1 Corinthians 7:12

[Aaron]

No. I don't even think they should be a posting member in the Baptist section if they deny this. Why, who denied it?

You did, and do. Even in your defense of yourself.

I've already spoken and will say no more about this occurrence.

 

[Skandelon]

Aaron, you interpret me about like you do the scriptures...by reading into it whatever you want it to say. :laugh:

You are entertaining. I'll give you that.

 

[preacher4truth]

You wrote: "Sounds good until one reads the Scriptures Skan. John the Apostle was imprisoned for preaching "The Word of God" (Revelation 1:9) which was the Scriptures. That means that Paul, Peter, all the Apostles were preaching the Word of God, or the Scriptures, so no, it doesn't undermine our Lord in doing so by calling it what it is."


That implies that you don't think I believe that when the apostles taught the scriptures they were teaching the word of God, but I've never denied that truth.

Nonsense. Your argument is that the Scriptures aren't called the Word of God. Remember that? That is what I am addressing, and the passage I give proves your ideology a fallacy. I showed you that John called it (The Scriptures) the Word of God.

Nothing I said implies anything you "see" in it. You're seeing things and actually hope for and want to see things in order to help you along the bogus and false trail you're creating.

And you tell Aaron he reads things into Scriptures? That's a false accusation, and is rather something you employ.

These are the tactics you use when folks prove you incorrect, time and again. You throw in diversions, rabbit trails, strawman arguments, twist the subject into a new topic, falsely accuse and stay on that path because you can't stay on the original topic. Why? Well if you stayed on path and topic, your feeble arguments are dismantled handily, so you need to add some fodder.

I proved you incorrect, and you're struggling again with the real topic, and throw in your own new topic because you're losing yet again. It's ridiculous really, but unfortunately this is what I've come to expect from you.

The Scriptures are the Word of God, all of it. It doesn't just "contain" the Word of God as you are suggesting, nor is it undermining Christ to call it such as you also state, which is yet another error of yours.

Here is one of your false misinformed statements concerning the Bible:

The bible has parts in it that even the authors say "this is not from God" but just give their preferences, so I don't think it would be accurate to call it that.

No where does the Word of God say "this is not from God" you simply just do not understand the text at hand, so you, yet again, use your proof-text methodology, not understanding the Scriptures. You used this to argue against calling the Word of God what it is. This is an unfortunate and misinformed deficient view of the Scriptures.

Heres more from you, which I've proven you incorrect concerning:

I don't think scripture ever calls itself "the word of God,"

Yes, it most certainly does name the Scriptures the Word of God.

There are some liberal scholars who propagate this nonsense too. Here are a few links and you need to take a look and change your views. Look into those who say the Bible "contains" the Word of God and see what you find. There are fundamental truths in these links that you need to heed. You need to rethink your position as it doesn't lead to a good place. Note that the apostles did call the Scriptures the Word of God, something you falsely claim the Bible never states, which when one reads the Scriptures, one will actually find it in fact does state this.

http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-God-Word.html

http://crosslandbaptist.org/2010/12/is-the-bible-really-gods-word/

http://whatsaiththescripture.com/The.Holy.Bible/Reasons7.Bible.Word.of.GOD.html

 

[Aaron]

Aaron, you interpret me about like you do the scriptures...by reading into it whatever you want it to say. :laugh:

You are entertaining. I'll give you that.

Ok. Which portions in our canon are not authoritative or for debate?

 

[Skandelon]

Ok. Which portions in our canon are not authoritative or for debate?

Show me where I made the claim that the scriptures weren't authoritative. A better question might be, "Which portions of the words you put into my mouth aren't really what I've said?"

 

[Skandelon]

Nonsense. Your argument is that the Scriptures aren't called the Word of God. Remember that? That is what I am addressing, and the passage I give proves your ideology a fallacy. I showed you that John called it (The Scriptures) the Word of God.

:BangHead: No, you showed that John preached the word of God, something we both confirm.

You know what, never mind. Call the bible whatever you want, it's fine. This is not worth it.

 

[preacher4truth]

:BangHead: No, you showed that John preached the word of God, something we both confirm.

You know what, never mind. Call the bible whatever you want, it's fine. This is not worth it.

Not quite. He preached it and called it the Word of God. That is, the Scriptures.

I call it what John and others called it. I also know you're in error with your statement saying authors say "this is not from God" (which is not what they said, nor is it a correct paraphrase) as you have no idea what you're talking about and need to study this out, and note this has been explained to you. Stop proof-texting and establishing teaching off of these erroneous misinterpretations you come up with.

If you want to run from this that's on you, not me. It's always easier to run than to admit that we're incorrect. At least this is what you've taught me.

 

[quantumfaith]

:BangHead: No, you showed that John preached the word of God, something we both confirm.

You know what, never mind. Call the bible whatever you want, it's fine. This is not worth it.

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Amy.G]

..... and we don't worship scripture just because it records the words of God.

This statement is confusing to me.
Scripture "records" the words of God?

Scripture IS the words of God. The paper and ink would be the means to "record" them.

 

[DHK]

This statement is confusing to me.
Scripture "records" the words of God?

Scripture IS the words of God. The paper and ink would be the means to "record" them.

Scripture is "the Word of God."
It is inspired of God in the original MSS, and He has promised to preserve it as I believe He has today.
Although it is the Word of God, not everything in the Word of God can be said to be "the words of God," as you suggested.
Satan said, "Thou shalt not surely die." Those are Satan's words, not God's words. They are the Word of God in that they are recorded accurately just the way that God wanted them recorded. But they remain Satan's words recorded by God. Thus it is still the Word of God but those "words" are not God's words.

It is verbally inspired--every word is inspired.
It is plenary inspired--The whole--every part of the Bible is inspired.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: (2 Timothy 3:16)

To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. (Isaiah 8:20)

As for God, his way is perfect; the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all them that trust in him. (2 Samuel 22:31)

Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. (Proverbs 30:5)

Hear the word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah. (Isaiah 1:10)

The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever. (Isaiah 40:8)

And it came to pass, that, as the people pressed upon him to hear the word of God, he stood by the lake of Gennesaret, (Luke 5:1)

But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it. (Luke 11:28)

Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. (Acts 6:2)

And when they were at Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews: and they had also John to their minister. (Acts 13:5)

Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. (Acts 13:46)

But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. (2 Corinthians 4:2)

 

[Aaron]

Show me where I made the claim that the scriptures weren't authoritative.

That thread was deleted.

We call the Scriptures the Word of God, because that is what they are. We don't call them the "words of God" as if every word is some law or proverb. We call them the Word because it was "uttered," or "breathed," by God in diverse manners and at sundry times—through histories, narratives, laws, statutes, commandments, and judgements. Even where the words of Satan himself are revealed.

It was all to testify of Christ.

But lest you go about thinking that the Scriptures do not call themselves the Word of God, you need to be instructed what it means to be God-breathed. It is said that Saul was breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord. What do you think that means.

Wait! Nevermind. We won't get a strait answer. We'll get an intelligible ganglion of words and phrases all with the intent of salvaging your opinion that the God-breathed does not mean God-uttered.

 

[webdog]

From the BaptistBoard statement of faith:

[/SIZE][/FONT]
Is one who denies this qualified to act as a moderator here?

Is someone who was booted from moderator status qualified to ask this?

 

[Aaron]

Wait! Nevermind. We won't get a straight answer. We'll get an intelligible ganglion of words and phrases all with the intent of salvaging your opinion that the God-breathed does not mean God-uttered.

oops! I meant UNintelligible.

 

[Aaron]

Is someone who was booted from moderator status qualified to ask this?

Do you guys hug, too? Besides, someone don't got his facts straight.

 

[webdog]

James 1:22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves

 

[webdog]

Do you guys hug, too? Besides, someone don't got his facts straight.

Someone don't got? :laugh:

 

[JesusFan]

I believe the Bible teaches us the words of God, but I believe to call it the 'Word of God" in the manner some do undermines the One given that title by the very scriptures being deemed to be God's words.

Rev. 19:11 I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. 12 His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. 13 He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.

Some questions to consider:

1. Is the man in this passage representing the scriptures, or Christ?

2. Is the Trinity made up of: The Father, The Scriptures and the Holy Spirit? Or The Father, The Son (who is given the title as the Word), and the Holy Spirit?

Could some be giving a title meant for Christ, to the scriptures?

TO BE CLEAR: That is not an effort to lesson our view of scripture. They are the inspired, God's Breathed testimony of divine truth! But, my effort is to see that we don't undermine our view of Christ, The one and ONLY who carries the title "WORD of GOD!" Now, obviously the bible records for us the words of God. There are the "thus saith the Lord" passages which give us direct quotes from God's mouth. They all are inspired (God-breathed) passages giving divine wisdom and guidance. But I'm simply speaking of the TITLE. The scripture doesn't call itself "The Word of God," but it does call Jesus "The Word of God." So, what should we conclude from that?

Is Jesus equal to the scriptures in such a way that both can correctly carry that same title, even if scripture itself doesn't claim it? Or can we draw that simple distinction without being labeled a liberal, non-bible believing heretic?

Do you that ALL and EVERY word in the Bible was inspired by god?
That it IS the literally word of God to us, regardless how we might see it?
That regardless of the writting, either the Lord said, or like paul said in his opinion..

that it ALL still is just as inspired/w/o errors and infallible?

 

[1 Timothy 3:3-9]

I have a hard time getting my reason around the bible being anything but exactly what God wanted it to say. Something of this magnitude and about someone as divine and God, I believe would in God's eyes be just fine.

 

[JesusFan]

I have a hard time getting my reason around the bible being anything but exactly what God wanted it to say. Something of this magnitude and about someone as divine and God, I believe would in God's eyes be just fine.

That is why asked Skan what he views on bible are, iof he sees it being either "partiall/fully" inerrant/inspired!

 

[Aaron]

Don't hold your breath.