-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Biblical Authority
- Thread starter MarciontheModerateBaptist
- Start date
MarciontheModerateBaptist
New Member
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Do "moderates" keep their Bibles in loose leaf binders, so it's easy to take out sections that they don't approve of? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Kinda like Luther?
Daniel
Kinda like Luther?
Daniel
Ernie Brazee
<img src ="/ernie.JPG">
The whole discussion comes to one point...
Either you believe the Bible is the infallible, inspired word of God or you don't. If you won't accept God's word then there is no more place for dicussion as either God is true or a liar. He either keeps his promises or he doesn't.
As for me God is true and all men are liars. I can and will trust God in spite of what the scholars believe.
Romans 3:3 (KJV)
3For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
Romans 3:4 (KJV)
4God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
Either you believe the Bible is the infallible, inspired word of God or you don't. If you won't accept God's word then there is no more place for dicussion as either God is true or a liar. He either keeps his promises or he doesn't.
As for me God is true and all men are liars. I can and will trust God in spite of what the scholars believe.
Romans 3:3 (KJV)
3For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
Romans 3:4 (KJV)
4God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
MarciontheModerateBaptist
New Member
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Either you believe the Bible is the infallible, inspired word of God or you don't. If you won't accept God's word then there is no more place for dicussion as either God is true or a liar. He either keeps his promises or he doesn't.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Behold, the overly simplistic party line - all or nothing.
Daniel Payne
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Behold, the overly simplistic party line - all or nothing.
Daniel Payne
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MarciontheModerateBaptist:
Behold, the overly simplistic party line - all or nothing.
Daniel Payne<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Shrewd trap but you still haven't answered the questions.
How do you know Christ without the scripture? If you don't accept all scripture as reliable, how do you decide which ones are and which ones are not? And, quite frankly, who gave you or anyone else the right to decide for anyone including yourself which parts are true and which are not?
Please cite the scripture that says you can disregard anything that does not make sense to you or makes you feel bad. Isn't a little Eve-like to think that you must understand and know all? What kind of pride brings someone to the point where they feel justified in creating their own God? You get to say what He is, is not, did, didn't do, thinks, feels, will do, etc.
The evidence pointing to the preservation of God's Word through the last 1900 years is overwhelming. You may scoff but the Bible is clear that God does providentially work in the affairs of mankind. There is no reason not to believe that God by an act of His own sovereign will revealed Himself to man except your own preconceived bias against the concept and, truthfully, lack of faith.
All of your arguments are subjective. Your feelings and experiences can never create a sound foundation for faith.
You accuse fundamentalists of oversimplifying. But what is the liberal doing? You just toss out anything that requires work and study. There is nothing noble in reducing God to something you define, manipulate, and ultimately dictate to.
Behold, the overly simplistic party line - all or nothing.
Daniel Payne<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Shrewd trap but you still haven't answered the questions.
How do you know Christ without the scripture? If you don't accept all scripture as reliable, how do you decide which ones are and which ones are not? And, quite frankly, who gave you or anyone else the right to decide for anyone including yourself which parts are true and which are not?
Please cite the scripture that says you can disregard anything that does not make sense to you or makes you feel bad. Isn't a little Eve-like to think that you must understand and know all? What kind of pride brings someone to the point where they feel justified in creating their own God? You get to say what He is, is not, did, didn't do, thinks, feels, will do, etc.
The evidence pointing to the preservation of God's Word through the last 1900 years is overwhelming. You may scoff but the Bible is clear that God does providentially work in the affairs of mankind. There is no reason not to believe that God by an act of His own sovereign will revealed Himself to man except your own preconceived bias against the concept and, truthfully, lack of faith.
All of your arguments are subjective. Your feelings and experiences can never create a sound foundation for faith.
You accuse fundamentalists of oversimplifying. But what is the liberal doing? You just toss out anything that requires work and study. There is nothing noble in reducing God to something you define, manipulate, and ultimately dictate to.
T
TaterTot
Guest
I think Daniel has an intelligent and critical mind, but I would suggest he take a hermeneutics class. Philosophy and several exegesis courses as well would help as he doesnt really seem to understand the true liberal stance he is championing.
And by the way, does anyone know who Marcion was? I wouldnt want his name attached to mine.
Blessings,
Tater
And by the way, does anyone know who Marcion was? I wouldnt want his name attached to mine.
Blessings,
Tater
Daniel Payne, if I may,...what Bible do you use ?
Daniel David
New Member
Martian, I want to tell you and also everyone else how much I learned and enjoyed the article you posted. I know we have had our differences before. I have come to the light though. I am just about to print as many copies of the article as I can and hand out to others. You can never have too much toilet paper you know!
rhoneycutt
New Member
Mr Curtis
Preciate the John 1:1 reference. Care to elaborate on what you are saying?
Russell
Preciate the John 1:1 reference. Care to elaborate on what you are saying?
Russell
rhoneycutt
New Member
Daniel
Nice try. Refer to earlier threads we have tried to explain our position (Liberal Hermaneutic etc.) It always comes down to the if you dont believe it all you cant believe any of it argument
.
You might enjoy my new hobby more than this. Stand with your back to a wall and lean foward. Slam the back of your head into the wall over and over. It will remind you of some of these threads.
Peace
Russell
By the way before I head back over to the wall would one of you folks explain to me how people who have never seen what we call a Bible or those too young to read one can come to know Jesus as their Saviour?? Or how people became Christians before there ever was a Bible? I guess it just aint possible is it?
[ February 12, 2002: Message edited by: rhoneycutt ]
Nice try. Refer to earlier threads we have tried to explain our position (Liberal Hermaneutic etc.) It always comes down to the if you dont believe it all you cant believe any of it argument
.You might enjoy my new hobby more than this. Stand with your back to a wall and lean foward. Slam the back of your head into the wall over and over. It will remind you of some of these threads.
Peace
Russell
By the way before I head back over to the wall would one of you folks explain to me how people who have never seen what we call a Bible or those too young to read one can come to know Jesus as their Saviour?? Or how people became Christians before there ever was a Bible? I guess it just aint possible is it?
[ February 12, 2002: Message edited by: rhoneycutt ]
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by rhoneycutt:
Mr Curtis
Preciate the John 1:1 reference. Care to elaborate on what you are saying?
Russell<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm just saying that we have God's word, and he has made sure we still have it. I view it as "God, the Word", or the "Word of God". Either way you view it, "The Word was God" tells me his word is truth, and I can trust in his word alone, for salvation.
And in just a few sentences, the affore-mentioned article not only casts doubt on the trust-worthyness of God's Holy Word, it actually insinuates that people who share my view are ignorant. "Yea, hath God said" is all over that article, and IMNSHO, it has no business on a Baptist Board. It stinks of apostasy, & whoever wrote it ought to be ashamed. It's hard to even joke about how blasphemous that article is.
And on a side note, I'm positive that nobody who shares the views of that article is KJV only.
Mr Curtis
Preciate the John 1:1 reference. Care to elaborate on what you are saying?
Russell<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm just saying that we have God's word, and he has made sure we still have it. I view it as "God, the Word", or the "Word of God". Either way you view it, "The Word was God" tells me his word is truth, and I can trust in his word alone, for salvation.
And in just a few sentences, the affore-mentioned article not only casts doubt on the trust-worthyness of God's Holy Word, it actually insinuates that people who share my view are ignorant. "Yea, hath God said" is all over that article, and IMNSHO, it has no business on a Baptist Board. It stinks of apostasy, & whoever wrote it ought to be ashamed. It's hard to even joke about how blasphemous that article is.
And on a side note, I'm positive that nobody who shares the views of that article is KJV only.
rhoneycutt
New Member
Mr Curtis
Are you trying to tell me that in your opinion John 1:1 is talking about what we currently call the Bible?
That is certainly a new one on me.
Alkire
The fact that I continue to post here leaves no doubt that I am a fool or insane or both.
Russell
Are you trying to tell me that in your opinion John 1:1 is talking about what we currently call the Bible?
That is certainly a new one on me.
Alkire
The fact that I continue to post here leaves no doubt that I am a fool or insane or both.
Russell
MarciontheModerateBaptist
New Member
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I would not want to be beside anyone who claims that the Word in John 1 is referring to anything that is written by the hand of man. Perfect example of bibliolatry - thanks! BTW, I commonly use the NRSV.
I do not think I will ever understand why ever single word has to be inerrant for a knowledge of Christ to exist. I could know any of you perfectly from a flawed introduction once I actually took the time to sit down and converse with you. I maintain that inerrancy places too much faith in a book and too little faith in a Person.
Daniel Payne
P.S. I know who Marcion is - it's a joke. Haha.
I would not want to be beside anyone who claims that the Word in John 1 is referring to anything that is written by the hand of man. Perfect example of bibliolatry - thanks! BTW, I commonly use the NRSV.
I do not think I will ever understand why ever single word has to be inerrant for a knowledge of Christ to exist. I could know any of you perfectly from a flawed introduction once I actually took the time to sit down and converse with you. I maintain that inerrancy places too much faith in a book and too little faith in a Person.
Daniel Payne
P.S. I know who Marcion is - it's a joke. Haha.
Originally posted by Mr. Curtis:
>I'm just saying that we have God's word, and he has made sure we still have it.
And He has made sure that those Greek Orthodox Christians don't have it, right?
> I view it as "God, the Word", or the "Word of God". Either way you view it, "The Word was God" tells me his word is truth, and I can trust in his word alone, for salvation.
Not word. Logos. Big difference.
>And in just a few sentences, the affore-mentioned article not only casts doubt on the trust-worthyness of God's Holy Word, it actually insinuates that people who share my view are ignorant.
Well, the truth hurts on many fronts, doesn't it?
> It stinks of apostasy, & whoever wrote it ought to be ashamed. It's hard to even joke about how blasphemous that article is.
Actually, the idea that the Bible is God is blasphemous.
>I'm just saying that we have God's word, and he has made sure we still have it.
And He has made sure that those Greek Orthodox Christians don't have it, right?
> I view it as "God, the Word", or the "Word of God". Either way you view it, "The Word was God" tells me his word is truth, and I can trust in his word alone, for salvation.
Not word. Logos. Big difference.
>And in just a few sentences, the affore-mentioned article not only casts doubt on the trust-worthyness of God's Holy Word, it actually insinuates that people who share my view are ignorant.
Well, the truth hurts on many fronts, doesn't it?
> It stinks of apostasy, & whoever wrote it ought to be ashamed. It's hard to even joke about how blasphemous that article is.
Actually, the idea that the Bible is God is blasphemous.
Scott wrote:
> How do you know Christ without the scripture?
How do you know the scripture without Christ?
> If you don't accept all scripture as reliable, how do you decide which ones are and which ones are not?
Christ criterion.
> And, quite frankly, who gave you or anyone else the right to decide for anyone including yourself which parts are true and which are not?
Paul.
> Please cite the scripture that says you can disregard anything that does not make sense to you or makes you feel bad.
""Everything is permissible for me"--but not everything is beneficial."
> Isn't a little Eve-like to think that you must understand and know all?
Who understands all, or claims to?
> What kind of pride brings someone to the point where they feel justified in creating their own God? You get to say what He is, is not, did, didn't do, thinks, feels, will do, etc.
Ask the bibliolaters.
> The evidence pointing to the preservation of God's Word through the last 1900 years is overwhelming.
And yet, some books of the Bible are older than 1900 years.
> You may scoff but the Bible is clear that God does providentially work in the affairs of mankind. There is no reason not to believe that God by an act of His own sovereign will revealed Himself to man except your own preconceived bias against the concept and, truthfully, lack of faith.
I think you meant to post this in alt.athiest. It doesn't apply to anyone in this thread.
> All of your arguments are subjective.
As are yours.
> Your feelings and experiences can never create a sound foundation for faith.
Neither can leather, paper, and ink.
> You accuse fundamentalists of oversimplifying. But what is the liberal doing? You just toss out anything that requires work and study.
Thanks for the belly laugh!
> There is nothing noble in reducing God to something you define, manipulate, and ultimately dictate to.
Amen. Please stop doing just that.
> How do you know Christ without the scripture?
How do you know the scripture without Christ?
> If you don't accept all scripture as reliable, how do you decide which ones are and which ones are not?
Christ criterion.
> And, quite frankly, who gave you or anyone else the right to decide for anyone including yourself which parts are true and which are not?
Paul.
> Please cite the scripture that says you can disregard anything that does not make sense to you or makes you feel bad.
""Everything is permissible for me"--but not everything is beneficial."
> Isn't a little Eve-like to think that you must understand and know all?
Who understands all, or claims to?
> What kind of pride brings someone to the point where they feel justified in creating their own God? You get to say what He is, is not, did, didn't do, thinks, feels, will do, etc.
Ask the bibliolaters.
> The evidence pointing to the preservation of God's Word through the last 1900 years is overwhelming.
And yet, some books of the Bible are older than 1900 years.
> You may scoff but the Bible is clear that God does providentially work in the affairs of mankind. There is no reason not to believe that God by an act of His own sovereign will revealed Himself to man except your own preconceived bias against the concept and, truthfully, lack of faith.
I think you meant to post this in alt.athiest. It doesn't apply to anyone in this thread.
> All of your arguments are subjective.
As are yours.
> Your feelings and experiences can never create a sound foundation for faith.
Neither can leather, paper, and ink.
> You accuse fundamentalists of oversimplifying. But what is the liberal doing? You just toss out anything that requires work and study.
Thanks for the belly laugh!
> There is nothing noble in reducing God to something you define, manipulate, and ultimately dictate to.
Amen. Please stop doing just that.