Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | How is the Bible the Word of God? | Ezra 9:2 | ischus | 115712 | ||
Tim, First of all, as you know,there are not only two choices as far as inspriration goes; verb. plen. or not at all. I believe that the bible is God's word, in that it contains spritual truths, as well as historical facts, which lead us to faith in God. I do not believe that the words of the bible were given orally or verbally or that they were dictated to the writers. I think that it is very much a human work, but that it is all God's will. This is especially true for the original autographs. I think there is sufficient evidence to make valid conclusions that what we read today is basically what was written back then... but there are variants, additions, changes, etc. As someone has already said, these do not effect the theology or other doctrines of the bible, but they are there nonetheless. Verbal inspriration is just not logical when you seriously look at how the bible was put together. There is no doubt in my mind that God was completely involved... I just don't think that he gave the words or thoughts to the writers orally or internally in every case. Now, there are many many places in the bible where a word of the Lord comes to a prophet,etc. There are also many places where the words do not find their origin in God. Much of the Old Testament that we have today is the result of thousands of years of copyists and editors. Even the NT has gone through many changes, but this is beside the point. I think that what we have is very close to what was originally written. Now, inspiration is simply beyond human comprehension, and when we try to explain it, we fail. But, I think that some of the best insights into how the bible was written and inspired can be seen in Jeremiah and Luke. I can't see how you can reconcile their means of obtaining the material that they wrote with verbal inspiration. Plenary is another issue. I can not truly say that what we have is all from God. You know the verses that should not be there, and to say that the whole work of the bible should be called His word is simply not true. However. I do beilieve in the plenary inspiration of the original autographs. ischus |
||||||
2 | How is the Bible the Word of God? | Ezra 9:2 | Hank | 115724 | ||
Ischus: Having read your post #115712 and Tim's response, I would like to get your thoughts on 2 Timothy 3:16, especially on the Greek word translated "inspiration" in most English Bibles. My understanding is that the literal meaning of this word is "God-breathed." If that be so, then this verse seems to clash somewhat with your views on the inspiration of Scripture. The verse says all Scripture is inspired by God and you say some of it is. Now I'm nearly three score and ten years old, have been a follower of Christ since I was 14, and I've never been able to figure out how we are supposed to sort the inspired parts of Scripture from the uninspired parts, assuming that that's what we're dealing with. Can you help an old man here who for many years has been limping along with the idea that 2 Timothy 3:16 is true and means exactly what it says? I never went to seminary nor studied higher criticism. I don't suppose Paul did either. Nor Jesus, for that matter. And from all the fruits I've seen of "higher criticism" I tend to think it ought to be renamed to "lower." --Hank | ||||||
3 | How is the Bible the Word of God? | Ezra 9:2 | ischus | 115734 | ||
Hank, Just so you know, I interperted your last post as somewhat sarcastic. I apologize if this is not so, but on the assumption that it was, let me say that I will take complete blame for how old I am. I know this is not your fault- it is totally mine. Howver, I have read the same bible as you have. I am old enough to read and write and think. I know that I am just a little kid to you, but I think that there were some who saw Timothy in this way as well. Now to the point: Theo- "God" pneustos- "spirit, breathe" I find it interesting that you have arrived at the exact definition of this word. Could you please explain it to me? I surely don't know what it means, and I think that if someone says that they do, they are kidding themself... but I am curious as to your definition. By the way, I have never denied the inspiration of the bible or God's part in it at any time on any post in this forum on purpose. If I have given that impression, I recant. What I am saying is that I do not go along with a verbal, plenary view of inspiration, and I don't see how we can use 2 Tim to support it. Let me just say that My instructors have taught me that the bible is the verbal, plenary, inerrant, inspired word of God. I know the full argument entirely. There is no need to present it to me. ischus |
||||||
4 | How is the Bible the Word of God? | Ezra 9:2 | Morant61 | 115742 | ||
Greetings Ischus! While the exact method may not be clear, the meaning of the word is very clear. It was used in the classics of the operation of the muse upon the artist so that their works were divine. In the same way, 2 Timothy 3:16 (as Peter does) is simply making the case that Scripture is primarily a result of God's will, not man's. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
5 | How is the Bible the Word of God? | Ezra 9:2 | ischus | 115743 | ||
Tim, TDNT is good, but You can't define a word by it's etymology. I know the concept is God working with man, and I agree with it. The only thing that we differ in is how much God, and how much man. I don't mean to cut this short, but I am about 81 percent dead right now so I need to retire. I look forward to continuing this tomor... |
||||||