Does the Bible Have to be "True"?

[First Baseman]

So all translations of the Bible are correct?

All of the ones approved by the Catholic Church are. If you doubt this then you doubt it. I, however, do not. And please don't try to post other things from other authorities because I really do not want to waste my time reading them.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

All of the ones approved by the Catholic Church are. If you doubt this then you doubt it. I, however, do not.

Ah... that's your test.

Sure: I'll agree that all versions of the Bible that are approved by the Catholic Church are probably consistent with each other. "True" is a stretch, IMO.

 

[First Baseman]

Ah... that's your test.

Sure: I'll agree that all versions of the Bible that are approved by the Catholic Church are probably consistent with each other. "True" is a stretch, IMO.

Opinion noted.

 

[McBell]

All of the ones approved by the Catholic Church are. If you doubt this then you doubt it. I, however, do not. And please don't try to post other things from other authorities because I really do not want to waste my time reading them.

interesting bias you reveal there.

 

[First Baseman]

interesting bias you reveal there.

Of course I'm biased. Everyone is. Do you claim to be completely unbiased? If so you deceive yourself.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Please don't twist my words to fit your preconceived mold of me.

Showing you an inconsistency, is not the same as twisting your words. There is no nefarious intent on my part to disparage or win.

What I said is obvious and direct. I suggest you go back and read it again.

It was both obvious and direct. That you don't understand the implications of what you wrote is simply astonishing. Perhaps, you should re-read what you wrote.

What I said is that those men were filled with the same Holy Spirit that inspired the writers to pen the scriptures in the first place.

You did say that, but you didn't cite scripture to support any of it. For someone who's relying on scripture, you're leaving a lot to men.

If you don't believe that, fine, stop saying things about me that are totally wrong and particularly biased or just plain stupid.

Well. I don't believe they had any scriptural or other authority to do what they did. I don't have a problem with their work, but to suggest that they were guided by the Spirit without any scriptural proof sort of accents the problem. You also suggested that they reviewed, scrutinized and researched, but there's nothing about that in the scriptures either. While Jesus may have referred to writings found in the OT when he mentioned 'scriptures', we know by logic that he did not mean anything in the NT. Ergo, these men have actually added to the scriptures. Revelations 22:18 suggests that this is not a good idea.

The scriptures never claim to be inerrant or the Word of God. Yet somehow, these men, whom you've never met and which we do not read anything about in any scripture, have convinced you otherwise. It's pretty obvious, to even the most casual observer that you have let the traditions of these men supplant what is taught in the scriptures. There's nothing really wrong in that per se, but the irony is palpable. The letter kills and only the Spirit gives life. Please don't take my word on it. I've sought to cite scripture to support my beliefs whenever possible or practical. Review them. Then go study Galatians and understand how man has set up the NT to be just another OT. It's my belief that we have only one law: Love. Love God. Love each other. Love life. If you want the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5) then simply learn how to love.

 

[Scuba Pete]

It appears as though I have my own personal troll here. Consider yourself reported.

Enough with the name calling. If you don't want to discuss something, stop replying to the thread. Unless he's following you in every thread, you have no basis to call him a troll. No need to be so unfriendly.

 

[Scuba Pete]

LOL. Good! How can they be different? When meaning no longer counts is when idolatry takes over I think.

I'm not following you here. Can you rephrase this?

 

[savagewind]

I'm not following you here. Can you rephrase this?

The first part is a little sarcastic. How can they be different? He says the words written are exactly as they should be. There exists no error in the Bible. But each Bible is a little different.

Someone asked him, "do all Bibles have no error?" Many people profess a god who would not let the meaning of any written word believed to be of God to be changed. He is one of them. But words ARE changed from Bible to Bible.

I think that when the words become the important thing but the meaning of the words becomes inconsequential then the words become a person's idol.

 

[savagewind]

@Scuba Pete did I explain it?

God's spirit is able to illuminate the meaning of the words which were written. Our friend believes without a shadow of a doubt that is what happened every time the original words first heard and written were copied. Many people believe the Bible that way.

So they feel no need to listen to God's spirit anymore. They do not have to! They believe in the words.

To believe in the words instead of to believe in God is idolatry. A person can surely do both. To do both is not idolatry. It is how I do it.

How? I believe in the spirit which caused the writing of words. I think maybe they fear they might lose God's approval if they doubt any of the words.

Which is childish and not according to something that I hold on to which is Acts 17:11.
Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.

Paul's words became scripture according to those saying the Bible is as it should be! How is it then that the Bereans are called "noble"? It means they are being complimented by God through the word.
And what were they doing? They doubted the teaching of scripture. They checked it.

Presently most people do not check it. Why would they? They say, "there is no error in it".

 

[Scuba Pete]

I think that when the words become the important thing but the meaning of the words becomes inconsequential then the words become a person's idol.

I do agree with this. I call it the deification of scriptures.

So they feel no need to listen to God's spirit anymore.

Which is unfortunate. They rely on their ability to understand scriptures rather than on obedience to the Spirit within them. It's nothing but hubris.

Here's the Great News: God works through the imperfect. Literalists, those who believe in inerrancy and even that the scriptures are the Word of God are trying to limit God. They're trying to tell God how to do his job. It's laughable.

 

[McBell]

Of course I'm biased. Everyone is. Do you claim to be completely unbiased? If so you deceive yourself.

Yet I am not the one claiming absolute truth....

 

[savagewind]

I think there is a problem believing every word in the Bible is the truth.

To believe in the words that have been handed down is honoring the ones who caused the words to be handed down if they are all true. There is nothing wrong with honoring one another.

But if you place your faith in some words that aren't true then you might cause dishonor to the ones who caused the writing of them.

Try it! You write something thinking that you are under the inspiration of The Holy Spirit. Nobody is perfect and you slip an idea of your own in but not on purpose! Then one or a million people run with your idea. You are dead and can't fix it. They end up in the wrong place because of your idea. You are dishonored. There is no denying it.

Isn't that why it is written, "Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly."