Optional Scriptures

[Aaron]

One of our resident DNC operatives made the claim oft-repeated by those whose goal is to hallow their un — no — their ANTI-scriptural stances:

Obviously you have not read all of Paul's writings in the NT.

Paul is not God, so in the following it is Paul speaking, not God:

“I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes.” (1 Timothy 2:9)

“Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: but I give my own opinion.” (1 Corinthians 7:25)

There are many places in Paul's writing where he says "I" letting us know it is he speaking and not God who is speaking.

In Romans, Paul refers to himself 103 times. In 1 Corinthians, he refers to himself 175 times. In 2 Corinthians, he refers to himself 103 times. In Galatians, which is one of his shorter books, he refers to himself 69 times!

Here Paul admits that what he is writing is his opinion and not inspired by God:

"Unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord .., but the rest is from me, not from the Lord” (I Cor. 7:10-12).

So, Bro, read Paul carefully and you will see that I am correct.

There is a strong case to argue that Paul did not consider most of his writing inspired. If he thought all his writing was inspired he would not have quoted scripture that was part of the canon and inspired.

I responded with a question:

What of the Psalms? Is God speaking or merely David et al?

 

[Van]

I think we can set aside the view that some of Paul's writings were not inspired. Every word was chosen by God. So the issue really is, are we supposed to apply these views as if God intended them as commands and instructions, rather than as an illustration, which may or may not have applicability to us in our culture.

As a minimalist, I try to discern what is the "least" God is telling us, and so to avoid neglecting His entire message.

God wants us to dress in a manner that nurtures a spiritual mindset, not in a worldly way that brings the lusts of the flesh to mind.

Study the passages where Paul indicates his preference, and see if you can boil it down to a timeless principle applicable to us today.

 

[Revmitchell]

All of the Bible is inspired even all of Paul's words. Extremists liberals hat Paul's writings and continually work to minimize them.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I have seen catholics attack IIPeter as not scripture. And IIPeter never actually claims to be inspired I think it's scripture because Paul knew the sex of the voice of Balaam's ass. I cannot find Balaam mentioned in the Apocrypha, or any other tradition, so I have to assume there was no other way for Paul to know this.

To deny the inspiration of the Epistles is certainly not a part of any Baptist faith, and a church who teaches such could not possibly be considered by any serious Baptist to be one of us. Varied as we be.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

On a side note about Balaam, I cannot read Numbers 22:33 without cracking up.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I have seen catholics attack IIPeter as not scripture. And IIPeter never actually claims to be inspired I think it's scripture because Paul knew the sex of the voice of Balaam's ass. I cannot find Balaam mentioned in the Apocrypha, or any other tradition, so I have to assume there was no other way for Paul to know this.

To deny the inspiration of the Epistles is certainly not a part of any Baptist faith, and a church who teaches such could not possibly be considered by any serious Baptist to be one of us. Varied as we be.

I erred typing "Paul" instead of "Peter". Too many P's.

 

[Yeshua1]

One of our resident DNC operatives made the claim oft-repeated by those whose goal is to hallow their un — no — their ANTI-scriptural stances:

I responded with a question:

What of the Psalms? Is God speaking or merely David et al?

God was speaking in and through the experiences and viewpoints of david unto us...