Jump to content
  • Welcome to Online Baptist

    Free to join.

Guest Mr. Thomas

PROVEN: Biblical Inerrancy

Recommended Posts

To Mr. Alan: Ok, to finish up:

10. Well, some people do just like to rebel, but the question is whether the Bible is the written word of God or if it has been tampered with in such a way that also leads to discord inherrently. I agree that if God wrote it then it must be inerrant because God inerrant. I also think Paul, Peter and such were also great trustworthy men, but not inerrant themselves, so if their book were written without God's direct intervention to the contrary, then their words would also be, strictly speaking not inerrant. And even if God did directly ensure inerrancy for these writers in this special case (and remember, none of the apostles knew that the Bible was going to exist, they didn't have that goal in mind), and produced an inerrant set on manuscripts, if any edits were made since the original letters, then the edited versions would errant even if the originals weren't, again unless God directly influenced the edits in such a way as to still reflect his will. At the very least some wording changes were made when they were translated (The greek 'logos' doesn't carry exactly the same meaning as the English word 'truth', but it is most often translated that way), and God would have had to influence all of the translators in such a way that the new meaning of the words would still reflect his will (even though it wouldn't be exactly the same meaning as before anymore). I really would like to believe that the Bible is an inerrant manual to God's will, but God himself didn't directly tell me it was, and I think there should be a heavy burden of proof when you say something speaks for God.

11. I think it is true for some people, but not everyone.

12. No, I don't remember ever coming across one.

13. I don't understand the question, but that is my understanding of how Darwin's theory works.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Guest Mr. Thomas said:

To Mr. Alan: Ok, to finish up:

10. Well, some people do just like to rebel, but the question is whether the Bible is the written word of God or if it has been tampered with in such a way that also leads to discord inherrently. I agree that if God wrote it then it must be inerrant because God inerrant. I also think Paul, Peter and such were also great trustworthy men, but not inerrant themselves, so if their book were written without God's direct intervention to the contrary, then their words would also be, strictly speaking not inerrant. And even if God did directly ensure inerrancy for these writers in this special case (and remember, none of the apostles knew that the Bible was going to exist, they didn't have that goal in mind), and produced an inerrant set on manuscripts, if any edits were made since the original letters, then the edited versions would errant even if the originals weren't, again unless God directly influenced the edits in such a way as to still reflect his will. At the very least some wording changes were made when they were translated (The greek 'logos' doesn't carry exactly the same meaning as the English word 'truth', but it is most often translated that way), and God would have had to influence all of the translators in such a way that the new meaning of the words would still reflect his will (even though it wouldn't be exactly the same meaning as before anymore). I really would like to believe that the Bible is an inerrant manual to God's will, but God himself didn't directly tell me it was, and I think there should be a heavy burden of proof when you say something speaks for God.

Mr. Thomas,

Although you presented the above answer to Brother Alan, I wish to make comment on it.  I believe that the above answer reveals the real reason that you are struggling with assurance of faith in the Bible (God's Holy Word).  In your present system of belief, you do NOT fully believe that the Bible is wholly God's Holy Word.  You appear to have a low view of Biblical inspiration, a low view of Biblical preservation, and a low view of providential translation.  As such, you seem to have a system of belief wherein whole portions (and maybe even many portions) of the Bible are simply the thoughts and interpretations of men, not the very (jot and tittle) words of God.  I can agree that IF I viewed the Bible (or at least portions of the Bible) as being simply sourced in men, I would also question its errancy (at least in those portions); for it is a certain fact that men are errant.  On the other hand, since I believe that "all Scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Timothy 3:16), and that no portion of Scripture originated out of "any private interpretation" of men or "by the will of man," but that "holy men of God spake [communicated] as they were moved by the Holy Ghost" (See 2 Peter 1:20-21), thus I believe that all Scripture is "true and righteous altogether" (See Psalm 19:9).  Even so, accepting the sincerity of your plea and truly seeking to help you, I would contend that your real problem and struggle is NOT with the errancy or inerrancy of the Bible, but is with the doctrines of inspiration and preservation.  I would contend that until you come unto full assurance of faith in the Biblical doctrines of inspiration and preservation, you will ALWAYS struggle with the question of errancy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To Pastor Scott Markle: I don't see your distinction between the two. How could you believe in one but not the other? But if neither Jesus nor any of the saints endorsed the Bible (it hadn't been compiled yet), then how do you know it inerrant? As far as I can tell, the Catholics were the ones to compile it and then claim inerrancy, but they also claimed other doctrines that we don't agree with. If the unwavering belief in inerrancy can be traced back to 'a pope told us so, so we believe it', then why do we believe this thing a pope told us but disdain other things popes have told us?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Guest Mr. Thomas said:

To Pastor Scott Markle: I don't see your distinction between the two. How could you believe in one but not the other? 

Mr. Thomas,

I am not quite certain that I am understanding "the two" that you are intending to reference.

IF by "the two" you mean (1) inspiration and (2) inerrancy, then I would express the following:

1.  Divine inspiration is the foundation for Biblical inerrancy.
2.  Divine inspiration is the source and origin for God's Holy Word, whereas Biblical inerrancy is the result of that divine inspiration.  (That is -- IF Scripture is inspired of God, THEN it follows that Scripture is inerrant, since God Himself is inerrant.)

That ALL Scripture is inspired of God as per 2 Timothy 3:16, such that God the Holy Spirit specifically and precisely moved the human penmen of Scripture to communicate God's Holy Word with "jot and tittle" accuracy as per 2 Peter 1:20-21, is my personal belief system.  As such, since I would hold that God the Holy Spirit Himself is perfectly inerrant, I would further hold that the product of His personally inspired Scriptures are also inerrant ("true and righteous altogether").  Even so, in ALL Bible study I begin with these premises, such that in Bible study I do NOT set up myself as a judge over the possible errancy of God's Holy Word, but I set up God's Holy Word as a judge over my own errancy.

(Note: All genuine logical processes begin with at least one or more premise.  In your own earlier postings, you claim to approach the inerrancy or errancy of any portion in Scripture with neutrality, claiming this as the best approach and claiming that your own logic is the means by which you make your judgment thereof.  In this manner, you have taken up some premises, such as:

1.  Human logic is an accurate tool by which to examine the truthfulness of Scripture.
2.  You yourself have a sufficient grasp of the "logic-tool" to employ its process accurately in general.
3.  You yourself have a sufficient grasp of the "logic-tool" to employ its process accurately over the content of Scripture.

I wonder if you first approached these premises with neutrality BEFORE you began to engage in your "logical" examinations of Scripture.)

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Thomas,

Thank you for your replies to my set of questions on the two paragraphs that I quoted from Dan Barker's book, "godless." I could not open the pdf text file that you uploaded, but, the previous answers were sufficient in my quest to know you and your beliefs better. I am not going to debate any of the questions or answers.

As with DaveW, I also think that your miss-quoting me, and twisting my post, was not good. For the records sake, I meant what I said and will make sure that everyone knows exactly what I meant.

On 10/29/2019 at 12:58 PM, Alan said:

Mr. Thomas,

God does not write the scriptures for your, or any man's, private thoughts on how, or what, or what dates, or times of reigns, should be mentioned. What you think and what I think should b e mentioned is immaterial. As I clearly brought out, the scriptures are very clear that King Jeroiachim had two reigns.  Therefore, it is abundantly clear that there is no contradiction between

2 Kings 24:8 and 2 Chronicles 36:9.

Alan

 

After studying your answers I have come to the conclusion that you are an atheist at heart and came here on Online Baptist to cast doubt on the inerrancy of the scriptures, promote atheism, and create an atmosphere of debate and quarrels among the brethren.

If you are truly seeking the truth concerning the supposed contradiction of the three passages of scripture previously discussed, than you will accept the fact that neither one of the three passages discussed do not contradict one another.

As a personal testimony. I was raised by a father that was a hard-core atheist and agnostic and I believed every word he said concerning the contradictions in the Bible, all religions were fraudulent, evolution was a scientific fact, all ministers were in the ministry for wealth, all ministers were hypocrites, and that the Bible was full of fables, legends, not logical, hell was not real and neither was heaven, and only deluded fools believed in Christ. My father's hatred for God, the Bible, the church (any church), and ministers of the gospel, was intense.  As my father believed, so did I. My father simply believed that when you died you went back to the dust of the earth and that was the end of it all. While in High School I had read, and accepted as fact, the writings of Thomas Paine, "Age of Reason," I still have a copy of "Age of Reason" in my library.

At 19 years old, looking at my possible death in the face while in the Vietnam War, I decided to read the little New Testament that was given to me in my induction in the military. Long story short, after reading the New Testament, hearing a message on the reality of hell, and a gospel tract,  I came to the logical, and correct, conclusion that the scriptures were true and everything that my father believed, and that I accepted as factual, was not true, but was fraudulent, man's philosophy, and a monstrous lie of immense magnitude.

I have seriously studied every, and I mean every, supposed contradiction written by Thomas Paine, Dan Barker, Vincent Bugliosi, and some other recent atheists, and have come to the conclusion that their supposed biblical contradictions are not contradictions. In fact, after studying the above books, and other atheist material, with your postings, I have come to the conclusion that you are an atheist.

If you are really seeking truth, you need to accept the answers to the previous three passages discussed as truth and seriously consider the previous posts of the brethren here on Online Baptist.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Alan
deleted a phrase

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To Alan: You're testimony is moving. Also, you are wrong about my intentions.

To All: I think this might be my last post as well. I came here looking for help, and I am grateful to those of you who tried. However, I don't find answers that boil down to "I believe because I want to" to be particularly helpful, although at least they are honest. Even if that's all you contributed to this thread, I am grateful for your time and moved by your care. The reason why I'm considering quitting are the discouraging aspirations being thrown onto my character and my motives.

You shouldn't treat me like I'm stupid or evil for asking questions that should have already occurred to you. Maybe if our pastors and parents had asked these types of questions, we would have answers by now that would help people like me who are struggling and help convert people who are now out of our reach. Maybe if we as a culture did this now we could have the way prepared for our children. But as long as we continue to fight against the practice of logic with concern to Christianity, we will continue to hemorrhage out of our churches all of our scientists, then other professionals, then the nation at large. Remember, God created logic, and at one point all of the great Scientists (Newton, Mendel, ect.) were Christians and fought with us to convert people instead of against us, and that's why whole nations were predominately Christian. God made the study of logic, and so when we kicked it out of the church we kicked out his blessings too and lost whole nations to the dark as a result. It's our fault that our scientists and leaders are atheist, we made them that way by bullying them out the church for doing what God made them to do. And now, thoroughly blinded and lobotomized, we won''t listen to the great Christian logicians of the past either; and call honest, good men like Thomas Aquinas evil because we would rather have abortions and gay marriage than to have to think hard in a church.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But your premise that many of us are rejecting logic and that we "believe because we want to" is just wrong.

Christians should be the greatest skeptics the world knows, but you are not trying the spirits. You truly are starting at the place that Thomas was: "I will not believe, unless I see the scars and feel the wounds."

There have been several answers given which you dismiss because you don't like them. They are not "bad answers" as you see them to be, they simply are not satisfying to you. We can't help that. If you do not want to believe, then nothing will convince you - and by all appearances you do not want to believe. You just want to ease your own conscience of the guilt you feel for rejecting the Biblical AND logical conclusions.

You reject any and all answers you are given NOT because they are illogical or inadequate but because you WANT TO REJECT them.

If you were serious about it would not have rejected for instance my original answers by saying:

"To Mr. DaveW: I can't tell you how much I appreciate your long and detailed answer; your effort has greatly moved me, and I am very grateful to you for your time and thoroughness! I have heard these answers or ones similar to them over years of asking these kinds of questions, but I am still uneasy; they are ad-hoc, or like you said, 'put together' and 'not watertight', and some are still strictly speaking errant (even if rounded in the inconsistent way suggested, the numbers of soldiers in the army are still not the same, and couldn't bereferenced in an exact sense, like in a scientific paper or a court of law, to which standards surely God's own word should meet). This doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the strict Biblical Inerrancy either, and as I'm sure you're aware there are many more contradictions in various degrees to be found through out the texts. However, like I said before, I am very, very grateful to you for your effort and dedication, and any more insight from you would be most welcome!"

 

You would have entered into discussion about what I wrote.

You didn't. You simply said it was not good enough for you.

You don't appear to be interested in the discussion you say you want.

You DO appear to be more interested in what men say about the Bible, but apparently only in men who doubt the Bible.

Why do you not quote men like Spurgeon who believed the Bible sart to finish was inerrerant? Or men like Tozer who believed the Bible was inerrant?

There are plenty of men who are on record as stating the Bible is without error, but you choose to enlist the words of men who throw doubt on the Bible.

And I still maintain that if you put as much store in the Word of God as you do in words of men (even men who do state that the Bible is without error), then you will be 1000 times better off.

If the men you choose to follow and defend are doubters of the Word of God, then where are you going to end up?

And you have not put up one serious answer to any verse I have posted. I was not posting them for the fun of, but because each of them answers your problems.  But you choose to ignore them because they are the Word of God which you do not trust.........

We have tried, but you refuse to accept our answers - not because they are inadequate, and not because they are insufficient, and not because they are wrong - they are none of these. You reject them because you do not like them......

I will not beleive unless I see the scars and feel the wounds.....

Joh 20:25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

26  And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.

 27  Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.

 28  And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

 29  Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

Edited by DaveW
Phone spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Guest Mr. Thomas said:

To All: I think this might be my last post as well. I came here looking for help, and I am grateful to those of you who tried. However, I don't find answers that boil down to "I believe because I want to" to be particularly helpful, although at least they are honest. Even if that's all you contributed to this thread, I am grateful for your time and moved by your care. The reason why I'm considering quitting are the discouraging aspirations being thrown onto my character and my motives.

You shouldn't treat me like I'm stupid or evil for asking questions that should have already occurred to you. Maybe if our pastors and parents had asked these types of questions, we would have answers by now that would help people like me who are struggling and help convert people who are now out of our reach. Maybe if we as a culture did this now we could have the way prepared for our children. But as long as we continue to fight against the practice of logic with concern to Christianity, we will continue to hemorrhage out of our churches all of our scientists, then other professionals, then the nation at large. Remember, God created logic, and at one point all of the great Scientists (Newton, Mendel, ect.) were Christians and fought with us to convert people instead of against us, and that's why whole nations were predominately Christian. God made the study of logic, and so when we kicked it out of the church we kicked out his blessings too and lost whole nations to the dark as a result. It's our fault that our scientists and leaders are atheist, we made them that way by bullying them out the church for doing what God made them to do. And now, thoroughly blinded and lobotomized, we won''t listen to the great Christian logicians of the past either; and call honest, good men like Thomas Aquinas evil because we would rather have abortions and gay marriage than to have to think hard in a church.

(Hmmmm, I am having to try this a different way because the forum is giving me troubles about posting.)

Mr. Thomas,

I am not certain that your above posting was at all directed toward my previous communications and challenges toward you; however, I would point out a few problems with your above posting --

1.  You assert that "God created logic" and that "God made the study of logic."  Have you first proven those assertions by any authoritative means, or are those assertions simply two of your assumed premises?  Remember that "logic" begins with one or more premises; therefore, when we engage in the process of logic, it is of value for us to recognize our starting premises.  If an individual cannot make that recognition, then an individual cannot engage in the process of logic correctly.  (As for myself, I would agree that God created human logic; however, I would also contend that the sin nature in man has corrupted that creation, such that human logic is NOT inerrant, but is actually and often errant.  Thus I would further contend that human logic cannot be trusted as the FOUNDATION for truth.  On the other hand, I am not at all sure that I would agree with your assertion that "God made the STUDY of logic."  I am not aware of ANY divinely revealed principles for following the process of logic, which would be required if God Himself actually made the STUDY thereof.  Now, I myself am quite familiar with the principles and processes of logic; and this familiarity is one of the very reasons why I reject human logic as the FOUNDATION for truth, although I DO employ human logic in my processes of Bible study.)

(Well, let us see if this posting works.  If so, then more to follow.)

(Well, look at that, it worked.  Let us now see if this attempt also works.)

2.  You seem to assert that the primary reason we are losing society from Christ unto wickedness is because we have removed logic from our system of Christianity.  Through this assertion you appear to make "logic" central to the core of Biblical Christianity.  However, as I study God's Holy Word, I find that CHRIST, not logic, is the central core of Biblical Christianity.  In fact, Colossians 2:3 declares concerning our Lord Jesus Christ, "In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge."  In addition, Colossians 2:6-8 further adds the following instruction and warning, "As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord [that would be - through faith], so walk ye in Him [that would also be - through faith]: rooted and built up in Him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.  BEWARE lest any man spoil you THROUGH PHILOSOPHY and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, AND NOT AFTER CHRIST."  (As for myself, I most certainly will not listen to ANY philosopher (whether he claims to be Christian or not) who teaches in contradiction "to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness" (See 1 Timothy 6:3).)

3.  As I mentioned in the previous point, you seem to assert that the primary reason we are losing society from Christ unto wickedness is because we have removed logic from our system of Christianity.  However, God's own Word in Romans 1:18-23 asserts something different concerning society, saying, "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.  For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: because that, WHEN THEY KNEW GOD, THEY GLORIFIED HIM NOT AS GOD, neither were thankful; BUT BECAME VAIN IN THEIR IMAGINATIONS, AND THEIR FOOLISH HEART WAS DARKENED.  PROFESSING THEMSELVES TO BE WISE, THEY BECAME FOOLS, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things."  Furthermore, 1 Corinthians 1:20-31 declares, "Where is the wise?  Where is the scribe?  Where is the disputer of this world?  Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?  For after that in the wisdom of God the world BY WISDOM KNEW NOT GOD, it pleased God BY THE FOOLISHNESS OF PREACHING to save them that believe.  For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: BUT WE PREACH CHRIST CRUCIFIED, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; but unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.  Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.  For ye see your calling, brethren, how that NOT many wise men after the flesh, NOT many mighty, NOT many noble, are called: but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: that no flesh should glory in His presence.  But of Him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption; that, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord."  (As for me, it would appear then that the real reason we are losing society is NOT because we have cast aside the wisdom of philosophical logic, BUT because we have cast aside the foolishness of preaching Christ.)

Now then --

1.  Your foundational authority for truth appears to be LOGIC.
2.  Whereas my foundational authority for truth is GOD'S WORD.

You initiated this thread discussion with a challenge against my foundational authority for truth, asking if God's Word is truly inerrant, or if it might actually be errant.
In return, I have challenged your foundational authority for truth, asking if human logic (and even more precisely - Mr. Thomas' ability in logic) is inerrant, or might actually be errant.

Can you defend the inerrancy of human logic; and even more precisely, can you defend the inerrancy of your own ability in logic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Guest Mr. Thomas said:

Remember, God created logic, and at one point all of the great Scientists (Newton, Mendel, ect.) were Christians and fought with us to convert people instead of against us, and that's why whole nations were predominately Christian. 

By the way, the reason that whole nations and people groups were converted unto Christ throughout church history was NOT because of the scientists, but was because of faithful preachers and missionaries who sacrificed all for the cause of Christ and His gospel.

(Note: "Logic" CANNOT carry forward its process correctly if it does not handle all information with precise accuracy.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

(Hmmmm, I am having to try this a different way because the forum is giving me troubles about posting.)

Mr. Thomas,

I am not certain that your above posting was at all directed toward my previous communications and challenges toward you; however, I would point out a few problems with your above posting --

1.  You assert that "God created logic" and that "God made the study of logic."  Have you first proven those assertions by any authoritative means, or are those assertions simply two of your assumed premises?  Remember that "logic" begins with one or more premises; therefore, when we engage in the process of logic, it is of value for us to recognize our starting premises.  If an individual cannot make that recognition, then an individual cannot engage in the process of logic correctly.  (As for myself, I would agree that God created human logic; however, I would also contend that the sin nature in man has corrupted that creation, such that human logic is NOT inerrant, but is actually and often errant.  Thus I would further contend that human logic cannot be trusted as the FOUNDATION for truth.  On the other hand, I am not at all sure that I would agree with your assertion that "God made the STUDY of logic."  I am not aware of ANY divinely revealed principles for following the process of logic, which would be required if God Himself actually made the STUDY thereof.  Now, I myself am quite familiar with the principles and processes of logic; and this familiarity is one of the very reasons why I reject human logic as the FOUNDATION for truth, although I DO employ human logic in my processes of Bible study.)

(Well, let us see if this posting works.  If so, then more to follow.)

(Well, look at that, it worked.  Let us now see if this attempt also works.)

2.  You seem to assert that the primary reason we are losing society from Christ unto wickedness is because we have removed logic from our system of Christianity.  Through this assertion you appear to make "logic" central to the core of Biblical Christianity.  However, as I study God's Holy Word, I find that CHRIST, not logic, is the central core of Biblical Christianity.  In fact, Colossians 2:3 declares concerning our Lord Jesus Christ, "In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge."  In addition, Colossians 2:6-8 further adds the following instruction and warning, "As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord [that would be - through faith], so walk ye in Him [that would also be - through faith]: rooted and built up in Him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.  BEWARE lest any man spoil you THROUGH PHILOSOPHY and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, AND NOT AFTER CHRIST."  (As for myself, I most certainly will not listen to ANY philosopher (whether he claims to be Christian or not) who teaches in contradiction "to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness" (See 1 Timothy 6:3).)

 

3.  As I mentioned in the previous point, you seem to assert that the primary reason we are losing society from Christ unto wickedness is because we have removed logic from our system of Christianity.  However, God's own Word in Romans 1:18-23 asserts something different concerning society, saying, "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.  For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: because that, WHEN THEY KNEW GOD, THEY GLORIFIED HIM NOT AS GOD, neither were thankful; BUT BECAME VAIN IN THEIR IMAGINATIONS, AND THEIR FOOLISH HEART WAS DARKENED.  PROFESSING THEMSELVES TO BE WISE, THEY BECAME FOOLS, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things."  Furthermore, 1 Corinthians 1:20-31 declares, "Where is the wise?  Where is the scribe?  Where is the disputer of this world?  Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?  For after that in the wisdom of God the world BY WISDOM KNEW NOT GOD, it pleased God BY THE FOOLISHNESS OF PREACHING to save them that believe.  For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: BUT WE PREACH CHRIST CRUCIFIED, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; but unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.  Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.  For ye see your calling, brethren, how that NOT many wise men after the flesh, NOT many mighty, NOT many noble, are called: but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: that no flesh should glory in His presence.  But of Him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption; that, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord."  (As for me, it would appear then that the real reason we are losing society is NOT because we have cast aside the wisdom of philosophical logic, BUT because we have cast aside the foolishness of preaching Christ.)

 

Now then --

 

1.  Your foundational authority for truth appears to be LOGIC.
2.  Whereas my foundational authority for truth is GOD'S WORD.

 

You initiated this thread discussion with a challenge against my foundational authority for truth, asking if God's Word is truly inerrant, or if it might actually be errant.
In return, I have challenged your foundational authority for truth, asking if human logic (and even more precisely - Mr. Thomas' ability in logic) is inerrant, or might actually be errant.

 

Can you defend the inerrancy of human logic; and even more precisely, can you defend the inerrancy of your own ability in logic?

 

Amen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/29/2019 at 7:34 PM, Guest Mr. Thomas said:

To Alan: If Jeroiachim had two reigns, don't you think both passages would have mentioned both reigns; instead of one mentioning one and the other supposedly referring to a second? As you demonstrated, other passages are very specific and do mention and distinguish when there are more than one reign or co-reigns. The same goes for Judas' death: if he both hanged himself and fell over in a field.If you hadn't already decided on the answer, that would have never been the interpretation you read into it. But worse than these inconsistencies comes from the gospels again when Matthew says Judas threw the 30 pieces of silver away, but Luke says he used it to purchase land and 'burst open' in it. That looks like a flat contradiction to me. Also, thanks for the response! I appreciate your time and you're laying your argument coherently and point-by-point.

To DaveW: Ok.

To Pastor Scott Markle: What's your opinion on the Mosaic vs Christian divorce laws I mentioned earlier? As a recap, Moses declared a set of divorce laws similar to what we have in law today. If a married couple wanted to split, they could so long as they signed a legally binding document to the effect, and they were free to remarry others afterwards. Jesus said something along the lines of 'Well, God told Moses give those laws because your ancestors couldn't handle the real law; which is that divorce is not to happen except for in cases of marital infidelity, and remarrying after a divorce is adultery." I think Jesus's law is better of course, and I think it's also more consistent with God's attitude towards marriage, even in the Old Testament. Now, suppose that a Jewish man in say 300 BC, read the Old Testament and logically concluded that Moses' divorce laws were not the true laws, and he derived the same laws Jesus later gave. Did our man do an ungodly thing by using his knowledge of God's character, his logic, and presumably the writings of contemporary scholars, to contradict the Bible as available to him at the time? Is is always wrong in any circumstances to contradict the Bible when God has a track record of reforming/changing laws as we grow 'less hard' than our ancestors?

I hate to interject myself here but it just hit me square in the face. Someone has a very limited knowledge in the Inerrant Word of God. Judas did not directly buy the field. The money was blood money and could not be placed back into the treasury. The potters field was purchased with the money by the Priests. It was still blood money and it still belonged to Judas. The priests had to do something with the money and they purchased the potters field with it. There is a lot of preaching in this passage and when it is all said and done the KJB is in perfect harmony here. As far as the divorce laws, there is perfect harmony here as well. Christ himself said; Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. That is what is wrong today. Hard hearts that will not except he true and inerrant WORD of God.

 

Edited by Rick Burton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/2/2019 at 12:36 AM, Guest Mr. Thomas said:

To All: I think this might be my last post as well. I came here looking for help, and I am grateful to those of you who tried. However, I don't find answers that boil down to "I believe because I want to" to be particularly helpful, although at least they are honest. Even if that's all you contributed to this thread, I am grateful for your time and moved by your care. The reason why I'm considering quitting are the discouraging aspirations being thrown onto my character and my motives.

I hope this helps. The power of God lies in the Word of God. I am going to quote one scripture here that, if you let it, it will help.

1 Corinthians 2: 1-5 And I brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling. and my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

Man's logic equals man's wisdom. The convicting power of God cannot be explained, but without it there is no salvation. Absolutely none of man's logic involved.  The whole message is let go of your wisdom and your logic and learn of God. 

 

 

Edited by Rick Burton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

Article Categories

About Us

Since 2001, Online Baptist has been an Independent Baptist website, and we exclusively use the King James Version of the Bible. We pride ourselves on a community that uplifts the Lord.

Contact Us

You can contact us using the following link. Contact Us or for questions regarding this website please contact @pastormatt or email James Foley at jfoley@sisqtel.net

Android App

Online Baptist has a custom App for all android users. You can download it from the Google Play store or click the following icon.

×
×
  • Create New...