Infallibility

[YmirGF]

Christian fundamentalists have it that the bible
is infallible, and that god guides their intrrpretation-
effectively making them infalluble.

I do agree but it is even worse in Islam. The Qur'an, to a huge percentage of Muslims, is the unerring and direct word of God. Period, kuffar. This is not a fundamentalist viewpoint, but more the normative viewpoint.

 

[YmirGF]

So when did this idea that a scripture or a prophet or a messenger or a pope is absolutely perfect in every way come into practice? Has it been there since early times, or is it more recent? What purpose does it serve?

What or who do you consider infallible, if anything?

As an eastern thinker and logical person, I don't get infallibility. To be clear, I understand what it means, I just don't get how anyone else could believe in it, yet I know some do. I just shake my head and go 'really?'

Here's an example. "I'm infallible. I said I was infallible, and since I'm infallible, it is only logical to conclude I'm infallible. I mean, how could an infallible person claiming to be infallible possibly be wrong?"

Does this sound logical to you?

I KNOW that it is illogical, so, I don't have to give it more than a nanosecond of consideration. It is blatantly absurd.

Frankly, if anyone ever talks about being infallible or their version of reality being infallible, I'd urge you to run, as fast as you can, in the opposite direction. Screaming and arm-waving is optional.

 

[Vinayaka]

Paradigm?

Life mindset.

 

[Vinayaka]

God's word in the original manuscripts is infallible and we have high confidence in the manuscripts we have in ensamble.

Paul corrected Peter in Galatians. There were times in church history the pope accepted correction, one case being excommunicating a country because they celebrated Easter on a different week... a Bishop told him that should not be cause for such as action particularly Easter and he accepted correction

Protestants have never agreed that church councils and synods are inflalible rather a good check and balance usually... Presbyterian and Reformed Baptists tend to favor decisions by a pulrailty of elders or people and feel its a good way to decide things but not asserting infallibility

Thanks. I think I'm more interested in the psychological why of it, rather than who is, and who isn't. I know not all Christian sects are. I just can't imagine reading anything without having the occasional 'Hmmm, not so sure about that.'

 

[Vinayaka]

I KNOW that it is illogical, so, I don't have to give it more than a nanosecond of consideration. It is blatantly absurd.

Frankly, if anyone ever talks about being infallible or their version of reality being infallible, I'd urge you to run, as fast as you can, in the opposite direction. Screaming and arm-waving is optional.

I'm with you, but still psychologically, it intrigues me. It seems ill.

 

[YmirGF]

I'm with you, but still psychologically, it intrigues me. It seems ill.

We are of one mind on this.

 

[Vinayaka]

We are of one mind on this.

Young children have it, to some degree, about their parents. "My mommy said ...." can be a very strong motivator to a kid. Heck, my grandfather, BSer that he was, had me convinced that the Canada Thistle was actually the purple rose of Texas. I argued it til I was blue in the face because 'My Grampa said so, and he would tell me a falsehood" But this was in grade 1. My teacher wasn't particularly impressed. Still she was kind enough to concede it to me, fully knowing some day I'd figure it out.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

So when did this idea that a scripture or a prophet or a messenger or a pope is absolutely perfect in every way come into practice? Has it been there since early times, or is it more recent? What purpose does it serve?

What or who do you consider infallible, if anything?

As an eastern thinker and logical person, I don't get infallibility. To be clear, I understand what it means, I just don't get how anyone else could believe in it, yet I know some do. I just shake my head and go 'really?'

Here's an example. "I'm infallible. I said I was infallible, and since I'm infallible, it is only logical to conclude I'm infallible. I mean, how could an infallible person claiming to be infallible possibly be wrong?"

Does this sound logical to you?

Do you think Lord Shiva is not able to create a human who is infallible?

 

[Vinayaka]

Do you think Lord Shiva is not able to create a human who is infallible?

My Siva doesn't 'create', he emanates. He doesn't do that, because it would be way too confusing for people. Nobody stopping people deluding themselves and leading others away from dharma instead of toward it. No individual in a body could handle it.

But of course you're right from your POV, because your guy said so, and he's infallible.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

My Siva doesn't 'create', he emanates. He doesn't do that, because it would be way too confusing for people. Nobody stopping people deluding themselves and leading others away from dharma instead of toward it. No individual in a body could handle it.

But of course you're right from your POV, because your guy said so, and he's infallible.

I personally have investigated the writings, teachings and life of Bahaullah, and found no errors in them.

 

[Vinayaka]

I personally have investigated the writings, teachings and life of Bahaullah, and found no errors in them.

Yes that is the Baha'i party line. You investigate from sources you are told to investigate from. I know it too well. However, this thread is about infallibility, which certainly isn't exclusively a Baha'i topic. When you first encountered the idea that your guy is perfect in every way, it was just a 'Yeah, that makes so much sense."?

Even in Hinduism we have it. For example, certain followers of Satya Sai Baba, the more zealous ones, will tell you straight up that he was infallible. My Gurus, on the other hand, would speak against such cut and dry proclamations.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Yes that is the Baha'i party line. You investigate from sources you are told to investigate from. I know it too well. However, this thread is about infallibility, which certainly isn't exclusively a Baha'i topic. When you first encountered the idea that your guy is perfect in every way, it was just a 'Yeah, that makes so much sense."?

Even in Hinduism we have it. For example, certain followers of Satya Sai Baba, the more zealous ones, will tell you straight up that he was infallible. My Gurus, on the other hand, would speak against such cut and dry proclamations.

I have read difference sources, including Anti-Bahai sources, and then judged unbiased, which side is true. After all, each person can investigate and judge for himself what is true and what is false.

 

[Audie]

Life mindset.

Ok, whatevs, thought you meant something.

 

[whirlingmerc]

Thanks. I think I'm more interested in the psychological why of it, rather than who is, and who isn't. I know not all Christian sects are. I just can't imagine reading anything without having the occasional 'Hmmm, not so sure about that.'

I think even people who believe in infallibility need to make sure they understand properly what is meant and they are not an infallible link in the process

One aspect is trusting God to generously provide wisdom that may be lacking in faith
but that can be a long lifelong journey as well from lesson to lesson

 

[CG Didymus]

I personally have investigated the writings, teachings and life of Bahaullah, and found no errors in them.

Baha'i teachings are absolutely wrong from a Christian pov. They base this on the infallible Word of God, their version of the Bible.

If the Baha'is are right, then Christianity not only never had the infallible truth, they've been deceiving people for 2000 years. Just the big ones, Jesus is God? No. Jesus rose bodily from the dead? No. Satan is real? No.

But how did Christians come up with these things? Their infallible Bible. But Baha'is can't say the Bible is infallible, because they believe there's errors in it... Like Ishmael, not Issac, being taken by Abraham to be sacrificed.

But the main error Baha'is point out, is to them, Christians misinterpreted their Bible. So for Baha'is, both the Bible and the Christian interpretation of it are not infallible, but wrong. So that leaves only one infallible word of God, the Baha'i writings.

So who's right? Two religions using their infallible word of God to show the errors of the other.

 

[Audie]

Baha'i teachings are absolutely wrong from a Christian pov. They base this on the infallible Word of God, their version of the Bible.

If the Baha'is are right, then Christianity not only never had the infallible truth, they've been deceiving people for 2000 years. Just the big ones, Jesus is God? No. Jesus rose bodily from the dead? No. Satan is real? No.

But how did Christians come up with these things? Their infallible Bible. But Baha'is can't say the Bible is infallible, because they believe there's errors in it... Like Ishmael, not Issac, being taken by Abraham to be sacrificed.

But the main error Baha'is point out, is to them, Christians misinterpreted their Bible. So for Baha'is, both the Bible and the Christian interpretation of it are not infallible, but wrong. So that leaves only one infallible word of God, the Baha'i writings.

So who's right? Two religions using their infallible word of God to show the errors of the other.

A LOT more than two.
They are all wrong.

 

[Faithofchristian]

So when did this idea that a scripture or a prophet or a messenger or a pope is absolutely perfect in every way come into practice? Has it been there since early times, or is it more recent? What purpose does it serve?

What or who do you consider infallible, if anything?

As an eastern thinker and logical person, I don't get infallibility. To be clear, I understand what it means, I just don't get how anyone else could believe in it, yet I know some do. I just shake my head and go 'really?'

Here's an example. "I'm infallible. I said I was infallible, and since I'm infallible, it is only logical to conclude I'm infallible. I mean, how could an infallible person claiming to be infallible possibly be wrong?"

Does this sound logical to you?

I have no idea where people get ( infallible)

In the book of Romans 3:23 "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God"

Notice the verse does say ( For all have sinned)
I guess that about covers it.
Therefore there is no one who is
( Infallible) this includes the prophets, priest, Pastor's, Preachers, "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God"

 

[Vinayaka]

I have read difference sources, including Anti-Bahai sources, and then judged unbiased, which side is true. After all, each person can investigate and judge for himself what is true and what is false.

Can you give a link to these? Many are just non-Bahai, not anti-Baha'i. But with the us versus them mindset, I can understand why you said they were anti-Baha'i.

 

[Vinayaka]

I think even people who believe in infallibility need to make sure they understand properly what is meant and they are not an infallible link in the process

One aspect is trusting God to generously provide wisdom that may be lacking in faith
but that can be a long lifelong journey as well from lesson to lesson

I have that latter aspect of trust, but it's not infallibility the way it's usually defined.

 

[Vinayaka]

I have no idea where people get ( infallible)

Thank you. That's interesting that you can't find it as a concept. Maybe it developed later. I know with prophets, messengers, it is often self-declared, or put on them by overly enthusiastic devotee/followers. A bit overdone for an honorarium I think.