Results 441 - 460 of 464
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Sir Pent Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
441 | How inspired is the NAS Bible today? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15497 | ||
Dear Joe, I like your point that a message is authoritative based on its source. To an extent this is true. However, a message from even the most authoritative source can become meaningless depending on the transmission of that message. For instance, a person could be reading a delicious recipe from the Betty Crocker cookbook. Now I would submit that is an authoritative source (when it comes to cooking, nowhere near the Bible). However, if that person is dislexic, and puts in 61oz of an ingredient instead of 16oz, then that recipe will not be successful. I would submit that if left to only the minds and abilities of man, an "accurate translation" that you refer to, would be impossible to the degree which we currently have. Would you not agree that God had to have been involved in that process to some degree? |
||||||
442 | How inspired is the NAS Bible today? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15492 | ||
Please forgive my ignorance, but what is the difference between your view of God's "providence" preserving the Bible through translations and my view of God's "inspiration" preserving the Bible through translations? How do you see those as being different? | ||||||
443 | How inspired is the NAS Bible today? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15483 | ||
Dear Tim, The same could be said about commentaries. Most Bible verses are very clear cut. If the verse says "Perez was the father of Hezron", then Perez was the father of Hezron. Most commentaries do agree on the interpretation of most verses. Yet there are some passages that are interpreted differently by different commentators based on their backgrounds and ideas. Once again, it seems to me that there is little difference between a translation and a commentary without believing that the Bible is still the inspired Word of God, and a commentary is solely the words of man. |
||||||
444 | How inspired is the NAS Bible today? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15481 | ||
Dear Schwartzkm, I apologize if I misunderstood your first post. I also would just like to say that I do not wish to "challenge you on the inerrancy of scripture". I agree with you that the Bible is inerrant. My question is specifically related to the "inspiration" of not only the original manuscripts, but also of a Bible you would find in your motel room. On the one hand, you said that "erros have crept in" to the modern translations, which might indicate that you believe that they are merely the work of man. On the other hand, you said that these errors "would not change a single Christian belief". My question to you is, "Do you believe that the accuracy and authority of the Bible has been maintained throughout the centuries by the work of man, or due to the inspiration of God upon the copiers/translators etc.?" |
||||||
445 | How inspired is the NAS Bible today? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15478 | ||
Dear Tim, Once again, we are very close to agreement on this issue, as we both feel that God has "preserved" His Word. It seems to me that you are saying that a translator puts the original text in a new language, as opposed to a commentator who tries to explain the text. However, if God is not involved in the translation process, then isn't the translator also just trying to take an idea expressed in Greek or Hebrew and "explain" it in English (or whatever). That just seems to be to close to the same thing. In order for it to make sense to me that the Bible is more authoritative than a commentary, I think that God must have been inspiring the translation process. It also seems to me that God inspiring the copy/translation process is the only thing that could have stopped the "telephone game" phenomenum. |
||||||
446 | How inspired is the NAS Bible today? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15471 | ||
Dear Retxar, I actually agree with almost all of the things you mentioned. I agree that the Holy Spirit will keep readers of the Word from going astray, if they will follow His direction. I also agree that God has preserved His Word throughout the centuries. I would disagree however, that it is insulting to God for me to believe that He has continued to inspire His Word. I don't understand why that would belittle God in any way. In fact, I think that it shows how brilliant, powerful, and most of all loving I believe Him to be. For God to be able to keep His message to mankind relevant and understandable in thousands of different languages and to people from thousands of different cultures, shows incredible intellegence. And for God to maintain the truth of his message throughout 2000 years despite the natural inclination of man to disrupt it with mistakes, and even changes due to different theological perspectives, shows great power. And finally for God to go to all this trouble in order to be able to speak to each and every person in the world regardless of educational background or anything else, shows just how much He loves every human being. |
||||||
447 | How inspired is the NAS Bible today? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15470 | ||
Dear Radioman, I must agree with you that I have no evidence that the modern versions of the Bible are inspired by God. I would hope that you would not think of me as heretical or going completely against Biblical doctrine to have this idea though. That seems a bit harsh, especially since I don't know of any Biblical passage that denies that God would continue to inspire His Word. Going back to the evidence issue, I would question whether there is any evidence that the original manuscripts were inspired by God either. It seems to me that it is something which we must choose to believe on faith, and thankfully both you and I have made that choice. |
||||||
448 | How inspired is the NAS Bible today? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15469 | ||
Dear Charis, Thank you for your response. I'm glad that I am not the only person who believes that God continues to inspire His Word. I also really like the point that you bring up about God inspiring the reading of the Bible through the Holy Spirit. I completely agree with that, and do think that it is a critical point in understanding how a person today could hear God speaking to them through reading the Bible just as much as they did 2000 years ago. |
||||||
449 | How inspired is the NAS Bible today? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15468 | ||
Dear Charis, Thank you for your response. I'm glad that I am not the only person who believes that God continues to inspire His Word. I also really like the point that you bring up about God inspiring the reading of the Bible through the Holy Spirit. I completely agree with that, and do think that it is a critical point in understanding how a person today could hear God speaking to them through reading the Bible just as much as they did 2000 years ago. |
||||||
450 | How inspired is the NAS Bible today? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15467 | ||
Dear Tim, When it comes to the idea that present day versions are still inspired by God, there are a couple of obvious questions that come up. You address one very well. How can versions contradict each other or have mistakes and yet be inspired. This could lead into a discussion of inerrancy of scripture, which I believe already has a thread dedicated to it. However, I would generally say that in most cases the contradictions are not actually contradictions at all. I also believe that any mistakes or true contradictions which may remain would not be of any significance to the message which God is expressing. I think that we are probably actually closer to agreement than we think since you mentioned that you also believe that the message is authoritative. I would ask you though, how can this be without God's inspiration? In other words, if the translations are just the work of men, then what makes them any different than a commentary? Yet we don't hold commentaries to be authoritative, but only helpful. |
||||||
451 | How inspired is the NAS Bible today? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15466 | ||
Dear Schwartzkm, You seem to indicate that you feel that the present versions are "inerrant", but are not "inspired". I believe there is a seperate thread discussing inerrancy of scripture, and I would prefer not to repeat that in this thread. Therefore, let's assume (as you and I both seem to believe) that scripture is inerrant. My question would be, how would it be possible for current versions of the Bible to be "inerrant" without the inspiration of God? In other words it seems inevitable that left in the hands of mere men, copies and translations of the originals would have to contain errors. Honest mistakes and even changes made to reflect individual's theology would over time change and mess up the Word of God. Since we both assume that the current versions are inerrant, how do you explain that this was possible aside from the direct hand of God? |
||||||
452 | How inspired is the NAS Bible today? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15463 | ||
Dear Joe, When it comes to the idea that present day versions are still inspired by God, there are a couple of obvious questions that come up. You address one very well. Are all of the versions inspired, and if not how can you tell them apart. I think that discussing the relative authority of different versions would be best suited by a seperate thread. But I would generally include major versions (ie. KJV, NKJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, etc.) translated by groups (thus excluding individual efforts like "The Message", which are not intended to be translations) of Christian scholars (thus eliminating the Mormon, Jehovah?s Witness, and other cult versions). |
||||||
453 | When did God's inspiration stop? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15398 | ||
I think we might be getting a little off of the original question of this thread. Would you guys mind if we start a seperate thread focusing on the inspiration of the Bible, past and present? | ||||||
454 | When did God's inspiration stop? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15396 | ||
I think we might be getting a little off of the original question of this thread. Would you guys mind if we start a seperate thread focusing on the inspiration of the Bible, past and present? | ||||||
455 | May I share a simple story to help? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15279 | ||
The main problem that I have with this theory is that it is a very static and limited view of the Word of God. If the Bible was just like any other "ancient book", then the points would be entirely valid, and there would be many gaps to fill. However, the Bible is not at all like any other "ancient book". Instead it is the living, breathing, Word of God. I believe that God has personally maintained this Word throughout changing languages, cultures, geographies, and history. Therefore, there are no gaps at all. But rather there is a book which God speaks through to people today, just like He did 2000 years ago. |
||||||
456 | May I share a simple story to help? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15154 | ||
I am not referring to any specific passage, but rather to an overall philosophy of interpreting scripture. You make the correct point that anytime ideas are put into words, there are rules regarding how they are to be written and read (grammar, etc.). My point is that these things are very basic, and able to be easily understood by the general population. I have a fundamental believe that the Bible is God's Word, and as such, He is responsible for keeping it accurate and understandable. Therefore, through all the translations, and changes in culture, I believe that God has caused His Word to transcend these things. I also believe that God gave the Bible to humanity at large, and not to small groups of the highly educated (to interpret for the masses). I have found in the past, that knowledge of certain cultural customs, or ancient language information has helped me to see some interesting points. However, I believe this knowledge to be unnecessary for understanding of the Bible. The vast majority of people have not had this information, and I don't think that God would so limit His audience. |
||||||
457 | May I share a simple story to help? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 15133 | ||
Dear EdB, I wish that I could claim authorship of this story, however I am not that creative. I also wish that I could let you know where it comes from , however my memory is not that good. It is one of hundreds of stories I have heard in sermons, prayer meeting devotionals, chapel services, etc. Feel free to use this story in a class, or anywhere else that it will help. As for my user id, I regret that you aren't a big fan of it (you are not alone), but perhaps my profile will help explain why I chose it. |
||||||
458 | Are we do pray to Jesus? | Matt 6:9 | Sir Pent | 14944 | ||
Welcome back Nolan, It takes a great person to be able to humble himself and admit when he has made mistakes. I appreciate your willingness to examine yourself and find ways to be a better example of Christ by "using good judgement" and "being a servant". May we all learn from this example. |
||||||
459 | Offices today? | Matt 15:9 | Sir Pent | 14413 | ||
Dear Charis, I apologize for seeming to limit the responsibilities of the offices that I mentioned to only administration of man-made institutions. I was merely trying to define the positions based on the structure they are a part of. In practicality, I believe that these positions are very important to fulfilling God's will and sheparding the flock. I mentioned that the lower office of "Deacon" was to be held by people within a church that can be looked to as examples. This is very important for a church. It is important for people who attend any church to be able to not only learn about God in sermons or Sunday School, but to also see how the Christian life is to be put into practice. It is also important for there to be people in a church who can be sought after for spiritual counsel and advice. This is an important "service to the faithful". As for the office of "Bishop" (or what we now call pastor), I believe that they too have an important role. I Timothy 3:5 speaks of them "taking care of God's church". Titus 1:7 calls them "God's steward", which seems to say that they are responsible for the faithful in thier congregation. This is such an important "ministry to the Lord" that it can be overwhelming at times to many of these people. I would like to also mention the third category of higher denominational administrations (what we now call Superintendants, etc.). I do not know of a Biblical precedent for such positions, and many denominations are consistently attacked for being merely man-made instituions. However, I believe that there is value to having a connectional body of Christ (although that should be a seperate thread). I also believe that these higher administrators are being of service to the faithful by setting a vision of how they can effectively accomplish the will of God here on earth. Of course I believe that God can give individuals direction for how to follow His plan, but often much more can be accomplished when a large number of people are working together for the same goal. |
||||||
460 | What in the Word is an 'office?' | Matt 15:9 | Sir Pent | 14395 | ||
I did a search, and found 34 occurences of the words "office" or its derivatives (offices, officer, officers) in the Bible. They all appear to fall under three basic catagories. 1. Offices of military nature. In the OT there are of course many references to officers in the armies of Israel and other nations. In the NT there are two kinds of military officers, Roman soldiers and officers of the Pharisees and chief priests (ie. John 18:3). 2. Offices of administration. In the OT there are several officers in government positions, which report to kings and pharaohs. In the NT an example of this kind of office are the tax collectors (ie Luke 5:27). 3. Offices of church responsibility. These are what I think your questions is referring to. In the OT the priesthood was referred to as an office, although in the NT this particular office seems to possibly be limited to only Jesus Himself (Hebrews 7:21-25). Paul makes a claim to an office of minister of the church (Col 1:24-26). There also are verses referring to the offices of Bishop (I Tim 3:1-7, Titus 1:5-9) and the office of Deacon (I Tim 3:8-13). Of these two offices, that of Bishop seems to be higher and refers to being responsible for the care and stewardship of a church. The office of Deacon seems to be one of lay leadership within a church and a person whom others can look to as an example. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ] Next > Last [24] >> |