Is God's Word Inerrant

[sevenseas]

You believe a concept you can't even define?

you know, you are not as smart as you like to think you are

I used the word INSPIRED

having had this kind of discussion with you before, I know you will not admit you had what I said mixed up with someone else because you have been trying to trip me up since yesterday

here's my post dude:

why would the Bible need to say it is inerrant when it says it is the INSPIRED word of God?

some people like to skirt around the edge of truth to come up with someone new and exciting rather than live by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God

and of course we can dicker about words all day long

and that's why this forum is so popular

that's post # 4

now if you want to be silly and keep trying to say I used perfect or inerrant and did not know what I was talking about, you will only illustrate what I already said

go did up some more weird videos that you and someone else can share

 

[Dino246]

looks like somebody does not know the difference between inerrant and inspired

I know what both words mean and I know which one I used

then I get asked if I know that inerrant means perfect and yet I said INSPIRED

guess he lost track of who said what

anyway, not playing those games

I would suggest that it's the fault of the OP for confusing the two, in this case.

 

[Enow]

I guess that is the reason for the instruction to rightly divide the word.

Trusting Jesus Christ for help in giving wisdom and discernment in understanding the truths in His words in the KJV is the only way to rightly divide the world of truth rather than looking to men to make an easier to read Bible version.

 

[sevenseas]

I would suggest that it's the fault of the OP for confusing the two, in this case.

yeah well, he's been digging at me since yesterday

I'm letting it go now cause the root cause of the digging is not something he would ever admit to

 

[seed_time_harvest]

GOD gave the law to Moses to give the law to men but men could not keep the law and the law didn't help men to keep the law.The law only pointed out when It was offended.(old covenant)

GOD had mercy on men and made It possible for man to have relationship with HIM(Grace through Faith)by sending HIS WORD to the earth manifested In the flesh to men In order to fulfill the law perfectly as a man for man,that's GRACE.(New Testament)

Somebody might mistakenly see error because the same GOD that spoke In the Old Testament Is the same GOD that spoke In the New Testament and they might say that since GOD's WORD doesn't change,we are suppose to keep the law and be under GRACE at the same time and the Bible says that work Is work and grace Is not work.

GOD's law Is perfect but man Is weak because of the flesh(carnal)
+++
Without the sacrifice of JESUS on the cross shedding HIS blood,man would have to keep the law without GOD's GRACE because all men were coming short of the glory of GOD.
+++
Example by a comparison.
If the only way to be righteous before GOD was to jump 10 feet.

Person A might be a couch potato and can only jump a few Inches and came short of 10 feet.

Person B Is the professional basketball player MJ and can jump 9 feet but still came short of 10 feet.

They would both come short,so then It wouldn't matter If the person was or wasn't close,If you miss heaven by an Inch,you missed It by a mile.

 

[Zi]

It depends who you are asking. Ask a non believer and they will say the whole thing contradicts itself and sounds silly. Spiritual matters are revealed by the spirit. Don't understand it or think there is an error? You must be looking through natural eyes. The Holy Spirit should be revealing it beyond your language barrier.

 

[sevenseas]

 

[Nehemiah6]

As with every concept, "inerrant" means different things to different people.

As applied to Scripture (the Word of God) it cannot mean different things to different people unless they wish to hide their unbelief under semantic games. As applied to Scripture, "inerrant" means completely and totally free from all errors, either of fact or of doctrine. In simple terms there are no mistakes in the Bible whatsoever, since it could not be the Word of God if it had any errors in it. Since God is perfect and flawless, His written words must also be the same.

Thus we come to the doctrine of Divine Inspiration. In simple terms it means that every prophet and every evangelist or apostle within the 66 canonical books wrote under the absolute control of the Holy Spirit. Therefore those words -- while having been written by men -- were indeed the Word of God (Scripture). This is confirmed in 2 Timothy 3:16,17.

But then we cannot stop with Divine Inspiration, since the original autographs (manuscripts) have perished through usage. So we come to the doctrine of Divine Preservation, which means that through a multitude of copies of copies stretching over hundreds of years, God guaranteed that when the Bible would be printed, the traditional Hebrew and Greek texts would be used. And that is exactly what happened during the Reformation.

More recently corrupt manuscripts were promoted as being "better" than the traditional texts, hence the "critical texts" became the standard, and resulted in a multitude of corrupt English Bible versions. But that is a separate issue.

 

[trofimus]

Thats how the KJV came to be?

 

[Nehemiah6]

Thats how the KJV came to be?

I'm not sure if you are implying that the KJV is corrupt or that this is a humorous matter. But before you say anything negative about the King James Bible do your homework.

 

[trofimus]

I'm not sure if you are implying that the KJV is corrupt or that this is a humorous matter. But before you say anything negative about the King James Bible do your homework.

I did.. what else?

 

[preacher4truth]

If God's Word is not inerrant than it is of no value and should be avoided.
I believe it is total arrogance for any person to believe he/she has the intellect to judge what is true and what is not true when it comes to God's Word.
Believe it all or reject it all.

Exactly, yet there are several on here that place God talking to them, personally, audibly, taking them on trips to heaven, plethora's of "prophets" who hear God say many things to them on the same level as Scripture. "God spoke to me personally and said..."

No. He didn't.

Some of these same hold the Word of God in disdain at the same time or hold a low view of it. The low view of revelation is witnessed in the fact that they take a flippant view of God speaking to others which happens, according to them very frequently. In fact, one of these "prophets" has claimed Scripture as suspect, while his personal prophecies are to be viewed as purely of God.

And he, of course, gets lot's of support while those who refute these things Biblically are ridiculed.

For the record I personally believe in plenary inspiration, full sufficiency and in the inerrancy of the Scriptures.

 

[hornetguy]

Haha I must have quoted you before you deleted it

One of the women must be silent threads? Gosh, there are so many of them

Are men trying to tell us something?

but, as expected, you aren't listening.....

 

[followjesus]

From bible dot org.

James Boice (Does Inerrancy Matter? [International Council on Biblical Inerrancy], p. 9) told of a gathering of ministers where an evangelical pastor argued a point based on the Bible’s teaching. He referred to Jesus’ words and to His promise to return.


When he had finished, a professor from a leading Protestant seminary stood up to counter what the pastor had said. He said, “You cannot appeal to the teaching of Jesus Christ, because we do not know what Jesus really taught. The Gospels are contradictory at this point. Each of them has been written to correct the others. So far as Christ’s return is concerned, we have simply got to get it into our heads that Jesus is never coming back and that all things are going to continue on as they have from the beginning.”


Dr. Boice added that it would be nice to think that such views are held only by a few liberals. But he cited a survey of over 7,400 clergymen in five major denominations. One question was, “Do you believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God?” This was not asking whether they believed the Bible to be without any error, but rather only if they believed the Bible to be inspired by God in some undefined sense. But in spite of the level at which the question was asked, 82% of the Methodists, 89% of the Episcopalians, 81% of the United Presbyterians, 57% of the Lutherans, and 57% of the Baptists answered, “No”! Dr. Boice wrote that booklet in 1979. I would guess that things have not improved much, if at all, in the three postmodern decades since then.
~~~~


Can you imagine what it must be like now? Now, 38 years later, what percentage would say no God's word in not inerrant. And what are these pastors teaching their congregation?


The way is narrow indeed and few there will be who find it because these pastors make the way to God wide and broad because they don't believe the Scriptures as absolute truth.


It would be interesting if each one of us asked our pastors/elders if they believe God's word is inerrant.

wow huh ? if we only believed Gods Word as is the Lesson from adam to the final exhortation in revelation. Always Gods Word is faithful and true, unchanging and immutable being the words of Our Creator. and every single one of them is spoken for our good whether comfort, warning or anything in between. this post is eye opening indeed and leaves little question where the idea of many false doctrines is rooted. from the beginning I have noticed before deceiving eve, first He caused her to question Gods word " Did God really say....." to question the Lords Word, is the precursor to deception. faith is the simplicity of believing His Word.

 

[hornetguy]

I'm not sure if you are implying that the KJV is corrupt or that this is a humorous matter. But before you say anything negative about the King James Bible do your homework.

OH, NO!!!!

 

[Dino246]

As applied to Scripture (the Word of God) it cannot mean different things to different people unless they wish to hide their unbelief under semantic games. As applied to Scripture, "inerrant" means completely and totally free from all errors, either of fact or of doctrine. In simple terms there are no mistakes in the Bible whatsoever, since it could not be the Word of God if it had any errors in it. Since God is perfect and flawless, His written words must also be the same.

Unfortunately, all you have managed to do is give your interpretation of what "inerrant" means. You haven't quoted a dictionary, and while I don't necessarily disagree with you, I would observe that nobody is obligated to accept your definition, let alone agree with it. Effectively, you've just set up yet another standard by which Christian would judge Christian.

Your definition could easily be applied to any particular translation of the Bible... and thereby used to defend that translation alone as 'the word of God'. Given that translation is inherently an inexact science, I would not accept that application of the concept.

 

[Willie-T]

Thats how the KJV came to be?

Or maybe, bibolitry?

 

[Denadii]

Since you could post certain verses right here, right now, and get several differing interpretations, we have to realize that none of us can, without a doubt, that what we are reading is what God intended. Therefore, it is foolish to make a statement about what we assume is "God's word" being inerrant.

That may be why the Bible never says God's word is inerrant.

Yeah. Here are four verses that do not say that Gods Word is inerrant. Go find more...

John 17:17

[SUP]17 [/SUP]Set them apart for holiness by means of the truth — your word is truth/inerrant.


Psalm 119:160The sum of your word is truth/inerrant, and every one of your righteous rules endures forever.


Ephesians 1:13-14In him you also, when you heard the word of truth/inerrant, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.


James 1:18Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth/inerrant, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

Again....Pardon the sarcasm......and again.....You don't have to pardon the sarcasm because I really don't mean the apology. LOL

 

[Nehemiah6]

Unfortunately, all you have managed to do is give your interpretation of what "inerrant" means. You haven't quoted a dictionary, and while I don't necessarily disagree with you, I would observe that nobody is obligated to accept your definition, let alone agree with it.

What I have done is explain inerrancy so that anyone can understand its meaning in siimple English. As to official definition, the one that is found in Theopedia says EXACTLY THE SAME THING but worded differently.

"Inerrancy is the view that when all the facts become known, they will demonstrate that the Bible in its original autographs and correctly interpreted is entirely true and never false in all it affirms, whether that relates to doctrines or ethics or to the social, physical, or life sciences."[1] The conservative evangelical stance on inerrancy was most recently and thoroughly articulated in 1978 in the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy.

 

[Dino246]

Yeah. Here are four verses that do not say that Gods Word is inerrant. Go find more...

John 17:17

[SUP]17 [/SUP]Set them apart for holiness by means of the truth — your word is truth/inerrant.


Psalm 119:160The sum of your word is truth/inerrant, and every one of your righteous rules endures forever.


Ephesians 1:13-14In him you also, when you heard the word of truth/inerrant, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.


James 1:18Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth/inerrant, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

Again....Pardon the sarcasm......and again.....You don't have to pardon the sarcasm because I really don't mean the apology. LOL

Last time I checked, "truth" and "inerrant" were not synonyms. Either you know both original languages extremely well, or you're practicing eisegesis to support a certain view.

While truth and inerrancy are parallel concepts, it is important to distinguish them where appropriate, and not simply conflate them.