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

[IS]

The context of scripture is inerrant and infallible (no perfect manuscripts, scribal errors, etc.), and whenever I perceive a contradiction or error, scripture corrects if like those Bereans. There's no better interpreter of scripture than scripture, sola scriptura. Scripture will answer that question, sometime while reading from cover to cover.

Opponents of scripture sometimes charge that w/ the logical fallacy "argumentum ad verecundiam."
Kinda ironic to me.

 

[Lovette]

The context of scripture is inerrant and infallible (no perfect manuscripts, scribal errors, etc.), and whenever I perceive a contradiction or error, scripture corrects if like those Bereans. There's no better interpreter of scripture than scripture, sola scriptura. Scripture will answer that question, sometime while reading from cover to cover.

Opponents of scripture sometimes charge that w/ the logical fallacy "argumentum ad verecundiam."
Kinda ironic to me.

Ultimately, the scripture's inerrancy and infallibility are reflected in the fulfillment of its prophecies, it also has its own chronicles and schedules, unlike any other religious text. That's how we know the bible is true and trustworthy.

 

[IS]

Ultimately, the scripture's inerrancy and infallibility are reflected in the fulfillment of its prophecies, it also has its own chronicles and schedules, unlike any other religious text. That's how we know the bible is true and trustworthy.

I agree with why some early Christians struggled. Like a lot of Jews, it is obvious that Jesus did not fulfill all the prophecies. We have the luxury of two millennia of developed eschatology (amillennialism). First or second coming? When the rod of iron? What about all those verses especially in the context of today's cultural softball male league?
Yea, I can understand why some reject Jesus Christ as the Messiah. But to me, the OT faithful remnant had a forward-looking faith. Christians or NT saints have a historical faith of Jesus' birth, death, and resurrection. To me it was beautiful, the moment I had to pivot with the OT faithful remnant into the forward-looking faith (Hebrews 6:1-4)
What I think? There's a partial hardening among the Jews; when the second coming of Christ occurs, many will believe. And a lot, I mean a lot of Christians will reject Christ for their feminine, queer, humanistic image projected upon G-d.

 

[Lovette]

I agree with why some early Christians struggled. Like a lot of Jews, it is obvious that Jesus did not fulfill all the prophecies. We have the luxury of two millennia of developed eschatology (amillennialism). First or second coming? When the rod of iron? What about all those verses especially in the context of today's cultural softball male league?
Yea, I can understand why some reject Jesus Christ as the Messiah. But to me, the OT faithful remnant had a forward-looking faith. Christians or NT saints have a historical faith of Jesus' birth, death, and resurrection. To me it was beautiful, the moment I had to pivot with the OT faithful remnant into the forward-looking faith.
What I think? There's a partial hardening among the Jews; when the second coming of Christ occurs, many will believe. And a lot, I mean a lot of Christians will reject Christ for their feminine, queer, humanistic image projected upon G-d.

There the two comings of the messiah, one time as the son of Joseph (literally the case for Jesus), a suffering servant whose own sacrifices an atonement for the sin of mankind; the other as the son of David, a conquering king reclaiming his kingdom and putting Satan in chains. In Jewish tradition they knew these two comings, but by the time of the Jesus's ministry, much of it was forgotten, the religious elites were carried away by the politics, the vox populi of the time, you know, they were caught between the Roman occupiers and local rebels.

 

[IS]

There the two comings of the messiah, one time as the son of Joseph (literally the case for Jesus), a suffering servant whose own sacrifices an atonement for the sin of mankind; the other as the son of David, a conquering king reclaiming his kingdom and putting Satan in chains. In Jewish tradition they knew these two comings, but by the time of the Jesus's ministry, much of it was forgotten, the religious elites were carried away by the politics, the vox populi of the time, you know, they were caught between the Roman occupiers and local rebels.

Yes, and why I said, we have the luxury in hindsight of theological development.
Why he no come back?
That question took time to answer.
Look at how many years the Nicene Creed took to formulate.

And that was then and not now. Matthew 5:6, most today have abolished the Lex Talionis. And ironically some use Matthew 5:6 for personal vendettas.

 

[Lovette]

He'll return by 2030, no later than 2040, depending on whcih year exactly was he crucified, 2000 years exactly from there.

 

[IS]

He'll return by 2030, no later than 2040, depending on whcih year exactly was he crucified, 2000 years exactly from there.

Now you lost me. Seriously, lost me. In other words, I'm not following.

 

[Lovette]

Now you lost me. Seriously, lost me. In other words, I'm not following.

you asked "Why he no come back", there's my answer. He won't come back until the age of the gentiles is fulfilled, Lk. 21:24.

 

[DavidLamb]

He'll return by 2030, no later than 2040, depending on whcih year exactly was he crucified, 2000 years exactly from there.

Nobody apart from God knows when Jesus will return. That is why Christians are told to be ready:

(Mat 24:42-44 NKJV) Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming. But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.

 

[IS]

There's no "ignore" a member option in this forum?

 

[Lovette]

Nobody apart from God knows when Jesus will return. That is why Christians are told to be ready:

(Mat 24:42-44 NKJV) Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming. But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.

Meanwhile, in the same chapter:

And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come. (Matt. 24:14)
Immediately after the tribulation of those days ... and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (Matt. 24:29-30)
Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near—at the doors! (Matt. 24:32-33)

We can know the general season by the signs, but not the precise day or the hour.

 

[IS]

Meanwhile, in the same chapter:

And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come. (Matt. 24:14)
Immediately after the tribulation of those days ... and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (Matt. 24:29-30)
Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near—at the doors! (Matt. 24:32-33)

We can know the general season by the signs, but not the precise day or the hour.

Ecclesiates 3:

1 There is a time for everything,
and a season for every activity under the heavens:

2 a time to be born and a time to die,
a time to plant and a time to uproot,
3 a time to kill and a time to heal,
a time to tear down and a time to build,
4 a time to weep and a time to laugh,
a time to mourn and a time to dance,
5 a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them,
a time to embrace and a time to refrain from embracing,
6 a time to search and a time to give up,
a time to keep and a time to throw away,
7 a time to tear and a time to mend,
a time to be silent and a time to speak,
8 a time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace.

I remember the time when a lady in church turned around and said, "G-d gave me a message to tell you." She then asked, "Are you from a halfway house?" I said, "NO!" Her cheeks turned bright red. I wasn't looking around for a pen to write down a message as authoritative as the prophets. She never conveyed her "prophetic" message. Yeah, I wasn't looking around for a pen. I thought it was the season for righteousness.

In hindsight, that church became a stepping-stone church. In some ways, I could rationalize her message. That Pentecostal/Charasmatic church was like every other dumpster alongside the wayside of the path.

 

[DavidLamb]

Meanwhile, in the same chapter:

And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come. (Matt. 24:14)
Immediately after the tribulation of those days ... and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (Matt. 24:29-30)
Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near—at the doors! (Matt. 24:32-33)

We can know the general season by the signs, but not the precise day or the hour.

So does that mean that you are able to predict that the gospel will have been preached in all the world by some time before 2030, or at the latest, 2040?

 

[Lovette]

So does that mean that you are able to predict that the gospel will have been preached in all the world by some time before 2030, or at the latest, 2040?

That means we are able to discern the signs of his coming, instead of turning a blind eye and mock those who do discern, that's like the opposite of being watchful, don't you think? 2030-2040 is just a rough estimate, not date setting.

 

[DavidLamb]

That means we are able to discern the signs of his coming, instead of turning a blind eye and mock those who do discern, that's like the opposite of being watchful, don't you think? 2030-2040 is just a rough estimate, not date setting.

Let me assure you that I was not mocking you. Yes I agree we are to be watchful because we don't know when our lord will return. I'm glad you said that you are not date-setting.

 

[Lovette]

Let me assure you that I was not mocking you. Yes I agree we are to be watchful because we don't know when our lord will return. I'm glad you said that you are not date-setting.

The point is that there IS an end of this world, as there's an end for the times of the gentiles, that's the completion of the Great Commission. We're living in the end time that is unlike any previous time in history, even other religious people and the atheists are feeling it.

 

[GWH]

Yes, and why I said, we have the luxury in hindsight of theological development.
Why he no come back?
That question took time to answer.
Look at how many years the Nicene Creed took to formulate.

And that was then and not now. Matthew 5:6, most today have abolished the Lex Talionis. And ironically some use Matthew 5:6 for personal vendettas.

Yes, and this hindsight includes insights I shared in post #16, which is buried so I dug it up for you:

Christians have good reasons to believe in the NT (whether inerrant or sufficiently true) God. Four types of evidence or reasoning may be viewed as supporting rational belief in God, although they do not prove He exists: the unique universe, theocentric human history, existential need and moral conscience.

Current scientific theory states that the universe began with a “bang”, when a marble of matter or a singularity of energy suddenly exploded, and that it will end with a “whimper” when the stars eventually fade to darkness. This unique universe theory is compatible or consistent with belief in a God who created the universe “ex nihilo”, who sustains it by His power, and who will judge its moral agents at the end of time.

Current knowledge of world history suggests that humanity descended from a common genetic source and differentiated into various cultures. Throughout history humanity has perceived deity to be the ground of meaning and morality. Theocentric history reached its apex or spiritual climax with the NT teaching that there is one almighty and all-loving God, who desires all humanity to live in harmony on earth and also in heaven, and who allows humanity to experience earthly existence including pain and disappointment (KOTH) for the purpose of teaching them their need for Him (cf. Heb. 12:10).

Current existential reality indicates that mortals need God in order to obtain immortality, that morality needs God for a universal moral imperative (UMI) and ultimate justice, and that the NT offers the best hope that this “duo of desirables” (DOD) or heaven and justice/hell can be attained. Just as physical needs are satisfied by material realities, perhaps our metaphysical needs indicate the reality of supernatural solutions (the God of the DOD).

Moral conscience indicates and logically requires accountability to a moral authority, and the supreme Authority would be God. Paul wrote (in Rom. 1:32 & 2:15) that people “know God’s decree that those who do evil deserve death” and that their consciences “show that the requirements of the [God’s moral] law are written on their hearts.” Our feeble attempts at earthly justice may reflect or serve as evidence of God’s perfect justice. This view is similar to Platonic idealism (cf. 1Cor. 13:12, Heb. 8:5, 9:23 & 10:1). We may perceive perfect justice partially (1Cor. 13:9-12) using spiritual eyes/intuition/a sixth sense along with inference, logic, and even imagination.

This evidence is not proof, but because this hope and belief are based on evidence and logic, it is rational rather than “blind”.

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

The point is that there IS an end of this world, as there's an end for the times of the gentiles, that's the completion of the Great Commission. We're living in the end time that is unlike any previous time in history, even other religious people and the atheists are feeling it.

I'm glad you're watching for the season. No one else seems to be doing so. Are you preparing yourself to endure? I am.

 

[biblestudent78]

in the context of biblical Theology, there is a liberal mind-set of interpretation. One must define what is biblical love. Saying "love your neighbor" has been taken out of context by many well intended people however, truth matters. The definition of evil from the word of God is very much defined and clear. in the Old Testament the Hebrew word "rah" means evil describes wickedness, bad , mischief. There are variations of this in the Old Testament speaking of one's actions or a lesser thing such as gossip. IN the New Testament Jesus speaks of evil done to us because of his name "ponēros" it is an adjective

Jesus In Mathew 6:34 called evil "kakia" or "kakos"


One's biblical theology must be supported by the authorial intent of the text. Has it been established as a normative or descriptive?

There is no doubt that the word evil contextually is not up for grabs, it is only watered down by many who pervert the love of God and his word to do "works" God said were evil and called sin.

CS1
I have not idea of how or what you consider "a liberal mind-set of interpretation. In real terms that usually means "you disagree with my dogmas so your interpolation is "liberal." It has been my experience that when one's theology is threatened the single escape word for all dogma defenders is "liberal." I am by this time in my life fully immune to this kind of head in the sand defense. For instance, there is no such thing as "biblical love." We have the love of God, the love of Jesus and the love of the Holy Spirit = truth.

I find it interesting that the same people that say "biblical" love is only the construct of "liberal theology." However when it comes to avoiding a divorce with your spouse there is "sudden" clarity about the definition of "love." "I love you but just not with biblical love said nobody ever. When your first child arrives there is another kind of love with which nobody is instantly familiar but few lack. Is that "biblical love?" if not adoption is the answer. Both Jesus and Paul spend a great deal of time talking about love, but neither define love as "biblical love." Paul in 1 Corinthians 13 and Galatians 5 give us a pure definition of what love is and its centrality to Christianity. It is actions taken, not weak emotions. In Matthew 25 Jesus defines love in terms that make many want to avoid conviction. We become desperate to explain away our requirement to become more and more loving human beings. We demand to argue 700 yr old unique Dogmas to avoid at all cost any honest confrontation with the extent of the conversion both required and enables from self-love to neighbor-love enabling a harmonious connection to God's love.

There is a wonderful old bluegrass song titled: "If you don't love your neighbor, then you don't love God."

 

[CS1]

CS1
I have not idea of how or what you consider "a liberal mind-set of interpretation. In real terms that usually means "you disagree with my dogmas so your interpolation is "liberal." It has been my experience that when one's theology is threatened the single escape word for all dogma defenders is "liberal." I am by this time in my life fully immune to this kind of head in the sand defense. For instance, there is no such thing as "biblical love." We have the love of God, the love of Jesus and the love of the Holy Spirit = truth.

I find it interesting that the same people that say "biblical" love is only the construct of "liberal theology." However when it comes to avoiding a divorce with your spouse there is "sudden" clarity about the definition of "love." "I love you but just not with biblical love said nobody ever. When your first child arrives there is another kind of love with which nobody is instantly familiar but few lack. Is that "biblical love?" if not adoption is the answer. Both Jesus and Paul spend a great deal of time talking about love, but neither define love as "biblical love." Paul in 1 Corinthians 13 and Galatians 5 give us a pure definition of what love is and its centrality to Christianity. It is actions taken, not weak emotions. In Matthew 25 Jesus defines love in terms that make many want to avoid conviction. We become desperate to explain away our requirement to become more and more loving human beings. We demand to argue 700 yr old unique Dogmas to avoid at all cost any honest confrontation with the extent of the conversion both required and enables from self-love to neighbor-love enabling a harmonious connection to God's love.

There is a wonderful old bluegrass song titled: "If you don't love your neighbor, then you don't love God."

Lets cut through the chase shall we. I did not say you have a liberal mind-set yet if the shoe fits please wear it. The context of my point is as I have said repeatedly. The word of God is without error and infallible.

IF you want to explain what Gods love to one's neighbor is that is biblical and provide an example, I am all ears. AS I have said secular humanistic approach to the word of God, which you said you did not know what it is yet, you speak on "Dogmas" is very interesting. However, to become more and more loving human beings to some means be openly acceptant of The LGBTQ, and other perversions today, which is a liberal theological position.

If the word of God is errored then there is no absolute truth, therefore one cannot fully say this is an act is sinful or wrong based on the Biblical text . Post modernism which you also said you do not know what it is. Teaches nothing is true nothing is relevant.