SureWord

[SureWord]

20 minutes ago, DaChaser said:

I meant the1689 Confession of faith of we Baptists!

Calvinists

[Pastor Scott Markle]

On 6/19/2020 at 9:03 AM, DaChaser said:

Only the Originals can be claimed to be fully inerrant!

On 6/19/2020 at 9:31 AM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

If you mean the original manuscripts themselves, then this statement denies the Doctrine of Preservation.

23 hours ago, DaChaser said:

Those are the Only books that the Church has ever claimed were fully inspired and inerrant!

There are known issues in any of the Greek/Hebrew texts, and all translations, but they are minor issues, as in numbers wrong, names confused etc!

So then, by the "experience" of textual criticism you do indeed deny the DOCTRINE of preservation.  Here is the question -- Does God's Holy Word teach a doctrine of preservation?  If it does, then we move to the next question -- What precisely are the details of that doctrine as taught by God's Holy Word?  

IF we actually hold that God's Own Word is the only and final authority for our doctrine and behavior, then we should ALWAYS BEGIN with the doctrinal truth and details that it teaches, BEFORE we take any view of man's experiences, philosophies, ideas, or structures.

(Yet, Brother DaChaser,

20 hours ago, DaChaser said:

The historical Creeds and Confessions have never stated that any translation is perfect, but that the Originals were fully inerrant and inspired, and the authority was in the Hebrew /Greek texts derived from them!

You continue to reveal that your own authority for doctrine is NOT God's Word itself, but is the "historical Creeds and Confessions" of man.)

[Alan]

1 hour ago, DaChaser said:

Even the TR itself as some issues, as there has been no standardized TR text yet determined, as Dean Burgeon himself saw the need to update even that text and update the Kjv!

 

And modern translations themselves do not reflect Westciott and Hort, more of a blending of Ct and readings from MT!

DaChaser,

You ignore the truth that these modern versions are full of doctrinal errors and then have the gall to try and find fault wit the KJV, the Tr, or you try and find a quote against the KJV.

It seems to me that it does not matter what truth we bring out you ignore the EXTREME DOCTRINAL ERRORS OF THE FAULTY TRANSLATIONS and disparage the KJV and its perfection.

Alan

[DaChaser]

4 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

So then, by the "experience" of textual criticism you do indeed deny the DOCTRINE of preservation.  Here is the question -- Does God's Holy Word teach a doctrine of preservation?  If it does, then we move to the next question -- What precisely are the details of that doctrine as taught by God's Holy Word?  

IF we actually hold that God's Own Word is the only and final authority for our doctrine and behavior, then we should ALWAYS BEGIN with the doctrinal truth and details that it teaches, BEFORE we take any view of man's experiences, philosophies, ideas, or structures.

(Yet, Brother DaChaser,

You continue to reveal that your own authority for doctrine is NOT God's Word itself, but is the "historical Creeds and Confessions" of man.)

The Church, as in the Body of Christ, never saw perfection and inerrancy and inspiration to any but the originals, not until KJVO came about was it then moved to translations!

4 hours ago, Alan said:

DaChaser,

You ignore the truth that these modern versions are full of doctrinal errors and then have the gall to try and find fault wit the KJV, the Tr, or you try and find a quote against the KJV.

It seems to me that it does not matter what truth we bring out you ignore the EXTREME DOCTRINAL ERRORS OF THE FAULTY TRANSLATIONS and disparage the KJV and its perfection.

Alan

I accept the Kjv as a legit translation, but do not ascribe to it being perfect and inerrant, as only the Originals were that!

[Pastor Scott Markle]

2 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

So then, by the "experience" of textual criticism you do indeed deny the DOCTRINE of preservation.  Here is the question -- Does God's Holy Word teach a doctrine of preservation?  If it does, then we move to the next question -- What precisely are the details of that doctrine as taught by God's Holy Word?  

IF we actually hold that God's Own Word is the only and final authority for our doctrine and behavior, then we should ALWAYS BEGIN with the doctrinal truth and details that it teaches, BEFORE we take any view of man's experiences, philosophies, ideas, or structures.

(Yet, Brother DaChaser,

You continue to reveal that your own authority for doctrine is NOT God's Word itself, but is the "historical Creeds and Confessions" of man.)

1 hour ago, DaChaser said:

The Church, as in the Body of Christ, never saw perfection and inerrancy and inspiration to any but the originals, not until KJVO came about was it then moved to translations!

Frist, this is a false statement.  In the New Testament our Lord Jesus Christ and the apostles attributed the perfection and inerrancy of divine inspiration to the Old Testament Scriptures, although they did NOT possess the original manuscripts thereof, but only copies of those original manuscripts (which is the whole point in the doctrine of preservation).

Second, in my posting above I did not speak a single word about any given translation or about the practice of translation in general.  I spoke only about the DOCTRINE of preservation.  So again I ask the question -- Does God's Holy Word teach a DOCTRINE of preservation?  (At this point your answer appears to me to be a negative; but you have not directly answered the question itself, so maybe my conclusion concerning your position thereof is wrong.)

[1Timothy115]

SureWord, Welcome aboard!

[DaChaser]

5 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Frist, this is a false statement.  In the New Testament our Lord Jesus Christ and the apostles attributed the perfection and inerrancy of divine inspiration to the Old Testament Scriptures, although they did NOT possess the original manuscripts thereof, but only copies of those original manuscripts (which is the whole point in the doctrine of preservation).

Second, in my posting above I did not speak a single word about any given translation or about the practice of translation in general.  I spoke only about the DOCTRINE of preservation.  So again I ask the question -- Does God's Holy Word teach a DOCTRINE of preservation?  (At this point your answer appears to me to be a negative; but you have not directly answered the question itself, so maybe my conclusion concerning your position thereof is wrong.)

I hold that the Bible has been preserved by God down to us in that in the various manuscripts, variants, lectionaries,  ECH quotes etc, we can reconstruct to all intents and purpose just what the original books had stated to us!

[Pastor Scott Markle]

13 minutes ago, DaChaser said:

I hold that the Bible has been preserved by God down to us in that in the various manuscripts, variants, lectionaries,  ECH quotes etc, we can reconstruct to all intents and purpose just what the original books had stated to us!

Ok, Brother DaChaser, so then you DO hold to a position on preservation.  However, that was not precisely my question.  Precisely, my question was -- Does GOD'S HOLY WORD teach a doctrine of preservation?  I am NOT asking if you hold to a position on preservation.  Rather, I am asking if you believe that GOD'S OWN WORD actually teaches doctrinal truth concerning the matter of preservation.

[DaChaser]

4 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Ok, Brother DaChaser, so then you DO hold to a position on preservation.  However, that was not precisely my question.  Precisely, my question was -- Does GOD'S HOLY WORD teach a doctrine of preservation?  I am NOT asking if you hold to a position on preservation.  Rather, I am asking if you believe that GOD'S OWN WORD actually teaches doctrinal truth concerning the matter of preservation.

As to the hebrew and the Greek text yes, but not as to translations

[Pastor Scott Markle]

33 minutes ago, DaChaser said:

As to the hebrew and the Greek text yes, but not as to translations

Brother DaChaser, I myself have no specific complaint with that.  (Now, I cannot say that we would agree on the DETAILS concerning that doctrine of preservation as taught in God's Holy Word.)