Does the Bible claim to be inerrant?

[James37]

I doesn't really matter which one because they are all sufficiently close in meaning that any of the 3 will convey the same truth.

Do you think that the "us" Luke refers to in verse 1 were believers?

 

[MarcR]

Do you think that the "us" Luke refers to in verse 1 were believers?

Yes I agree with that

 

[James37]

Yes I agree with that

"Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us," (Luke 1:1)

Is there anything that is not true in how this verse?

 

[MarcR]

"Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us," (Luke 1:1)

Is there anything that is not true in how this verse?

There is nothing untrue there; but it is NOT an accurate translation of Luke 1:1

There are 1000 paces or about 3000 British feet in a Roman mile. This is also perfectly true but it isn't a translation of Luke 1:1 either.

 

[James37]

There is nothing untrue there; but it is NOT an accurate translation of Luke 1:1

There are 1000 paces or about 3000 British feet in a Roman mile. This is also perfectly true but it isn't a translation of Luke 1:1 either.

How can be inaccurate and true at the same time?

 

[Magenta]

How can be inaccurate and true at the same time?

You are a smart person. Surely you can figure out how something can be true but an inaccurate interpretation of what was written? I will give you an example. Say I wrote, "I walked a mile to school, and a mile home from school, every day, twice a day," and someone interpreted it to say, "I walked four miles every day to school and back." That second statement is true according to what I wrote, but it is not an accurate interpretation of what I originally wrote.

 

[MarcR]

How can be inaccurate and true at the same time?

If instead of believed the KJV had 'a Roman Mile is 1000 paces', would you accept that as an accurate translation just because it is true? There are more true statements than you or I could count in ten lifetimes but they do not all translate Luke 1:1.

 

[trofimus]

Well they are in the 28th edition of the NA so you may want to update your library! Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are 2 texts that disagree between themselves quite a bit so committing to one or the other is fatal as far as debate is concerned. As far as I know NA and the newer Bibles are in agreement for the most part since they tend to be based on that text.

You are right, new manuscripts are being found and examined.

I think its not even in NA 28.

No translator translates just from one manuscript (Vaticanus or Sinaiticus), but mostly from the NA text.

 

[MarcR]

How can be inaccurate and true at the same time?

Consider this invented scenario as an example:

Fact Mr Trump drank coffee with breakfast.

In the U.N. general Assambly the speaker said " I can't accept that"

The translator said "Mr. Trump drank coffee with breakfast.

The statement is undenyably true but it is NOT an accurate translation.

 

[Hungry]

The words found in the bible.



“For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.” (1 Peter 1:24-25)



"Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.……..For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take." (Acts 1:16, 20) Is this prophecy?

"God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee." (Acts 13:33) How about this?

Then why were they (the Psalms) quoted almost a hundred times in the New Testament? David was a king but his writings were prophetic.



So the Bible came from the Pope? Even Dino246 would probably disagree with that.

You can believe that psalm 69 is prophetically speaking of Jesus. When I read it it sounds like David asking for vengeance against those who go against him, not Him. Jesus never was given gall to eat and He asked for forgiveness against those who tortured Him, not retribution. He never asked for deliverance from his enemies, he went as a lamb to the slaughter. The only similarity is vinegar to drink, which might have been a cruel prank in the day. Also regarding the word (logos) that endures forever, is this the same logos that was in the beginning that was with God (theos), and was God (theos)? Do you think Peter was talking about the Bible? The second psalm could have been him writing a song inspired by the prophets.

This is why there is no point debating scripture. You take written words taught to you interpreted one way, and I take the same words and interpret them differently. If you read the whole chapter of 1 Peter 1, instead of fractions you would see the message Peter delivered. We are to love, obey the truth through the Spirit and be born again through the Word of God that lives forever. This in my opinion is obedience to Christ not validation of the Bible. For the record I don’t believe the pope wrote the Bible. It was put together by people who were under the authority of the Roman Church. What was selected, what was omitted and how it is interpreted for the most part has been by offices driven by political ambition. Reformation and some of the subsequent faiths or divisions are the result (in some cases) of Spirit led individuals realizing everything taught by the Church isn’t Christianity. It is not my intension to further bring division into the Body of Christ, just to challenge others to read scripture as it is written. The Spirit opens eyes and will teach you, don’t trust man. Scripture to the Christian life, is like the rules are to a board game. The point of the game isn’t to contest the rules. Too many people who label themselves followers are more focussed on rules rather than strategy.

 

[James37]

Also regarding the word (logos) that endures forever, is this the same logos that was in the beginning that was with God (theos), and was God (theos)? Do you think Peter was talking about the Bible?

It was "the word which by the gospel is preached unto you" (1 Peter 1:25)

But this is a dead end discussion because it is obvious you reject what the Bible says!

 

[Hungry]

It was "the word which by the gospel is preached unto you" (1 Peter 1:25)

But this is a dead end discussion because it is obvious you reject what the Bible says!

It’s a dead end discussion because you choose to use half of the verses you want to make them say what you want them to say. Read the first half of that verse. Stating I reject what the Bible says, just indicates your lack of interest in admitting you might be wrong.

 

[James37]

It’s a dead end discussion because you choose to use half of the verses you want to make them say what you want them to say. Read the first half of that verse. Stating I reject what the Bible says, just indicates your lack of interest in admitting you might be wrong.

The words found in the bible.


“For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.” (1 Peter 1:24-25)

I already quoted both verses yesterday and you have been refuted by the what the word of God says.

 

[James37]

You can believe that psalm 69 is prophetically speaking of Jesus.

What did Jesus say about Psalm 69?

"[FONT=&quot]But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause." (John 15:25)

[/FONT]"[FONT=&quot]They that hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of mine head: they that would destroy me, being mine enemies wrongfully, are mighty: then I restored that which I took not away." (Psalm 69:4)

[/FONT]

 

[James37]

You take written words taught to you interpreted one way, and I take the same words and interpret them differently.

I just quoted Bible verses so the words speak for themselves. You on the other hand are a private interpreter so let us hear what Peter has to say about that!

"[FONT=&quot]Knowing this first, that no [/FONT]prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." (1 Peter 1:20)

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

 

[James37]

If you read the whole chapter of 1 Peter 1, instead of fractions you would see the message Peter delivered. We are to love, obey the truth through the Spirit and be born again through the Word of God that lives forever.

"[FONT=&quot]Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever." 1 Peter 1:23

[/FONT]The "word of God" here is lower case and is likened unto seed!

Concerning the Parable of the Sower Jesus said "[FONT=&quot]The sower soweth the word." (Mark 4:14)

It is the written word or that which is heard that is sown not "the Word."
[/FONT]

 

[James37]

The written word is about Jesus so in that sense you are sowing Jesus but the point is that it is written!

"Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God" (Hebrews 10:7)

 

[James37]

could have been

my opinion

The thing is that our suppositions and opinions do not count for much. What does the Bible say?

 

[James37]

It is not my intension to further bring division into the Body of Christ, just to challenge others to read scripture as it is written.

Why don't you take up your own challenge because it is clear that you have a problem with reading "scripture as it is written!"

 

[Joseppi]

Luke 1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

First I refer to the Authorized Version above.
The word “declaration” refers to Luke’s gospel as both a legal testament and a proclamation.

The phrase ‘even as they delivered them unto us’ means that the things which are most surely believed among us, were things delivered to the group ‘us.’
In the context of a declaration; the phrase ‘even as they delivered them unto us’ refers to testimonies provided by witnesses having been given to a council of, eyewitnesses and ministers of the word of God, that received those testimonies “even as” they were delivered to them by the witnesses, (meaning that the council recorded the testimonies of those witnesses without altering them in any way).
That is how certainty was assured.

By council I refer to them whom Luke was associated in gathering the gospel record.

Luke 1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are fulfilled among us, even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and servants of the Word; it seemed good to me also, having accurately followed after all things from above, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus...

The corrupt text above is proven corrupt in that it refers to things ‘fulfilled’ as being things that were delivered.

But, fulfilled things can’t be delivered because those are things done.
Witnesses deliver testimony.
Things fulfilled are not carried about.

There are other problems in the corrupt sentence.
The corruptors present the nonsense phrase “having accurately followed after all things from above” because, since they intentionally ruined the idea of the Gospel of Luke being the testimony of witnesses, the corrupters were then forced to provide some means of providing the certainty Luke aimed at. So, they claim the certainty is provided by Luke alone, based on his personal accuracy in all things from above.
But the word of one man can’t produce historical certainty.
Only the legal witness of many can.