Paulbs Take on Inerrancy

[bob_brinton (bob_brinton)]

I Corinthians 7:12,15:

"To the rest I declare-I, not the Lord [for Jesus did not discuss this]-that if any brother has a wife who does not believe [in Christ] and she consents to live with him, he should not put away or divorce her. (15) But if the unbelieving partner [actually] leaves, let him do so; in such [cases the remaining] brother or sister is not morally bound. But God has called us to peace."

This is the Apostle Paul writing in the Bible that what he is writing is from him and not from God. He's saying that what many of you have called the Word of God is in this instance not the Word of God. You have a catch 22 here, dears. Have a nice evening.

[susanna_krizo (susanna_krizo)]

Bob,
I'm not sure if you are being sarcastic or if you are asking a sincere question, but I am going to assume the latter.

Paul was an apostle because he had seen Jesus in person. He was also taught by Jesus in person:

Gal 1:11-12
But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Paul is saying that Jesus didn't deal with this issue but it is in fact God's Word for...

2 Tim 3:16-17
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

2 Peter 1:20-21
knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

Susanna

[daved (daved)]

When Saint Paul wrote that:
>>>
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, etc.
>>>
the Hebrew Old Testament had no vowel points.

However, all of the Old Testaments of our modern English Bibles
have been translated from Hebrew Texts that do have vowel points.

Saint Paul never said that any Masoretic Text "was given by inspiration of God",

I doubt that any GGWO pastor would agree that
the underlying Hebrew text of the KJV was "given by inspiration of God"
so where does a GGWO Christian go
if they want to find "the inspired Word of God",
which is mentioned so often from the GGWO pulpit, or on "The Grace Hour"

When a GGWO pastor tells you that the Old Testament of your KJV is wrong,
and then tells you what the original Hebrew actually says,
what Hebrew text is that GGWO pastor using to correct the KJV?

Is it a Hebrew text without vowel points,
such as the one that Saint Paul said "was given by inspiration of God"?

Daved

[susanna_krizo (susanna_krizo)]

Daved, Could you please explain what you meant by

"Saint Paul never said that any Masoretic Text "was given by inspiration of God""

I'm not sure that I understand exactly what you mean

Susanna

By the way, are you from Geneva?

[daved (daved)]

suzanna_krizo asks:
>>>
Daved, Could you please explain what you meant by

"Saint Paul never said that any Masoretic Text "was given by inspiration of God""
>>>

No Masoretic Texts existed in the first century A.D. when Saint Paul wrote his epistles.
[e.g. When Paul said that "all scripture is given by inspiration of God",
there were no extant Hebrew texts that had vowel points.
Vowel points were added later.]

In the first century A.D. the Hebrew Text was a consonantal text,
however in the first century the Hebrew text had been partially vocalized,
as certain consonants were being used to indicate vowels.

In the rough 700 A.D. to 1000 A.D. period,
the Masoretes added vowel points to the consonantal Hebrew text
to fully vocalize the Hebrew text.

The Old Testament of the KJV is translated from the Ben Chayyim Hebrew text of 1525 A.D.
The Ben Chayyim Hebrew text is a Masoretic Text.

The Old Testament of English Bibles published after 1940, is translated from a BHS text, which is derived from the Leningrad Codex of 1008-1010 A.D.
The Leningrad Codex is the only 100% complete Masoretic Text in existance.

I am not from Geneva, I live in Massachusetts.

Daved

[bob_brinton (bob_brinton)]

In verse 10 of I Corinthians 7, Paul writes this:

"But to the married people I give charge-not I, but the Lord-that the wife is not to separate from her husband."

When he gets down to verse 12, he directly states that now he (Paul) is speaking and not the Lord. So he is openly saying that what he now is writing is the word of Paul and not the Word of God. If the Holy Spirit inspired him to write this, then the Holy Spirit said that this verse is not the Word of God. Is there any reason for us to think that Paul thought that all that he wrote was directly from God when he here says this is not?

What I seek here is spiritual intellectual honesty. It is not meant to undermine anyone's faith. I think refusal to take the above verse in its own context as meaning what it actually says is a form of denial. The system is given to oversimplification. We don't have answers for every doubt or question. If we did we would live by doctrine and our own understanding and not faith.

[nwmomike (nwmomike)]

2 Peter 3:16 - as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.

Corinthians 7:25 Now concerning virgins: I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I give judgment as one whom the Lord in His mercy has made trustworthy.

Apostolic Authority Having direct knowledge of the incarnate Word, and being sent out as authorized agets of the gospel, the apostles provided the authentic interpretation of the life and teaching of Jesus. Because their witness to Christ was guided by the Spirit (John 15:26-27), the apostles' teaching was considered normative for the church. They were regarded as the "pillars" (Gal 2:9) and "foundation" (Eph 2:20; cf. Rev 21:14) of the church, and their teaching became the norm for Christian faith and practice. The deposit of revelation transmitted by the apostles and preserved in its written form in the New Testament thus forms the basis of postapostolic preaching and teaching in the church. Baker's Evangelical Dictionary.

Apostles had authority by virtue of their office. Paul was trustworthy to be a direct messenger of scripture which his writings are binding as inspired directly by the Holy Spirit.

2 Peter 3:16 - as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.

Peter's all inclusive of Paul's epistles as equating to scripture needs no further explanation.

M or Michael

[bob_brinton (bob_brinton)]

It remains that Paul said it was not God speaking. Is that God saying that it's not God speaking?

[rjfernalld (rjfernalld)]

Where is Jim when we need him, huh, Bob? I am sure he has an answer...I'd like to hear it. This is a good question!

[nwmomike (nwmomike)]

yet I give judgment as one whom the Lord in His mercy has made trustworthy.

Plus you must not have read what I posted on Apostolic Authority. The Word is built on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets.

Paul made a distinction that Christ had not taught that directly but by his authority and apostleship he could command as did Peter and the others.

To take yours to it's logical conclusion then you could rip out anything that didn't say "thus says the Lord". Which also means that many of the prophets who spoke on God's behalf could not be counted as the Word of God which it is.

M or Michael

[bob_brinton (bob_brinton)]

I dragged that other thread up, Roberta; which Jim also 'failed' to respond to. I expect he'll come by, though.

[bob_brinton (bob_brinton)]

So what God has to say is determined by what apostles and prophets decide to say? Interesting take. I'm soon off to the dentist. Have a nice day.

[bob_brinton (bob_brinton)]

Balaam was a prophet, and he caught a mouthful from his ass.

[bob_brinton (bob_brinton)]

When Peter and Paul disagreed, which one was speaking God's Word?

[nwmomike (nwmomike)]

I don't think that comment about Balaam was called for at all. Are you hear to build up people in God's word or tear down. If it's the latter then I see no further discussion.

M or Michael

[rjfernalld (rjfernalld)]

Michael

Our Bob has a quirky sense of humor and I think that was just his way of being funny. Bob is not a vindictive or mean person in any way. I am sure he will explain that he was making a quip when he returns. Truly, I know him and have not ever known him to be anything but gracious and kind and his humor has often diffused many a heated arguement amongst some of us who get a bit over the line at times.

Roberta

[nwmomike (nwmomike)]

Roberta,
Thanks for clearing that up. It works the opposite for me though. I see to much of that done by unbelievers mocking so I see no place for at least Christians to imitate.

M or Michael

[nwmomike (nwmomike)]

Bob,
In which reference are you speaking to that you have issue with their disagreements? I guess I'm not seeing why because anyone disgreed that the issue wasn't resolved or was not be taken to be included in God's word. Especially over doctrinal issues.

I may not be able to argue with you reasonably enough but it seems to take your point then what did Peter mean by
2 Peter 3:16 - as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.

Did Paul, Peter or even the prophets at all times speak for God? We would have to say no. But the large question is did they speak for God conclusively in the end on doctrinal issues? Absolutely.

But to make the claim as you have "what many of you have called the Word of God is in this instance not the Word of God". If by that you mean that God didn't direct them to act that way, true. But does it mean that it's not part of God's word or to be included as scripture you cannot. It was include for our teaching.

Paul was basing it on what Christ had already said about the issue.

If you take issue with Paul's writing then you'd have to take issue with Peter's statement.

Maybe someone can explain it better than me.

M or Michael

[terra_cognita (terra_cognita)]

In the Corinthian passage Paul is reaffirming what Christ taught on divorce in verses 10-11. In verse 12 he is saying that the Lord never taught on the marriage relationship between a believer and unbeliever (not of the Lord), so he is addressing the issue. His response is authoritative because he is under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Same thing is true in verse 25.

[karen (karen)]

This Scripture has always freaked me out: "as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures" II Pet. 3:16. This kind of verse always reminds me of Pastor Stevens and others who manipulate people into agreeing with them through fear. Does apprehension of truth require fear or persuasion? If someone is not convinced about something, is the way to bring them to agreement to scare the pants off them? I know that I am open to God's truth, but I believe it is the Holy Spirit's work to show it to me. This verse implies that if I get it wrong, I am doomed. What about the verse that says nothing can separate me from the love of God?

This brings me to consider the causes of doubt. In the past, when I told someone on this board that I struggle with the inerrancy issue, he characterized my reservations as the “sin of unbelief.” As if confessing my doubts and repenting will make me believe. In the past, I did that very thing and all that resulted were suppressed doubts that created distance between God and myself. And eventually, all those doubts came spilling out and compelled me to deal with them. I can’t travel that road anymore. More than this, I don’t believe God wants me to. He has shown an astonishing willingness (astonishing to me, because His way of dealing with me is so dramatically different from what I experience from many Christians) to lead me through understanding, not coercion.

As I understand it, most Christians believe we need a completely inerrant document or we will be deceived by subjectivity. But I must assert that the foundation of Christian belief for ALL OF US is a subjective leap of faith. There is no completely objective way of knowing truth—not unless God opened the heavens and dropped a book into our hands. Let’s face it, the claims the Bible makes about itself being the Word of God are not unique. Many so-called holy books make the same claims, but we don’t accept those claims. So what sets the Bible apart for Christians? IT IS THE SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCE OF CONFIRMATION THROUGH THE HOLY SPIRIT. The Holy Spirit was powerful enough to show us the true book from the false ones so why not believe He is powerful enough to keep on showing us truth from error in the particulars? The way it comes across to me is that “every Word” Christians don’t trust God enough that He can do this.

The Bible tells us that “perfect love casts out fear.” I believe this is true as His Holy Spirit has confirmed it for me many, many times. On the other hand, verses like II Pet. 3:16 contradict this truth and produce something in believers that I believe is antithetical to the nature of God. I see humanity in this verse, not our Lord.

What I believe separates me from “every Word” Christians is how we submit to truth: They come under the authority of words on a page; I yield to the words spoken by the Holy Spirit to me in a context He creates. I read the Scriptures and wait for the Holy Spirit to inhabit them—and those He speaks to me are the ones I “keep.”

Perhaps someday I too will embrace every Word, but it will be ONE WORD at a time. Until then, the Holy Spirit will be my gatekeeper to ensure I do not allow anything to corrupt my understanding of the divine nature. A little leaven leavens the whole lump.

[nwmomike (nwmomike)]

Karen,

Just to clarify before I address it, you believe:
But I must assert that the foundation of Christian belief for ALL OF US is a subjective leap of faith. There is no completely objective way of knowing truth

M or Michael

[karen (karen)]

Yes, that's what I believe.

[nwmomike (nwmomike)]

Karen,
Instead of going into to great detail I'll give you resources. I want to help maybe clear up some things you may have been taught. A note in point that I don't necesarily agree with everything these sites, only the links posted here at least for the most part.

http://www.christiancourier.com/archives/whatIsTruth.htm
Especially the section Biblical Facts Regarding Truth.

http://www.truthnet.org/Christianity/Apologetics/Truth2/

http://www.tpub.com/content/USMC/mcwp212/css/mcwp212_58.htm

http://www.josh.org/search/default.asp?numinlistgroup=10&groupnum=0&myhomepag e=http://www.josh.org&keysearch2=pcl_&keysearch5=holiday%20 sale
Either "The New Tolerance" or "Right From Wrong" are both wonderful books to read.

http://www.apologeticsindex.org/r14aa.html

If we look to subjective experience as the ultimate test of truth then you could end up like the Mormons who believe that to test whether the Book of Mormons is true is that you get a "burning in the bosom". They feel that is the test that the BOM is true.

You should read those articles or at least one of the books I mentioned. You would probably change that and many statements you made.

In closing, if you believe the Bible what has changed, is it you or the Word? Which is true? Reading the books or articles you will see what I mean about truth and about what is subjective and objective.

M or Michael

[karen (karen)]

Michael,

I will read the articles, but I must tell you that I have read many articles about inerrancy.

However, first I want to respond to this statement you made: "If we look to subjective experience as the ultimate test of truth then you could end up like the Mormons who believe that to test whether the Book of Mormons is true is that you get a 'burning in the bosom'. They feel that is the test that the BOM is true."

The FACT is that I do NOT believe as the Mormons do--I do not accept the BOM, nor do I look for a subjective feeling to confirm truth. As I said before, God leads me through understanding--illumination of truth that builds on other truths He has taught me. There is internal consistency in my beliefs and they are based on the Bible. I do not suddenly have fantastic or ridiculous visions and experiences. You are making a slippery slope argument that has no foundation in truth.

Whether Christians want to admit it or not does not negate the fact that faith is subjective. The Bible may be an objective document, but conviction about its truth is derived subjectively. Jesus was/is a real person, but belief that He is the Son of God is subjectively experienced. Otherwise, why are we told that faith is the evidence of things NOT SEEN? Seeing is objective experience; faith is not.

The way God has seen fit to reveal Himself is a combination of objective/subjective data--the Word and the Spirit. My approach to truth requires both; the conservative, systematic approach to theology can easily exclude the Spirit, and in my opinion usually does.

-Karen

[dave_drago (dave_drago)]

Karen,
Your searching is good. Your observations and objections and cautions are very understandable. I can identify with you. I do not know why but of all the posts on FACTnet I enjoy your questions the most. You probably are slowly moving back to an historical understanding of the FAITH. This is good. Take your time. Ask the tough questions. I think you are asking ‘what is truth?’
John 18:37-38: “Therefore Pilate said to Him, "So You are a king?" Jesus answered, "You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice." 38 Pilate said to Him, "What is truth?"-NASU

We hear His voice through the Scriptures. The Pharisees believed the Scriptures, yet they rejected Him. How sad! You are correct it takes more than head knowledge. It takes surrender and trust in Jesus.
John 5:39-41 "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; 40 and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.” NASU
1 Timothy 3:16 By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness:
He who was revealed in the flesh,
Was vindicated in the Spirit,
Seen by angels,
Proclaimed among the nations,
Believed on in the world,
Taken up in glory.

Your interpretation and approach towards the Scriptures, "becoming the word of God when you experience it” is very similar to Barth's neo-orthodoxy. I do not support this view. It is overly subjective and experience oriented. However, blind faith is not healthy either. And, when we became Christians we did take a leap of faith; but, in the historical crucifixion, death, burial resurrection, appearance and ascension of Jesus into heaven from where He will return to judge the living and the dead. Again, we know this because of Scripture. Our hope is not vain or blind.
1 Corinthians 15:1-8: “Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; 7 then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; 8 and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also.”-NASU

Yes, we all must ask The Holy Spirit which we are given at salvation (John 14:16-17, Romans 5:5, 1 Cor. 6:19, Eph. 1:13, Eph. 4:30, I Thess. 4:8, 2 Tim. 1:14, Heb. 6:4, 1 Jn. 2:20 &27), to lead us into all truth. He is our teacher. He is our Guide.
John calls it the anointing in 1 John2:20 & 27.
1 John 2:20-23: “But you are not like that, for the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you know the truth. 21 So I am not writing to you as to those who need to know the truth, but I warn you as those who can discern the difference between true and false. 22 And who is the greatest liar? The one who says that Jesus is not Christ. Such a person is antichrist, for he does not believe in God the Father and in his Son. 23 For a person who doesn't believe in Christ, God's Son, can't have God the Father either. But he who has Christ, God's Son, has God the Father also.” -TLB

Jesus said we would be given the Holy Spirit to teach us.
John 14:16-17: "I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; 17 that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.” NASU

John 15:26-27: "But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me. 27 And you also will bear witness, because you have been with Me from the beginning.” -NKJV

John 16:7-15 “Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. 8 And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: 9 of sin, because they do not believe in Me; 10 of righteousness, because I go to My Father and you see Me no more; 11 of judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged. 12 "I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13 However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. 14 He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. 15 All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you.”–NKJV

For us, apart from Scripture we would not know Him. This Spirit testifies of the Scripture’s inspiration. Jesus always testified of Scripture. The Scriptures testify of Jesus.

Luke 4:21-22 And He began to say to them, "Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing." 22 And all were speaking well of Him, and wondering at the gracious words which were falling from His lips; and they were saying, " Is this not Joseph's son?" NASU

John 10:34-36"Has it not been written in your Law, ' I SAID, YOU ARE GODS'? 35 "If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), 36 do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, ' I am the Son of God'?
NASU

John 17:13"While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your name which You have given Me; and I guarded them and not one of them perished but the son of perdition, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled.
NASU

John 19:36-37 “For these things came to pass to fulfill the Scripture , "NOT A BONE OF HIM SHALL BE BROKEN." 37 And again another Scripture says, "THEY SHALL LOOK ON HIM WHOM THEY PIERCED." NASU

Acts 1:16-17 "Brethren, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit foretold by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. NASU

Galatians 3:8-9 The Scripture , foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "ALL THE NATIONS WILL BE BLESSED IN YOU." 9 So then those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham, the believer. NASU

Galatians 3:22 But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. NASU

1 Timothy 4:13-14 Until I come, give attention to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation and teaching. NASU

2 Timothy 3:15-17 “and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” NASU

2 Peter 1:20-21: “But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, 21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” -NASU

Still, there are many passages and doctrines I do not understand. For instance, Jim Faucett and I enjoy batting around election, free will and God's Sovereign choices. However, the Spirit testifies to me that The Word of God is true…even though I do not apprehend all of it. You may say that my reasoning is circular. My hope is based on what the Scriptures say.

For Him,
Dave

[karen (karen)]

Dave,

I really enjoyed reading your response. And I must say that Jesus' words about the Scriptures are the most persuasive for me. But there are obstacles for me in taking an inerrancy stand that I only understand in part. I will continue to address them until this matter is settled for me, one way or the other.

You said: "My hope is based on what the Scriptures say." But you see, my hope is in the Person who has been with me most of my life. I think I was probably saved at the age of 6, around the time I received my "First Communion" in the Catholic Church. I remember falling in love with Jesus, who I knew died for my sins, even though I didn't understand the substitutionary atonement until many years later. What remained with me throughout my childhood and adolescence was not a system of belief, but a consciousness of Someone who loved me. And there were a few occasions when I was overwhelmed by His presence, which were breakthrough experiences for me.

During the years after the ministry when I was questioning who God was, the Spirit reminded me that we “met” through the Bible. And indeed, even when I did not consider myself a Christian any longer, the Spirit would bring scriptural passages to mind for particular circumstances. However, what was most convincing for me is the way God constantly showed me how the principle of the Cross released me into life. But I couldn’t take the next step until I saw Him revealed in Christians. As long as the wrong spirit was coming from professing believers, I could not receive their words.

Here's what is perplexing to me about so many (though not all) staunch Bible believers. They don't seem to have an experiential knowledge of God. I can discern that they don’t know His ways, even if they are knowledgeable about theology. It makes me very wary of their claims about the Scriptures. Spiritual awareness and fruit are very important evidences to me about truth.

So you see, though God uses the Bible to speak to me, it is my personal experiences with Him that are the anchors of my faith. Without His confirmation of the gospel, there is nothing to distinguish Christianity from any other religion in the marketplace of ideas. Though Jesus’ death and resurrection are historical events that are recorded in the Bible, it is the power of the Holy Spirit that persuades me, not the record itself.

Anyay, thanks, Dave, for addressing my questions without judgment. I’m not sure where God is taking me, but what you say gives me a lot to think and pray about.

-Karen

[jeannie (jeannie)]

Dear Karen,

I find your train of thought so interesting. I understand you when you write. I did from our very first contact. It was obvious to me that you knew Him. I appreciate your ability to make me think deeper, because honestly some of the points you have brought up on the forum I never even considered. Maybe that is your job.. to make us think.. make this walk more real. As I have gotten to know you over this past I have always found you to exude Christ. I hope you keep asking your questions and delving into getting to know Him and all the aspects of His body of Christ on earth. You help others to hone their faith, but for me your faith and trust in Christ is as obvious and concrete as the keyboard in front of me.

Your experience of "knowing Him" at a young age is mine also. I was 11 years old and I knelt before my crucifix and dedicated my life to Jesus and helping others. I reflected back on that declaration all through my teen years. It was an important milestone in my life. I didn't have understanding, but it was the point I became a seeker of Him, until I found Him. From that point on I viewed life as both concrete and unseen and He as my only witness... I "see" the same in you...

[bob_brinton (bob_brinton)]

I was led to the Lord by my mother when I was four years old, and still clearly remember how I felt about it. I was responding to the Lord Himself and His sacrifice for me and longing to have me with Him for eternity. Receiving Him was the cornerstone of my belief, not reading the Word. I love the Word, and don't really have things in the Bible that I worry about. But I perceive that most believers take the Bible as being the Word, while my take on the Word is anything God says, past or present. In addition to this, I do not consider the Holy Spirit to be 'under' the authority of the Bible. I consider Him to have authority to tell us what it means and how it is to apply, and to direct us beyond it when he chooses to. This is all I have time to write at the moment. I may not be back till morning. No offense is intended. I merely want the Spirit to be given proper honor as the One we have in Christ's stead for our daily walk. Anything less is unacceptable.

[nwmomike (nwmomike)]

Quote:I will read the articles, but I must tell you that I have read many articles about inerrancy.

Response: The links I posted had more to do with truth and about objective truth and your statement “There is no completely objective way of knowing truth”. To believe that then wouldn’t you have to take the stance that truth is only subjective? That’s what I’m trying to point out.

However, first I want to respond to this statement you made: "If we look to subjective experience as the ultimate test of truth then you could end up like the Mormons who believe that to test whether the Book of Mormons is true is that you get a 'burning in the bosom'. They feel that is the test that the BOM is true."

Quote:The FACT is that I do NOT believe as the Mormons do--I do not accept the BOM, nor do I look for a subjective feeling to confirm truth. As I said before, God leads me through understanding--illumination of truth that builds on other truths He has taught me. There is internal consistency in my beliefs and they are based on the Bible.

Response: But aren’t you saying that the objective truth is the Word of God and it must conform to what it says when you feelings and God’s word disagree? So the objective truth is the word of God.

Quote: I do not suddenly have fantastic or ridiculous visions and experiences. You are making a slippery slope argument that has no foundation in truth.

Response: I was basing it still on your original statement that if you follow it to where it must end. But you just said that your beliefs are based on the Bible. So maybe the statement that there is no objective way of knowing truth is probably not the best statement. That’s all I want to make sure is that we don’t parrot what society is trying to tell us in regards to truth and that is why I provided the links.

Quote: Whether Christians want to admit it or not does not negate the fact that faith is subjective. The Bible may be an objective document, but conviction about its truth is derived subjectively.

Response: Okay, let me see if this conveys what I’m trying to say. How do you know that the Bible is an objective document and is to be trusted as the Word of God? As most Chrisitians would say that the primary reason is fulfilled prophecy. This can be observed objectively right? I don’t want to get ahead of myself as you make a good point later.

Quote:Jesus was/is a real person, but belief that He is the Son of God is subjectively experienced. Otherwise, why are we told that faith is the evidence of things NOT SEEN? Seeing is objective experience; faith is not.

Response: Great. I want to make a distinction though between what you knew objectively first in order to make the subjective experience valid. It all points back to an objective truth that allows you to have faith in what is unseen. We have faith in what is unseen because we know that God is faithful in what is seen.


Quote:The way God has seen fit to reveal Himself is a combination of objective/subjective data--the Word and the Spirit. My approach to truth requires both;

Response:Great. Okay, but you have to take a view that there is objective truth and there must be some way of discovering it. Hopefully you see that we should stay away from statements like there being no objective way to know truth.

Quote: the conservative, systematic approach to theology can easily exclude the Spirit, and in my opinion usually does.

Response: Yes, it can and does in many cases. But that does not mean it has to. Like you said it is a combination of objective/subjective data. The systematic approach can observe the objective and where it falls flat faith and the Spirit illuminate us. It will never contradict what the Word of God already says. So one does not need to exclude one or the other.

I hope you see that I wasn’t trying to contradict you but to show that some statements don’t necessarily hold true if we really believe them the way we say we do. I hope that if it’s still not apparent someone might see where we’re not seeing eye to eye and step in to maybe clear what we’re both saying.

I’m sure Jeannie and others can verify that I’m not stuck with just a systematic approach to my faith. But when it comes to cults, isms, etc. you have to deal with mostly objective data to refute their claims and so much of it has to deal with truth and truth claims. So that is why it may seem at times I focus mainly on objective information. I hope this all helps and doesn’t make you frustrated any at all. It is not my intent.

M or Michael

[karen (karen)]

Michael,

I'm reading the articles now and will respond later.

However, I want to clarify the point I've been trying to make: I believe there is objective truth, but that the way God has ordained for us to have knowledge/conviction of that truth is through subjective means. For instance, two people hear the gospel. One thinks it's a good story, but doesn't believe it is true; the other person receives the witness of the Holy Spirit and responds in faith. Each person has an encounter with a story that is related in space and time (objective), but only one receives assurance that it is true (subjective). The second person’s experience is subjective, because it cannot be verified objectively. It is a reality that is personally experienced. And it seems that God wants it this way, because if He didn’t, He’d just appear on the earth in power and glory (objective) and noone could deny Him.

I think what many people don’t understand is that there is a difference between secular and Christian postmodernism. Secular postmodernists don’t believe in objective reality; Christian postmodernists recognize that spiritual reality is objectively true, but subjectively experienced. They recognize that in order for Christians to stand on the Bible (whether in whole or in part), they must make a subjective leap of faith to get there.

That's why they think it's ludicrous to just tell people to believe as if the existence of the Bible in space and time makes it self-evidently true. Postmodern Christians know that without the Holy Spirit revealing truth experientially, no one can receive it. And to completely deny experience is to admit that one only has head knowledge.

Anyway, I know you're not trying to frustrate me. It's just that I spent a decade trying to make your view of Christianity work and God just came in and demolished it. There are things He's shown me outside the camp that frankly, I can't explain, though I will continue to try.

-Karen

[rjfernalld (rjfernalld)]

Karen. Your explanation of the post-modern Christian experience is perfect and one I also believe. It was the Holy Spirit showing me truth experientially that saved me from despair altogether.

Excellent.

[nwmomike (nwmomike)]

Karen,
I honestly don't know how to proceed. I think we agree in part but really concerned about what you mean my view of Christianity doesn't work. Either I didn't make my point clear, which is always possible, or we're saying some of the same things but on different aspects. I never did say that I believe that the Bible's existance in space and time make it self-evidently true. I'll have to see if someone else makes sense of where we both diverge and where we come together or something. I'll just leave at that for now.

M or Michael

[minutus (minutus)]

Studying the lives of past believers like Augustine, David Brainerd, Richard Baxter, and Jonathan Edwards I find all experienced an intensely overpowering sense of their own sinfulness and lostness (to the point of near death) which later led to deep joy in the awareness of the love of God. Has anyone here had such an experience?

[nwmomike (nwmomike)]

Minutus,
Definately. I haven't read their stories but can certainly relate.

M or Michael

[jim_faucett (jim_faucett)]

I am not sure exactly what is the point of 1 Corinthians 7 being brought up here.

Consider this:
2 Tim. 4:13 (ESV)
When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books, and above all the parchments.


This statement is contained in the scriptures. You can not now go to Troas to get Paul's cloak, books and parchments. But yet this is the word of God and it can teach us something about Paul and what his relationship with Timothy was like.

In verse 10 of 1 Cor. 7 Paul is paraphrasing Christ's own words found here:
Matthew 19:6 (ESV)
So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate."

So Paul paraphrases thus:

1 Cor. 7:10 (ESV)
To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband

Paul continues his own teaching in these verses, he does not say "the following words are not inspired, so take heed"--he is simply distinguishing that he is not quoting or paraphrasing Christ here, but rather he is expounding on the implications of Christ's words thus:

1 Cor. 7:12-14 (ESV)
To the rest I say (I, not the Lord) that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. [13] If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. [14] For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.

Paul understands that the Lord Jesus is interested in keeping covenant with families. Christ, while he is our personal Savior, is not here to instantly dissolve our families but to extend to them the promise of faith--while in some cases the gospel will indeed divide:

Matthew 10:34 (ESV)
"Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.

But Paul says:

1 Cor. 7:15 (ESV)
But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace.

Does he conflict with Christ? I think not:

John 14:27 (ESV)
Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid.

Remember that the chapter addresses a question that the church at Corinth put to Paul. Here is a key to understanding the passage:

1 Cor. 7:26 (ESV)
I think that <font color="0000ff">in view of the present distress</font> it is good for a person to remain as he is.

These instructions concerning remaining single were not for all times, as that would be repugnant to God's purpose in designing marriage for mutual help and comfort.

[bob_brinton (bob_brinton)]

Jim; I appreciate you showing up here. This is not my most mentally alert time of day (that being early morning). I did not mean to imply that Paul was in conflict with Christ; but rather addressing territory that the Lord did not Himself address. I think what he wrote is fairly straight up; and I'm not disagreeing with what Paul says. But what he does say is that they are his own words, and not the Lord's. To say that they are the Lord's words (indirectly, through the Spirit), is to me a form of changing what is actually said here.

[hodeuon (hodeuon)]

Bob, down at the bottom of the chapter in verse 40, Paul concludes, "and I think I also have the Spirit of God." Since they (the Holy Spirit and Paul) state that verse 12 is not from the Lord, do you think that "Lord" here could specifically refer to Jesus?

Hodeuon

[jim_faucett (jim_faucett)]

What Paul is doing is giving exposition, giving the sense if you will to what Christ taught, (that is what preachers, including apostles, are supposed to do):
Neh. 8:8 (ESV)
They read from the book, from the Law of God, clearly, and they gave the sense, so that the people understood the reading.


Paul is NOT saying that what he is teaching here is merely his own opinion.

I agree with what Hody just posted.

[nonotone (nonotone)]

minutus,

I've read some of these great men of God. There are many days when I can only be occupied
with these things:

1) How TOTALLY depraved and sinful that I am 2) It is ONLY by the Mercy of my faithful
Lord Jesus Christ -who SOVEREIGNLY called and saved me ONLY by His Grace!

It is far better to be aware of these things then to attempt to hide in a phony
theological system being advanced by men.

Why doesn't the leadership at GGWO GET SOME REAL GRACE (notice I did not say "GUTZ") and
"come out" to live in the SIMPLICITY of the GOSPEL and the reality of historical
Evangelical Christianity. The psychobable, incoherent manipulative "doctrines", and
phony "anointing" from CHS have little in common with real GRACE and a system of studying
the Holy Scriptures that is consistent with historical Evangelical Christianity.

A good friend (also a former TBS/GGWO'er) and I were just discussing this today and
rejoicing that we have the FREEDOM to love one another in Christ without having to worry
about CHS "defining" our relationship as a "soul attachment". Think about the RICH
FELLOWSHIP IN CHRIST that has been destroyed because of this man's ego and need to
control. IT'S DISGUSTING!!

(Message edited by nonotone on December 01, 2004)

[jim_faucett (jim_faucett)]

He's saying that what many of you have called the Word of God is in this instance not the Word of God. You have a catch 22 here, dears. Have a nice evening.

There is no catch 22. He is not saying this is not the word of God. He is saying he is not paraphrasing or quoting Christ in verse 12 as he did in verse 10. He is expounding on the teaching of Christ from the Spirit of God, applying it to the 'present distress' of that particular situation which the Corinthians inquired of him:

1 Cor. 7:1 (ESV)
Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: "It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman."

It is obviously not ALWAYS good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman, but it was good in the matters concerning about which they wrote to him during that distressing time.

CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT!

[rjfernalld (rjfernalld)]

Hi Jim...welcome back.

[bob_brinton (bob_brinton)]

Hodeuon, Thank you for bringing verse 40 to my attention. Now is not the time for me to find the heart of this. I need to read the whole passage when I am more alert, hopefully tomorrow morning. If I think it should be readdressed here at that point, I will do so.

[bob_brinton (bob_brinton)]

This portion of the letter is addressed to questions the Corinthians had directed to Paul. In verse 1: "Now as to the matters of which you wrote me..."

At the end of verse 17, Paul writes, "This is my order in all the churches." I'm assuming he's refering to the churches under his particular spiritual jurisdiction. I'm sure not all the churches were. Jerusalem wasn't.

In verse 25 he writes, "Now concerning the virgins (the marriageable maidens) I have no command of the Lord, but I give my opinion and advice as one who by the Lord's mercy is rendered trustworthy and faithful."

In verse 32 he starts out, "My desire is..."

Verse 40 states: "But in my opinion [a widow] is happier (more blessed and to be envied) if she does not remarry. And also I think I have the Spirit of God."

He goes on in the following chapter to address meat offered to idols. Much of chapter 7 has the flavor of 'this is my preference, if you feel you can bear it; but it's not binding'. He very carefully distinguishes between what is his own counsel and what he has as direct instruction from the Lord. You really should prayerfully consider this and be a bit disturbed about it. I don't think you're accepting what he is saying on its own terms. He was writing a letter directed to Corinth which addressed issues which living people had raised. Do we have any indication that he considered this to be Scripture? I'm not saying it's not. I'm just raising the point. My heart continually cries for intellectual honesty in spiritual matters. Jesus did not buy into the theological system of His day. Luther bought out of it in his. We can't trust traditional teaching that's developed over the course of time to always tell us the truth. That's one reason why the Holy Spirit is so vital to us.

[jim_faucett (jim_faucett)]

On biblical hermeneutics Dan Doriani in "Getting the Message" writes:

"Believers and unbelievers can both acquire valid techniques of interpretation. Many of them apply to any book, essay, or poem. Skeptics can understand the grammar and terminology of the Bible perfectly well. Investigators can temporarily enter the biblical world to gain information. But unless God grants a willingness to submit to biblical authority, they can read all day and profit nothing. Unless they are repenting of their sins, they will resist and refuse to apply God's word, even as they read it. As a result, they will use inappropriate methods, such as trying to find purely natural explanations for supernatural events, or systematically doubting everything until they establish an unshakable core of reliable facts. Unfortunately, their reliable facts about Jesus may amount to little more than saying that he taught, healed people, and was executed by the Romans.

The half-committed Christian occupies an awkward position, too. He weaves his way through the Bible like a child picking his way through the vegetables while dining with Aunt Alberta, not quite sure if the goal is to eat or avoid eating. So much in the text seems unpalatable: "This can't mean what it appears to say...Surely that no longer applies today," he mutters to himself when biblical statements offend his tastes. The half-committed Christian can hardly have a hunger for Bible study. He is not sure he wants to know its message.

What advantage then, does a believer have over skeptics and waverers? Is it his general spirituality? A sensitivity to spiritual things? A capacity for religious empathy? A belief that supernatural events can occur? The believer's essential advantage is that he takes the right posture before the Bible. He does not look it in the eye, as if he were an equal who has the right to criticize it at any point. He does not merely encounter it, expecting to meet new horizons, new worlds of thought that may or may not break in and change him. He submits to its authority, for he holds it to be the very Word of the sovereign Lord whom he loves.

Christians have an advantage because their higher commitment to the Bible may make them work longer and harder on the text. Still, the Christian's advantage lies less in the work they do on the text than in the work God does in them as they bow before it. Again, a skeptic using proper methods can discover the ideas presented in the Bible. Believers have no mystical advantage in grasping the grammar or customs of the Bible. But because God operates on the heart, convicting of sin and of God's greater grace, the Christian is willing to receive the message, even if it stings."

Italics are the author's own.

[bob_brinton (bob_brinton)]

I love all the attention Doriani gives to the Holy Spirit, given to us in Christ's stead.

[rjfernalld (rjfernalld)]

Dan Doriani and the My Way or the Highway Gang, appearing here all week.

Be sure to downoad their latest MP3 "You're only a REAL Christian IF..."

[rjfernalld (rjfernalld)]

Pssssssst...Jim! That was a joke *grin*

[bob_brinton (bob_brinton)]

Since the subject seems to be in the process of being recycled...

[bob_brinton (bob_brinton)]

bump