What are your thoughts?? For a mature faith does inerrancy matter?

In the //Charisma House Announces 'Most Modern Version' of KJV// thread I defended my belief of the Superiority of the KJV for the english speaking people.
much of my fondation for my side of the disscussion was on the doctrine of inspiration, almost all of the books I quoted from where not written by KJV nor Textus Receptus people, one of the books even used the NIV for its quotes.

Threads have a tendency of running off on rabbit trails but for this thread, I would like to keep the discussion off of Bible translations, even though if personaly asked I will defend my belief but other than for a brief answers or to make a point that can only be made with the KJV I will make it, but not try to critize other translations that differ, I would like to keep this disscussion translation neutral. There is alot of good strong points in favor of inspiration and inerrancy believed and written by people whom are not KJV Only, acctually I have found much better points on inspiration from books that are not written by KJV onylist than by them who are.

I have a book in front of me that to me does not make since, it is written by a liberal southern baptist Clayton Sullivan. 'Toward a mature faith does biblical inerrancy make since?' In which clay makes an extreme case in opposition to inerrancy, that I do not believe any common posters to SI would agree with.

So What are your thoughts?? For a mature faith does biblical inerrancy matter?

“For a mature faith does biblical inerrancy matter?”

Unfortunately, yes, it matters, because the doctrine of inerrancy is perhaps the deadliest man-trap the devil has ever devised for the people of God. Here is a shortened version of an old essay of mine titled “The Cult of Biblicism,” which is so well-written that the impartial reader will surely deem it Infallible:

The Reformers believed that Sola Scriptura (“only scripture”) would answer all questions, resolve all doctrinal disputes and provide a basis of unity for all believers.

Today there are over 32,000 warring denominations, all claiming the Bible as their Authority. Clearly, Sola Scriptura has not worked out the way it was supposed to.
The doctrine of biblical inerrancy, which was supposed to set Truth on objective grounds and guard against “subjectivism” has instead led to the most arbitrary kind of subjectivism: we can believe whatever we want to believe, and make the Bible tell us we are right.

The reason is that the Bible, by its very nature, has no authority. It is a helpless book, totally at the mercy of its interpreters. Consider the endless debates about freewill vs. predestination, pre-trib vs. post-trib and eternal security vs. reprobation. People can make the Bible say whatever they want it to say, and the Biblicist method of “exegesis” facilitates this: just hop-scotch thru the Bible stringing together proof-texts that support your pet doctrines and disregard the rest.

We can even use inerrancy to prove that the Bible is false, if that’s what we want to believe. We are told that "the Bible is the infallible, verbally inspired Word of God and there are no contradictions, inconsistencies or scientific inaccuracies in it. If there were a single error, that would prove it is not the Word of God, since God doesn’t make mistakes."

If that is the standard, then it is easy enough to discredit the Bible by listing all the contradictions (Deut. 24:16 - Josh. 7:19-26; 2 Chron. 25:4 - Is. 14:21), discrepancies (Matt. 28:10,16 - Luke 24:49; Matt. 27:5 - Acts 1:18; Acts 9:7 - Acts 22:9), misattributions (Zech. 11:12-13 - Matt. 27:9) and apparent misinterpretations (Hosea 11:1 - Matt. 2:15; Zech. 9:9 - Matt. 21:1-7).

The doctrine of inerrancy has destroyed the faith of millions by making the Bible the supreme authority over heaven and earth, and then basing its authority on a standard of journalistic perfection that it does not meet up to.

Inerrancy is one of the very few religious doctrines that can be proven wrong, but it remains the foundation of Industrial Religion.

Why then do we cling so stubbornly to the creed of Biblicism? Because “the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” Heb 4:12

This sort of divine communication was never to man’s taste, so we wave the Bible and say, “This is the Word of God!” Because the Bible is an object that we can control, whereas the Living Word of God, Jesus, is a Subject who acts upon and controls us.

We all know that false teachers can put the Bible to evil use. If the Bible is the Word of God, then God has lost sovereignty over His own Word. Was Satan speaking the Word of God when he quoted Scripture to Jesus?

The Word of God is not a static deposit of truth that God has handed over to men and devils to do with as they please. The Word of God is an ongoing event: the event of God speaking to us.

May He speak to us today and deliver us from the Bibleonian Captivity!

you guys are talking over my head. can i just say that if what we hold in our hands has mistakes and mistranslations and may not be correct then we have nothing, and all the people who say the bible is a book of myths and fables may have a point after all. also, what duz it say about god that he could not preserve his word? what a weak and pathetic god who belongs in the same category as zues or joseph smith.

if we can not trust what is in our hands then we are wasting our time and lets go party and get drunk and be gluttons becuz what else is there 2 live for? eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die.

i am a natural born skeptic, but i am shocked 2 find a christian forum where believers call in2 question the very scriptures they say they believe. oh i know, every1 couches their words in very spiritual language and theological rhetoric but in essence for all the "intellect" being bantered about; all that is really being said is that u do not believe what u have in ur hands is true. it cant be counted on. if not then it brings into question EVERYTHING we say believe from creation to salvation to heaven.

and people are down on me becuz i am a skeptic? more amazing is that those who voice their opinions the loudest here readily admit that they have never studied the history of the english bible. think about how that sounds.

throw ur bibles away. they can not be trusted. the heathen are correct.

amrkelly,wayneman,and SkepticGuy Many good thoughts!

Waymen wrote RE:
///Unfortunately, yes, it matters, because the doctrine of inerrancy is perhaps the deadliest man-trap the devil has ever devised for the people of God. Here is a shortened version of an old essay of mine titled “The Cult of Biblicism,” which is so well-written that the impartial reader will surely deem it Infallible:
The Reformers believed that Sola Scriptura (“only scripture”) would answer all questions, resolve all doctrinal disputes and provide a basis of unity for all believers.
Today there are over 32,000 warring denominations, all claiming the Bible as their Authority. Clearly, Sola Scriptura has not worked out the way it was supposed to.
The doctrine of biblical inerrancy, which was supposed to set Truth on objective grounds and guard against “subjectivism” has instead led to the most arbitrary kind of subjectivism: we can believe whatever we want to believe, and make the Bible tell us we are right.
The reason is that the Bible, by its very nature, has no authority. It is a helpless book, totally at the mercy of its interpreters. Consider the endless debates about freewill vs. predestination, pre-trib vs. post-trib and eternal security vs. reprobation. People can make the Bible say whatever they want it to say, and the Biblicist method of “exegesis” facilitates this: just hop-scotch thru the Bible stringing together proof-texts that support your pet doctrines and disregard the rest. ///

Waymen, I hold to a very solid conservative belief in inerrancy as demonstrated in the other thread.

But I will agree that you bring up some very important points that I agree with!
but also I feel that you take those same good points over the deep end.
In a similar way to what the denomination of the church that I attend is affliated with has.
Such a position has over the years destroyed an historicaly sound denomination.
There are many spirits and if the spirit contridicts the written Word than we need to question the spirit.
The denomination that I am speaking of Strongly promotes being led by the spirit and not being led by the dead letter , but their spirit has led them in complete opposition to the Written Logos, to such an extent that they have left the true inward Logos.

But having said that, I will agree with you that their is a "The Cult of Biblicism" We see it, You see it, I see it. People who fight tooth and nail for the doctrine of inerrancy, but deny that doctrine in personal practice.

And I will go as far as to say that most of the books written on KJV superiority have that feel to me personaly and sometimes almost leave me with a sick feel after reading them.
Yet when I am reading my Bible and Believe my Bible regardless of the supposed contridictions, I do not have that sick feel.
I go away very much with inward assurance of my position, and much (true) peace and that (peace is not the peace of hidden pride, as what one can go away with after reading KJVonly material.)

We know that "The Cult of Biblicism" is not a new cult, we know that it was a Jewish cult of Jesus day, he pointed it out, But he also pointed out that those of that cult actually did not believe the scripture, He pointed out to them if they actually believed the scripture than they would have reliezed whom He was.

So Jesus did not tell those of the "The Cult of Biblicism" of his day, that they put to much belief and trust into the scriptures, He never makes that arguement!!!(search the scriptures and see!) , but instead his approach was one of pointing out to them, as you have made aware that those whom are of the "The Cult of Biblicism" do not believe the scripture,, because if you truly believe the scripture than no, you do not make the scripture say what ever you want it to say. but instead you allow God to lead you to the true interpatation of scripture.
If you trully believe the scripture you do not allow systematic interpataions, Theology, and such traditions to make the ((Word of God of none effect)) Jesus referred to the written Word, as the Word of God, let us not refer to it as less.

edit: to be continued

Edit: PS: while reading over this again I found this statement a little odd at best: wayneman wrote ///Here is a shortened version of an old essay of mine titled “The Cult of Biblicism,” which is so well-written that the impartial reader will surely deem it Infallible:///

I do find the Bible Infallible, but I think in light of Scripture, waynemans essay regardless of how well written will surely be deemed as falliable.

proudpapa,

I had little hope that you would share my belief in Wayneman Infallibility.

But you do raise an important point: denominations that reject infallibility eventually drift into dead liberal theology or wild "charismatic" excesses. So I understand perfectly why so many believers feel that it is essential to uphold the doctrine of inerrancy. But the fact is that it has proved ineffective as a defense mechanism against doctrinal error and division.

I have a personal grudge against inerrancy and the field of Christian Apologetics as a whole. As a teenager I heard the Word of God and believed and was baptized. Two years later I walked away from the faith; religious rationalism was my downfall.

First, I was told that there could be no contradictions in the Bible, since God wrote it. But I soon discovered that there were hundreds if not thousands of contradictions and inconsistencies. So I turned to the Apologists for answers, but their explanations and "proofs" were so weak and specious that they talked me right out of believing.

I was smart enough to see that the doctrine of inerrancy did not hold up under scrutiny, but not smart enough to see that the fault lie with the church's doctrine of inspiration, not with the Bible itself.

The Lord could have given us the kind of flawless Bible that fundamentalism requires, but He didn't, probably because He doesn't want us to be fundamentalists.

Apologetics hands the victory to the enemy by meeting infidels on their own ground: fallen human reason vs. fallen human reason. Paul did nothing of the kind:

"For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect." (1 Cor. 1:17)

"And my speech and my preaching were not with persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God." (1 Cor. 2:4-5)

"For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God." (2 Cor. 10:4-5)

We don't need logical formulations to defend the Bible: we know the Bible is truth because the Spirit of Truth bears witness, not because some egghead reasoned us into believing.

Hi wayneman,

I apperciate your reply because it better helps me to understand your position and where you are coming from on this topic.

wayneman wrote ///But you do raise an important point: denominations that reject infallibility eventually drift into dead liberal theology or wild "charismatic" excesses. So I understand perfectly why so many believers feel that it is essential to uphold the doctrine of inerrancy. But the fact is that it has proved ineffective as a defense mechanism against doctrinal error and division.///

I agree the doctrine of inerrancy has not preserved denominations from falling away from the truth. But I see this because denominations as a rule Bring the Bible into bondage by there treatise, councels, articals of faith, theologies and other such traditions, that make the Word of God of non effect.

They bring to bondage the freedom of conscience (the ears to hear) to there adherents, they in essence and all reality do not support the inerrancy of scripture they deny it.

wayneman wrote ///I have a personal grudge against inerrancy and the field of Christian Apologetics as a whole. As a teenager I heard the Word of God and believed and was baptized. Two years later I walked away from the faith; religious rationalism was my downfall.
First, I was told that there could be no contradictions in the Bible, since God wrote it. But I soon discovered that there were hundreds if not thousands of contradictions and inconsistencies. So I turned to the Apologists for answers, but their explanations and "proofs" were so weak and specious that they talked me right out of believing.///

Hi wayneman,
As I briefly alluded to in the other thread I had a simmaler experience as does many Christians. What is really bad is when those same ones that preach the scripture is infalible become the ones whom point out supposed contridictions.

For me It caused a Crisis of Belief, and caused me to lash out very much as skeptic alluded to as what would be reality if we did not believe that we can trust the Bible that we have.

You know what I was upset with God, because He would allow seeming contridictions in the scripture that were bound to throw off any rational mind from believing the Bible.

In absolute Spiritual agony I looked down two paths the one I could try to hang on to my faith and be bound by all these rules and stuff (As Paul says if 'if there be no resurrection' 'we are of all men most miserable' (Pascals Wager does not cut it!) the other path I could do as I wanted, live however I wanted, be as wicked as I wanted, pursue any thing I wanted. But you know what I seen in the end of this path, I seen myself in Hell mad at God because of allowing the seeming contridictions, In essence I still believed (Because of this, I doubt anyone deep down does not believe)

I do not know if this spirtual agony and all these things flashed before me hapened in minutes or hours.
It was the lowest point of my Life, I had no one and no where to turn but the moment I reliezed that I still believed, a since of Joy swept over me and I praised God that He did not let go of me even when I was so willing to let go. But shortly after that Joy came, fear swept my soul, like I had never felt before, fear that I blasphemed God and that there was nothing I could do to correct it.
I stayed stuggling in the Faith seeing myself as holding on to the edge of a cliff for years becoming more and more Christian in appearence outwardly but tormented with fear that I had stepped over the line.

Than I came across a man that was no pretender, He came in the Spirit and he was teaching from the Jot and tittle of scripture which was upseting the carnal christians in the study, I instantly recognized that he was in the Spirit but all of the other christians just wanted to argue with him.
as I wrote in the other thread :

//"I showed him this contridiction,
I thought, I would shake his faith when I showed him,
no instead he so calmly said I will find the answer the explanation to the seemingly contridiction.
His faith was grounded, he had already been through a terrible crises as I have to.
When you bounce back from a crises and God reveales himself to you in away that He never has before,
You become grounded and confident in your faith.
He found the answer for me and after he did I was still a little sceptical but very impressed of his faith.
Faith is passed onto faith not from good worded rational arguement.
I have Faith that the nature that the Bible speaks of its self, is reality, I hope others can see my unswearving faith in the Sovernity of God and embrace such faith.
The answer that he gave me I found was also believed by others it can be found in Edwin R. Thiele's 'The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings'
and also Floyd Nolen Jones 'The Chronology of the Old Testament' which is a defence of the Masoretic text
I learned something from finding the answer to this seemingly contridiction,
I learned how to read the Bible.
It is a much deeper book than many Christians realize,
Listen I have learned to love the seeming contridictions, Between kings, chronicals, the prophets, the new testament there are hundreds upoun hundreds of them.
We need to ask ourself why Did Sovern God inspire such minute detail in the original autographs, if He new that such details would not be preserved??
What a Joy beyond measure to look at a condridiction with no appearent solution and believe it any how,
and to totally give up on ever finding a solution and to trust Gods Sovern hand in it being that way.
Do you know what happens when you have pushed thru with faith and believed anyhow?
I find most often the minute I have trully given up and stop thinking, a sollution appears as clear as Crystle.
Once you have that answer the entire Bible becomes more real and more dimensional.
Sometimes it can be weeks or months or longer for in answer. (WE as Christians no how hard it is to let go) But the sollution comes when you are totally broken and have given up on finding the sollution,
and Willing to trust without sight."//
https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=48237&forum=48&start=20&viewmode=flat&order=1

hopefully to becontinued!

Hi wayneman

wayneman wrote///I was smart enough to see that the doctrine of inerrancy did not hold up under scrutiny, but not smart enough to see that the fault lie with the church's doctrine of inspiration, not with the Bible itself.
The Lord could have given us the kind of flawless Bible that fundamentalism requires, but He didn't, probably because He doesn't want us to be fundamentalists///

I agree that God does not want us to be pharisaical fundamentalist but He also does not want us to be liberal sadducees.

I will ask you a question that I asked in the other thread that I do not believe anyone answered.

What scripture did Jesus use to prove the resurrection of the dead with the Sadducees ??

The 'smart enough' is our down fall, the 'smart enough' is our carnal mind it is the flesh(sarx)rom 8:7 Gal 5:17

Faith in other hand, by biblical definition is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.(Heb 11:1)
That is faith is the (inward certainty) the evidence and substance of things that we know, but that we can not see or prove Solely by naturalistic means by our 'smart enough'.

scripture demonstrates to us That 'the trial of our faith, is much more precious than of gold that perisheth'

and we see God putting his people through such trials of faith through out history

Abraham 'was smart enough' to know that Sara was to old to produce children, because he 'was smart enough' he reconciled his smarts with Gods promise and created Ishmael,
We have Ishmaels being produced on all sides of the inerrancy doctrine.

The israelites spent 40 years woundering in the wilderness because they 'was smart enough' to know that they could not beat the giants in Canaan.

It was when Peter 'was smart enough' that he began to sink after walking on water.

The entire Bible could be summarized as Believing Gods Words when all of our 'smart enough' is opposed to believing.

Listen, I understand why many are taking an extreme position on inarrancy when we look at the pharisaical qualities that often accompany fundamentalists, But as the saying goes lets not throw the baby out with the bath water.

wayneman wrote ///The Lord could have given us the kind of flawless Bible that fundamentalism requires, but He didn't, probably because He doesn't want us to be fundamentalists.
Apologetics hands the victory to the enemy by meeting infidels on their own ground: fallen human reason vs. fallen human reason. Paul did nothing of the kind:///

But wayneman, you are using the same contradictory double talk that the fundamentalist use in there inerrancy doctrines.
You are using fallen human reason 'smart enough'
to deem the Bible as faliable but at the same time calling your own fallen human reasoned 'essay so well-written that the impartial reader will surely deem it Infallible'

I find obvious flaws through out the small amount of your essay that you posted

Wayneman your essay stated /// We all know that false teachers can put the Bible to evil use. If the Bible is the Word of God, then God has lost sovereignty over His own Word. Was Satan speaking the Word of God when he quoted Scripture to Jesus?///

Satans, strategy from the beginning was 'hath God said' which was in reffrence to a command that was given before Eve whom he asked, was even created, her understanding of the command most likely was taught translated to her by Adam.

Satans strategy has been to twist and turn and ommitt Gods Written Word.

wayneman you said /// If the Bible is the Word of God, then God has lost sovereignty over His own Word. Was Satan speaking the Word of God when he quoted Scripture to Jesus?///

I answered this in the other thread the context of the event demonstrates how much power is in the Written Word, this scripture in no way underminds the written Word. (we need to read our Bibles deeper, they are not just another novel)

First we must admitt that Jesus Christ 'God who was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory'

When tempted by the tempter on every single point relied not on what was going on in His head, but on The Written Logos.

on other hand when the tempter came he did not do as you mistakenly assumed in your (in)fallible essay, no, he did as always, he distorted the verse he ommitted part of the verse out of context.

I brought this point up in the other thread:

///psalms 91 from the Bible
11 For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways.
12 They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.

psalms 91 from the satans translation

11 He shall give his angels charge concerning thee:
12 and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

Do you notice any differences in the translations??

The different versions was between psalms 91 and Satans version of psalms 91, That he used with the temptation of Jesus in Matthew ch 4 v 6

What you should know about Inerrancy by Charles C. Ryrie moody press 1981
p77

"The second temptation also illustrates the importance of plenary inspiration. Satan tried to intice the Lord to throw Himself off the pinnacle of the Temple by assuring Him that he could claim the promise of psalms 91:11-12 that Gods angels would guard Him. But in quoting those verses Satan omitted part of verse 11: "to guard you in all your ways." The omission distorts the meaning of the promise, which is that God will keep the righteous on their journeys,not that He will preserve them when they take needless risks. A needless risk was exactly what Satan had proposed to Christ. The Lord replied that to bank on part of a verse would be to tempt God. Instead He would rely on every word that came from God,including every word of Psalms 91:11-12." ///

I here alot of unbiblical talk about believing in the Bible some how quinches the Spirit. but that is not what the Bible teaches nor is it my experience.

When reading John ch 5:39 do not stop reading untill Jesus is through making His point in v 47
if you have a bible with subject headings that break up this into different thoughts throw it away.

For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

"What scripture did Jesus use to prove the resurrection of the dead with the Sadducees ??"

Exodus 3:6 - "'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.' God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.'" Matt. 22:32

BTW, I didn't expect anyone to take seriously my joke about Wayneman Infallibility.

Anyway, we are closer together than I first thought. I also experienced that agony of doubt. Ever since I first heard the Gospel I have known deep down inside that it is Truth, even when I was intellectually convinced that the Bible was legend and folklore. It was the Mystics - Boehme, Law, Grubb,and Theologia Germanica - who rescued me from Doubting Castle.

The Light began to dawn when I came across William Law's statement that, "He who relies on his Reason relies on that Faculty which is weakest and most unreliable in Man."

And from Boehme: "Reason must yield up its own Hearing and Life, and give itself up to God, that God may live in the Understanding of Man, else there is no Finding in the Divine Wisdom."

"As little as a piece of work can apprehend him that made it, so little also can man apprehend and know God his Creator, unless the Holy Ghost enlighten him; which happeneth only to those that rely not upon themselves, but set their hope, will and desires upon God alone, and move in the Holy Ghost, and these are one spirit with God."

"Not I, the I that I am, know these things; but God knows them in me."

"Science cannot abolish faith in the all-seeing God, without worshiping in His place the blind intellect."

I no longer rely reason, but on revelation.

And I realize now that doubt is the dialectical partner of faith; doubt overcome makes faith stronger, like when Sampson overcame the roaring lion and came home with handsful of honey.

"When you bounce back from a crises and God reveales himself to you in away that He never has before,
You become grounded and confident in your faith.
He found the answer for me and after he did I was still a little sceptical but very impressed of his faith.
Faith is passed onto faith not from good worded rational arguement.
I have Faith that the nature that the Bible speaks of its self, is reality, I hope others can see my unswearving faith in the Sovernity of God and embrace such faith."

Well, so do I.

I agree with you, Bear.

Jesus is the Supreme Ruler of the Universe(s). He "commands all men everywhere to repent."

He bought all men with a price. Those who do not submit to him as Lord are rebels and will be treated as such.

We do not owe allegiance to the scriptures, we owe allegiance to The King.

That being said, I certainly agree that the HS will use the scriptures to lead us to the King.

Regarding inerrancy, I guess an example would be helpful. I know some numbers may be off in Chronicles, but I am wondering if Wayneman can give an example of a supposed contradiction that "makes a difference."

I used to think that the 4 gospel accounts of the resurrection were inconsistent and irreconcilable, until I heard a good teacher explain that while different, they are not irreconcilable.

Hi wayneman,

PP asked "What scripture did Jesus use to prove the resurrection of the dead with the Sadducees ??"

wayneman correctly wrote: ///Exodus 3:6 - "'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.' God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.'" Matt. 22:32///

When I discovered this I could not believe it, Jesus made the case for the resurrection of the dead based on the verb tense of (I am) rather than (I was). He was making this point using copies of copies that where about 1500 years after the original writings. He had just told the Saduccess that they erred not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. This doctrine astonished the multitude.

When I discovered this I looked throughout books to see if anyone else had noticed this reality, most books on inspiration do not ever mention it, I finally came across 2 books the one is by a German Gerhard Maier 'The end of the historical critical method' the other by Ryrie that I quoted before.

I do not find anything in scripture ever undermining its own authority, even though I will agree that the letter without the Spirit killeth it breaks us, It did me after I regained my trust in it, the fear that I spoke of in the last post still plauged me and even more after I regained trust in the scripture and years had passed, it was not something I could just throw off by forgetting. I am thankful now for it because otherwise I would not have trully known my own depravity.
My own sins some habitual hidden gross sins at the time, did not ever trully break me because I always rested in comparative righteousness because of the lack of authenticity I seen around me.
But that hidden fear in light of Scripture broke me. Rather I was destined to Hell or not,I had know where else to turn but to the Cross, when I trully did I experienced an instant realm of Grace and instantly the Bible changed from a Book of Laws to a Book of Grace, and instantly a question that I had always asked myself about Cain and Able was answered.
So I understand how trusting in the dead letter is futile but even if someone whom is not not enlightened actually stops viewing scripture from a preconcieved lens and starts believing its nature as it reveals of its self than it is going to do its 1st purpose and that is as a schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
But after that it works in accordance with faith to for doctrine and for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
That we may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

wayneman wrote ///Anyway, we are closer together than I first thought. I also experienced that agony of doubt. Ever since I first heard the Gospel I have known deep down inside that it is Truth, even when I was intellectually convinced that the Bible was legend and folklore. It was the Mystics - Boehme, Law, Grubb,and Theologia Germanica - who rescued me from Doubting Castle.///

I have to admitt after I read your fist post, I had a sterotype of a more Liberal and not as real, as you have demonstrated in these last couple of post, I am enjoying the fellowship.

I am thankful for these Mystics rescueing you from the Doubting Castle. those are Some excelant quotes from the mystics, I have a William Law book but never spent much time in it, alot of the realities that is mentioned in those quotes I have gathered over time.

wayneman wrote ///I no longer rely reason, but on revelation///

That is wounderful.

I do not at all find that this underminds inerrancy but should also be applied to the Written Revelation as to gain more revelation.

Peter says of his personal eyewitnesses account of our Lord Jesus Christ majesty, and of his mystical experience on the Holy mount, where he personaly heard the voice from heaven he said of all of this: that we have a More Sure Word than even that of our own experience, and Peter says that it is the word of prophecy, the prophetic books in Scripture.

2 pet. ch 1
16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.
19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Hi amrkelly

amrkelly wrote ///The whole purpose and the only purpose of scriptures is to reveal Christ crucified for sin. It is a mystery which was kept hidden for ages past and is still hidden from the one who does not put their faith in Christ Himself and none other///

I would disagree that the only purpose of scripture is to reveal Christ crucified for sin, that indeed is the schoolmaster part,
but scripture it's self says that it is also profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

When we accept it as a Holy and perfect book with every Jot and tittle being placed exactly as Gods sovereign hand as willed it to be placed, it very much becomes a spirtual book, the Most Spirtual Book and the deepest book.
When we except the seeming contridictions as sovereignly placed and trust those contridictions as a means of showing us deeper realities and meanings we push into spirtual realities.

I understand the negativity toward the fundamentalist that fights hand and nail for inerrancy and yet never experiences spirtual realities but I do not find that this negates Gods sovereign hand in placing the exact Jot and tittle that He wants for our generation.

"I am wondering if Wayneman can give an example of a supposed contradiction that 'makes a difference.'"

Significantly, NO! All of the discrepancies in the scriptures, including those I listed in my first post, are trivial. From Genesis to Revelation there is a remarkable continuity in the things that really matter - e.g., there are 18 factual discrepancies between the 4 gospel accounts of Calvary and the Resurrection, but all agree on what really matters: Jesus Christ died for the sins of the world, rose from the dead and lives forever.

On doctrinal issues such as Election and the Second Coming, apparent contradictions are resolved in terms of *paradox*. Divine truth is always paradoxical. The carnal mind does not like paradoxes; its nature is to think along the lines of either/or, but God's truth often is both/and: *both* election *and* free will. Religious rationalists cannot abide this, so they embrace a "moeity" (one-half of the truth) and call it "total truth" or "systematic theology."

Systematic theology is an effort to encapsulate divine truth in a closed, finite system that answers all questions. This is closer to gnosticism than faith.

Perhaps the Lord loaded the Bible with paradoxes and evidences of human frailty to help us resist the temptation to make an idol of the Bible, or make ourselves systematic theologians.

proud papa,

This thread is based on a contentious topic, and had the potential to degenerate into a brawl. Happily, that has not happened. This is a good discussion.

I have participated in this thread in the hope that anyone who is in Doubting Castle because of some doctrine of inspiration that they heard in Sunday School will see that 1.) They are not the only ones; 2.) They are making things unnecessarily complicated by taking Pop Theology seriously; 3.) There is no reason to remain in doubt of the testimony of the apostles and prophets; 4.) The Bible is not our teacher; it is the textbook of the One Great Teacher. John 14:26

so in other words i am correct; we can not trust that the scriptures we have now are true. if u say "parts of it are true" then i ask "which parts? how do u know? r the true parts just the parts u like?"

u all write pages and pages of words. they mean nothing. u have brought the very scriptures in2 question. basically what each of u are saying is a quote as old as the garden of eden: "hath god said?" (loosely translated means "did god really say this? i doubt it. how could u ever know for sure?"

sad. very sad.

i like this board, and am beginning 2 feel a little more accepted here than i did originally, but i must say that there is much compromise on this board. catholic mystics are given credence and the scriptures r doubted 2 the point where the average reader of this board can easily walk away thinking "why believe the bible? they dont!"

Skeptic

None of the mystics I named were Catholic, and Theologia Germanica was Luther's second-favorite book. No one is assaulting the Bible; I am calling to account that form of Protestant Priestcraft that teaches us to put our faith in the Book rather than the One the Book points us to.

when i referred to catholic mystics i was referring to other conversations on this board where we are encouraged to consider the words of certain catholic mystics.

as for the rest of ur post, i have no idea what ur saying. "priestcraft"? sounds like a video game.

a little less showing off our intellect and a little more plain speak.