerrant.

 

"What have we done? We have taken the great, sanctified doctrine of the priesthood of the believer and made it to cover every damnable heresy that mind could imagine.... It's a tragedy."

~ W.A. Criswell

 

"May I speak on The Curse of Liberalism? Because of the opprobrious epithet “liberal,” today they call themselves “moderates.” A skunk by any other name still stinks!"

~ W. A. Criswell