God Is Inerrant and Infallible, The Bible is Neither


#41

Matthew et. al,
Here are some excerpts from a short book which enabled me to see God and His plan of salvation as outlined in the Bible in a new way. (Please forgive the length of this comment but by providing some excerpts from linked material I hope to encourage people to make the effort to study it further.)

Concerning the nature of Scripture:
“The Bible then resembles, yet differs from, other books, just as the flesh of Christ resembles and yet differs from the flesh of other men.”

“…like Christ’s flesh, and indeed like every other revelation which God has made of Himself, the letter of Scripture is a veil quite as much as a revelation, hiding while it reveals, and yet revealing while it hides…”

from:
http://www.alampthatburns.net/jukes/restitution/restitutionofall-section1.htm

Concerning the testimony of Scripture:
“I pass on now from the nature of Scripture to its teachings as to the destiny of the human race, and more especially of those who here either reject or never hear the gospel…”

“What then does Scripture say on this subject? Its testimony appears at first sight contradictory. Not only is there on the one hand law, condemning all, while on the other hand there is the gospel, with good news for every one; but further there are direct statements as to the results of these, which at first sight are apparently irreconcileable. First our Lord calls His flock “a little flock” (Luke 12:32), and states distinctly that “many are called, but few are chosen” (Matt. 20:16; 22:14); that “strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leadeth unto life (εἰς τὴν ζωήν), and few there be that find it” (Matt. 7:14); that “many shall seek to enter in, and shall not be able” (Luke 13:24); that while “he that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life (ζωὴν αἰώνιον), he that believeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him” (John 3:36); that “the wicked shall go away into everlasting punishment” (Matt. 25:46; κόλασιν αἰώνιον), “prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt. 25:41); “the resurrection of damnation” (John 5:29); “the damnation of hell” (Matt. 23:33), “where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched” (Mark 9:44); that though “every word against the Son of Man may be forgiven, the sin against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven, neither in this world (ἐν τούτῳ τῷ αἰῶνι), nor in that which is to come” (Matt. 12:32); and that of one at least it is true, that “good had it been for that man if he had not been born” (Matt. 26:24)…”

“Words could not well be stronger. The difficulty is that all this is but one side of Scripture, which in other places seems to teach a very different doctrine. For instance, there are first the words of God Himself, repeated again and again by those same Apostles whom I have just quoted, that “in Abraham’s seed all the kindreds of the earth shall be blessed” (Gen. 12:3; 22:18; Acts 3:25; Gal. 3:8); words which St. Peter expounds to mean that there shall be “a restitution of all things,” adding that “God hath spoken of this by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began” (Acts 3:21). St. Paul further declares this wondrous “mystery of God’s will, that He hath purposed in Himself, according to His good pleasure, to rehead (ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι) and reconcile (ἀποκατάλλαξαι, to reconcile back again) unto Himself, in and by Christ, all things, whether they be things in heaven,” that is the spirit-world, where the conflict with Satan yet is (Rev. 12:7), “or things on earth,” that is this outward world, where death now reigns, and where even God’s elect are by nature children of wrath, even as other men (Eph. 1:9-10; Col. 1:20; Eph. 2:3). Further St. Paul asserts that “all creation, which now groans, shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption, into the glorious liberty of the children of God” (Rom. 8:19-23). In another place he declares, that “God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself” (2 Cor. 5:19), and that Christ “took our flesh and blood, through death to destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb. 2:14); that “if by the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many” (Rom. 5:15)…”

Andrew Jukes, a 19th century English clergyman, who wrote the above words goes on to write:
“The truth which solves the riddle is to be found in those same Scriptures which seem to raise the difficulty, and lies in the mystery of the will of our ever blessed God as to the process and stages of redemption:—

(1) First, His will by some to bless and save others; by a first-born seed, “the first-born from the dead” (Col. 1:18), to save and bless the later-born:—

(2) His will therefore to work out the redemption of the lost by successive ages…or, to use the language of St. Paul, “according to the purpose of the ages” (Eph. 3:11):—and

(3) Lastly, His will (thus meeting the nature of our fall,) to make death, judgment, and destruction, the means and way to life, acquittal, and salvation; in other words, “through death to destroy him that has the power of death, that is the devil, and to deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage” (Heb. 2:14).”

from:
http://www.alampthatburns.net/jukes/restitution/restitutionofall-section2.htm

He then explains the only theology I have yet encountered which can reconcile all of the above (and many other) apparently contradictory passages in the Bible. It’s not Calvinism, nor Arminianism but contains truthful elements of each. It was orthodox Christianity for the first four centuries after Christ.


(Patrick Travis) #42

Hi Paul.

Do you believe Christ will touch the Mount of Olives literally?<<

Who was Zech. 14:1-4 message to? Was it to post exilic Jews encouraging them to follow covenant with promises for Jerusalem for faithfulness to covenant? Did they accept Messiah? Was Jerusalem destroyed as a result? Where is the focus of Jerusalem now according to Hebrews 12:22,23; 13:14.
So, to answer your question. The repetitive prophetic imagery of both Jerusalem and Christ coming against the nations Rev.19:11-16 remains.
Dispensationalist creating two “peoples of God” and “two Jerusalem’s” has been removed. Likewise the premise of your question.
Regards


(Patrick Travis) #43

I suggest you and others actually read the Chicago statement and it’s meanings/definitions of infallible and inerrant. Section 3 C may be of interest to some.

https://carm.org/chicago-statement-of-biblical-inerrancy


(Patrick Travis) #44

During the Exodus and following it was important for God to be seen as ALL powerful. My conjecture is that with this mindset the writers of the OT in particular would attribute everything to God. If it was some other being doing bad things and God did not stop them, then He was not ALL powerful.<<

So Robelle you are in favor of a robotic satan and humanity that has no abilitiy to make “limited choices/freewill?”
You can’t have it both ways.
By some God is damned if He does and damned if He doesn’t…do it their way. :slight_smile:
Isa. 45:6,7.


(Robert Lindbeck) #45

It is a “mindset” thing. How you believe God exercises His power. For the Israelites, they needed to believe in an ALL powerful God, not just another god. My God is so powerful, He can let me make choices. It is not a case of either/or.
With my limited brain, I can’t hope to explain or understand the power and nature of God. I have the example of Christ to open my eyes but it is like looking at the Grand Canyon through a pin hole.


(Patrick Travis) #46

Think I am understanding you more. To me the Biblical God doesn’t make excuses that Satan or other power did something and not Him. He takes ultimate responsibility as all powerful and nothing occurs without His causing or allowing it for admittedly purposes we do not fully comprehend for after all we are not God.


(Lynden Williams) #47

It is disturbing to read comments which elude to the statement “that God’s ways are not our ways” Which is suppose to excuse anything that we find questionable in the statement of other believers or of scripture itself. Its intension is to shut down the discussion of things that don’t seem to support the same conclusions as the one proclaiming the “Thus sayeth the Lord”.

I find the fact that many churches put the 27 (I think it has even grown to 28, now) beliefs on the back of their church bulletins is a sure way to keep the “purity” of the doctrines in tact. Then your “present truth” will always be correct. But it is an even more assured way of keeping the pews from filling, or the Gospel from being presented to the, yet un-reached world. Jesus set the Pharisees 27 rules on its ear. Few among us are able to look at all 27 or 28 and not find something you might take issue with. Imagine what that says to those who are sitting in your pews for the first time. “If you don’t believe what I believe, then you can’t join my club”. Great Message.

The Chicago Statement is just another way of nailing a list of rules to the door. Luther didn’t nail rules to the door, he nailed his objection to those rules. And the spirit moved and thus began the reformation. And, if there ever was a need for reformation it is now.


(SOMMER) #48

Great article! I agree. About words reflecting God’s character, I’m reading this book:
https://www.amazon.com/Inexpressible-Hesed-Mystery-Gods-Lovingkindness/dp/0830845496/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1RARBRTAULPZQ&keywords=inexpressible+michael+card&qid=1556084668&s=books&sprefix=Inexpressible%2Cstripbooks-intl-ship%2C260&sr=1-1


(Patrick Travis) #49

Luther did not just say open season to believe anything. His objections were based on scripture using the principles, I beleve, found in the Chicago statement that opposed a church that used “faith and tradition” and methods in opposition to Sola scripture.


(FrankieB) #50

Amen to this article. The issue of the mistakes and problems in the Bible are open and clear when you look at the text. The MT is a prime example. I am reading the story of Hosea at the moment and there are intractable problems in that book with the text. One, for example, is the word for “purchase” in 3:2. It has a daghesh in the middle letter of the word that has had scholars trying to explain since forever, without any resolution to the issue: וָאֶכְּרֶהָ “And I purchased/procured her” is the usual translation. Even Gesenius (GKC 20h) gets a serving by Andersen and Freedman (298) for his attempt at an answer. This is just one example of the intractable problems in the text. There are others in Hosea but I will not labour the point. It is the writers who were inspired, not the text. Perhaps it was just a fly dropping on the work in Hos. 3: 2 that passed into history as a scribal mark!


(Patrick Travis) #51

Frankie,
You are dealing with a MT copy. Not the Hebrew autograph. This is one of the things the Chicago statement refers to.
The problems come when one begins to say which parts are true and which parts aren’t. Such power we humans then have over textual interpretation.


(FrankieB) #52

Exactly, they are whistling in the wind. I can’t find a Hebrew autograph on ebay, or abebooks. Can I buy one from them? LOL!! Its a bit like the original of the Qur’an being stored in heaven…no, sorry, it is EXACTLY like having the original of the Qu’an stored in heaven. It is nonsense. The exact logic of conspiracy theorists. It cannot be reasoned with.
Bottom line, is that we only have what we have; and any assertions about the autographs (or Vorlage) are made with logic that cannot be proven or denied. It is the ultimate in crooked thinking, in my view. We will never have a Hebrew autograph, so its a wasted argument. It’s man trying to clean up God’s mess. Look at God’s command for Hosea to go and choose a practising prostitute for a wife. How many scholars try and clean up the obvious here for God and sanitize it so that it can receive the Dove Award for designation as inspired scripture! We don’t want God warts and all as he presents himself; we don’t want scripture as it presents itself, warts and all. Even in the autograph we will still have Hosea told to check out the harlots and find one that catches his eye and marry her. How are we going to sanitize that away? In the end, the efforts is going to be as successful as the efforts of scholars in B. C. Judaism and early Christianity to try and purge anthropomorphisms from the biblical text and the LXX, and limit their implications through allegorical interpretation in an effort to harmonise its teachings with a Hellenistic philosophic theism that was so prevalent among these men. What they tried with anthropomorphism, these fundamentalists will try with the intractable textual problems, with just as much success.


(Steve Mga) #53

I have been told in the past that the Song of Solomon being XXX rated like it is,
was forbidden to be read by any Israelite under 30 years of age.
Actually, sex education for Scripture readers begins at an early age.
Genesis 1-3 tells us that the 1st adult humans wore no clothes and were OK with it.
And if we think about “be fruitful and multiply” – no one else on earth would
have thought of wearing “clothes”.


(FrankieB) #54

And just picture, in a perfect world, of seeing your neighbour over on the next paddock, making love out in the sun, amongst the flowers, without a care in the world, not embarrassed of seeing you and the Mrs walking their way to have a chat!!
Can’t have that scenario!! Need to edit that idea!!


(Patrick Travis) #55

I find at times some choose to chew on a few bones instead of all the delicious fillet.
Cheers


(Patrick Travis) #56

The Victorian age created many “man made” rules and regulations. Scriptures relevance is harmed by both overstating and understating what it says. The Songs are lovely.


(FrankieB) #57

Not sure what that means, but I always have beef bones boiling in the cauldron (slow cooker) for about 10 days, then I add carrots, celery, onion and sea salt for a day and then take half a cup a day for my genetic hand-me-downs in my hips. Without it, I am limping; with it, I don’t notice my hips at all. Have not had the same effect with a fillet…and I can’t remember when I last ate one. Give me the benefits of bones any day! LOL


(Patrick Travis) #58

My wife, an Asian loves to flavor her food with beef spine bones in the mix while cooking. I prefer fillet mignon. :slight_smile:
Cheers


(Patrick Travis) #59

I also enjoy 24 oz 1% milk every morning with a boiled egg and peanut butter and honey sandwich. I’m 74 and the amino acid Casein dairy products haven’t killed me yet! My view in food is “temperance in all things.” Weight control and exercise, a glass of wine at night…and hope you have good genes! The rest simply puffs people up with their self denial “righteous” eating! :slight_smile:


(Steve Mga) #60

Frankie –
For your hip joints have you tried this every day for 8 weeks?
Glucosamine 1500 mg
Chondroitin 1200 mg
MSM 900 mg
Mine are all in one Tab. 2 a day for a week or 2 to begin will not
hurt you.