The Bible is: [poll]

I picked the last choice, as I think historical context is important. Also, as I am not a fundamentalist or and inerrantist, the first choice is not even a consideration.

 

I voted for the first one. Although I believe that context is important in determining application, the Bible is God's Word for all time.

 

I don't see how it is possible to read any words without interpretation and contextualization. When you read this post, you are interpreting what the words I'm saying means and you do so within the context of everything you have understood those words and ideas to mean in your past experience.

"Exact words" imply language specificity and I believe the Bible to be God's Word in languages other than the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic that they were originally written in. Any translation attempts no longer use the exact words.

I am at a loss of what choice to pick but the questions do serve up some good thoughts for discussion.

 

At first glance, I figured this to be an easy vote. But when you consider everything, it became a difficult decision.
I do feel the Bible is God's Word and His Word shall shall never pass away. So it is for all time. But we must also consider that His message was what He was telling us. I feel the culture differences is a key also. Many things were spoken in that time that people then understood exactly what the lesson was. They could identify with it. I feel if we do not take the time to study what the culture was in those time periods, we come away with a completely different understanding of what the message may have been (In certain instances).

For example: we may understand what Christ is telling us when He speaks of Him being the bridegroom and us being the bride. But to those in that day, knowing the customs of a marriage, they were able to identify with the message. Our custom for marriage is different, so if we try to imply His words with our practices, it could cause confusion with what message was being taught.

 

It was a difficult choice for me, too, but I ultimately went with option one (the plenary verbal inspiration choice).

I couldn't go with option three because I believe that inspiration goes beyond the message to the actual words of Scripture. I speak only of the originals. I don't consider any particular translation's choice of vocabulary to be inspired, though the message is inspired.

The last option seems attractive, but I think it implies that the Bible is "God's word" in a summary sense and not a plenary verbal sense. I do think that interpretation and contextualization are important, but not in a progressive, revisionist sene.

 

I took the poll and was very surprised to see the wide range of scores on this board. Our scores were very different Magnetic Poles. Guess that is because...

I picked the first choice because I am a fundamentalist and an inerrantist, the last choice is not even a consideration. :smilewinkgrin:

 

I am also in this position. However, the way one answers the poll depends upon how one interprets the term "The Bible". I am fortunate enough to have more than one translation of what are commonly called 'Bibles'. But 'Bibles' take many forms.

The way I thought of the first poll response was that none of the autographs were ever gathered together as a 'Bible' (as we typically understand the term), and therefore it doesn't qualify. The third potential reponse probably represents the majority of translational efforts; placing most Hebrew Tanakh and Greek New Testaments squarely into the second option (where the vast majority of words are the exact ones originally selected by the Holy Spirit). I think those words are important.

I'm not fond of the last choice for several reasons. First, it seems there is a distiction being made in the other poll answers between "word" and "message". If the 'Bible' is the exact words of God then God's message must naturally be present (even if one doesn't recognize it); but not necessarily vice-versa. Therefore, they should not be bond together by the conjunction "and" in the same answer (maybe 'or'). Second, I don't think I agree with the word "need" in that response; interpretation and contextualization are inevitable to some degree (but a "need"?). Thirdly, I agree with what Deacon (Rob) posted above.

 

The poll is imperfect because it is not precise. I would much rather it listed theories of inspiration. I put one because I believe in verbal-plenary inspiration, but five also has some merit--depending on the theory of inspiration behind it.

 

mistaken post

 

Just goes to show that people are different. :thumbs:

 

I picked the last choice because I am a fundamentalist and an inerrantist, the first choice is not even a consideration.

I believe all English Bibles collectively and individually are the inerrant Written Word of God: The Holy Bible. I believe the Living Word of God: Messiah Jesus, is the main subject of the inerrant Written Word of God.

(statement for the slo: the "Fisherman's Bible" is NOT what I mean by "all English Bibles". The "Reader's Digest Bible" is NOT what I mean by "all English Bibles")

 

Just curious,
If it is God's exact words for all time (#1), which translation? All translations are not exact.

 

#3. WORDS change translation to translation, language to language. The message does not change, period.

Yes, there is interpretation and contextualization, but the message is still God's message and it should never be altered.

 

That is why I picked 3 too...

But all questions have their problems.

 

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Christ is the Word, the Message and the inspiration.