ANY Posting ON BB NOT Viewing the Bible As Being Inerrant/Infallible?

Tell us what you mean when you use the words;

inherent
infallible

I have heard various definitions of these words. Therefore I need to know what you mean by these words else it is impossible to address the question.

 

Well, this one is a "toughie" to answer. The Word, which was written by men who were inspired by the Holy Ghost is infallable. But these were written in Hebrew, Greek, Aramiac, etc. I can not read in those languages, so I have to read bibles that men translated from those languages into english. These can be fallable, seeing that a man translated it from the original to the english. So the bible can be fallable(not saying that it is, but it could be), whereas those parchments that have their original writtings(prophets, Apostles, etc.) is infallable.

IOW, all the different translations could be fallable(not saying they are definitely fallable), but the true Word of God is not.

 

Hello convicted1 and JesusFan

First lets define “fallible”........
fal-li-ble
adj.
1. Capable of making an error: Humans are only fallible.
2. Tending or likely to be erroneous: fallible hypotheses.
[Middle English, from Medieval Latin fallibilis, from Latin fallere, to deceive.]
----------------------
For sure, humans are capable of making errors(this is something we are good at);
But I question the hypotheses that our heavenly Father, would have left His Word totally in man’s hands.

If you accept this premise, than you would have to question why God would have given His Word to mankind in the first place; If it would be lost in such a short period of time.

As for the issue of God’s Word, losing it’s inspiration by being “translated”;
There was a popular “translation” of the Bible around in our Lord’s time; Why didn’t He give even one word of warning, about it.
-------------------------
We must accept something more than a “fallible” Bible but less than “double inspiration”.

I believe what our fathers in the faith came to, was called “God’s providential protection”.

providence
n
1. (Christian Religious Writings / Theology)
a. Christianity God's foreseeing protection and care of his creatures
b. such protection and care as manifest by some other force
2. (Christian Religious Writings / Theology) a supposed manifestation of such care and guidance
3. the foresight or care exercised by a person in the management of his affairs or resources
--------------------------
God “arranged” for “us” to have access to a perfectly preserved Bible.

This doesn’t mean that there will not be English Bibles on the market, that are “less perfect”;
But God gives each of us a choice.........depending upon our faith in Him.

{Snip - Keep the discussions regarding versions in that forum. It has its own forum for a reason. Plus, it is a violation of the rules to degrade others has having "lesser faith" because they are not KJVO}

Those “weaker” Christians are no less saved or loved by God then the “stronger” ones;
It’s just a matter of “faith”!

 

That's the biggest piece of hogwash I have seen on BB since I have been here since 2003!..

YOU have absolutely no right, or ability to judge other Christians based on the bible they use.

Sorry, but you owe every Christian that uses another bible other than the KJV an apology.

the NIV is more faithfully translated than the KJV.. and is closer to the originals than the KJV. Why? Because I said so.

See, that is about as stupid a comment as you made.

I have no way to prove what I said, and you have no way to prove what you said.. blindly following KJVO lemmings is not faith.. it is stupidity.

 

I don’t owe anyone an apology;
Here is what the Bible tells us to do.............
Romans 14:1-3
V.1 ¶ Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, [but] not to doubtful disputations.
V.2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
V.3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.

I do not “despise” anyone, regardless of the Bible they use.
Nor should I be judged, for the Bible I use.

 

That is a definition I have heard and it makes sense. Now on to an answer for what my opinion is worth. My opinion and 40 Kc will get you a good cup of espresso in Prague. :laugh:

1. We do not have original manuscripts and even if we did I do not understand how we could prove they were inerrant and infallible. That might be a good topic for another thread.

2. As we do not have the original manuscripts it is an article of faith and unprovable that they were inerrant and infallible. Note I did not say they were with error or fallible, but that it is an article of faith.

3. I cannot understand why so many want to use this issue as a litmus test of other being Christian or not. Let's say they were inerrant and infallible ... that does not mean our interpretation is inerrant and infallible.

4. I believe that the evil one has used this topic very effectively in pitting Christian against Christian.

Now I will duck the :tonofbricks:

 

Hello Crabtownboy

You said.......

Since when, does a “Christian” have to “prove” the Bible to be “inerrant and infallible”?
Isn’t that something, we accept by FAITH?
------------------------
You next said..........

So you agree; The entire issue of the Bible, is a question of FAITH!
------------------------
You continued...........

I don’t either. Acceptance of the Gospel, should be the only litmus test, of a person being a Christian!
------------------------
Also you said........

Now this is an interesting point. You are almost saying that coming to a correct interpretation, is not an exact science.
The Bible tells us that there is only ONE WAY to come to the correct interpretation.....
1 Corinthians 2:13
“Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.”

The “Spiritual things”, that we are to compare a passage to, in order to get a correct interpretation, is the rest of the Bible.

Therefore, if someone doesn’t honestly “compar Scripture with Scripture”, they will not come to a correct interpretation
But....an honest study of God’s Word, will give a 100% correct interpretation!
------------------------
Finally you said........

This point, is why I responded to your response.
It seems as though this may be aimed at me.

I would never go about to “sow discord among the brethren”: God hates that!
But I would, encourage my brothers and sisters in Christ, to take a step of faith and start “expecting more” of our heavenly Father.

 

This is known as the "I'm a better Christian than you" hypothesis.

I've heard enough out of StillLearning. Into the kill file for thee!

 

This junk sound like a kid on a playground, "My bible can beat up your bible." :BangHead:

Listen, my faith isn't in the KJV, NIV, NKJV, or any other printed copy of God's Word. My faith is in the God of the Bible. The Spirit of God is fully capable of taking the Word of God (yes! even in modern English) and reveal the Father to us.

 

*Using my best pirate voice...* Arrr, what say ye that we vote him off the island?

 

I believe that the Bible is the Inspired, Inerrant and Infalible Word of God.

 

Since KJVonlyists can refer to me as "less faith", then I am free to refer to the KJVonlyists as less [Snip - no you're not. Two wrongs don't make a right.] . Example:

http://av1611.com/kjbp/faq/errors.html

QUESTION: What if there really ARE mistakes in the King James Bible?

ANSWER: Then it's up to YOU to find the Book that God was talking about in Psalm 12:6,7 and Jesus was talking about in Matthew 24:35.

So apparently God was talking about the KJV of the Bible centuries before it became available. Sorry, but you cannot have an intelligent conversation with people like this even when you can clearly show them errors made by scribes.

 

So you believe in "Name it and Claim it" bibliology.

God never promised to preserve or inspire translations. Not even the KJV.

 

Oh boy.

Says the one who just clearly not only judged, but condemned others as lesser, who don't use the KJV.

Then you pull Romans on them to slap them again, and this passage was never intended for them. This from a guy who hears about Sarah Palin on the radio, then immediately compares her to the KJV and makes a thread.

No wonder I ditched these KJVO folks. [snip - don't make it personal]

 

Totally uncalled for. telling people they are weak in faith because they don't use the KJV. The KJV isn't perfect. It is a translation made by fallible men. Is the Bible preserved? sure it is, just like it was before the KJV came out. Did those people have less faith?