In your opinion is the entire Bible "inerrant" or "infallible" as it relates to scripture?

[rewriter]

You couldn’t have said this to my face??

I never stated perfection! No church is perfect, but we strive to be so. This is the difference.

I was responding to what appeared to be confusion about why I had made a comment by another poster who seemed to miss that my comment had been to you, there was no reason to respond directly to you regarding someone else's apparent confusion.

You strive to be perfect, well and good. When then will you acknowledge that our knowledge of scripture is highly flawed as indicated by the points I have brought out, including that some references in the NT were thought to be imperfectly presented until less than 75 years ago when the Dead Sea Scrolls were found and translated showing that the references were perfectly presented, just not preserved in the OT texts we had been using. Or how about acknowledging that there are multiple words in both the OT and NT that we simply are not certain of the meaning, we have a general idea, but not a firm one, such as the word in 2 Timothy 3:16 that seems to have been created just for that verse as it is unknown in any earlier writings, possibly created to avoid using the previously used term that carried connotations that the early church wanted to avoid at that specific time.

 

[Citizen]

Citizen, let's start with the simple divisions related to how one is saved. In one corner we that the Calvinists and neo-Calvinists comprising largely are: The Presbyterian Churches: Denominations like the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. (Note: The much larger PCUSA is historically Reformed, but more "liberal." In the modern day, it is largely represented by the Continental Reformed, Presbyterian, and Congregational traditions, as well as parts of the Anglican, Baptist and Waldensian traditions, in addition to a minority of people belonging to the Methodist faith (known as Calvinistic Methodists) The core "Truth" of Calvinism is that God decided before He created the world who would be saved, thus all others are condemned to hell. Nobody "chosen" can fall no matter how anti-Christ their life and nobody no matter how devout and faithful can be saved. Jesus died only for the "elect" and nobody else.

Those supporting the Calvinistic theology include:
John Piper: Former pastor of Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis and founder of Desiring God. He is a primary figure in modern "New Calvinism." John MacArthur: Pastor-teacher of Grace Community Church in California and featured voice on Grace to You. While some debate his classification because he does not adhere to traditional Covenant Theology, his soteriology (doctrine of salvation) is historically Calvinistic. Tim Keller: The founding pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City and a key figure in the The Gospel Coalition network. Tim Challies R.C. Sproul: Founder of Ligonier Ministries and a widely celebrated Reformed theologian and pastor. Mark Dever: Pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington D.C. and primary leader of 9Marks. Matt Chandler: Lead pastor of The Village Church in Texas and a prominent preacher within the Acts 29 Network. Charles Spurgeon (Historical): Often called the "Prince of Preachers," this 19th-century English Baptist pastor of the Metropolitan Tabernacle in London heavily championed Calvinist doctrines.

Those supporting Arminian theology which opposes Calvin theology include:
Billy Graham. Methodist and Wesleyan TraditionsThe United Methodist Church (UMC): The largest representative of Wesleyan theology, affirming free will and prevenient grace.The Wesleyan Church and Free Methodist Church: Both stem directly from the 18th-century Methodist movement and uphold Arminian soteriology.The Church of the Nazarene: A prominent denomination in the broader Holiness movement that strictly adheres to the teachings of Jacobus Arminius and John Wesley.2. Pentecostal and Charismatic Churches Assemblies of God (AG): The largest Pentecostal denomination, which holds that Christ died for all and affirms the believer's free will to accept or reject grace.Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee) and Church of God in Christ (COGIC): Both emphasize personal choice in salvation and the empowering work of the Holy Spirit.International Church of the Foursquare Gospel: Another major charismatic body that aligns with Arminian views on grace and atonement.3. Baptist Denominations Free Will Baptists: This group historically rejects the Calvinist doctrine of "eternal security" or "once saved, always saved," teaching instead that believers can fall from grace.General Baptists. Unlike the "Particular Baptists" (who are Calvinist), General Baptists trace their heritage to the early 17th century, advocating for a general/unlimited atonement.

Brethren and Pietist: Brethren Church (Ashland), Brethren in Christ Church, Church of the United Brethren in Christ, Evangelical Congregational Church, Evangelical Covenant Church, Evangelical Free Church of America [SEA editor’s note: the Evangelical Free Church of America is officially neutral on Arminian vs. Calvinist vs. Lutheran soteriology and allows all of them.

Holiness (these are mostly offshoots of the Methodist tradition): The Christian and Missionary Alliance, Church of Christ, Holiness, Church of God (Anderson, Indiana), Church of God (Holiness), Church of the Nazarene, Churches of Christ in Christian Union, Churches of God, General Conference (Winebrenner), The Free Methodist Church of North America, The Wesleyan Church are Armenian

Christian and Restorationist Churches (Stone-Campbellite Tradition): Independent Christian Churches and Churches of Christ, Christian Congregation, Inc. are Arminian

Adventist: Advent Christian Church General Conference, Grace Communion International (formerly the Worldwide Church of God).

Pentecostal: Assemblies of God, International Fellowship of Christian Assemblies, Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee), Church of God in Christ, Congregational Holiness Church, Elim Fellowship, Fire Baptized Holiness Church of God, Independent Assemblies of God, Fellowship of Christian Assemblies, International Church of the Foursquare Gospel, International Pentecostal Holiness Church, Open Bible Churches, Pentecostal Church of God, Pentecostal Free Will Baptist Church, United Holy Church of God, Vineyard Churches International are Arminian.

Protestantism makes up about 40% of the U.S. population, and the vast majority of these denominations fall under the Arminian umbrella rather than the Calvinist (Reformed) umbrella.

Explicitly Arminian/Wesleyan Denominations: The United Methodist Church, the Global Methodist Church, the Church of the Nazarene, the Wesleyan Church, and the Assemblies of God (along with most Pentecostal and Charismatic churches) are fundamentally rooted in Arminian soteriology.

Baptist and Non-Denominational Churches: The Southern Baptist Convention (the largest Protestant body) and the booming non-denominational sector mostly practice a form of Arminianism. While they often include a blend of beliefs—such as pairing the Arminian view of free choice with the Calvinist view of "eternal security" or "once saved, always saved"—their day-to-day theology emphasizes individual choice.

The Restoration Movement: Churches of Christ and Christian Churches reject Calvinism outright, emphasizing human responsibility and the personal decision to accept faith and baptism.

The Catholic Dynamic: While Roman Catholics (19% of the U.S. population) are not Protestant and do not identify as Arminian, Catholic soteriology similarly rejects Calvinist double-predestination and strongly emphasizes free will, aligning them closer to the Arminian side of the spectrum.

So there are some "facts" and as you will note each traces its beliefs and subsequent Truth about salvation to those of the 16th, 18th and 21st centuries.

If you have counter facts, please present them

And you're still avoiding answering your own false claim about 50,000 churchs.

Show us with proof which of those churches aggressively deny the validity of other churches as Christian...

...Or do most of them, despite their differences, consider other churches that preach the Biblibal true Christ and gospel message to also be Christian.

it's a very important point that requires an answer.

 

[TruthDefender]

I was responding to what appeared to be confusion about why I had made a comment by another poster who seemed to miss that my comment had been to you, there was no reason to respond directly to you regarding someone else's apparent confusion.

You strive to be perfect, well and good. When then will you acknowledge that our knowledge of scripture is highly flawed as indicated by the points I have brought out, including that some references in the NT were thought to be imperfectly presented until less than 75 years ago when the Dead Sea Scrolls were found and translated showing that the references were perfectly presented, just not preserved in the OT texts we had been using. Or how about acknowledging that there are multiple words in both the OT and NT that we simply are not certain of the meaning, we have a general idea, but not a firm one, such as the word in 2 Timothy 3:16 that seems to have been created just for that verse as it is unknown in any earlier writings, possibly created to avoid using the previously used term that carried connotations that the early church wanted to avoid at that specific time.

2 Tim. 3:16 is not hard to understand. (?)

Don’t you find it amazing that people can spend a lifetime trying to find an answer to some things, but yet reject Truth when it is right in front of them? They reject it for a variety of reasons, too strange/ weird, too uncommon, it doesn’t fit into their parameters of acceptable science, etc.


“At that time Jesus answered and said, “I thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to babes.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭11‬:‭25‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

“He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end.”
‭‭Ecclesiastes‬ ‭3‬:‭11‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

“But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
‭‭I Corinthians‬ ‭2‬:‭14‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

 

[biblestudent78]

And you're still avoiding answering your own false claim about 50,000 churchs.

Show us with proof which of those churches aggressively deny the validity of other churches as Christian...

...Or do most of them, despite their differences, consider other churches that preach the Biblibal true Christ and gospel message to also be Christian.

it's a very important point that requires an answer.

I won't get derailed by you from my major premise. That every denomination and non-denominal church differs about how one is saved, how we are forgiven, what is the Christian role in life etc. My premise is that when we give every person, regardless of education, ethics, morality and potential conflicts of interest including financial interest (aka the prosperity gospel) the assurance that only one interpretation of the scriptures are valid then we get exactly what we see today.

Now to provide sources for the number of denominations worldwide
Center for the Study of Global Christianity (CSGC) based at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. They publish their data through the comprehensive World Christian Encyclopedia and maintain the frequently updated World Christian Database.

Pew Research Center: Excellent for broad, global demographic breakdowns of the major Christian streams (Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox) rather than granular organizational tallies.

The Association of Religion Data Archives (ARDA): A premier data clearinghouse that aggregates localized surveys and religious censuses, making it incredibly reliable for tracking specific groups in the United States and North America.

There is some debate within all these organization as to what represents a "different" denomination. For instance denomination A in Africa may be very different than their US or European counterpart. As an Example the African Anglican Church has broken ties to the European Anglican Church and is thus counted a different denomination. This extensively happens in the Global South, Africa and South East Asia. While some may retail a partial naming convention with their worldwide counterparts, their religious practices and ecclesiastic beliefs are different. While there may be as few as 300 ecclesiastic "families" at the church level they are not sending money to their historic church historical progenitors. Thus, when churches pool contributions and share new identities they can be considered a different denomination. These numbers do not include that vast and widely different "non-denominational" churches as they are self-contained, non-participatory with higher church organization and while they may adopt a mixture of Christian traditions they are not bound by any. So, to the fact that non-denominational churches are the fastest growing in North America, they are not the fastest growing worldwide.

Back to reality. The claim that everyone can read the same bible and come to the same conclusions about the most important understandings of the man-God relationship is demonstrably false. Do you consider Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox and Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons and Pentecostals Christians?

 

[biblestudent78]

This is not the whole thing. Lol
It’s the entire NC.

Please present the "whole thing."

 

[TruthDefender]

Please present the "whole thing."

It’s in my statement, but you’re missing it.
It’s a rather elementary question. Do you even understand the NC/ NT?

 

[biblestudent78]

It’s in my statement, but you’re missing it.
It’s a rather elementary question. Do you even understand the NC/ NT?

I see vague and unrelated bible snippets used to claim some kind of mystical reality known only to you. You are unwilling or unable to converse on the very subjects you introduce. Your statements themselves are just accusatory snippets. When I look back on your feedback they are all snippets of unrelated texts cut from the whole cloth of their original message. The Hebrew Bible and the New Testament are not weegie boards where you get to spin your personal ecclesiastical arrow hoping it gives you divine guidance. This is exactly why Christianity is shattered into thousands of pieces. We can only see in the bible what we have been programmed by our ancient forefathers and our personal church culture, dogmas and rationalizations.

 

[pinebeach]

We can only see in the bible what we have been programmed by our ancient forefathers and our personal church culture, dogmas and rationalizations.

Sadly true

 

[pinebeach]

“But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”

Are you not a cessationist though?

 

[pinebeach]

The whole Bible is Truth. Just read!

Right only the original Hebrew does not relate to our world as it sits in this century or probably most before this one.

The Bible is not a handbook for moral behavior. The authors were not writing to us. They were writing to comtemporaries who had a very different take on things than do we. And don't comeback with some smack comment about it also does not include tv's, pc's and cars because that will simply reflect an understanding of the physical rather than the spiritual which is the actual understanding Jesus spoke of, not to mention all the prophets and how about Paul? What of the deeper spiritual understanding he had and portrayed through his letters?

Not to malign you, but you speak of truth, include truth in your forum name, but deny spiritual realities of the NT and one can only wonder about the old.

 

[pinebeach]

14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

The Bible literally spells that out yet people continue to deny it in the form in which it was written. That is plain to see in threads all over this forum.

 

[TruthDefender]

Are you not a cessationist though?

A what?

 

[pinebeach]

A what?

Google it but I think you know since I have seen some of your responses regarding spiritual gifts in other threads

A what indeed LOL!

 

[pinebeach]

Bible "inerrancy" is the belief that everything in the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament is literally true and accurate about history, and related events without fault.

Bible infallibility is the belief that the bible is infallible as it reals to all things spiritual and is spiritually true

The better question, with reference to the Bible, might be is the spiritual reality presented in scripture to be believed or should we see scripture as history with events described with an added God impartation

 

[TruthDefender]

The better question, with reference to the Bible, might be is the spiritual reality presented in scripture to be believed or should we see scripture as history with events described with an added God impartation

Wow! So you don’t believe in Bible history? Then I’m assuming you don’t believe that God wrote it through chosen men? Sad!

 

[Citizen]

I won't get derailed by you from my major premise. That every denomination and non-denominal church differs about how one is saved, how we are forgiven, what is the Christian role in life etc.

1. That's not your initial claim. You clearly stated 50,000 churches aggressively deny the validity of other churches as Christian.
2. You failed to prove #1, so now you move the goal posts to "every church differs on salvation". Another statement you failed to prove.

I've looked at many doctrinal and faith statements of Christian denominations/non-denominations from all over, and the majority agree with and confess the following truth:

Eph 2:4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.

This makes your statement that "EVERY denomination and non-denominal church differs about how one is saved" also false.

There's nothing wrong with presenting a viewpoint for honest, respectful discussion, such as rejecting sola scriptura. When you dishonestly create false claims and unfairly smear churches to achieve an argument goal, that's when it becomes nothing more than lies.

 

[rewriter]

2 Tim. 3:16 is not hard to understand. (?)

Don’t you find it amazing that people can spend a lifetime trying to find an answer to some things, but yet reject Truth when it is right in front of them? They reject it for a variety of reasons, too strange/ weird, too uncommon, it doesn’t fit into their parameters of acceptable science, etc.


“At that time Jesus answered and said, “I thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to babes.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭11‬:‭25‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

“He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end.”
‭‭Ecclesiastes‬ ‭3‬:‭11‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

“But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
‭‭I Corinthians‬ ‭2‬:‭14‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

If 2 Timoth 3:16 is so easy to understand, what EXACTLY did Paul mean by "theopneustos"? Note I am not asking what YOU believe it means but what the Apostle Paul meant by it and show the support. Now since the word is unknown prior to Paul's use of it, you have only what other people thought that Paul meant, so the only source that can provide insight into what Paul meant is direct communication from Paul, and such will be rather difficult as he has been dead for roughly 1950+ years, and claiming the HS assisting you with the interpretation runs into the problem that other people also claim the inspiration of the HS in their differing understanding.

And I would note that the verses you cite work against you as much as they work for you. If you are the "natural man" in your understanding of this issue, then they speak against you and you cannot prove that you are not.

By the way, are you aware of the term used prior to Paul's writing and its connotations? If so, then present the term and note what it implies, or else admit your ignorance. And I doubt that AI can help you out on this query, so either you have studied enough to learn the answer or you have not.

 

[biblestudent78]

Are you not a cessationist though?

Pick your theology. Then defend it by going back to the "source." I have already listed those sources, so pick one or two.

 

[biblestudent78]

Google it but I think you know since I have seen some of your responses regarding spiritual gifts in other threads

A what indeed LOL!

Can you not fully disclose your sacred sources? Please do. Reality therapy is painful no matter the source. I live in the current world, not the 16th century or the 18th or even the 20th century. I see those claiming the gift of the Holy Spirit promised by Jesus prospering in the world were those who deny Spiritual Gifts declining. Perhaps the actual experience of Christianity is not an A or B dialectic. My person religious tradition says those gifts were time dependent. I personally to not belief in these manifestation of the Holy Spirit based on my theological upbringing. However, I do not put myself in the judgement seat of God. The practical reality believed by most Christians, is if it magnifies and honors God in Jesus, it cannot be wrong. In 1516 we said the deeds of the Roman Catholic Church were sinful and discarded them. In 1529 we were convinced Martin Luter was wrong. The only continuously operating Church of earth that was not condemned by the Protestant revolution was the Eastern Orthodox Church which continues to exist anti-Roman Catholic and fully in accord with Apostolic teachings although Protestants fail on purpose to understand their value of Icons.

 

[rewriter]

Can you not fully disclose your sacred sources? Please do. Reality therapy is painful no matter the source. I live in the current world, not the 16th century or the 18th or even the 20th century. I see those claiming the gift of the Holy Spirit promised by Jesus prospering in the world were those who deny Spiritual Gifts declining. Perhaps the actual experience of Christianity is not an A or B dialectic. My person religious tradition says those gifts were time dependent. I personally to not belief in these manifestation of the Holy Spirit based on my theological upbringing. However, I do not put myself in the judgement seat of God. The practical reality believed by most Christians, is if it magnifies and honors God in Jesus, it cannot be wrong. In 1516 we said the deeds of the Roman Catholic Church were sinful and discarded them. In 1529 we were convinced Martin Luter was wrong. The only continuously operating Church of earth that was not condemned by the Protestant revolution was the Eastern Orthodox Church which continues to exist anti-Roman Catholic and fully in accord with Apostolic teachings although Protestants fail on purpose to understand their value of Icons.

One point that many people miss is that when Lutherans committed to what they believe, they spelled out the few points where they differed with the Roman Catholics, then they spelled out their beliefs on points where they were not certain if there was agreement or not with the RCC, but then after these points they decreed that on all other issues, they agreed with the RCC.

Now the RCC has evolved since that time, so there are more points of disagreement, but there is also still a lot of theology on which Lutherans, and likely many other Protestant denominations, officially agree.