Archie the Preacher
Member
Hello again, Yeshua
This is because what God told 'us', He inspired; and that is how I am sure it is the information He wants us - me - to know.
No doubt someone will object on the basis of something he read somewhere - like the two legalist Irish monks in the 'Trinity' video. "Oh! That's the Barfelflingen Heresy denounced by Snuggums the Really, Really Charming." But it is an analogy, and useful for comparison - if pushed too far it will fall short of the original.
In fact, there is ample evidence of several different patterns or forms of how God influenced the writers. Obviously, when God told Jeremiah (Ch 36, v 1 and following) “Get a scroll. Write on it everything I have told you to say ..." the Lord was 'dictating'. There are several places with that formula and I have no doubt the writer did exactly as told.
The books of Psalms and Proverbs were likely written by men who were attempting to honor God, but probably not consciously recording something to be used by God. Although I could be wrong about that.
The Torah, the first five books 'of Moses' were written - according to Jewish tradition and some indications in the Bible - by Moses. As you know, they are the history of the relation between God and Creation - including man - the Fall. It is also the history of the beginning of the Nation (group of related people, not geopolitical entity) of Israel beginning with Abram. Also the giving of the Commandments, the extended Law and the journey from Egypt to what was to be the country of Israel-Judah.
I think it likely Moses had some help with the writing, with Moses as the editor, producer and publisher in the human sense. But as much as Moses (likely) oversaw the writing of the Torah, God kept watch over Moses to make sure it was in accord with God's purposes, desires and intent.
The books of history in the Old Testament, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah were written by men who were likely commissioned by the Kings of Israel. Nearly every country on Earth has kept a record of what went on. I'm sure those men were careful to keep as accurate an account of things as they reasonably expected future generations to read and rely on their work as 'authentic'. I don't think they knew God had influenced the King to insure the history was recorded - I'm not sure the King was aware at the time. Nor do I think the writers knew God was making sure all was done correctly, in accord with His purposes.
The same applies to Job, Ruth and Esther, more or less. I don't think that was ordained by the King, but God 'suggested' to someone to make a record; then ensured the record was correct.
The Gospels were written with the expectation future Christians would read them. I'm not sure any of the writers heard a voice commanding them to write, but God certainly inspired them in any event. Luke mentions feeling a need to write both the Gospel of Luke and Acts of the Apostles, but does not specifically mention the urging of God. (We know he was - now, of course.)
When Paul wrote his letters and Peter and whoever wrote Hebrews and so forth, they were writing with the knowledge they were influencing other Christians and future Christians. I sometimes wonder if Paul was aware he was writing the SOP for the Christian church, but regardless of how 'inspired' the writers 'felt' (feelings are so fleeting and unreliable) they were 'inspired' as they wrote to explain what God wanted written, and what God expected of Christians.
In the matter of much of this, God made sure what was written was what he wanted. I would not be surprised to find (what a neat thought, we will find out) God did in some specific cases 'dictate' the words. For sure, God inspired the subjects and solutions contained therein.
In Revelation, John is commanded to write down what he saw and heard. But that is not the same language as used to Jeremiah. Not that God allowed any errors of fact or substance.
So, of the various forms of 'inspiration' argued by church fathers and church grandsons, it strikes me that most were used at some point or other.
There is a big disagreement about whether there were 'any' errors in the autographs - the original documents of the Bible. It is a silly argument for at least one reason: There are no autographs to be studied. There is NO WAY to determine the matter. I rather suspect - more than suspect - the 'perfection' faction are merely modern day legalists who want to believe more than anyone else and therefore have a claim to more righteousness than others. It reminds me so much of the rabbis who wrote the Mishnah and Gemara and added so many regulations to the Mosiac Law. Remember the ones Jesus identified as " ... you experts in religious law as well! You load people down with burdens difficult to bear, yet you yourselves refuse to touch the burdens with even one of your fingers!" (Luke 11:46)
So I don't really care about the petty and legalistic self-justification argument of 'no errors of any kind'. It is the message that matters; and that is why the Bible can be translated and STILL be authentic, authoritative and the everlasting Word of God.
Yeshua, did I answer your question or put you to sleep? Or both?
Certainly God has preserved His 'word' or 'words', as the case may be, to be EXACTLY what He intended. I know I can rely on the Bible to tell me everything I need to know to have a relationship with God and live properly. It even tells me when I live improperly how to rectify my misdeeds and regain a proper relationship with Him. (Or how He rectifies...)Yeshua1 said:
This is because what God told 'us', He inspired; and that is how I am sure it is the information He wants us - me - to know.
I think that works, yes. It is probably as good an idea as any. Somewhat like an editor with full editorial authority.Yeshua1 said:
No doubt someone will object on the basis of something he read somewhere - like the two legalist Irish monks in the 'Trinity' video. "Oh! That's the Barfelflingen Heresy denounced by Snuggums the Really, Really Charming." But it is an analogy, and useful for comparison - if pushed too far it will fall short of the original.
In fact, there is ample evidence of several different patterns or forms of how God influenced the writers. Obviously, when God told Jeremiah (Ch 36, v 1 and following) “Get a scroll. Write on it everything I have told you to say ..." the Lord was 'dictating'. There are several places with that formula and I have no doubt the writer did exactly as told.
The books of Psalms and Proverbs were likely written by men who were attempting to honor God, but probably not consciously recording something to be used by God. Although I could be wrong about that.
The Torah, the first five books 'of Moses' were written - according to Jewish tradition and some indications in the Bible - by Moses. As you know, they are the history of the relation between God and Creation - including man - the Fall. It is also the history of the beginning of the Nation (group of related people, not geopolitical entity) of Israel beginning with Abram. Also the giving of the Commandments, the extended Law and the journey from Egypt to what was to be the country of Israel-Judah.
I think it likely Moses had some help with the writing, with Moses as the editor, producer and publisher in the human sense. But as much as Moses (likely) oversaw the writing of the Torah, God kept watch over Moses to make sure it was in accord with God's purposes, desires and intent.
The books of history in the Old Testament, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah were written by men who were likely commissioned by the Kings of Israel. Nearly every country on Earth has kept a record of what went on. I'm sure those men were careful to keep as accurate an account of things as they reasonably expected future generations to read and rely on their work as 'authentic'. I don't think they knew God had influenced the King to insure the history was recorded - I'm not sure the King was aware at the time. Nor do I think the writers knew God was making sure all was done correctly, in accord with His purposes.
The same applies to Job, Ruth and Esther, more or less. I don't think that was ordained by the King, but God 'suggested' to someone to make a record; then ensured the record was correct.
The Gospels were written with the expectation future Christians would read them. I'm not sure any of the writers heard a voice commanding them to write, but God certainly inspired them in any event. Luke mentions feeling a need to write both the Gospel of Luke and Acts of the Apostles, but does not specifically mention the urging of God. (We know he was - now, of course.)
When Paul wrote his letters and Peter and whoever wrote Hebrews and so forth, they were writing with the knowledge they were influencing other Christians and future Christians. I sometimes wonder if Paul was aware he was writing the SOP for the Christian church, but regardless of how 'inspired' the writers 'felt' (feelings are so fleeting and unreliable) they were 'inspired' as they wrote to explain what God wanted written, and what God expected of Christians.
In the matter of much of this, God made sure what was written was what he wanted. I would not be surprised to find (what a neat thought, we will find out) God did in some specific cases 'dictate' the words. For sure, God inspired the subjects and solutions contained therein.
In Revelation, John is commanded to write down what he saw and heard. But that is not the same language as used to Jeremiah. Not that God allowed any errors of fact or substance.
So, of the various forms of 'inspiration' argued by church fathers and church grandsons, it strikes me that most were used at some point or other.
There is a big disagreement about whether there were 'any' errors in the autographs - the original documents of the Bible. It is a silly argument for at least one reason: There are no autographs to be studied. There is NO WAY to determine the matter. I rather suspect - more than suspect - the 'perfection' faction are merely modern day legalists who want to believe more than anyone else and therefore have a claim to more righteousness than others. It reminds me so much of the rabbis who wrote the Mishnah and Gemara and added so many regulations to the Mosiac Law. Remember the ones Jesus identified as " ... you experts in religious law as well! You load people down with burdens difficult to bear, yet you yourselves refuse to touch the burdens with even one of your fingers!" (Luke 11:46)
So I don't really care about the petty and legalistic self-justification argument of 'no errors of any kind'. It is the message that matters; and that is why the Bible can be translated and STILL be authentic, authoritative and the everlasting Word of God.
Yeshua, did I answer your question or put you to sleep? Or both?
