quote:

ORIGINAL: cow451

quote:

ORIGINAL: EStan

You should read the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy. [;)]

I have. It's one way to interpret scripture. It's interesting that the Chicago Statement does not endorse YEC, but allows that there are differences among the faithful about the interpretation of Genesis.

quote:

ORIGINAL: EStan

quote:

ORIGINAL: cow451

quote:

ORIGINAL: EStan

You should read the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy. [;)]

I have. It's one way to interpret scripture. It's interesting that the Chicago Statement does not endorse YEC, but allows that there are differences among the faithful about the interpretation of Genesis.

Yes, that's true. I wasn't trying to start a debate about interpreting Scripture - rather, making a point for Robto that fallible humans can produce an inerrant Bible, under the guidance of the Lord God. The CSOBI just says it SO much better than I ever could!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

quote:

ORIGINAL: cow451

quote:

ORIGINAL: EStan

You should read the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy. [;)]

I have. It's one way to interpret scripture. It's interesting that the Chicago Statement does not endorse YEC, but allows that there are differences among the faithful about the interpretation of Genesis.

The people who wrote the Statement of Biblical Inerrancy will eventually die as well. [;)]So if one's faith is in people, whether theologians, kings, or scientists who will die as well, instead of the Living God, then he has nowhere to turn when he dies. [&o]

quote:

ORIGINAL: cow451

quote:

ORIGINAL: EStan

quote:

ORIGINAL: cow451

quote:

ORIGINAL: EStan

You should read the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy. [;)]

I have. It's one way to interpret scripture. It's interesting that the Chicago Statement does not endorse YEC, but allows that there are differences among the faithful about the interpretation of Genesis.

Yes, that's true. I wasn't trying to start a debate about interpreting Scripture - rather, making a point for Robto that fallible humans can produce an inerrant Bible, under the guidance of the Lord God. The CSOBI just says it SO much better than I ever could!

Give one example of something God has entrusted to humans that was perfectly carried through. The books we know as the Bible did not magically appear. The Torah writings were compiled after being handed down orally for generations. Fallible humans made decisions about which were to become canon. We do not have any original manuscripts. Need I go on?

quote:

ORIGINAL: EStan

Yes, that's true. I wasn't trying to start a debate about interpreting Scripture - rather, making a point for Robto that fallible humans can produce an inerrant Bible, under the guidance of the Lord God. The CSOBI just says it SO much better than I ever could!

quote:

ORIGINAL: robto

quote:

ORIGINAL: EStan

Yes, that's true. I wasn't trying to start a debate about interpreting Scripture - rather, making a point for Robto that fallible humans can produce an inerrant Bible, under the guidance of the Lord God. The CSOBI just says it SO much better than I ever could!

Interestingly, though, the Bible nowhere makes the claim that it is inerrant.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

quote:

ORIGINAL: robto
Interestingly, though, the Bible nowhere makes the claim that it is inerrant.

False. John 1:1-2 says, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning."

So to claim that the Word of God is errant is to claim that God is errant.

quote:

Also, 2 Ti 3:16, "All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness so that he man of God is thoroughly equipped for every good work.'

quote:

And Hebrews 4:12, "The word of God is living and active..."

quote:

I have no choice but to use every medical help that doctors can give me. But again, they can't save of us from death. Only Jesus can. So it's wise to remember these words of Christ; "For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?" And it never profits a man to risk his soul in order to change God's word to fit the beliefs of mortal men since the words of mortal men will disappear like a mist.

quote:

ORIGINAL: gluadys

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

quote:

ORIGINAL: robto
Interestingly, though, the Bible nowhere makes the claim that it is inerrant.

False. John 1:1-2 says, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning."

So to claim that the Word of God is errant is to claim that God is errant.

And John 1:1-2 is not talking about the bible.

quote:

Also, 2 Ti 3:16, "All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness so that he man of God is thoroughly equipped for every good work.'

Note that one thing Paul does not say about the scriptures is that they are inerrant.

quote:

And Hebrews 4:12, "The word of God is living and active..."

But now we are back to the "word" not the "scriptures". Is this the same Word that John was speaking of---the one that is not the bible?

In fact, the bible never refers to the scriptures as the "word of God".

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico
What do you think the Word as referred to in John 1;1-2 is? the code of Hamurabi? [sm=eek.gif]

quote:

So if you think the bible is not the word of God, then where do you find the Word of God, Glaudys?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

In ancient times, many people saw their rulers or emperors as gods. It's no different today except that the gods of the 21st century are scientists. They are automatically trusted to the degree that many people who call themselves Christians try to change the bible to fit what scientists say instead of the other way around. [sm=eek.gif]

quote:

These people who worship scientists as gods never challenge scientists who are fallible human beings. Instead, they defend everything scientists claim no matter how impossible, ridiculous, or how much they contradict the bible and they change God's word instead.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

In ancient times, many people saw their rulers or emperors as gods. It's no different today except that the gods of the 21st century are scientists. They are automatically trusted to the degree that many people who call themselves Christians try to change the bible to fit what scientists say instead of the other way around. [sm=eek.gif]

So I guess you miss the irony in the term "creation scientist". It would seem that creationists treat science as a god given their continuous efforts to make their religion look scientific. When was the last time you heard a scientist call creationism "just another science"? However, you see creationists calling evolution "just another religion" all of the time. The pedestal that you think science has been placed on is your own doing.

quote:

These people who worship scientists as gods never challenge scientists who are fallible human beings. Instead, they defend everything scientists claim no matter how impossible, ridiculous, or how much they contradict the bible and they change God's word instead.

Scientists are revered due to their impact on our understanding of reality. Are you saying that these people do not deserve a small dose of thanks?

But that's as far as it goes. If you really think that scientists are worshipped as gods then I really have to question your grasp of reality. If that were so then why do I have to apply to keep my job every 3 years in a grant system where only 5-10% of grants are accepted (at least for the moment). Would you think that you were being worshipped if you had a 5-10% of keeping your job?

quote:

ORIGINAL: gluadys

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico
What do you think the Word as referred to in John 1;1-2 is? the code of Hamurabi? [sm=eek.gif]

Seems you don't know your bible as well as you think. The Word John refers to is described in vs. 3 as "being in the beginning with God". This rules out both the bible and the code of Hammurabi as both had a beginning in human history and were non-existent in the beginning with God.

John further refers to this same Word in vs. 14 where he says "The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory of a father's only son, full of grace and truth." Doesn't sound like a book to me.

As we continue we find John (the evangelist) referring to what John (the Baptist) said of this Word made flesh. "This is he of whom I said 'He who comes after me ranks ahead of me because he was before me.' " And if you keep reading through to vs. 18 the Word of John 1:1 is clearly identified as Christ.

quote:

So if you think the bible is not the word of God, then where do you find the Word of God, Glaudys?

Where the bible tells me to: in Christ.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

quote:

ORIGINAL: gluadys

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico
What do you think the Word as referred to in John 1;1-2 is? the code of Hamurabi? [sm=eek.gif]

Seems you don't know your bible as well as you think. The Word John refers to is described in vs. 3 as "being in the beginning with God". This rules out both the bible and the code of Hammurabi as both had a beginning in human history and were non-existent in the beginning with God.

John further refers to this same Word in vs. 14 where he says "The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory of a father's only son, full of grace and truth." Doesn't sound like a book to me.

As we continue we find John (the evangelist) referring to what John (the Baptist) said of this Word made flesh. "This is he of whom I said 'He who comes after me ranks ahead of me because he was before me.' " And if you keep reading through to vs. 18 the Word of John 1:1 is clearly identified as Christ.

quote:

So if you think the bible is not the word of God, then where do you find the Word of God, Glaudys?

Where the bible tells me to: in Christ.

Do you know what the word "word" means? Obviously not. It is what one speaks. The term "word" doesn't mean beginning. [;)] it takes much effort to twist the bible to the degree that you have. That's like Bill Clinton trying to redefine the word "is" to pass along his lies also. But that's what people have to do to twist the bible; redefine simple words and make them mean something totally unrelated to what they mean.

But since it's Satan's job to keep people from believing the bible, he does his job extremely well. he can turn 6 days into billions of years, the dust of the ground into the wombs of apes and the word "word" into meaning the "beginning." No other book becomes as garbled and twisted as some people try to make the bible. [8|] They can change the bible into a completely different book than what it says and claim that God said it that differently. But again, that doesn't fool the elect and it certainly doesn't foold God. Sorry. [;)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico
The term "word" doesn't mean beginning.

No, and "in the beginning" doesn't mean "beginning"either.

John 1:3 says the Word was in the beginning with God.

quote:

ORIGINAL: gluadys

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico
The term "word" doesn't mean beginning.

No, and "in the beginning" doesn't mean "beginning"either.

John 1:3 says the Word was in the beginning with God.

Wrong again. John 1:1-3 says, In the beginning was the Word. And the Word was with God and the Word was God."

So you prove that in order to deny that the bible is the word of God, you have misquote it and try to redefine simple words like "word" and "beginning" just like Bill Clinton tried to redefine the word "is" to pass along his lies also.[sm=purplelaugh.gif]But he didn't fool anyone but himself any more than you do. And deleting posts and threads doesn't change that one bit. Sorry. [;)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

Wrong again. John 1:1-3 says, In the beginning was the Word. And the Word was with God and the Word was God."

So you prove that in order to deny that the bible is the word of God, you have misquote it and try to redefine simple words like "word" and "beginning" just like Bill Clinton tried to redefine the word "is" to pass along his lies also.[sm=purplelaugh.gif]But he didn't fool anyone but himself any more than you do. And deleting posts and threads doesn't change that one bit. Sorry. [;)]

quote:

How do you know if scientists agree with reality since you never question them?

quote:

They are automatically trusted to the degree that many people who call themselves Christians try to change the bible to fit what scientists say instead of the other way around.

quote:

How do you know if scientists agree with reality since you never question them? Where do apes turn into people in reality?