05 Jul 07
Originally posted by NemesioI believe you are correct in it gave them a sense of continuity, but
You misunderstood. Of course I believe that lineage was critical to Jewish folk. That's why these
authors took the pains to create lineages for Jesus which took Him to either Abraham or Adam.
What I don't believe is that any of them knew any of the actual lineages. At best, only one could
possibly know it because the other one doesn't match at all.
...[text shortened]... as Midrashic fantasies to give the wandering nomadic
Jews a sense of continuity.
Nemesio
in addition God did make a promise about blood lines, so in order
to know if that was kept, knowing one's blood line became very
important.
Kelly
05 Jul 07
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesNow that's an old one. If you were a group of first century Palestinian farmers then yes. However, if you were group of international botanists then no.
Is the mustard seed the smallest of all seeds?
Come on, you can to better than that Dr.S.
05 Jul 07
4 edits
Originally posted by whodeyDoes the King James Bible claim that the mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds?
Now that's an old one. If you were a group of first century Palestinian farmers then yes. However, if you were group of international botanists then no.
Come on, you can to better than that Dr.S.
Are you suggesting that the claims of the Bible are only true in a relative sense, for example, relative to the information available to the authors?
If botanists can learn enough about botany to disprove the Bible's claim about the mustard seed, might geologists conceivably learn enough about the earth to disprove the story of the flood? Might cosmologists learn enough about the universe to disprove the story of Jericho? Might biologists learn enough about life to disprove the story of creation?
05 Jul 07
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesThe theology of inerrancy is no where found in the Bible, rather, it is a construct based upon the interpretation of the Bible making the claim to be the inspired word of God. My interpretation, therefore, of inerrancy would be that the general spiritual principles and general occurances actually happened. When one begins to strain at the details, however, they are missing the bigger picture for what I would say would be inearrant. The parable, for example, for which the mustard seed was mentioned conveys a truth that I would say is inerrant. However, the scientific truths of the mustard seed are in question. However, Christ was not attempting to convey a scientific truth, rather, he was using a parable to make them better understand a spiritual truth. If I were a Palastinian farmer and Christ gave an example of the smallest seed in existence for which I had to point of reference, the parable would probably loose its meaning, thus becoming impotent.
Does the King James Bible claim that the mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds?
Are you suggesting that the claims of the Bible are only true in a relative sense, for example, relative to the information available to the authors?
If botanists can learn enough about botany to disprove the Bible's claim about the mustard seed, might geologist ...[text shortened]... story of Jericho? Might biologists learn enough about life to disprove the story of creation?
05 Jul 07
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyMight the flood story be similar in that the story itself conveys a truth while being scientifically inaccurate in its details?
The theology of inerrancy is no where found in the Bible, rather, it is a construct based upon the interpretation of the Bible making the claim to be the inspired word of God. My interpretation, therefore, of inerrancy would be that the general spiritual principles and general occurances actually happened. When one begins to strain at the details, however, ...[text shortened]... had to point of reference, the parable would probably loose its meaning, thus becoming impotent.
Might the Jericho story be similar in that the story itself conveys a truth while being scientifically inaccurate in its details?
Might the creation story be similar in that the story itself conveys a truth while being scientifically inaccurate in its details?
Might the resurrection story be similar in that the story itself conveys a truth while being scientifically inaccurate in its details?
05 Jul 07
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesActually, I read once where they said the Jericho story could be scientifically accurate. If you have that many people marching that many days and causing that magnitude of vibrations, and then on the last day do the same but add that magnitude of sound vibrations, walls could indeed crumble. Just throwing into the mix what I read.
Might the flood story be similar in that the story itself conveys a truth while being scientifically inaccurate in its details?
Might the Jericho story be similar in that the story itself conveys a truth while being scientifically inaccurate in its details?
Might the creation story be similar in that the story itself conveys a truth while bei ...[text shortened]... in that the story itself conveys a truth while being scientifically inaccurate in its details?
05 Jul 07
Originally posted by pawnhandlerLOL. I was referring to the sun standing still in the sky for a whole day. Isn't that in the Jericho story, or am I confused?
Actually, I read once where they said the Jericho story could be scientifically accurate. If you have that many people marching that many days and causing that magnitude of vibrations, and then on the last day do the same but add that magnitude of sound vibrations, walls could indeed crumble. Just throwing into the mix what I read.
05 Jul 07
1 edit
Originally posted by whodey
My question is posed to those of faith. How many believe the word of God is inerrant? If you do believe the word of God to be inerrant, what does this mean? Do you believe the original text to be inerrant, do you believe that EVERY translation made is inerrant or just certain ones etc.? We all know that the Bible claims to be the inspired word of God. So does this translate into inerrantcy?
My question is posed to those of faith. How many believe the word of God is inerrant?
I do.
If you do believe the word of God to be inerrant, what does this mean?
"The Bible alone, and the Bible in its entirety, is the Word of God written and is therefore inerrant in the autographs."
http://www.etsjets.org/doctrine.html
Do you believe the original text to be inerrant, do you believe that EVERY translation made is inerrant or just certain ones etc.?
The originals autographs were inerrant. Translations contain some errors in translation - but they still convey the meaning God intends.
We all know that the Bible claims to be the inspired word of God. So does this translate into inerrantcy?
The Bible claims to be inspired by God, the original means literally God breathed. So it is not a product of the mind of men, but of God speaking through men to reveal Himself in a verbal written form. Since God can not speak lies, then the propositions God reveals through His Word are true propositions.
05 Jul 07
Originally posted by ColettiThe Bible does not claimed to be inspired by God. Nowhere does it say "when we put together this collection of songs, letters, and books, it will create a book that is inspired by God." Nor does it say "Dear Timothy. God inspired me to write you this letter so that in 2000 years people will still read it."
[b]My question is posed to those of faith. How many believe the word of God is inerrant?
I do.If you do believe the word of God to be inerrant, what does this mean?
"The Bible alone, and the Bible in its entirety, is the Word of God written and is therefore inerrant in the autographs."
http://www.etsjets.org ...[text shortened]... can not speak lies, then the propositions God reveals through His Word are true propositions.[/b]
05 Jul 07
1 edit
Originally posted by pawnhandler
The Bible does not claimed to be inspired by God. Nowhere does it say "when we put together this collection of songs, letters, and books, it will create a book that is inspired by God." Nor does it say "Dear Timothy. God inspired me to write you this letter so that in 2000 years people will still read it."
2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
There are plenty of references to Scripture in Scripture that speak of it being God's Word and inspired by God (God breathed).
Pro 22:19-21 So that your trust may be in the LORD; I have instructed you today, even you. (20) Have I not written to you excellent things Of counsels and knowledge, (21) That I may make you know the certainty of the words of truth, That you may answer words of truth To those who send to you?
Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
Mat 4:4 But He answered and said, "It is written, 'MAN SHALL NOT LIVE BY BREAD ALONE, BUT BY EVERY WORD THAT PROCEEDS FROM THE MOUTH OF GOD.' "
Rom 15:4 For whatever things were written before were written for our learning, that we through the patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope.
2Ti 3:15 and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
1Th 2:13 For this reason we also thank God without ceasing, because when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you welcomed it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which also effectively works in you who believe.
2Pe 1:21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
Col 3:16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.
The argument is accumulative. Christ clearly indicates the Old Testament is God's Word, and that His words (Christs) were God's. Paul, Peter in the rest testify that their words and teachings were not by their own authority, but there were presenting God's Word. There are many verses that testify for the inspiration of the Bible as God's Word, the revelation of God to men.
As for the age, a truth is a truth for all times, places, and people. There no expiration date on truth.
05 Jul 07
Originally posted by ColettiPaul, Peter in the rest testify that their words and teachings were not by their own authority, but there were presenting God's Word. There are many verses that testify for the inspiration of the Bible as God's Word, the revelation of God to men.2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
There are plenty of references to Scripture in Scripture that speak of it being God's Word and inspired by God (God breathed).
[quote]Pro 22:19-21 So that your trust may be in the LORD; ...[text shortened]... truth is a truth for all times, places, and people. There no expiration date on truth.
I don't think Paul agree with you:
(king James Version)(1 Corinthians)(1Cor-46-25)(Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.)