Infallible Word of God?

[McCree79]

"This God—his way is perfect; the word of the LORD proves true; he is a shield for all those who take refuge in him." Psalm 18:30

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

[Yeshua1]

Incorrect. I believe that if you were to have a face to face chat with him, and he trusted you enough to be completely open with you, he would tell you that what he said to Job in chapters 38-41, while accurate enough on the surface and in accordance with what he believed at the time, was the single biggest mistake he ever made. "Might makes right" was a horrible precedent to set...the logical conclusion being that, if Satan can acquire more power than our God (his desperately desired aim), then he deserves to be worshiped and honored for having that power. I say no; I say that he would then need to be held to account for his abuse and misuse of that power. And I say that the same applies to our God...except that in His case I believe that He agrees enthusiastically.

God knows everything,he cannot make any mistakes, he does not have a redo button!

 

[Yeshua1]

No God doesn't need to learn or go through bumps and bruises to get there.
that is heresy.

Smells of Open Theism!

 

[ehbowen]

No God doesn't need to learn or go through bumps and bruises to get there.
that is heresy.

Depends upon how you define heresy. If heresy = 'Not in accordance with accepted doctrine', then you're right. If heresy = 'false' or 'untrue', then I'm convinced that you're wrong.

Sent from my STV100-1 using Tapatalk

 

[ehbowen]

God knows everything,he cannot make any mistakes, he does not have a redo button!

And I say that the reason that he knows everything is that he does have an undo and a redo button and he has used both in the past. Satan has similar tools as well, but...that's another can of worms.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

No God doesn't need to learn or go through bumps and bruises to get there.
that is heresy.

Agreed. Absolute heresy, God does not make mistakes.

 

[ehbowen]

Agreed. Absolute heresy, God does not make mistakes.

"Does" or "Did"?

What's at the center of every pearl?

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

"Does" or "Did"?

What's at the center of every pearl?

God never has made a mistake, is not making mistakes, and will never make a mistake.

 

[Logos1560]

God does not make mistakes.

Do you agree that God did not make the actual mistakes or errors found in KJV editions?

 

[ehbowen]

God never has made a mistake, is not making mistakes, and will never make a mistake.

Once again, I believe that you're thinking in linear time. I'm thinking sequence.

The deeper question is, if you make an honest mistake... but take responsibility for it, make restitution for it, learn from it, and never repeat it again... then was it really a mistake?



Sent from my STV100-1 using Tapatalk

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Once again, I believe that you're thinking in linear time. I'm thinking sequence.

The deeper question is, if you make an honest mistake... but take responsibility for it, make restitution for it, learn from it, and never repeat it again... then was it really a mistake?



Sent from my STV100-1 using Tapatalk

God makes no honest mistakes and God has no necessity to learn seeing that he himself possesses all wisdom and knowledge. The scriptures are clear

What does it mean that God is omniscient?

 

[ehbowen]

God makes no honest mistakes and God has no necessity to learn seeing that he himself possesses all wisdom and knowledge. The scriptures are clear

What does it mean that God is omniscient?

I would suggest that you contemplate the effect upon your faith if it turned out that your position was wrong, as I have the effect upon mine if my position is wrong.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

I would suggest that you contemplate the effect upon your faith if it turned out that your position was wrong, as I have the effect upon mine if my position is wrong.

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

You speak not according to the law of God nor of his testimony in his word, therefore there is no light in you.

Jeremiah 8:9 The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken: lo, they have rejected the word of the LORD; and what wisdom is in them?

Friend I would suggest that you repent and bring your own thinking into line with the word of God.

 

[ehbowen]

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

You speak not according to the law of God nor of his testimony in his word, therefore there is no light in you.

Jeremiah 8:9 The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken: lo, they have rejected the word of the LORD; and what wisdom is in them?

Friend I would suggest that you repent and bring your own thinking into line with the word of God.

Be very careful about making a false accusation. I have not "rejected the word of the LORD." I have come to a deeper and better understanding of both it and the Persons behind it.

For the present, I'm not trying to say that you need to believe me nor that you need to agree with me. I'm just saying what I think in a marketplace of ideas with the hope of iron sharpening iron. You don't need to believe me...but you should believe that I DO believe it.

 

[Jerome]

Why such a fixation on using these red flag terms: inerrant and infallible? Can't you just agree that Scripture is truthful, reliable, authoritative, normative?

When some do not like to see Inerrant/Infallible being used, reminds me of when some do not like to have justification/propitiation still used in translations, like somehow those words no longer are good to use.

Except it was David Dockery (Gospel Coalition council member) who expressed those sentiments back in 1990!

http://media.sbhla.org.s3.amazonaws.com/7009,17-Aug-1990.PDF

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (BP)--Speakers at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary's Pastor's School discussed ways to move Southern Baptists "beyond the impasse" in the denomination's current theological debate.

During sessions on "Four Views of the Bible among Southern Baptists," seven scholars spoke at the Louisville, Ky., school about the nature of biblical authority and interpretation. They also proposed ways for Southern Baptists to find common ground in the present theological controversy.

During the conference, Dockery said Southern Baptists will have to decide if "we can hold together tensions on various views about the Bible as well as various views of interpreting the Bible." Southern Baptists must understand the Bible is truthful, authoritative and is both a divine and human book, said Dockery.

"A lot of us get quite hung up on terms like inerrant and infallible," he said. "I think it is very possible to move the discussion forward and still talk about the nature of Scripture without using those particular red flag terms"...."I would prefer that we talk about the Scripture as truthful, reliable and authoritative and see it having to be the normative guide for the church, for our lives and for the Christian community"

Another speaker, R. Albert Mohler Jr., editor of the Christian Index, newsjournal for Georgia Baptists, said Southern Baptists need to try to build a theological consensus....Mohler described inerrancy as "an important issue" but it "isn't the most important word about Scripture."

 

[John of Japan]

And I say that the reason that he knows everything is that he does have an undo and a redo button and he has used both in the past. Satan has similar tools as well, but...that's another can of worms.

Do you, then, believe in dualism?

 

[John of Japan]

Once again, I believe that you're thinking in linear time. I'm thinking sequence.

God exists and operates from outside of our space-time continuum, or He could not be the Creator. He sees all of history at a glance. His omniscience precludes error.

The question has been asked of you, and I hope you will answer: do you hold to open theism?

The deeper question is, if you make an honest mistake... but take responsibility for it, make restitution for it, learn from it, and never repeat it again... then was it really a mistake?

You are referencing the omniscient God here, yet this statement has no basis in theology. What passage in the Bible can you use to defend it?

According to what you say, God is not omniscient. Is that your belief?

 

[ehbowen]

Do you, then, believe in dualism?

I do not believe in dualism. What I believe is quite complex and would take some length to fully explain. I'm not sure anyone here's really interested.

 

[HankD]

I would suggest that you contemplate the effect upon your faith if it turned out that your position was wrong, as I have the effect upon mine if my position is wrong.

Here is a "what if"...

What if after several "sequences" of events concerning the worlds rejection of Jesus Christ God determines that He made a "mistake" in having sent His son Jesus Christ to redeem mankind and now decides to take responsibility for it, make restitution for it, learn from it, and never repeat it again, He then empties heaven of the "saved" shuts down the Gospel never again to save anyone and further destroys the earth and all its inhabitants?

This seems entirely possible using your definition of a "mistake".

 

[ehbowen]

God exists and operates from outside of our space-time continuum, or He could not be the Creator. He sees all of history at a glance. His omniscience precludes error.

The question has been asked of you, and I hope you will answer: do you hold to open theism?

You are referencing the omniscient God here, yet this statement has no basis in theology. What passage in the Bible can you use to defend it?

According to what you say, God is not omniscient. Is that your belief?

1. Let me look up "Open Theism", I'm not familiar with it. I'll get back with you on that.
2. The scripture has numerous references where God changed his mind or was willing to (Numbers 14:11-23, Genesis 18:22-23). God explicitly stated that prophecies of judgment were always conditional (Jeremiah 18:7-10). Paraphrasing Greg Matte of Houston's First Baptist: The defining characteristic of God is not immutability or omniscience; the angels around his throne do not cry out, "Omniscient, omniscient, omniscient!" God's defining characteristic is holiness...and if you can propose a course of action which is more holy than the one he has in mind he will either listen patiently and then let you know why and how you are wrong...or else adopt it and say, "Thank you." If God was unwilling to listen and improve his plan then we might just as well worship a God of wood or stone.
3. God was not omniscient in the early "layers" of the process. He has been surprised quite a few times, both unpleasantly and pleasantly. However, in the final analysis he does absolutely and completely overcome evil and the evil one and attain to total omniscience of the past, present, and what we call the future (which is to him the zone of time in which it may still be possible to make changes and improvements). And, since he is indeed a being outside of time, that omniscience and omnipotence touches and reshapes all of linear time from infinity past to infinity future.