Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | 2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | 2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed [given by divine inspiration] and is profitable for instruction, for conviction [of sin], for correction [of error and restoration to obedience], for training in righteousness [learning to live in conformity to God's will, both publicly and privately--behaving honorably with personal integrity and moral courage]; |
Subject: Infallibility of the Bible questioned. |
Bible Note: Hi, Tim; Hope you got your beauty rest. ;-) Sunday's a busy day, I know. I think the difference is in the method, the reasoning backwards. If one built one's entire worldview and theology on a literal reading of Genesis 1 and worked forward to belief in Jesus, any doubts about that interpretation could bring the whole edifice down. But I've said before that I believe in the Bible because I believe in Jesus, not the other way around. As I work my way back in time from Jesus' earthly ministry, I eventually encounter the historical Adam and Eve. With them I also encounter the beginning of human history, the first eyewitnesses to God's actions, the introduction of sin into a perfect world, the first foreshadowing of Jesus, the introduction of Satan, and the first pronouncement of his ultimate fate. These things cannot be denied. As I continue backwards from there, the next significant thing I encounter is "In the begining, God". I can't find any theological importance in the duration or manner of creation, so I don't see any reason to assume scientific rigor in the Bible's description. You may be interested to know that for most of my Christian life, I doubted the historicity of Adam and Eve. I was perfectly content with the notion that Jesus simply built on his Father's parable when he referred to them in his discussion of marriage. But I evenrually realized that I could not get around Paul's contrasting of Jesus to Adam. If Adam didn't really exist, that part of Paul's theology would simply be wrong. Since I believe beyond doubt that God inspired Paul's theology, it couldn't be wrong. So Adam must have existed. This proves I am teachable. ;-) And plaase note that I am not insisting on my reading of Genesis 1. As in the recent "Judas in hell" debate, I think there is room for differing views without doing harm to any aspect of Christian theology or the authority of Scripture. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones who fervently hopes God agrees that the renewing and restorative power of the Sabbath can be accomplished through watching football playoff games. |