Featured Do you believe in the scriptures being Infallable?

Every Baptist on the BB believes the bible is the inspired, infallible, word of God. Be careful of making false accusations against other BB members.

 

Jordan, your KJVO heresy has caused you to live in confusion and error rather than in liberty and grace.

Every bible text and competent translation teaches us that the History of the bible is infallible history, the promises of the bible are infallible promises, and the prophecy of the bible is infallible prophecy.

Your problem is that you believed the lies your pastor told you, that the KJV is the only inspired, perfect translation of the bible. Unfortunately your pastor has no evidence to support his lie.

God's word, the bible, tells us the truth of any matter is established on the testimony of two or three others. Please post two or three facts, from the bible, that prove the KJV is the only infallible English translation.

And Jordan, you claim to be a "bible believer" but in reality you don't believe the bible. Any bible. You even deny the KJV.

The bible says that any bible that is able to make you wise unto salvation is the inspired scripture. The difference between you and me is that I believe what the bible says and you deny what the bible says.

2 Timothy 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

 

No. Definitions may differ, but the end result is the same. No promise of God will ever fail to come to pass.

 

I believe the Byzantine textform is without error of fact. But even the Alexandrian textform, which I believe to be inferior to the Byzantine textform, is without error of fact. There are variances of how those facts are expressed, variants in spellings, variants in word order, etc., but the facts they present are still true and correct.

 

But wouldn't the abandonment of the historically held belief in an inerrant bible disqualify a person from being a "conservative evangelical?"

I suppose that would depend on how you define "all true."

For instance, I have noticed in the past couple years that my study habits have deteriorated and I am starting to lose the ability to focus on a subject to exegete every nuance of meaning. So, in my old age I have gone back to school! I am presently enrolled in three classes at Dallas Theological Seminary. Genesis. John. And a refresher in Bible Hermeneutics.

I was delighted to discover the Professor teaching Genesis, Dr. James Allman, Professor of Old Testament Studies and Hebrew at DTS, believes the same as I do about Genesis.

And that is that verse 1 of chapter 1 is a title giving a summary of the entire event, and verse 2 is the first verse of the actual narrative expressing the condition of the earth at the time the narrative begins, with verse 3 beginning to tell the story.

It is imperative for any man, to be a teacher of the bible, to know the languages the bible was inspired in. In this case, Hebrew. Without a knowledge of the Hebrew language the teacher (so-called) would not know that verse two starts with a disjunctive clause which means that verse 2 is not an outgrowth of verse 1, either chronologically or logically. This is a standard methodology of Hebrew when recounting a narrative. First a summary (verse 1) followed by a statement of conditions at the beginning of the narrative (verse 2) then the narrative itself (verses 3 and following).

But some Christians (especially of the KJVO variety) would accuse me of apostasy for not holding to their (incorrect) understanding of Genesis 1. And that flawed understanding is based on their inability to properly exegete the Hebrew text.

So, which understanding is "all truth?" What the Hebrew actually says, or what a person thinks it says because of the necessity of studying only the English translation because of their lack of academic ability to exegete the Hebrew?

Unfortunately, in today's "my way or the highway" methodology "all true" has become a matter of ill-informed opinion rather than a solid understanding of the exegetical truth of the passage.

See the problem?

By the way. Good discussion. Thanks for jumping in. This is the type of discussion that makes the Baptist Board so valuable.

 

Exactly. One position (KJVO or TRO) is based on uninformed opinion. The other position (mine ) is based on a scholarly examination of the text, its transmission, and the text-critical criteria used to arrive at an informed conclusion.