The NKJV

[Guest brandplucked]

The Wordof God is inerrant. The bible is only the vessel.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Gerioke, what you say here may initially sound very profound and "right on", but I'm wondering what the heck it means. There doesn't seem to be any content to it. What exactly do you mean by "the Word of God"? Are you referring to the Person of Christ, the 2nd person of the Godhead, or are you talking about the written words?

If you would define your terms a bit more clearly, then perhaps I could understand what it is you are trying to say.

Thanks,

Will K

[yomotalking]

If he did....then you would find something thats...wrong!!

[Gerioke]

The Wordof God is inerrant. The bible is only the vessel.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Gerioke, what you say here may initially sound very profound and "right on", but I'm wondering what the heck it means. There doesn't seem to be any content to it. What exactly do you mean by "the Word of God"? Are you referring to the Person of Christ, the 2nd person of the Godhead, or are you talking about the written words?

If you would define your terms a bit more clearly, then perhaps I could understand what it is you are trying to say.

Thanks,

Will K

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The truth will prevail, despite what you absorb from your chosen literature.

I'm only trying to be concise.

[Guest brandplucked]

Hi Deacon, thanks for you thoughts. As I read through them, it occurs to me that you are probably what I would call a liberal theologian. I could be wrong about this, but several of your comments make me draw this conclusion. For instance, do you believe in a literal hell where the damned will be tormented for ever and ever? Do you believe that Jesus Christ is GOD, the JEHOVAH of the Old Testament? (Not just "divine" but God Himself?)

Do you personally believe The Bible (any Bible in any language) IS NOW the inerrant and complete words of God?

In one respect, it must be nice to pick up Bible labled KJV and believe that every word in it is inerrant. Ignorance is bliss.

Deacon, it is obvious that you personally do not believe that any Bible is the inerrant words of God. I assume you think you are enlightened in this knowledge and that the Bible believer is the one who is ignorant.

The top English translations are good.  But, they are far from inerrant.  Even where there are no "errors" per se, they can be very misleading just because of the limitations of the translation process.  One thing I'm especially curious about is how they decide which words to translate and which ones to just transliterate.  Why does the word "deacon" appear in any English bible?  Every translator knows deacon means servant.  On the other hand, why don't you find the words Tartarus and Hades in many English versions?  Both terms are well known to English speaking people, but many translators would prefer to conflate the two terms and call it Hell, and at the very least, some meaning is lost.  And, this is without getting into that city dump that is called "Hell" by many bible translators.

Deacon, here you question all bibles out there and have placed your own mind and understanding as the final authority. "Tartarus" and "hades" are well known to English speaking people"??? Try going out into the streets and asking people what in the world Tarturus means.

The original language manuscripts have various differences, proving that there are errors.  Even if we assume one of them is without error, we have no way of knowing which one.

Deacon, this is going further than even most who do not believe in an inerrant Bible. They at least think the originals were inspired, though they have never seen them, but you go beyond this - You don't even think the originals were without error.

If you don't mind, could you please answer the two little questions at the beginning of this post? This will give us a better idea of where you are coming from theologically. Do you believe in a literal hell where the damned will be tormented for ever and ever? Do you believe that Jesus Christ is GOD, the JEHOVAH of the Old Testament? (Not just "divine" but God Himself?)

Will K

[Guest brandplucked]

If he did....then you would find  something thats...wrong!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Yomo, then maybe you can explain for us what he means by saying: "The Word of God is inerrant. The bible is only the vessel."

I can't make heads or tails out of this pithy saying. Can you tell us what he is talking about?

Thanks,

Will

[Guest brandplucked]

The Wordof God is inerrant. The bible is only the vessel.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Gerioke, what you say here may initially sound very profound and "right on", but I'm wondering what the heck it means. There doesn't seem to be any content to it. What exactly do you mean by "the Word of God"? Are you referring to the Person of Christ, the 2nd person of the Godhead, or are you talking about the written words?

If you would define your terms a bit more clearly, then perhaps I could understand what it is you are trying to say.

Thanks,

Will K

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The truth will prevail, despite what you absorb from your chosen literature.

I'm only trying to be concise.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi again Gerioke, you didn't answer the question. All I was trying to do was to gain some clarity on what you were trying to say. I still have no idea. By saying "the Word of God is inerrant", what are you referring to? The capital W in "the Word" usually refers to the eternal Son of God, but a small w in "the word" refers to the written words. I just asked a simple question hoping you could define your terms for us.

Will K

[apothanein kerdos]

There is a difference between the inerrant truth of the bible and the inerrant gramatics of the bible. The inerrant truth is a fact, that is seen in the manuscripts and certain translations. THe inerrant gramatics simply does not exist, when looking at manuscripts and translation errors, the Bible is "imperfect" in a grammatical sense, but perfect in the truthful sense. This, ironically enough, lends more validity to the Bible then anything else...showing that even though imperfect men made errors in translating and copying, the truth remained the same.

[Gerioke]

The Wordof God is inerrant. The bible is only the vessel.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Gerioke, what you say here may initially sound very profound and "right on", but I'm wondering what the heck it means. There doesn't seem to be any content to it. What exactly do you mean by "the Word of God"? Are you referring to the Person of Christ, the 2nd person of the Godhead, or are you talking about the written words?

If you would define your terms a bit more clearly, then perhaps I could understand what it is you are trying to say.

Thanks,

Will K

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The truth will prevail, despite what you absorb from your chosen literature.

I'm only trying to be concise.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi again Gerioke, you didn't answer the question. All I was trying to do was to gain some clarity on what you were trying to say. I still have no idea. By saying "the Word of God is inerrant", what are you referring to? The capital W in "the Word" usually refers to the eternal Son of God, but a small w in "the word" refers to the written words. I just asked a simple question hoping you could define your terms for us.

Will K

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well i guess you're not as smart as you like to think you are then, eh?

[yomotalking]

I agree.

I like that!

[doulon]

Well i guess you're not as smart as you like to think you are then, eh?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Is it really too much to ask that you answer a simple question? It would seem that you don't want to (or can't) answer Brandplucked's question.

It would be far better to answer his question than to attack his intelligence.

If you still refuse to answer then perhaps one of the others that stated how they like your comment could answer for you; that is, of course, if they even understood what you were saying. One can make an assumption as to what you meant but I imagine if Brandplucked did this you would no doubt rail upon him for 'putting words in your mouth' that you didn't mean.

As I said, what is so difficult about answering his question?

doulon