Inerrancy/infallibility of the Bible

[Bill Velek]

I'm new here, so I don't know how well some of my 'former-Catholic' religious beliefs will be tolerated, although I also have a certain 'fundamentalist' slant; I'm not a troll and I'm not looking for arguments or to persuade anyone over to my point of view, so I hope I will remain welcome.  I am a very conservative and orthodox trinitarian Christian. While I strive to always be kind, polite, loving and compassionate, my views are not typically considered as 'politically correct':  I am very much pro-life and consider abortion to be murder, and I don't believe in same-sex marriages nor in heterosexual adultery or fornication, or the sinful direction that our secular society is moving due to materialism and selfishness.  At the same time, while I try to speak the Truth of Scripture, I pray that I will not be judgmental because I am a sinner, too, with a plank in my own eye; but if anything, one of my greatest failures as a Christian is in not finding the courage to rebuke others when I really should.  I used to be involved in a number of different ministries over the course of my life, but have not been active since I discontinued attending my church many years ago.  But I'm still strong in faith, prayer and study, and I'm absolutely convinced that we are living in the last days.

 

Now, before I ask several questions that are on my mind, let me first state that I believe that the entire Bible -- both the Old and New Testaments -- are the "inspired Word of God", and the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us as Jesus Christ. So, as such, it is the Divine Word of God ... and in fact ... _IS_ God.  I truly believe that.  Now, for clarification, I don't mean the physical appearance of the Word when written on papyrus or parchment or paper (or appearing on a computer screen) -- i.e., literally the 'book and pages' themselves -- "are God", ... as if to say that a half dozen books of the Bible sitting in a room represent the real and actual presence of God six times (ignoring the fact that God is omnipresent and therefore in the room, whether the Bible is there or not).  No; I'm saying that the Truth spoken by God (and whatever He speaks _IS_ the Truth), whether by a faint whisper, or a loud shout, or a mere thought never audibly spoken but instead implanted by the Holy Spirit in the minds of the writers of Scripture, ... _IS_ God.  That is, the 'command' itself -- "Let there be light" -- actually spoken by Almighty God with all of His power and authority are Divine; _THEY_ are the "Word of God".  The same 'TEXT' which merely echos it and is written or printed with ink in a man-made book, are just RECORDINGS of the Holy Word of God, yet still entitled to our due respect and veneration because of what they represent, ... but the 'book' itself is not something to be worshiped because it is NOT God Himself.  However, since the original Word itself is from God and IS God, it must, of absolute fact and necessity, be true and infallible IN THE MANNER AND WAY THAT IT IS INTENDED TO BE SO, BY GOD. Let me rephrase that:  it is -- as originally dictated, inspired, and INTENDED by God -- absolutely infallible; so, to me that means that the ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS (in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek ... as opposed to Latin, English or any other language) ... are absolutely infallible WHEN UNDERSTOOD AS GOD INTENDED THEM TO BE UNDERSTOOD.

 

Allow me to expound a bit on that last phrase to put it into proper context:  I believe that there were times when God was teaching a lesson by employing symbolism (e.g., in John 10:9, Jesus is the "door" [or gate] but He is not LITERALLY a physical door). And along those lines of symbolism, I happen to believe, by faith, that there have only been about 6,000 years since the creation of Adam and Eve; there are prophetic reasons for that which I won't digress into at this time.  But, at the same time, while I do believe and will certainly acknowledge that Almighty God truly has the awesome power to create all that exists even in just the blink of an eye, and that He therefore COULD have created everything in six 24-hour days, ... I find no inconsistency in accepting in faith that God _could_have_ also chosen, and probably _did_, to take millions of years for the development of the cosmos and the deposits of coal and oil which scientists insist took eons -- or, then again, maybe He did it all instantly.  Either way, I find it hard to believe that one position or the other will have anything at all to do with our salvation.  Who is going to tell God that He can't speed-up or slow-down His 'clock' whenever and as ever He sees fit?  So in my view, God probably allowed billions of years before he created man and woman by giving them a soul, and only ~6,000 years have passed since then.

 

Likewise when we come across certain things in the Bible, such as 2 Kings 2:23-24 -- "From there Elisha went up to Bethel. While he was on the way, some little boys came out of the city and jeered at him: “Go away, baldy; go away, baldy!”  The prophet turned and saw them, and he cursed them in the name of the LORD. Then two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the children to pieces."  I personally view that as fictional but nonetheless an important symbolic story meant to teach a lesson -- not to mock the prophets -- just like the parables told by Jesus taught lessons.  If literalists want to believe in every word of the Bible literally, that's their prerogative which I will always respect -- especially because I will ALWAYS recognize and acknowledge that it is absolutely possible that God could chose to have things happen exactly and as literally as is stated in the Bible.  So on most points I'll just shrug my shoulders, while on others we will probably just need to agree to disagree.

 

Of course, there are other issues or difficulties in determining the meaning of Scripture, literally or otherwise.  For instance, as I understand it, the Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew, and some parts of the New Testament written in Aramaic and others in Greek.  I don't speak or read any of those languages, so I must use English translations.  With regard to ANY translation of ANYTHING from one language to another, it is very common for some of the 'essence', or even some of the vital meaning, to be 'lost in the translation'.  I think a perfect example is when Jesus asked Peter three times whether Peter loved him, repeating it to the point that Peter's feelings seemed to be hurt by our Lord's persistent questioning; to many if not most Christians, the English translation (and I don't care WHAT 'version' you are using) loses an awful lot in the translation unless more than just the naked Scripture is presented to them, because the English language/translations make no distinction between the word for affection that Christ was using versus the word for affection that Peter used.  As I've explained to my kids when they were growing up, a clearer distinction in English might be something like this -- Jesus asking: Peter, do you LOVE me?  With Peter then responding: Lord, you know I LIKE you.  At the very least, there seems to be differences in degree of affection between what the two of them meant.  But I'm not writing to discuss or debate that point. And I am aware that there are many people who view any contention that the differences in those two Greeks words for love ("agape" and "phileo") is incorrect and inconsequential; I suppose that remains to be debated, but it is undeniable that the English translations (at least every version that I've checked) uses just one word for love throughout John 21:15-17, whereas the Greek for the same verses uses two different words - "agapas" [strong's G25]; "philO" and later "phileis" [strong's G5368]. Two different word roots with two different meanings!  Why?  I can't write out the Greek (you can find it easily on the web), but the KJV says:

 

"15So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. 16He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. 17He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

 

In addition, translating from one language to another, even when done during the very same time period of the writing, still presents great difficulties with idioms. I believe that this applies "across the board" regardless of version.  And if you don't know what an idiom is, I just used one in the quotes in my last sentence; someone who doesn't understand English and who translates it 'literally' because they don't know any better, will insert their foreign-word equivalents of "across" and "the board", but the result they will reach will have a completely different meaning than my idiomatic phrase which means that it "relates to all without exception".

 

So, I will usually use a parallel Bible and view several different English translations, and sometimes I will even check the Hebrew or Greek and consult Strong's.  Although I trust most of the translations (I don't put much faith in transliterations), normally prefer modern to the KJV; however, I also consider the KJV to be divinely inspired, and I find strong evidence in the various readings I've done in Biblical numerology and hidden codes and such.  Anyway, I just wanted to let folks know where I am 'coming from', since many future discussions will undoubtedly involve Scripture.

 

God Bless to all.

Edited September 18, 2014 by Bill Velek

[Alejandro84]

Hi Bill, yes the scriptures are the infailable Words of God. And it is living and sharper than any two edged sword. There is nothing in the scriptures that is fictional. To address briefly your comment on literalists. The scriptures make clear distinctions of what is literal and what is figurative(not saying that the spiritual is always understood). The account of what took place with Elisha is actual not fictional, same as with Elijah going up in the whirlwind, Joshua and the Israelites crossing over Jordan and Jonah being in the belly of a great fish. What is figurative in the scriptures is certain conversations, with told idioms and parables which is common among Hebrews. Jesus spoke in figurative language for most of the time and in others he spoke plainly. Like when he spoke about eating his flesh and drinking his blood, this was figurative but his disciples couldn't understand what it was specifing to. For the unbelievers they couldn't comprehend these words and took them as being literal. Then you have words where Christ says plainly that the Son of man will be betrayed into the hands of men and shall be crucified. Which is actual. He spoke in regards to the spiritual side (being understood that when one believes in him in what he would accomplish it would be as eating and drinking) and the actual.

I mention all of that to say this, when the scriptures detail an occurance in the old testament it is actual not fictional nor figurative, but when there are teachings and as being spoken as in pertaining to the understanding of the wisdom and knowledge of God it can be figurative, not vise versa.

Edited September 18, 2014 by Alejandro84

[Willa]

I also agree in the verbal plenery God-breathed Scriptures when in their original texts. I also believe that they are understood most fully by the work of the Holy Spirit, explaining spiritual to spiritual.. 1 Cor 2:13-14.

But I always interpret literally whenever possible, which does not negate the lesson learned from it. Normally parables were set forth as such, and an explanation was given by Christ. EZ 37 In the valley of dry bones, it does speak of life coming back into the nation of Israel, first physical and then spiritual. This imagery is poetic but verse 11 clearly explains it. So I believe that if the Bible says the bear devoured the children, it probably did just that. But it is more important to understand the lesson.

So I am not sure what your point of discussion is. Probably most of us agree with you. But we have some here who think that KJV is the bible that Paul wrote. lol

[other one]

Welcome Bill.....   I think you will find yourself comfortable here.

[Bill Velek]

SNIP ...

I mention all of that to say this, when the scriptures detail an occurance in the old testament it is actual not fictional nor figurative, but when there are teachings and as being spoken as in pertaining to the understanding of the wisdom and knowledge of God it can be figurative, not vise versa.

 

Thank you very much, Alejandro84, for taking the time to respond.  That statement is very logical and you might be absolutely correct.  I don’t really dispute your position, or believe so strongly in my opinions that I would vehemently voice any disagreement with that; I just don’t know for certain, but it’s worth giving it a lot of thought, reflection and prayer.  As it is, there is actually very little that I do not believe in _literally_, and probably more than most Christians who don’t necessarily identify themselves as ‘fundamentalist’.  I’ll go down a list of some major points as they come to mind, and would appreciate any clarification that you or others might provide.  Thanks in advance.

 

Creation – as I’ve already said, I don’t really believe that it took a literal 6 days of 24 hours each; however, since I acknowledge that God is certainly capable of doing so if He chose to do that, I would not argue against it.  The key point is that I acknowledge that ALL of creation came about solely through the hand of God, no matter how long He chose to take.  However, I will reiterate that I also believe that the time since the creation of Adam and Eve is only approximately 6,000 years.

 

The Fall of Adam and Eve – I believe that there was certainly some sort of an act of disobedience of God which we call ‘Original Sin’, but I’m uncertain whether the specifics described in Genesis should be taken literally or figuratively – though the underlying message should be the same in either case.  That is, I’m _inclined_ to believe that the forbidden fruit _might_ have been something like a sexual act rather than simply ‘an apple’ (or any sort of fruit, etc.).  What does an ‘apple’ have to do with their realization that they were ‘naked’? ... and ‘nakedness’ at least _suggests_ to me sexuality was involved. But once again, I wouldn’t argue against a literal interpretation; it is completely plausible.

 

The existence of angels and the fall of Lucifer – I absolutely _literally_ believe all that I have ever read in the Bible about that; anyone who disbelieves in angels can’t be a Christian ... period!!!  By disbelieving in angels, one must disbelieve Jesus Himself along with so many Biblical events leading to His birth.

 

The Nephilim Giants, and that they came from fallen angels breeding with women – I believe that _literally_, what little there is mentioned of it in the Bible.  And I also believe _literally_ that it is happening again today – “as it was in the days of Noah”.  But that is another discussion.

 

Noah’s Ark and the Great Flood – I believe _literally_ in Noah’s Ark: that Noah built it to the dimensions specified in the Bible, and that God directed all the animals to enter the Ark as described, and that the rains came and completely flooded everything for the time mentioned, etc.  But I’m not really sure what I believe as to whether or not it was a WORLDWIDE flood.  Once again, I’ll repeat myself in saying that it is clear that God has the awesome power to do ALL things and therefore could do it exactly as described, verbatim; while it would be a mystery of science about where so much water came from and where it then went as it dried up, don't we have plenty of other mysteries of science?  Therefore, God COULD do it, regardless of scientific skepticism.  But in my mind, God _might_ have decided to flood just _part_ of the world – all of the world known to Noah and his family – which might have been sufficient to serve His purposes.  That would be a lot more scientifically feasible.  Since I just don’t know about that with any confidence, I can’t argue against a literal interpretation of every single detail.

 

The Tower of Babel – I believe that it would be an absolute scientific, social, and statistical impossibility for any single widespread language of any complexity in ancient times to have developed only through evolution without God directing it; that means that I believe that language was _created_ by God Almighty, and of course that when He did so He created just a single language all across the world (for what logical purpose would He create many languages).  I also believe that because of a sinful act(s) by man, that God decided to confuse man’s single language with babel, causing men to speak one of many different languages, and the confusion that resulted.  I don't know what man's evil was, or that it was _necessarily_ a tower which had to be the thing which prompted God to do so; on the one hand, I would question that any society would exert the enormous amount of effort (labor and expense) to build a tall tower for purportedly the single purpose of shooting an arrow into the Heavens -- that just doesn't make any sense to me at all.  However, other than that I have no logical reason to question any of the Biblical account and am inclined (leaning) to believe it _literally_ just because that’s what the Bible says.  EDIT: I don't know where I got the part about shooting an arrow; some memory of that narrative from somewhere other than the Bible, I suppose.  Sorry about that.

 

The Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah – I believe ALL of that literally:  that the cities in that area were destroyed by fire and brimstone raining down from Heaven because of their immorality, including particularly their _sexual_ immorality, which no doubt included heterosexual sins as well as the abomination of homosexual sins (thus “sodomy” despite contemporary ‘political correctness’); the involvement of angels; that God would have saved them at Abraham’s bequest had he found at least ten righteous men; that Lot’s wife was turned into a pillar of salt for looking back; etc.

 

I believe _literally_ everything about Moses and the accounts of his survival, by floating in a basket in the Nile, of Pharaoh’s mass killing of Jewish children; of his adoption into Pharaoh’s house, etc.; of his encounter with God in the form of the burning bush; of all the plagues imposed on Egypt; of the flight of the Jews into the desert including the dividing of the Red Sea, the manna from Heaven, the water from the rock, etc. while they wandered in the desert for 40 years; the finger of God engraving the tablets of stone with the Ten Commandments; and God’s destruction of those Jews who worshiped the golden calf, etc.

 

Balaam and the Donkey – I believe _most_ of the account literally, but I’m inclined to believe that the part were the donkey speaks to Balaam is somehow symbolic rather than literal; it just seems to me that if the angels reveal themselves anyway, why have the donkey involved in the interim?  Again, God has the awsome and infinite power to do ALL things, including making a donkey talk, so it COULD have happened and therefore maybe it should be taken literally.  I wouldn’t argue about it, but for me it is something that falls into the same category of questionability as did the story of the two bears killing 42 children because of Elisha’s curse (my original post).  While I do acknowledge that it is very possible that such things happened _literally_, just as they are described in the Bible, to me there exists the possibility that God was inspiring His scripture writers to use some ‘literary license’ to convey His message.  And I don’t believe for a moment that if He has chosen to do so, that this in any way makes Him a liar or the Bible untrustworthy – for that is where discernment comes into the picture.

 

The Walls of Jericho – I believe it literally; that they came tumbling down as described in the Bible.  While there doesn’t appear to me to be any scientific basis for what happened, God has that awesome power and sometimes He uses it to make His point or achieve His purposes in miraculous ways.  

 

I believe _literally_ in all other Old Testament miracles that I can think of, such as Daniel in the lion’s den; and in Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego in the furnace; and in Jonah in the belly of a whale; and in all of the prophecies foretelling of Jesus the Messiah; and of the Virgin Birth of Jesus Christ; and of the Star of Bethlehem and the Magi which followed it; and all of the narratives – literally – contained in each book in the New Testament, including all miracles performed by Jesus, and His transfiguaration, His crucifixion and death, His resurrection, and His ascension into Heaven, as well the descent of the Holy Spirit at Jesus’ baptism, and upon the disciples on Pentecost, and upon Centurion Cornelius and his family (Acts 10:44-47).

 

And I believe _literally_ in the Biblical prophecy of the end of times leading to the tribulations, the wrath of Almighty God, and the Day of our Lord at the Second Coming of Jesus Christ -- and I believe that that time is RAPIDLY approaching.  I pity most people because I don't think they truly believe that.

 

All in all, there is very little of the Bible which I consider as open to the mere possibility of being merely figurative or symbolic rather that literally, without every actually _insisting_ that such things can not be literal.  And after thinking about it, I realize that there really isn’t very much of it that I question as being literal, and in any even I don’t think my personal interpretation of the above will make any difference to my salvation.  Most importantly, I believe in all of the tenets of the Nicene Creed.

 

May God Bless all of us.

Edited September 18, 2014 by Bill Velek

[Alejandro84]

Hi again Bill, so what I gather from your point of discussion is that you believe the Word of God to be inerrant and infailible correct? And that it is all one needs for reproof, correction and instruction in righteousness, and not other books that claim it helps one understand the bible.

I've never read the Nicene Creed myself.

[Bill Velek]

SNIP ...

So I am not sure what your point of discussion is.  ... SNIP

 

Well, as I mentioned in my original introductory post which you might have missed (doesn't matter), I'm sort of searching to find myself and what sort of a formal church I might fit into.  But maybe I was rambling more than anything, and if so I apologize.  I had actually started to draft a post for a thread with a question of whether it is possible for some valid Biblical prophecy to be partially wrong/incorrect in some way, but before I finished writing it, I think I had managed to find an answer on my own.  You see, while I was reading 2 Kings 3, I became a bit disillusioned at the end of it -- verse 27 -- because it appeared to me that Elisha's prophecy was not completely fulfilled.  I will now quote _pertinent_ parts from the KJV, the NIV, and the NAB translations to explain:

 

First the KJV:

SNIP ...

13And Elisha said unto the king of Israel, What have I to do with thee? get thee to the prophets of thy father, and to the prophets of thy mother. And the king of Israel said unto him, Nay: for the LORD hath called these three kings together, to deliver them into the hand of Moab. 14And Elisha said, As the LORD of hosts liveth, before whom I stand, surely, were it not that I regard the presence of Jehoshaphat the king of Judah, I would not look toward thee, nor see thee. 15But now bring me a minstrel. And it came to pass, when the minstrel played, that the hand of the LORD came upon him.16And he said, Thus saith the LORD, Make this valley full of ditches. 17For thus saith the LORD, Ye shall not see wind, neither shall ye see rain; yet that valley shall be filled with water, that ye may drink, both ye, and your cattle, and your beasts. 18And this is but a light thing in the sight of the LORD: he will deliver the Moabites also into your hand. 19And ye shall smite every fenced city, and every choice city, and shall fell every good tree, and stop all wells of water, and mar every good piece of land with stones.

SNIP ...

24And when they [the Moabites] came to the camp of Israel, the Israelites rose up and smote the Moabites, so that they fled before them: but they went forward smiting the Moabites, even in their country. 25And they beat down the cities, and on every good piece of land cast every man his stone, and filled it; and they stopped all the wells of water, and felled all the good trees: only in Kirharaseth left they the stones thereof; howbeit the slingers went about it, and smote it. 26And when the king of Moab saw that the battle was too sore for him, he took with him seven hundred men that drew swords, to break through even unto the king of Edom: but they could not. 27Then he took his eldest son that should have reigned in his stead, and offered him for a burnt offering upon the wall. And there was great indignation against Israel: and they departed from him, and returned to their own land.  (Bold and underline emphasis mine.)

 

The NIV:

SNIP ...

13Elisha said to the king of Israel, “Why do you want to involve me? Go to the prophets of your father and the prophets of your mother.”  “No,” the king of Israel answered, “because it was the Lord who called us three kings together to deliver us into the hands of Moab.”  14Elisha said, “As surely as the Lord Almighty lives, whom I serve, if I did not have respect for the presence of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, I would not pay any attention to you. 15But now bring me a harpist.”  While the harpist was playing, the hand of the Lord came on Elisha 16and he said, “This is what the Lord says: I will fill this valley with pools of water. 17For this is what the Lord says: You will see neither wind nor rain, yet this valley will be filled with water, and you, your cattle and your other animals will drink. 18This is an easy thing in the eyes of the Lord; he will also deliver Moab into your hands. 19You will overthrow every fortified city and every major town. You will cut down every good tree, stop up all the springs, and ruin every good field with stones.”

SNIP ...

24But when the Moabites came to the camp of Israel, the Israelites rose up and fought them until they fled. And the Israelites invaded the land and slaughtered the Moabites. 25They destroyed the towns, and each man threw a stone on every good field until it was covered. They stopped up all the springs and cut down every good tree. Only Kir Hareseth was left with its stones in place, but men armed with slings surrounded it and attacked it.  26When the king of Moab saw that the battle had gone against him, he took with him seven hundred swordsmen to break through to the king of Edom, but they failed. 27Then he took his firstborn son, who was to succeed him as king, and offered him as a sacrifice on the city wall. The fury against Israel was great; they withdrew and returned to their own land.  (Bold and underline emphasis mine.)

 

Now the NAB:

SNIP ...

13 Elisha asked the king of Israel, “What do you want with me? Go to the prophets of your father and to the prophets of your mother.” The king of Israel replied, “No, the LORD has called these three kings together only to deliver us into the power of Moab.”  14 Then Elisha said, “As the LORD of hosts lives, whom I serve, were it not that I respect Jehoshaphat, the king of Judah, I should neither look at you nor notice you at all.  15 Now get me a minstrel.” When the minstrel played, the hand of the LORD came upon Elisha,  16 and he announced: “Thus says the LORD: Provide many catch basins in this wadi.  17 For the LORD says: Though you will see neither wind nor rain, yet this wadi will be filled with water for you to drink, and for your livestock and pack animals. 18 And since the LORD does not consider this enough, he will also deliver Moab into your power.  19 You shall destroy every fortified city and every choice city, fell every fruit tree, stop up all the springs, and ruin every fertile field with stones.”

SNIP ...

24 But when they [the Moabites] reached the camp of Israel, the Israelites rose up and attacked the Moabites, who fled from them. They ranged through the countryside destroying Moab —  25 leveling the cities, each one casting the stones onto every fertile field and filling it, stopping up every spring, felling every fruit tree, until only the stones of Kir-hareseth remained. Then the slingers surrounded and attacked it.  26 When he saw that the battle was going against him, the king of Moab took seven hundred swordsmen to break through to the king of Edom, but he failed.  27 So he took his firstborn, who was to succeed him as king, and offered him as a burnt offering upon the wall.  The wrath against Israel was so great that they gave up the siege and returned to their own land.  (Bold and underline emphasis mine.)

 

So, it seemed evident to me that the prophecy of Elisha was not completely fulfilled -- what with the failure of Israel/Judah/Edom to "smite", "overthrow", or "destroy" ... "every" ... "fortified', "fenced" or "choice" city, which Kir-hareseth must have been because it had a "wall" upon which the sacrifice was made.  But then I began to wonder whether the word "shall" or "will" as contained in the highlighted portion of verse 19 was a command instead of a prediction (prophesy).  So maybe Elisha wasn't wrong after all.  But what about the second clause of verse 18, which was clearly a prophecy?  ... that the Lord "will also deliver the Moabites into your hand" (KJV and NIV), or "... into your power" (NAB).  So clearly Israel/Judah/Edom failed to ultimately defeat the Moabites as the Lord seemed to promise, and this again seemed like a failed prophecy to me --- at least it didn't happen in Chapter 3 and I couldn't find where it happened anywhere in any of the later chapters of 2 Kings.  But then I finally found in 2 Chronicles 20:22, that the Moabites were defeated by the Lord when they came against Judah.  So I presume that this was the later fulfillment of the prophecy in 2 Kings 3.  I hope I've now figured it out correctly; any comments?

 

Anyway, thanks for your welcome and your response.

 

Welcome Bill.....   I think you will find yourself comfortable here.

 

Thanks also to 'Other One'.

 

May God Bless us all.

[kwikphilly]

Blessings Bill

     Welcome to Worthy.....................& you are welcome.........I must admit,I am not always up to reading long long posts,,,,for that I do apologize but I read enough to know that you are a man who believes every God Breathed Word of the Bible,as do I ......

    Hope you enjoy Worthy as much as I do                                                                                With love-in Christ,Kwik

[Bill Velek]

SNIP ...

I've never read the Nicene Creed myself.

 

It's pretty much the universally accepted 'basic' creed of 'most' trinitarian Christians whether they are Catholic or 'Protestant'.  Wiki (link) begins by stating:

 

The Nicene Creed ... is the profession of faith or creed that is most widely used in Christian liturgy. It forms the mainstream definition of Christianity for most Christians.

... and ...

The Nicene Creed has been normative for the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Church of the East, the Oriental Orthodox churches, the Anglican Communion, and Protestant denominations.

 

I don't know what is meant by "Protestant denominations" on the Wiki page, i.e., how inclusive the phrase is among the full range of Protestants.

 

Thanks for commenting, and May God Bless all of us.

[JTC]

Hello Bill and welcome to the board,

 

I'm about your age and I was born and raised Catholic. But I wasn't very into it, and as I'm sure you know, back then questions were extremely discouraged, the Mass was in Latin, so very few knew what was going on, and I didn't feel close to God. At 18 I believed I became an atheist. But God was always on my mind. At 27 I started reading the Bible. When I finished it I joined a bad church some HS friends went to. That was 32 years ago and I've never found a church I was at home in. Two years ago, after the Sandy storm I got Verizon TV and EWTN & Telecare channels came with it. I started to learn much has changed in Catholicism since I quit. But not enough. I also think we're in the latter parts of the end times. If indeed we are, I think it's high time true Christians stop quibbling over differences and rather look for agreements. To me anyone who believes Jesus came, died for our sins, was resurrected and went back to Heaven is a Christian. I guess you can say if they believe the Nicene Creed they're a Christian, even if they never heard of that creed. I get upset when either Protestants hate Catholics or visa a versa. So if you ever want to discuss Catholic beliefs I'm your man. But I have a hunch you know more than me.

Welcome again.