Bacteria Amaze

[Guest shiloh357]

QUOTE (The Lorax @ Apr 12 2009, 01:26 AM)

Sorry, but I don't believe everything in the Bible is God's word. Some is antithetical to His word.

That becomes problematic because you can't really trust anything the Bible says, can you? I mean if the Bible if the Bible is not really reliable in your eyes in the Genesis accounts of creation, the fall, the flood, and so forth, then it doesn't follow that it should be trusted on even more important matters such as salvation. If we follow your approach, then who is to say that the NT is not just as flawed in its accounts of Jesus' life and teachings?

The problem is that you are setting yourself against the testimony of Scripture and what Scripture says about itself under the inspiration and direction of the Holy Spirit.

As pertaining to Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy, the OT referred to the Law of God and the Word of God interchangably. The Torah of Moses was "The Word of God" in OT before the prophets and ecclesiastical writings were added to the OT canon. This can be seen in both Psalm 19 as well as Psalm 119 and numerous other places.

Paul in commenting on the entire OT canon in his day called it Scripture and said that it was inspired in totality and that it was profitible for our instruction. Peter said that the Prophetic record of Scripture was a more sure and reliable record than His on eyewitness testimony of seeing Jesus' testimony and Peter even refers to the writings of Paul as Scripture.

The Bible never claims that part of it is the Word of God. It claims that it is the Word of God in totality and this claim is made under the inspiration and direction of the Holy Spirit.

Here are the logical problems you run into by denying the inerrancy of the Bible:

1. The Bible claims to be perfect (Ps: 12:6 & 19:7).

2. The Bible must stand or fall as a whole. Think about this: How long would a newspaper or news periodical (like US News & World Report) stay in business if they routinely ran errors in their reports? How much credibility would they have? They would be quickly discredited and they would not be considered a reliable source for news and information. It would not make any difference if errors were confined to just one part of the publication. No one subcribes to misinformation. They expect their news source to be accurate all times, particularly if they are paying for it.

3. The Bible is a reflection of God. If God is not able to preserve His Word from error, then how can we trust Him to preserve us, and how can God claim to be either all-knowing or all-powerful? If God cannot protect His own integrity, then He cannot be trusted with ensuring our salvation. If it is full of contradiction, myths and factual errors of every stripe, as many contend, God's own testimony of Himself as a perfect, all-knowing God is false and He is a liar.

4. The Bible is an examiner of our heart: For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. (Hebrews 4:12)

Notice it is the Bible who judges us, not we who judge it. If we sit around deciding what parts of the Bible to accept or reject, we are subjecting the Bible to our superior knowledge and suddenly, we become the examiners of the Bible and the Bible is subject to the whims of man.

5. The Bible is the rule of faith and practice for the Christian, but if it is unreliable and flawed, how do we put any trust in it? Would you drive a car if the brakes worked most of the time?

[The Lorax]

So Shiloh, I ask again, do you stone disobedient children to death or don't you?

(Deuteronomy 21:18-21)

[The Lorax]

I have two questions for you, then, Lorax:

1) Are you a Deist, and if not how do you distinguish or separate your theology from Deism?

No, I'm not a deist. Deists don't believe Jesus is the Lord.

2) Do you believe God runs our lives and circumstance the way you believe He runs the universe? That is, do you believe "God's sovereign hand" means that He is just letting your life and my life run themselves? Because if so, why bother praying, since your circumstances are "programmed" and how they work themselves out are "programmed"?

Great question, thanks for asking.

With the introduction of free will, predictability went out the window. Humans truly have agency; we are capable of making choices and doing things without the direct intervention of God.

I suspect God's *physical* intervention on this Earth is currently limited, and will be, until the Second Coming. However, that is not to say Jesus is not here with each of us. I still pray.

[The Lorax]

You cant (well you can but it is not an honest thing) deny part of the Bible and accecpt other parts.

OK then. Since you believe in and practice every word of the Bible...

Do you take stubborn, rebellious children to the edge of the village and stone them to death? (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)

And what do you think about this. Do you agree with the following?

And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.

Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

Exodus 21:20-21 (King James Version)

So beating your servant or maid to near-death is OK?

[Guest shiloh357]

So Shiloh, I ask again, do you stone disobedient children to death or don't you?

(Deuteronomy 21:18-21)

Of course not, and I will explain why. The commandment pertaining to stoning disobedient children only applied to ancient Israel when the were theocractic form of government. In God's theocracy, the stoning of practicing homosexuals, sorcerers, false prophets, sabbath breakers, adulterers, and irretrievably rebellious sons were part of the civil code within that theocracy.

It was not a universal commandment given to all humanity. It is necessary to understand the different divisions within the Mosaic law. Some commandments were civil, some were ceremonial and others were moral/ethical. The stoning you are referring to pertain to the civil code not the ethical/moral commandments. It is the moral/ethical commandments which apply universally (do not murder, do not steal, etc.). The civil commandments applied solely to Israel and ONLY when Israel was a theocracy, which ceased when Israel became monarchial.

So, you cannot compare your rejection of God testimony of Creation with the fact that we do not follow a commandment that is not applicable to this age anyway. Your sin is your rejection of the Bible's authority and inspiration and your repeated challenge to God's integrity, thereby.

You really don't know the Bible very well, which is not surprising given the amount of effort you place in not believing it.

[The Lorax]

Have you read the whole Bible?

More than once.

Do you understand that there were different covenants given throughout the ages?

The rules you speak of were rules given to those living under the Mosaic Covenant and the Mosiac Law. IF you read the Bible you will find we are under a NEW Covenant, and as such we are no longer obligated to follow the rules you speak of

This does not make the false or any sort of junk you are saying about the Word of God, it means that we live under a different covenant.

This argument you use is the argument used by atheist who seek to attack the Bible and God. Why does one whom calls himself a follower of Jesus attack the very thing that speaks of Jesus?

...Because I don't believe the Bible is completely inerrant.

The Bible was inspired by God. He revealed Himself to its various authors who subsequently transcribed His message. Thusly did God's message come into the form of a physical book. While the book embodies a divine message, it is still a book and therefore has been subject to error and human distortion over the thousands of years of its existence.

Jeremiah 8:8 (King James Version)

8How do ye say, We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us? Lo, certainly in vain made he it; the pen of the scribes is in vain. (emphasis mine)

There are parts, specifically in the Old Testament, that I find downright repugnant. You know, the various things on genocide, slavery, etc. These cannot be reconciled with a loving God, period. In my opinion, these atrocities imperfection reflects the barbaric times in which the Bible was written. Either that or God is the barbarian, and that's something I refuse to believe.

Now this raises the inevitable question: If the Bible contains flaws, who is to say any of it is true?

It is my personal relationship with Jesus Christ, not my scholarship of the Bible, that keeps me in the faith. Some of the Bible is antithetical to Jesus' teachings, and those are the parts I approach with skepticism. This is a realization that I had early on, and I will admit it was distressing.

While God's message was a perfect message, I do not believe the Bible is a perfect book, to the extent that it was transcribed, translated, and reproduced by fallible human beings over the ages. This is my personal belief. If that makes me sub-Christian or heretical by your standards, so be it. The bottom line for me is, I am not willing to throw away my God-given sense of decency in order to stand by genocides, torture, and other things that are written about the Bible, specifically the Old Testament. I simply can't reconcile that with Jesus or with a loving God.

Anyway, I expect to get an earful from you and many others, sure. This won't bother me, because I understand there are hundreds of sects of Christianity and manifold interpretations of the Bible. You might call me a heretic, but a Jehovah's Witness would call you a heretic, and who's to say they're wrong? It helps to keep a sense of perspective about these things. Furthermore, I am open to change. So if I'm wrong, and I probably am, at least I can change. However, those with rigid, dogmatic ideologies cannot change. That's what's good about keeping an open mind, and that why this mind is staying open.

Happy Easter.

[The Lorax]

Do you dismiss the idea of hell also?

The God I believe does not allow people to fry in a fire forever.

I assume you believe differently.

[The Lorax]

Eternal hell is certainly unbelievable to me. The God I believe does not allow people to fry in a fire forever - that would be the epitome of evil. But I assume you believe differently.

Yes, I do believe differently, I believe the Word of God that was given to us in the Bible.

Question:

Suppose someone tampered with the Bible and changed things about, adding in some repugnant stuff. How would your theological approach prevent you from falling prey to those changes?

[kat8585]

...Because I don't believe the Bible is completely inerrant.

Then how do you trust any of it?

Now this raises the inevitable question: If the Bible contains flaws, who is to say any of it is true?

Exactly! Do you just pick the parts you want to believe?

[kat8585]

While God's message was a perfect message, I do not believe the Bible is a perfect book, to the extent that it was transcribed, translated, and reproduced by fallible human beings over the ages.

Do you really think God would allow His perfect book to have human error in it? So there would be doubt as to what is true and what isn't? Either it's all true or none of it is.