A personal Soap Box

[geisha779]

quote:

So inerrancy is a "new" claim about scriptures made from what I see as a defensive position. In my view, it stems from a fear that a study of the Bible's sources and different writers, claims, errors, etc. would bother people. I disagree. Plenty of Christians accept the imperfections in the texts while still believing in God, Jesus, salvation, etc.

If God is not perfect, then Jesus was not perfect, then our very salvation, eternal life, access to God is also in question. I refuse to debate this. God IS perfect, our salvation is a done deal, and Jesus finished the works his Father gave him to do. Scripture validates this.

2 Peter 1:20,21 - Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 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.

That says inerrancy to me.

John 10:35 - If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken.

If the scripture cannot be broken, then the scripture is inerrant.

We can and do debate what constitutes scripture. Example: the comma in 'verily I say unto you, today' or 'unto you today,' etc. VP has just as much right to reach conclusions as anybody else. I have as much right to choose him as a competent authority as others have to choose someone else.

quote: How does one come to the place where posting this is "correct" after years of seeing

it obviously is non-factual? There's a few possibilities:

A) Lying is perfectly acceptable if the poster is the one doing it.

B) One can't see outside the mental "prison" of a framework that only holds extremes.

C) One can distort things if one is upset.

D) One is hallucinating completely and doesn't see the posts others make at all.

I find all the possibilities disappointing and sad.

You keep attacking my credibility, yet you continue piling on as if the "integrity of GSC is always at stake". THAT is what is sad.

I don't really believe Penworks post was a challenge to debate, but, rather to discuss, and this is after all, a discussion forum. I understand this is your personal thread, but it really does read like her questions and perspective are genuine. I believe that they are..... and she brought up a discussion topic.... so, what is wrong with addressing with some depth, the points raised? She brought them up in your thread....and I thought I read somewhere, you are in the "Ministry of reconciliation" business. No, that God has entrusted this to you..is that correct? Wouldn't that make it your responsibility to address her sincere questions about the bible? Isn't this supposed to be your area of expertise given you have taken the world's greatest bible class series....PFAL...where you were lead into understanding scripture as it has not been known since the 1st Century? I don't think anyone is questioning your right to believe what you do...just the why of what you believe.

However, answering her with scripture seems rather ironic given the points raised. How much authority do you think that is going to have if she has questions about the cannon and inerrancy itself?

Language is not perfect, yet if scripture is inspired, then it appears God chose one imperfect way to make His perfect will known....doesn't it? What's up with that? What exactly does inspired mean in reference to the scriptures? What about the cannon we have today? Is that perfect, or inspired? You know who chose the books we rely on today don't you? What was their theology? If they were idolaters, then how much faith should we put in God's willingness to work in them at all? Was there no one around at the times the different cannons were being discussed who believed correctly? Was there anyone who knew the "truth" ? And come to think of it...if there was...why did God let them be silenced? Why did God hide His word for 2,000 years and then wait until a drunk abuser came along to reveal it in PFAL? Why did God allow plagiarized work to be cobbled together to reveal His truth after 2,000 years? Plagiarism is theft. Hardly seems like a just God to me. I thought He didn't go against His own will...I thought He was perfect?

Are you familiar with any of the authors Penworks has quoted, or are you familiar with an ongoing discussion in Christians circles, which deals honestly with these points? Aware of those who refute these arguments, and with some really sound points of their own? Remember those no good seminary students and their professors? You would have to branch out a bit...extend yourself to understand the discussion which goes well beyond this forum.....but, it seems to me, if you have the burden of reconciliation......it is your responsibility to know what people are questioning...where the ideas come from...who is addressing them...and then process the information yourself. This would be so that you are comfortable in such a discussion.

I have had this discussion with her before.....I learned a great deal and it was a faith building exercise for me, but not without some serious consideration and educating myself...which has actually extended itself way beyond the discussion forum. It is an interesting topic. Thanks Penworks...you made me examine and you made me really consider what I believe and the discussion prodded me to think. . . . . I am sincere, thank-you. The result was being more comfortable with my faith...but, it took some serious critical thinking and genuine thought.

John, if someone asks you questions like the ones Penworks put forth...you should at least be willing to engage them...if, as you say....reconciliation is your responsibility.

Edited April 1, 2011 by geisha779

[chockfull]

The men in the fellowship I currently attend. I spend a lot of time with them. Camping, canoeing, wood cutting, drinking, etc. Just us men. In the 6 years I've hung out with them, not ONCE have I heard any of them say anything lewd or derogatory about their wives or any other women in the fellowship. Just doesn't happen. They KNOW that the sexual stuff in twi really happened. They've all been married 20 plus years just like me. They do physical work for a living like me. There's no inner circle of "mature believers" or whatever.

And thus, those that are evil that are in power remain in power. The money collected every week goes to them to continue to support their evil.

[So_crates]

And thus, those that are evil that are in power remain in power. The money collected every week goes to them to continue to support their evil.

Evil wins when good men do nothing

SoCrates

[excathedra]

I know who you are, BTW. Never met you, unless I happened to be standing in line next to you at an ROA or something. I know who your first husband is and I've met him before. I guess I shouldn't assume he is the 'fiance' you spoke of, but did you ever tell him what VP did? Was HE like VP in that way? I can't help but be curious. OMG! I'm going to read Kris' book sometime. Have you read it? Do you recommend it for someone like me?

we may have met on the wow burger line (yummy)

i never told him until much years later and he is SO NOT LIKE VP AT ALL IN THAT WAY

I never read Kris' book because I just can't bring myself to -- I have read parts of it on-line and bought it for people who wanted to read it and couldn't afford it, but no i can't read it for some reason, so I don't know if i can recommend it to you

i also have jimmy doop's paper and i've promised to copy it and send it to some people (i'm such a .....), but i want to read it myself before i do that -- i've only read parts

thank you for asking

[johniam]

quote:

I don't really believe Penworks post was a challenge to debate, but, rather to discuss, and this is after all, a discussion forum.

Geisha, remember the first thing Penworks said to me was that she thought I had my mind made up, and she is right, I do. Her pov includes premises just like mine. What I posted is how far I'm willing to go in that direction on that topic. I wasn't putting her down. Would I learn something if I read those references she spoke of? Sure. But do I HAVE to?

Keep in mind, also, that VP chose his set of premises AFTER having been in seminary and being exposed to some or all of the same considerations Penworks has brought up. We're not robots; we all have to decide what to keep and what to discard. VP taught no private interpretation, but, IMO, it isn't humanly possible to be interested in the bible and to process it verse by verse or word by word WITHOUT speculating here and there what something might mean. That's private interpretation, isn't it?

The first time I read the book of Job I felt like I was reading a good mystery story. Who was right? Job? The 3 friends? What about the 4th guy? Quite the boatload of controversy, eh? God gets involved, He reproves Job, yet Job passed God's 'smell test' better than the 3 friends. But God says nothing to or about the 4th guy. Much debate potential here. Some say the 4th guy was born of the wrong seed. Some say he did well; that he pointed Job back to God rather than focus on Job's sins, like the 3 friends did. Who can tell?

I think God WANTS people to try to think critically about stuff like that. I kind of think that's what Penworks is doing. I have no problem with that. I merely choose not to investigate further at this time.

[waysider]

remember the first thing Penworks said to me was that she thought I had my mind made up, and she is right

So, then, what's your point in being involved in discussion other than to push your private agenda?

edit: Are you still having trouble figuring out the quote function?

Edited April 2, 2011 by waysider

[So_crates]

quote:

I don't really believe Penworks post was a challenge to debate, but, rather to discuss, and this is after all, a discussion forum.

Geisha, remember the first thing Penworks said to me was that she thought I had my mind made up, and she is right, I do. Her pov includes premises just like mine. What I posted is how far I'm willing to go in that direction on that topic. I wasn't putting her down. Would I learn something if I read those references she spoke of? Sure. But do I HAVE to?

No you don't have to do anything you don't choose to do. But, I would think in the interest of keeping an open mind you would at least entertain other points of view.

What if we told you the same thing you just told Penworks? This discussion would have lasted two posts. It would have boiled down to you have your opinion, I have mine, let's both go our seperate ways.

Keep in mind, also, that VP chose his set of premises AFTER having been in seminary and being exposed to some or all of the same considerations Penworks has brought up. We're not robots; we all have to decide what to keep and what to discard. VP taught no private interpretation, but, IMO, it isn't humanly possible to be interested in the bible and to process it verse by verse or word by word WITHOUT speculating here and there what something might mean. That's private interpretation, isn't it?

So you admit Saint Vic's version of the bible is private interpretation and not the given word of God. After all he taught it word by word and verse by verse.

I merely choose not to investigate further at this time.

Then why bother to have this discussion? Yes, we get back to that old bugaboo, what's your agenda?

SoCrates

[geisha779]

quote:

I don't really believe Penworks post was a challenge to debate, but, rather to discuss, and this is after all, a discussion forum.

Geisha, remember the first thing Penworks said to me was that she thought I had my mind made up, and she is right, I do. Her pov includes premises just like mine. What I posted is how far I'm willing to go in that direction on that topic. I wasn't putting her down. Would I learn something if I read those references she spoke of? Sure. But do I HAVE to?

Keep in mind, also, that VP chose his set of premises AFTER having been in seminary and being exposed to some or all of the same considerations Penworks has brought up. We're not robots; we all have to decide what to keep and what to discard. VP taught no private interpretation, but, IMO, it isn't humanly possible to be interested in the bible and to process it verse by verse or word by word WITHOUT speculating here and there what something might mean. That's private interpretation, isn't it?

The first time I read the book of Job I felt like I was reading a good mystery story. Who was right? Job? The 3 friends? What about the 4th guy? Quite the boatload of controversy, eh? God gets involved, He reproves Job, yet Job passed God's 'smell test' better than the 3 friends. But God says nothing to or about the 4th guy. Much debate potential here. Some say the 4th guy was born of the wrong seed. Some say he did well; that he pointed Job back to God rather than focus on Job's sins, like the 3 friends did. Who can tell?

I think God WANTS people to try to think critically about stuff like that. I kind of think that's what Penworks is doing. I have no problem with that. I merely choose not to investigate further at this time.

I just thought, since she had these questions, and you said God Almighty Himself has entrusted you with the ministry of reconciliation....you would be all over sincere questions... reaching out to her with the perspective of what you call the word of God, which you say you learned in PFAL. I doubt highly, VP was exposed to Karen Armstrong and Bart Ehrman in seminary...they were not around then. Smart people, fascinating premise, and one that raises difficult questions concerning the idea of inerrancy as we were taught in in PFAL. Again, God did chose an imperfect mode of communication, using language.....to impart His perfect will. What is up with that?

I think what is really interesting about Job and his friends is that they all spoke the truth....the right words...but, some simply understood them and applied them incorrectly. Ironic!

You know, we are allowed to change our minds...grow and learn...there is nothing wrong with that.....there is no shame in that at all. One could even say it is a good thing. :)

Edited April 2, 2011 by geisha779

[johniam]

quote: Then why bother to have this discussion? Yes, we get back to that old bugaboo, what's your agenda?

quote:

So, then, what's your point in being involved in discussion other than to push your private agenda?

You guys are the last people who should finger point about an agenda. Yours is so obvious that it can be seen from space. You are the on the spot reporters waiting for any breaking story about Johniam. Must be a slow news day.

[johniam]

quote: God did chose an imperfect mode of communication, using language.....to impart His perfect will. What is up with that?

Language is neither perfect nor imperfect; it's a tool. People are imperfect. God is perfect. For instance...

For God so loved the world.

That is a perfect thought. No? The language is what it is; 'Chose' is the past tense word; 'choose' is present tense. You seem to do the same thing with 'lead' and 'led'. That's not the language's fault; it's yours. The on the spot reporters have had many breaking stories about my failure to properly use the quote function or whatever. Again, that's not the quote function's fault; it's mine.

Ye shall not surely die.

That is not a perfect thought.

[So_crates]

quote: Then why bother to have this discussion? Yes, we get back to that old bugaboo, what's your agenda?

quote:

So, then, what's your point in being involved in discussion other than to push your private agenda?

You guys are the last people who should finger point about an agenda. Yours is so obvious that it can be seen from space. You are the on the spot reporters waiting for any breaking story about Johniam. Must be a slow news day.

And once again, ladies and gentlemen, he dodges answering the question.

As I recall, he brought up the subject of personal agendas. So, why does he need to take the focus off himself and put it on us?

I wonder what his agenda is. Why won't he be honest about it? Why won't he flatly state it?

SoCrates

Edited April 4, 2011 by So_crates

[geisha779]

quote: God did chose an imperfect mode of communication, using language.....to impart His perfect will. What is up with that?

Language is neither perfect nor imperfect; it's a tool. People are imperfect. God is perfect. For instance...

For God so loved the world.

That is a perfect thought. No? The language is what it is; 'Chose' is the past tense word; 'choose' is present tense. You seem to do the same thing with 'lead' and 'led'. That's not the language's fault; it's yours. The on the spot reporters have had many breaking stories about my failure to properly use the quote function or whatever. Again, that's not the quote function's fault; it's mine.

Ye shall not surely die.

That is not a perfect thought.

Obviously it is an imperfect mode of communication if I am getting my spelling lessons from you. I was aware of the error, I just didn't bother to go back and correct yet another problem in my post. Pointing out the errors in my posts in no way addresses the questions posed. Language is an imperfect and LIMITED mode of communication as is evidenced by these forums. I have given you a hole big enough to drive a truck threw through so that you could begin to address the ideas of inerrancy. I was trying to help you out! Now I realize that you are so out of touch...you have no idea what I was alluding to...that figures.

So, why would God use men, an imperfect and LIMITED mode of communication, and something which could easily be confused....to impart something so important as His perfect will? If He is God, He could have used anything....right?

Edited April 4, 2011 by geisha779

[Twinky]

bump

quote: Johniam, seeing as how at least half of what's in PFAL has been proven to be WRONG,

Proven??? LOL Allow me to translate.

"Give God the praise, for we know this man is a sinner".

Whether he is a sinner or not, I don't know, but whereas I was blind, now I see.

Still SIT, still pray and get answers, still have the hope, still fellowship with other believers, still study the word, still get edified, etc. PFAL introduced me to all that stuff and the God behind it. Just when is this "at least half" going to kick in?

Hi Johniam, do carry on here...!