Is the Bible inerrant inspired word of God?

[IamWhoIam]

From the beginning, Satan's attack has been on the word of God. Satan's attack is changing the word of God. Satan's attack is getting man to doubt the truth of every word of God.

Yes satan does attack the word of God, Jesus was tempted in the wilderness is a example of that.

Im joyful you can read any bible translation and rightly divide the word of God and understand the message,

it doesn't matter what version you read correct?

 

[Nehemiah6]

... who can say with 100% accuracy that their bible is error free without mistranslations etc. ? none...

That is precisely what the Enemy would have you believe. He wants the Sword of the Spirit to become a butter knife, and that is why we have a proliferation of modern Bible versions, each one trying to be just a little bit "better".

So if you wish to know how you can be 100% certain, you will need to spend some time and energy on investigating the issue. Had you done so you would not have made the above remark.

 

[John146]

Yes satan does attack the word of God, Jesus was tempted in the wilderness is a example of that.

Im joyful you can read any bible translation and rightly divide the word of God and understand the message,

it doesn't matter what version you read correct?

Understanding the gospel message can be found in most versions, but all truth for the believer to study and live by is not found in all versions. All versions cannot be the word of God since all say different things and even contain different truths. Either one is the word of God, or none of them.

 

[crossnote]

"Who is the inerrant, inspired, Word of God." = Grandpa

Wonderful truth.

Now, why didn't I think of that?

Perhaps because without God's written Word we would not know the 'Who' .

 

[IamWhoIam]

That is precisely what the Enemy would have you believe. He wants the Sword of the Spirit to become a butter knife, and that is why we have a proliferation of modern Bible versions, each one trying to be just a little bit "better".

So if you wish to know how you can be 100% certain, you will need to spend some time and energy on investigating the issue. Had you done so you would not have made the above remark.

You have not understand what I was saying or you wouldn't have made the remark you did. for that is exactly what I'm saying to do the leg work, look at multiple bible version to know the correct translation. the issue is endless debating over what bible is the correct translation.

 

[IamWhoIam]

see you all later I'm logging off for the evening.

P.S don't get hook, line, and sinkered and end up on the dry land wondering how you got there.

peace out.

 

[Bogadile]

Perhaps because without God's written Word we would not know the 'Who' .

That is not the case at all. The Apostles were preaching before they had any New Testament Scriptures.

A book is not the only way to know about Jesus, people can speak, even a donkey can speak in some instances.
Many people in history could not even read.

 

[crossnote]

That is not the case at all. The Apostles were preaching before they had any New Testament Scriptures.

A book is not the only way to know about Jesus, people can speak, even a donkey can speak in some instances.
Many people in history could not even read.

And you don't think oral tradition wouldn't have changed the message? Look at the pagan accounts of the Flood descended from Noah,; Look at Rome and the mess she has made with her oral tradition. The reason why the apostles wrote their Gospel accounts was that they foresaw wolves would sneak in and teach damnable heresies without a written record.

 

[Hizikyah]

And you don't think oral tradition wouldn't have changed the message? Look at the pagan accounts of the Flood descended from Noah,; Look at Rome and the mess she has made with her oral tradition. The reason why the apostles wrote their Gospel accounts was that they foresaw wolves would sneak in and teach damnable heresies without a written record.

I just want to say judeo christian speaking the term "oral tradition" has whole other connotations, and an 23 vols of man mad non-sense was made from oral tradition, this does not mean all word of mouth is false.

up until like 00 yearsago or something like that people didnt own their own copies of Scripture, one had to be rich to afford one. and the romans would not allow it during their inquisition and militant dominant times

 

[Bogadile]

And you don't think oral tradition wouldn't have changed the message? Look at the pagan accounts of the Flood descended from Noah,; Look at Rome and the mess she has made with her oral tradition. The reason why the apostles wrote their Gospel accounts was that they foresaw wolves would sneak in and teach damnable heresies without a written record.

There was nobody walking around Jesus and taking notes of what He said. The gospels written years later, here is what Luke has to say about it:

Luke 1:1-3
Since many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as those who were eyewitnesses from the beginning and ministers of the word have handed them down to us, I too have decided, after investigating everything accurately anew, to write it down in an orderly sequence for you, most excellent Theophilus,

You seem to think that just because people have the Bible now all of our problems and doctrines are sorted out? While we still have just as many if not more heresies and false teachings as there was back then.
With the Bible being a huge book, you can make it say whatever you want.

 

[crossnote]

I just want to say judeo christian speaking the term "oral tradition" has whole other connotations, and an 23 vols of man mad non-sense was made from oral tradition, this does not mean all word of mouth is false.

up until like 00 yearsago or something like that people didnt own their own copies of Scripture, one had to be rich to afford one. and the romans would not allow it during their inquisition and militant dominant times

That's why there were Ezra's to read and explain as well as ...
Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written in it, for the time is near.
(Rev 1:3)

 

[Hizikyah]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]John 21:25, “Now there is much else that [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]יהושע [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]did. If every one of them were written down, I think that the world itself would not contain the written books. Awmĕin.”[/FONT]

 

[crossnote]

There was nobody walking around Jesus and taking notes of what He said. The gospels written years later, here is what Luke has to say about it:

Luke 1:1-3
Since many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as those who were eyewitnesses from the beginning and ministers of the word have handed them down to us, I too have decided, after investigating everything accurately anew, to write it down in an orderly sequence for you, most excellent Theophilus,

You seem to think that just because people have the Bible now all of our problems and doctrines are sorted out? While we still have just as many if not more heresies and false teachings as there was back then.
With the Bible being a huge book, you can make it say whatever you want.

As I said, read the pagan accounts of the Flood (as all were eyewitness- Noah, Shem, Ham and Japheth) that were passed down orally, then read the account inspired by God given to Moses. Which will you believe? The same process held true as the Holy Spirit brought to the Apostles remembrance all that Jesus taught.

You seem to think that just because people have the Bible now all of our problems and doctrines are sorted out?

Waa? are we attempting mind reading now? I never thought or said that. LOL

 

[Locutus]

Not when it gets in the "hands" of some theologies.

 

[Angela53510]

There was nobody walking around Jesus and taking notes of what He said. The gospels written years later, here is what Luke has to say about it:

Luke 1:1-3
Since many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as those who were eyewitnesses from the beginning and ministers of the word have handed them down to us, I too have decided, after investigating everything accurately anew, to write it down in an orderly sequence for you, most excellent Theophilus,

You seem to think that just because people have the Bible now all of our problems and doctrines are sorted out? While we still have just as many if not more heresies and false teachings as there was back then.
With the Bible being a huge book, you can make it say whatever you want.

It really should be mandatory for every new Christian to take a hermeneutics course. No, we would still not agree 100%. BUT, there would be so many less bad doctrines formed by out of context verse plucking.

As for the Greek, reading the Greek last night at our Bible study, while the English was read in various versions, I saw some flaws here and there, in the translations. But none that were so big, they did not convey the meaning the author wanted.

Plus, if people would read the whole Bible, over and over, they would start to see the unity in what is written. It is not just about the words, the sentences, but the big picture! The whole Bible puts together the big picture. There is a reason Paul told Timothy to study!

"Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth." 2 Tim. 2:15

And of course, there is:

"Every scripture is inspired by God and useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the person dedicated to God may be capable and equipped for every good work." 2 Tim. 3:16-17

 

[CS1]

THE WORD OF GOD IS FULLY WITH OUT ERROR. there are no flaws . it is completely God breathed and inspired without error. Where there is confusion, it is with man only and his limited understanding.

The word of God give us what is needed for appropriate worship and righteous living. those who speak about the Greek and Hebrew it is important to study as the Word of God says however, many have been saved and never hearing a Greek or Hebrew preached or translation.

 

[Nehemiah6]

The Apostles were preaching before they had any New Testament Scriptures.

And you will note that they were quoting extensively from the Hebrew Bible (the Tanakh), and were also being given words from God Himself. While the Book is not the only way to know about Jesus, the Book is there to reveal Jesus, and all should read the Bible and believe it. We should never forget that the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation, and that Gospel is embedded in the Scriptures.

 

[Johnny_B]

I believe it is. And when there are some human comments (like "bring me a cloak I left in Troas"), I still believe that God wanted that statement to be read. He inspired it to be written down. Sometimes it shows the human side along with the spiritual - why would not God plan it that way?

And even though there are various quality copies of scripture, and worded differently, the basic message is the same. It all points to Jesus and The Cross. Could it be that different people need to hear it phrased differently in order to understand it?

It is the Spirit behind the message that needs to be discerned.

There is a danger when you try to decide what part is God's and what part is man's own thoughts. Everyone would draw the distinction differently. It is much easier to believe in the inerrant inspired Word of God.

I like the way you explained it.

I see the Bible as inerrant in it original manuscripts. The Jews were so precise in thier copying of the manuscripts that if a letter did not fall in the exact spot it would be thorwn away and they would start over again. The parchment was a certain size and there was a letter in a word that had to be exactly in the center of the parchment it was not allowed to pass inspection. This is why the copy of the book of Isaiah found in the Dead Sea Scrolls was so accurate, because they were so precise in thier copying of the OT manuscripts. Everything had to be exact or it did not pass the inspection and would be destroyed.

 

[Prov910]

Why read and study from something that has errors in it? Who are you or anyone else to determine what words we cant trust to be right and which ones are errors?

Why? For the same reason I go to church and listen to my minister: To learn. I realize my minister is not a perfect human. To my knowledge, there's only been one perfect human who walked the face of the earth. Jesus Christ. Nonetheless, my minister—although not perfect—preaches the gospel. He helps me to learn the word of God.

I feel the same way about the bible. I believe the bible was inspired. I read the bible nearly every day. It's a tool I use to help me worship God. But the bible is not God. I don't worship the bible. I worship God. For all I know the bible may have had errors or misinterpretations introduced into it during the past 1500 years of translation, copying and publication. My own opinion is that I don't know for sure that the bible is "inerrant".

Perhaps others are able to know for themselves that the bible is the inerrant word of God. I'm fine with that, and am glad that they've come to this understanding. After all, in all my reading and studying of the bible I haven't found anything I consider to be an error. But as for me, I know that only God is good. And as such, only God is inerrant. Hence, I worship God not the bible. /jmho

 

[SovereignGrace]

You have not understand what I was saying or you wouldn't have made the remark you did. for that is exactly what I'm saying to do the leg work, look at multiple bible version to know the correct translation. the issue is endless debating over what bible is the correct translation.

Nehemiah6 and john146 are KJVonlyists. Flee!!