Word of God

[Jack777]

The Bible is the WORD of GOD, the whole thing, OT to NT. Thinking in terms of Evolution or whatever is helpful to arrive at conclusions about things in the biosphere and the rock record. I see people that are YEC, OEC, IGA and A&P on here. I would like to state that as a Christian the Bible comes first NO MATTER WHAT YOU THINK. I kind of like typing in all caps. WOW.

I determined the relative age date for the oldest known amphibian in the world 30 years ago. SO WHAT!!!!

I did not throw out the Bible and order an amphibian salad to celebrate.

I am writing this for people like Abigail who are not jaded by all this hoopla.

This trashing the Bible seems to go on with people who claim Christ. I am not talking about you grmorton, so calm yourself. No one personalize this please.
First seek His Kingdom and His Righteousness!!!!

The Sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God:

Where does one begin in witnessing to the fact that the Bible is the Word of God? For one thing, the resolution of what we know of the Bible as God's Word and how it fits with science has to begin with the knowledge that the Bible is correct and it is Revelation. That is the place to start, not with the assumption science is going to disprove the Bible. There is likewise no reason to think the Bible will disprove factual science. We must keep in mind that miracles do happen by the Hand of God and that He can intervene as He pleases and in what way that He pleases.

It is not a matter of me finding people that agree with me that the Bible is the Word of God. I knew that it is the Word of God from the first day I believed and received the Holy Spirit and Faith. That was when I believed on Him that the Father sent as my Lord and Savior. I did not need anyone to agree with me then and I do not now. You said that Gleason Archer did not count and besides most seminaries don't think the Pentateuch is the Word of God and the Bible is the Word of God. Then you chided me twice because I did not offer other sources. I am posting this not because you are not satisfied but because I am very happy to give a reason for my Faith and testify that the Bible is the infallible, inerrant, inspired Word of God. I wish that everyone knew this. I know that Jesus is the Word and that subject alone would exhaust quite a few books worth of pages. He is the Memra and after He came to earth as fully God and fully man the Targums ceased to include the use of the Memra. Jesus is the Word in the flesh and the Scriptures are also the Word of God. Space does not allow very much to be posted, but here is another start at seeing that the Bible is the Word of God.

All wisdom cometh from the Lord, and is with him for ever. Who can number the sand of the sea, and the drops of rain, and the days of eternity? Who can find out the height of heaven, and the breadth of the earth, and the deep, and wisdom? Wisdom hath been created before all things, and the understanding of prudence from everlasting. The Word of God most high is the fountain of wisdom; and her ways are everlasting commandments. To whom hath the root of wisdom been revealed? or who hath known her wise counsels? [Unto whom hath the knowledge of wisdom been made manifest? and who hath understood her great experience?] There is one wise and greatly to be feared, the Lord sitting upon his throne. He created her, and saw her, and numbered her, and poured her out upon all his works. She is with all flesh according to his gift, and he hath given her to them that love him.

Sirach 1:1-10 1

And she called the name of Jehovah who spoke to her, Thou art the •God who reveals himself, for she said, Also here have I seen after he has revealed himself.2

The Bible gives testimony to the fact that it is the Word of God. Below are some examples:

The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.

Deuteronomy 29:29

And as they were going down to the end of the city, Samuel said to Saul, Bid the servant pass on before us, (and he passed on,) but stand thou still a while, that I may shew thee the Word of God.

I Samuel 9:27

But the Word of God came unto Shemaiah the man of God, saying,

I Kings 12:22

And it came to pass the same night, that the Word of God came to Nathan, saying,

I Chronicles 17:3

Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

Proverbs 30:5

Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Mark 7:13

Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the Word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.

Luke 3:2

And Jesus answered him, saying,

It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

Luke 4:4

And it came to pass, that, as the people pressed upon him to hear the Word of God, he stood by the lake of Gennesaret,

Luke 5:1

Now the parable is this: The seed is the Word of God.

Luke 8:11

And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are these which hear the Word of God, and do it.

Luke 8:21

But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the Word of God, and keep it.

Luke 11:28

If he called them gods, unto whom the Word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken

John 10:34

And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the Word of God with boldness.

Acts 4:31

Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the Word of God, and serve tables.

Acts 6:2

And the Word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.

Acts 6:7

Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the Word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John

Acts 8:14

And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles had also received the Word of God.

Acts 11:1

But the Word of God grew and multiplied.

Acts 12:24

And when they were at Salamis, they preached the Word of God in the synagogues of the Jews: and they had also John to their minister.

Acts 13:5

Which was with the deputy of the country, Sergius Paulus, a prudent man; who called for Barnabas and Saul, and desired to hear the Word of God.

Acts 13:7

And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the Word of God.

Acts 13:44

Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the Word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

Acts 13:46

But when the Jews of Thessalonica had knowledge that the Word of God was preached of Paul at Berea, they came thither also, and stirred up the people.

Acts 17:13

And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the Word of God among them.

Acts 18:11

So mightily grew the Word of God and prevailed.

Acts 19:20

Not as though the Word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

Romans 9:6

So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.

Romans 10:17

What? came the Word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?

I Corinthians 14:36

For we are not as many, which corrupt the Word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

II Corinthians 2:17

But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the Word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.

II Corinthians 4:2

And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God:

Ephesians 6:17

Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the Word of God;

Colossians 1:25

For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the Word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the Word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

I Thessalonians 2:13

For it is sanctified by the Word of God and prayer.

I Timothy 4:5

Wherein I suffer trouble, as an evil doer, even unto bonds; but the Word of God is not bound.

II Timothy 2:8

To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the Word of God be not blasphemed.

Titus 2:5

For the Word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged 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.

Hebrews 4:12

And have tasted the good Word of God, and the powers of the world to come

Hebrews 6:5

Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the Word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Hebrews 11:3

Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the Word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.

Hebrews 13:7

Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

I Peter 1:23

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the Word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

II Peter 3:5

I have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the Word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one.

I John 2:14

Who bare record of the Word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

Revelation 1:2

I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the Word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Revelation 1:9

And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the Word of God, and for the testimony which they held

Revelation 6:9

And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

Revelation 19:13

And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the Word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Revelation 20:4

Notes

Just a small representative of the study of the term "Word of God" in a small representative of the books available could not be represented fully here. However, a few extracts of verses and notes below is a small start. In 73 books surveyed there are 6824 occurrences of the phrase "Word of God." This number of uses of the phrase "Word of God" in the thousands of books that have been published may be multiplied similarly. Another set of 96 books including the works of the Ante-Nicene Fathers also had a frequent references to the Word of God. There is one occurrence in the King James Authorized Version of the Apocrypha and 49 occurrences in 48 verses in the King James Authorized Version of the Bible. The word "Revelation" occurs 6299 times in the same books selected. As indicated by the verses from Scripture, Yahweh reveals Himself to us. He is distinct in that He can be known only by His Revelation to us. The Bible is His Revelation to us. Jesus came to us as fully man and fully God as the Revelation of the Father to us. Jesus is the Living Word, ever Pure, ever True and ever Faithful. The things that He has revealed to us are preserved in His Word, the Bible. He affirmed the truths in the Bible and the Truth of Revelation to us in the Bible. Jesus obviously believed that the story of Jonah is true and knew it to be true. Jesus obviously accepted the writings of the prophets, including Daniel who is a favorite target of the Higher Critics.

Clement of Alexandria wrote in his First Epistle that the Apostles were established in the Word of God. He did not say they were somewhat familiar with truth-telling myths.

"The apostles have preached the Gospel to us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ [has done so] from God. Christ therefore was sent forth by God, and the apostles by Christ. Both these appointments, then, were made in an orderly way, according to the will of God. Having therefore received their orders, and being fully assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and established in the Word of God, with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth proclaiming that the kingdom of God was at hand. And thus preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the first-fruits [of their labors], having first proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons of those who should afterwards believe. Nor was this any new thing, since indeed many ages before it was written concerning bishops and deacons. For thus saith the Scripture in a certain place, 'I will appoint their bishops in righteousness, and their deacons in faith.'"3

Tertullian acknowledged that the Bible is the Word of God

"The apostle, too, writing to the Ephesians, says that God 'had proposed in Himself, at the dispensation of the fulfillment of the times, to recall to the head' (that is, to the beginning) 'things universal in Christ, which are above the heavens and above the earth in Him.' So, too, the two letters of Greece, the first and the last, the Lord assumes to Himself, as figures of the beginning and end! which concur in Himself: so that, just as Alpha rolls on till it reaches Omega, and again Omega rolls back till it reaches Alpha, in the same way He might show that in Himself is both the downward course of the beginning on to the end, and the backward course of the end up to the beginning; so that every economy, ending in Him through whom it began, — through the Word of God, that is, who was made flesh, — may have an end correspondent to its beginning."4

There are many proofs that the Bible is the Word of God besides these.

Unless otherwise indicated quotations from the Bible are from the King James Authorized Version

The Holy Bible, The King James Authorized Version, (Cambridge: Cambridge) 1769.

1 "The Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach, or Eccelsiasticus," in The Holy Bible, The King James Version Apocrypha, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1995.

2 The Holy Bible, Translator, Darby, J. N., 1890 Darby Bible, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1995.

3 Clement of Alexandria, "First Epistle," Translator, S. Thelwall in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 1, A. Cleveland Coxe, Editor American Edition, Editors A. Roberts and J. Donaldson, Books for the Ages, Ages Software Albany OR Version 2.0 © 1997

4 Tertullian, "On Monogamy," Translator, S. Thelwall in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 4, A. Cleveland Coxe, Editor American Edition, Editors A. Roberts and J. Donaldson, Books for the Ages, Ages Software Albany OR Version 2.0 © 1997

[rogero]

Jack,

1) I thought that Jesus Christ, the Logos, was the Word of God?

2) Do you believe the NT references you quoted are referring to the Bible in its present form, since of course the canon of scripture was not together at the time of those writings. Ergo, how do you know that "Word of God" is referring to Bible?

3) Do you believe that the Bible can be read without interpretation, kind of like a computer manual?

4) How do you square your belief in an old Earth and at least some biological evolution at the level of speciation with the standard Fundamentalist interpretation held by Bible believers like your friend Abigail? In other words, you and she contradict each other's intepretation of Genesis, so at least one of you is wrong.

Thanks!

R

[shunyadragon]

The Bible is the WORD of GOD, the whole thing, OT to NT. Thinking in terms of Evolution or whatever is helpful to arrive at conclusions about things in the biosphere and the rock record. I see people that are YEC, OEC, IGA and A&P on here. I would like to state that as a Christian the Bible comes first NO MATTER WHAT YOU THINK. I kind of like typing in all caps. WOW.

You gave a fine list of quotes that mention the claims of Word of God, but none of these mention the Bible that was compiled by the Romans between 200 and 400 years after these words were uttered or written. Many others in history also make this claim including many books excluded from the Bible. How do you differenciate one claim from another? For something to be wortht of this claim the following are reasonable criteria.

The omnipotent all-powerful God must not make misjudgements, mistakes, change God's mind, or regrete decisions. The God of the Bible fails to meet this criteria.

The God should not be arbitrary, jealous or vindictive God that orders ethnic cleansing including men women and children.

The document called the literal 'Word of God' must be internally and externally consistent with history and the nature of existence as we know it, The Bible fails completely

[rogero]

Jack,

1) I thought that Jesus Christ, the Logos, was the Word of God?

2) Do you believe the NT references you quoted are referring to the Bible in its present form, since of course the canon of scripture was not together at the time of those writings. Ergo, how do you know that "Word of God" is referring to Bible?

3) Do you believe that the Bible can be read without interpretation, kind of like a computer manual?

4) How do you square your belief in an old Earth and at least some biological evolution at the level of speciation with the standard Fundamentalist interpretation held by Bible believers like your friend Abigail? In other words, you and she contradict each other's intepretation of Genesis, so at least one of you is wrong.

Thanks!

R

Jack,

I would appreciate your trying to answer these questions. Also, the following:

5) Why would a Fundamentalist like you use a quote from the Deuterocanon? Do you consider that the inspired Word of God as well? I thought you Fundies called that the Pseudepigrapha ("false writings")?

6) Several verses you quoted (or cut 'n pasted) seem to indicate that the Word of God is not a book, but a being, God Himself, or words spoken by God. How are you sure these are referring to the extant canonical scriptures? See the following:

Hebrews 6:5

Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the Word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

I Peter 1:23

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the Word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

II Peter 3:5

I have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the Word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one.

Revelation 6:9

And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

And in Jn 10:34 it is clear that the Word of God is what these folks spoke when they were filled with the HS. Are you suggesting that all the words they spoke at that time became part the canon of scripture?

John 10:34

And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the Word of God with boldness.


Jack -- you really need to explain yourself in your own words instead of your short brittle statements followed by long cut 'n pastes of Bible commentators with whom you agree. Maybe you persuade others with this style, but I have no idea how this techique is supposed to convince anyone of your Fundamentalist yet very non-standard (and to me, contradictory) views on the science and theology of origins.

Perhaps you could also return to the bumped thread in Natural Sciences where you were asked to explain what you mean by biological evolution.

R

[NeilUnreal]

I thought that Jesus Christ, the Logos, was the Word of God?

Ditto. I believe the only Word of God is Christ, and the only place that Word is ever written is on the heart.

-Neil

[Jack777]

Thank you for your valuable replies. I appreciate them all.

I have never claimed to be a fundy. I composed a song about this concept, but I am shy. I think it is funny that people label me a fundy because I understand the Bible. Wow, the bar has been lowered. I cannot answer all the fine questions right now. I will copy them to disk and brew up some coffee (maybe eat a Sara Lee Danish) and puruse them and answer specifics and get back to this thread.

My inattention to this section of late is because of other concerns right now. I will be back maybe moreoften within a month. I know, I know, "whew" LOL...

I did think about some things though. In fact there are lots of reasons to believe the Bible is the Word of God, just not enough time to post them all--or space.


Moses, the Angels, the Pentateuch--The Word of God

In order to justify certain ideas some have in the past 300 years and still do today, try to relegate the Word of God to being a nice story or parts of the Word of God being truth-telling myth. This is a mistake. The Apostle Paul studied under the theologian Gamaliel and was certainly acquainted with the Torah, our Pentateuch. Paul was commissioned by Jesus Christ Himself to take the Gospel to the Gentiles and was an Apostle speaking the Word of God under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Paul notes that the Law was given to Moses by Yahweh and that it was ordained by the Holy Angels of Yahweh. Jesus is the Captain, the LORD Sabaoth, the Lord of the Holy Angels.

When Jesus was tempted in the wilderness by Satan, Jesus quoted Scripture. Jesus knew the Pentateuch is the Word of God and testifies powerfully to that fact. To deny the Word of God as being The Word of God is what the Higher Critics do and so think they know more than God. Jesus is God and He Himself delivered the Word of God to Moses.

Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred. And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread. But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple, And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him.

Matthew 4:1-11

The following is taken from Word Pictures of the New Testament by A. T. Robertson as well as other sources showing the validity of the Bible.

Galatians 3:19 -

What then is the law? (ti oun ho nomoṡ). Or, why then the law? A pertinent question if the Abrahamic promise antedates it and holds on afterwards.

It was added because of transgressions (tōn parabaseōn charin prosetethē). First aorist passive of prostithēmi, old verb to add to. It is only in apparent contradiction to Galatians 3:15., because in Paul’s mind the law is no part of the covenant, but a thing apart “in no way modifying its provisions” (Burton). Charin is the adverbial accusative of charis which was used as a preposition with the genitive as early as Homer, in favour of, for the sake of. Except in I John 3:12 it is post-positive in the New Testament as in ancient Greek. It may be causal (Luke 7:47; I John 3:12) or telic (Titus 1:5, Titus 1:11; Jude 1:16). It is probably also telic here, not in order to create transgressions, but rather “to make transgressions palpable” (Ellicott), “thereby pronouncing them to be from that time forward transgressions of the law” (Rendall). Parabasis, from parabainō, is in this sense a late word (Plutarch on), originally a slight deviation, then a wilful disregarding of known regulations or prohibitions as in Romans 2:23.

Till the seed should come (achris an elthēi to sperma). Future time with achris an and aorist subjunctive (usual construction). Christ he means by to sperma as in Galatians 3:16.

The promise hath been made (epēggeltai). Probably impersonal perfect passive rather than middle of epaggellomai as in 2 Maccabees 4:27.

Ordained through angels (diatageis di' aggelōn). Second aorist passive participle of diatassō (see note on Matthew 11:1).

About angels and the giving of the law see Deuteronomy 33:2 (LXX); Act_7:38,

This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear.

This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

Acts 7:37-38

About angels and the giving of the law see Act_7:52;

Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:

Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.

Acts 7:52-53

About angels and the giving of the law see Hebrews 2:2;

Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip.

For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward;

How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;

God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?

Hebrews 2:1-4

About angels and the giving of the law see Josephus (Ant. XV. 5. 3).

And for ourselves, we have learned from God the most excellent of our doctrines, and the most holy part of our law, by angels or ambassadors; for this name brings God to the knowledge of mankind, and is sufficient to reconcile enemies one to another.

Josephus, Flavius, The Works of Josephus, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1997.

King David also wrote about the role of the Holy Angels of God when Moses met with God. This is another affirmation of the Pentateuch being given to Moses by Yahweh and of the role of the Holy Angels in ordaining it. They were witnesses to the validity of the Word of God as the Word of God

The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands of angels: the Lord is among them, as in Sinai, in the holy place. Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them. Blessed be the Lord, who daily loadeth us with benefits, even the God of our salvation. Selah.

Psalm 68:17-19

The Holy Angels are ministers and appointed to carry out the will of God as King David says here. God is active and His Holy Angels have been too. This contradicts the contention that the Bible is truth-telling myth as some would have it.

The LORD hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom ruleth over all. Bless the LORD, ye his angels, that excel in strength, that do his commandments, hearkening unto the voice of his word. Bless ye the LORD, all ye his hosts; ye ministers of his, that do his pleasure. Bless the LORD, all his works in all places of his dominion: bless the LORD, O my soul.

Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain: Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters: who maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind: Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire: Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever. Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a garment: the waters stood above the mountains. At thy rebuke they fled; at the voice of thy thunder they hasted away. They go up by the mountains; they go down by the valleys unto the place which thou hast founded for them. Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth.

Psalm 103:19-22, 104:1-9

By the hand of a mediator (en cheiri mesitou). En cheiri is a manifest Aramaism or Hebraism and only here in the New Testament. It is common in the LXX. Mesitēs, from mesos is middle or midst, is a late word (Polybius, Diodorus, Philo, Josephus) and common in the papyri in legal transactions for arbiter, surety, etc. Here of Moses, but also of Christ (I Timothy 2:5; Hebrews 8:6; Hebrews 9:15; Hebrews 12:24).

Yahweh Elohiym of Hosts

And David went on, and grew great, and the LORD God of hosts was with him.

II Samuel 5:10

God of hosts may also be translated "God of Armies" (6:2). The hosts are the armies of angels that are at the Lord’s command (v. 24).

Earl D. Radmacher, general editor; Ronald B. Allen, Old Testament editor, Nelson study Bible [computer file], electronic ed., Logos Library System, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson) 1997.



We will encounter the Holy Angles of God someday. Jesus explained:

The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Matthew 13:39-43

Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind: Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away. So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Jesus saith unto them, Have ye understood all these things?

They say unto him, Yea, Lord.

Then said he unto them, Therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old.

Matthew 13:47-52

For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

Matthew 16:27

Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Matthew 24:29-31

When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

Matthew 25:31-33

For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.

Mark 8:36-38

The Holy Angels were always on hand to do whatever Jesus asked.

Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?

Matthew 26:53

And he was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted of Satan; and was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered unto him.

Mark 1:13

The Holy Angles announced the birth of Jesus as well as giving Revelation to Daniel. They are an affirmation that Scripture is the Word of God and is Revelation.

[rogero]

Thank you for your valuable replies. I appreciate them all.

I have never claimed to be a fundy. I composed a song about this concept, but I am shy. I think it is funny that people label me a fundy because I understand the Bible. Wow, the bar has been lowered. I cannot answer all the fine questions right now. I will copy them to disk and brew up some coffee (maybe eat a Sara Lee Danish) and puruse them and answer specifics and get back to this thread.

My inattention to this section of late is because of other concerns right now. I will be back maybe moreoften within a month. I know, I know, "whew" LOL...

I did think about some things though. In fact there are lots of reasons to believe the Bible is the Word of God, just not enough time to post them all--or space.

... (long cut 'n paste deleted)...



Jack,

The questions I posed were very straightforward and have nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not you fashion yourself as a "Fundy." That moniker appears to be appropriate in light of your Biblical Inerrantism (you "understand the Bible" -- what, you don't like to called a Fundamentalist?) and disregard for anything extra-biblical, with the exception of an occasional mild interest in narrow areas of geology. However, the title applied to you is irrelevant to this discussion.

What is relevant is your lack of reply to my simple and focussed questions. Instead of even attempting a reply, you profer another long (irrelevant?) cut 'n paste.

Well, for your and the other readers' convenience, here is the complete list of questions to your OP:



1) I thought that Jesus Christ, the Logos, was the Word of God?

2) Do you believe the NT references you quoted are referring to the Bible in its present form, since of course the canon of scripture was not together at the time of those writings. Ergo, how do you know that "Word of God" is referring to Bible?

3) Do you believe that the Bible can be read without interpretation, kind of like a computer manual?

4) How do you square your belief in an old Earth and at least some biological evolution at the level of speciation with the standard Fundamentalist interpretation held by Bible believers like your friend Abigail? In other words, you and she contradict each other's intepretation of Genesis, so at least one of you is wrong.

5) Why would a Fundamentalist like you use a quote from the Deuterocanon? Do you consider that the inspired Word of God as well? I thought you Fundies called that the Pseudepigrapha ("false writings")?

6) Several verses you quoted (or cut 'n pasted) seem to indicate that the Word of God is not a book, but a being, God Himself, or words spoken by God. How are you sure these are referring to the extant canonical scriptures? See the following:

Hebrews 6:5
I Peter 1:23
II Peter 3:5
Revelation 6:9

And in Jn 10:34 it is clear that the Word of God is what these folks spoke when they were filled with the HS. Are you suggesting that all the words they spoke at that time became part the canon of scripture?




And, I will repeat my statement:



Jack -- you really need to explain yourself in your own words instead of your short brittle statements followed by long cut 'n pastes of Bible commentators with whom you agree. Maybe you persuade others with this style, but I have no idea how this techique is supposed to convince anyone of your Fundamentalist yet very non-standard (and to me, contradictory) views on the science and theology of origins.

Perhaps you could also return to the bumped thread in Natural Sciences where you were asked to explain what you mean by biological evolution.



R

P.S. When you do come back "more often within a month" are you going to answer open questions, or are you going to continue to try to impress us with brittle confusing rhetoric and long quasi-irrelevant cut 'n pastes of your own "research" over the past 30 years or those Fundies with whom you agree, modulo any discussion or explanation?

If the former is the case, then I look forward to your return.

P.P.S. I think you'd like to see the new Monty Python stage production "Spamalot." :lol:

[Jack777]

rogero,

We have grown close over these months and I could not bear staying away another minute. Yes, with sadness it will be that I will not post as often, but for you I will try.

shunyadragon wrote:

You gave a fine list of quotes that mention the claims of Word of God,

Thank you, I am glad you liked my list of quotes. I think they are pretty fine too.

but none of these mention the Bible that was compiled by the Romans between 200 and 400 years after these words were uttered or written.

I am trying to deduce exactly what you mean, so forgive me if I do not respond to exactly what you mean. The New Testament was written down long before the range of dates you cite. The letters and Gospels were cited with such profusion that the New Testament is the best preserved text of any ancient writing. From the quotes alone before it was "compiled" as you put it, the entire New Testament could have been reproduced without extant texts of the originals or copies of originals. We have more sure copies of the New Testament than any text from antiquity that are preserved so close to when they was written originally. You would have to believe that Caesars accounts of his campaigns or Homer's works are spurious by your reasoning.

Many others in history also make this claim including many books excluded from the Bible.

Which books make this claim? Please quote from one, some or all of them so I will know how to answer.

How do you differenciate one claim from another?

Which books am I to differentiate from the Bible?

For something to be wortht of this claim the following are reasonable criteria.

The omnipotent all-powerful God must not make misjudgements, mistakes, change God's mind, or regrete decisions. The God of the Bible fails to meet this criteria.

Please cite examples that prove your claims. Again, I need something to answer. The God of the Bible is God, there is no other.

The God should not be arbitrary, jealous or vindictive God that orders ethnic cleansing including men women and children.

On what basis do you arrive at these conclusions? Please cite examples from the Bible.

The document called the literal 'Word of God' must be internally and externally consistent with history and the nature of existence as we know it, The Bible fails completely

The Bible is consistent. Why do you think it is not?

rogero

See Chuck Missler web site and download MP3 on science and the Bible, the one on extraterrestrial message, and the one on the Creator. Jesus is the Creator.

Bible declares God is omniscient

The Bible is 100% accurate

The Bible has scientific foreknowledge

Design of the text shows the Bible is the Word of God

Evidence of a supernatural system of messages in the Bible is proof it is the Word of God

Predictive prophecy proves that the Bible is the Word of God

Only Holy Book in the world that authenticates it is from God

God authored the Bible according to II Timothy 3:16 and II Peter 1:21

Aristotle’s Dictum says to give the document the benefit of the doubt

The New Testament is the most authenticated document in the world. There are over 25,000 early mss of 99.5% accurate. W. F. Albright states there is no reason to date any book after 80 AD

Archeological discoveries prove the accuracy of the New Testament

rogero wrote

Jack,

1) I thought that Jesus Christ, the Logos, was the Word of God?

He is. You did not read what I wrote.

2) Do you believe the NT references you quoted are referring to the Bible in its present form, since of course the canon of scripture was not together at the time of those writings. Ergo, how do you know that "Word of God" is referring to Bible?

Read the quotes. Context. You have to believe the Apostles and Jesus are liars to think the Bible is not true. There is ample evidence that supports the fact that we have a reliable witness. Why would you think God cannot deliver what we need to know as believers?

3) Do you believe that the Bible can be read without interpretation, kind of like a computer manual?

No and yes. The Bible is interpreted by the Holy Spirit. Yes, it can be read like a computer manual if you know enough.

4) How do you square your belief in an old Earth and at least some biological evolution at the level of speciation with the standard Fundamentalist interpretation held by Bible believers like your friend Abigail?

I am not quite sure what Abigail believes and even if I thought I did, it would be better for her to answer for herself. It is not necessary for people to understand science to understand the Bible. God comes to where we are at, not where other people think we should be. It is not necessary to understand the Bible to understand science up to to a certain level.

I have heard the term "Fundamentalist" much of my life. I do not know what you mean by "Fundamentalist" or "Standard Fundamentalist." Please explain. I can tell you that I am not a Protestant, Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Pentecostal, or non-denominational Christian. I suspect that you may not know what I might think. I am a Christian and almost have come to reject that term as it has been claimed by so many who are apostate. My consolation is that it is from the early ekklesia. I prefer the term believer. However, the people that do not know what a Christian believes won't understand that either. So, you tell me what a Fundamentalist is and what a Standard Fundamentalist is. I suspect I am neither. I used to object to terms such as "Conservative Christian" and "Liberal Christian." I have found most people have no clue as to what a conservative economist or a conservative politician might be like. People have begun to equate Marxist, Leninist, National Socialist, and Stalinist ideas with the term Liberal. Liberals are embracing all of these ideas and owning them without having a clue as to the origins of their ideas. Although there is much literature available that defines these things, people do not think. I used to be on the Executive Board of a union and I have been in management as a professional and learned what management versus labor issues have their grounding in socialist and capitalist ideas and ideals. Things have come a long way since the attempts to establish utopias such as the experiment at New Harmony or the go some of the intellectuals and American Transcendentalists of the early 1800's had at utopian collectivism. Scale and application matters in interpreting and defining systems and the ideas embraced whether they are socialist, national socialist, or communistic. Does one refer to the French Revolution when clarifying what is meant by egalitarianism, to New Harmony or to the Puritans? Just as I have not received a clear picture of what anyone on this forum means by the term "Evolution" I have similarly not seen what anyone means by the term "Fundamentalist." Is it the designation as defined by those who called themselves "Fundamentalists?" In what way would anyone define that term? Science is science and facts are facts. In tend toward preferring reality based factual information over anything close to it, while I realize absolute reality can only be known by Revelation. Still, mixing sodium chloride and water produces salt water. Then again, the ocean is said to be salt water but is much more complex with many more ions, colloidal suspensions, organic material, attritus, and detritus present

In other words, you and she contradict each other's intepretation of Genesis, so at least one of you is wrong.

I would have to know what she believes before I could agree with you on this. Do you have a quote from her?

Thanks!

R

You are welcome.

rogero wrote,

Jack,

I would appreciate your trying to answer these questions. Also, the following:

5) Why would a Fundamentalist like you use a quote from the Deuterocanon? Do you consider that the inspired Word of God as well? I thought you Fundies called that the Pseudepigrapha ("false writings")?

What is a Fundamentalist in your view? Who said they are false and in what way? Please cite instances where they are false. Please submit valid evidence that refutes anything you assert is untrue.

6) Several verses you quoted (or cut 'n pasted) seem to indicate that the Word of God is not a book, but a being, God Himself, or words spoken by God.

I see you do not like it if I give evidence from other sources The Word of God is the Word of God. Jesus is the Word of God, He is referred to as the Memra in the targums, the same thing. The Word of God is the Revelation of God to us as spoken by the Prophets and directly revealed to Moses. The Word of God is a being, God and it is the written Revelation to us.

How are you sure these are referring to the extant canonical scriptures? See the following:

Context.

Jack -- you really need to explain yourself in your own words instead of your short brittle statements followed by long cut 'n pastes of Bible commentators with whom you agree.

Why do you not accept the witness of others?

Maybe you persuade others with this style, but I have no idea how this techique is supposed to convince anyone of your Fundamentalist yet very non-standard (and to me, contradictory) views on the science and theology of origins.

What is not clear? I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. Those who believe should not be snagged into believing lies. People who do not believe have problems enough. If you do not believe then do not. I am not in charge of you. The only reason I have not wiped the dust from my feet is because of believers. I also hate to see such misconceptions about science, but that is minor. I cannot convince anyone of anything concerning the Bible. That is the work of the Holy Spirit. My job is to believe on Him whom the Father has sent.

Perhaps you could also return to the bumped thread in Natural Sciences where you were asked to explain what you mean by biological evolution.

I will

rogero,

You are just a quizzical kind of guy are you not Monsieur? You have managed to quiz when in doubt and avoid backing up anything you think. Since I have been on this forum the standard operating procedure is to immediately ask questions to defocus, you are not alone though. I notice it is a trend. So, since I have answered your questions that are then met with more questions and more questions, you can answer mine.

Are you a Christian? If not, then it does not matter what I answer.

The Gospel is foolishness to those who are perishing.

If you are a Christian, then you should know the Bible is the Word of God. Reading is fundamental, you know that, are you against reading? Jesus told the rich man that was in Hell roasting and no longer boasting that even if someone were sent from the dead his brothers would not believe because they did not believe Moses and the Prophets. They would end up in Hell just like him because they do not believe Moses and the Prophets. It is silliness to quibble about the Word of God. Jesus is God of Very God, Light of Very Light, He is Yahweh, He is the Word of God and gave the Word of God to us.

Do you know that?

If you think that the Bible is not true, what Scriptures do you reject? How do you know what is true and what to reject? That means you know more than Jesus because He thinks the Scriptures are true. He did not reject them. If you think you know more than God as you seem to claim, how come you think you do? I do not believe you know more than God. I know you do not know more than God. you need to know that if you do not. Inquiring minds want to know.

I had a Sunday School class taught to me by a Baptist, a staunch Baptist who does not know it but he is a staunch New Ager, apostate, New Ager. He thinks religion evolved, people evolved, and probably light bulbs evolved. He also was a definite disciple of those who are of the school of Higher Criticism. In other words he was apostate, but he sure likes to think he likes Jesus. He likes the idea of Jesus, but cautioned me against putting my faith in the Bible. He hissed that it is the "system." "There you go," I thought. I almost could not believe my ears. I would like to know if you are a New Ager? It is easy to characterize people with some help. The ideas seemingly do not matter to you, so we can dote on personalities for awhile to your amusement.

I have simply thought of you as a Christian without qualification. Now, since we are getting friendly enough you think you know if I am a Fundamentalist or not, and hang onto the ad hominem like a tick on a hound, I would like to know if you are a New Ager. It seems like the idea that all roads lead to God and life is like the spokes of a wheel and everyone will go to heaven no matter what we think, say or do is what a lot of people think on here. Whatever anyone believes is fine. Some people appear to be Christians in the same sense I am a Washington Redskins fan, like "block that kick," and "Go Jesus, sis-boom-bah, rah, rah, rah."

I used to work for a company that put into practice New Age ideas. Some of my fellow workers had Ascended Masters and others believed various things about the afterlife including but not limited to reincarnation. In any event the New Age jargon is a bit dated but here is a self-check for believers.

Biblical Christianity versus New Age Thought

Bible New Age Movement



------------- God is . . .



Father Force

Personal Impersonal

Only good Good and evil

Created all things All things

-------- Jesus is . . .



Second person of Godhead Man who took on Christ office

God and man God in man

Died and rose from dead Died and was reincarnated



--------- Man is . . .

Made like God God

Evil in present state Basically good

Spirit and body Basically spirit

After death, body will be resurrected

After death, body reincarnated

Saved by God’s grace Saved by human works

Here is a characterization of what someone involved in the New Age movement might be like. Is this you?

"Geisler talks about another educational program called QR, Quieting Reflex, used in our public schools. One book used is entitled Meditating With Children: the Art of Concentration and Centering by Debra Rosemond. It’s called a workbook on New Age educational methods. The New Age journal says the book successfully integrates yoga, concentration, meditation, creative fantasy, psychology, and most assuredly love in a way that clearly shows interesting adults a path to fulfilling their child’s spiritual need.

He then tells of John Danfey’s book A Religion for the New Age. The author says that

'I am convinced that the battle for humankind’s future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of the new faith, a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being.

These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach regardless of the education level, preschool, day care or large state university.'

The New Age has captivated many business organizations. Some of their training programs for their employees involve New Age philosophy. Then there is the captivity of some branches of the health industry and of the music industry. Very different from rock music, New Age music for meditation and relaxation helps one "converse with nature, to be one with the universe."

Finally, there is the influence of New Age theology on the church. Subtle pantheistic views are being taught. Counterfeit theology becomes a substitute for biblical theology. Dominion theology and prosperity theology are really New Age concepts. Many sincere Christian leaders do not recognize this. Extremes in signs-and-wonders theology, name-it-and-claim-it, visualization, and mystical meditation come close to the claims and practices of Science of Mind. Whatever you can visualize you can claim. That you can have and you can be anything your imagination can create is not biblical. It is demonic.

Often as I listen to certain TV evangelists and preachers, I am shocked at their lack of biblical exposition. They are little more than performances and personality cults, full of emotionalism and tend towards dangerous mysticism. They show little true biblical teaching or skilful use of reason and objective truth. I am afraid their power over people and power to raise money is demonic, even though they may be sincere Christians.

In closing I have extracted from Dr. Geisler’s material the major contrasts between Christianity and the New Age movement concerning God and man (see Fig. 62.1).

Geisler concludes, "There are only two religions, one is spelled DO and you will be accepted. And the other is spelled DONE, it is finished. ‘I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.’ It’s done. That’s Christianity. It’s a free gift."

The New Age movement is a satanic movement of self-deification diametrically opposed to Christianity. The terrible danger arises from its deceptive packaging. It even has infiltrated the Christian church, and we need to remind ourselves of those words of 1 John 4:1, "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world."

I thought that Jesus Christ, the Logos, was the Word of God?

He is.

neilunreal wrote,

Ditto. I believe the only Word of God is Christ, and the only place that Word is ever written is on the heart.

-Neil

If you think that Jesus is the Word of God, then why do you disbelieve Him? He is the One who delivered the Word of God to Moses.

[NeilUnreal]

If you think that Jesus is the Word of God, then why do you disbelieve Him? He is the One who delivered the Word of God to Moses.

Jesus is the Word of God. What he delivered to Moses (and whatever scribes and redactors gave us the text we attribute to Moses) was Himself in their hearts that they gave witness to in writing.

-Neil

[rogero]

rogero,

We have grown close over these months and I could not bear staying away another minute. Yes, with sadness it will be that I will not post as often, but for you I will try.



Aw, Jack --- you're so sweet! Thanks for making time in your busy schedule to attempt to answer my questions. It is really quite an honor.



...
rogero

See Chuck Missler web site and download MP3 on science and the Bible, the one on extraterrestrial message, and the one on the Creator. Jesus is the Creator.



Thanks for the advice, however I'd rather see you answer my questions yourself, since you so boldly proclaim your POV.



Bible declares God is omniscient



Chapter and verse, please.



The Bible is 100% accurate



This is a synonym for "inerrancy" I suppose? If so, giving a synonym is not a valid logical argument for a premise. It is merely restating the question -- a most common student flaw on essay questions.

The Bible is "100% accurate" in what sense, Jack? Please explain.



The Bible has scientific foreknowledge



Perhaps in some cases, but much of this is post hoc, "hindsight is 20/20." But this is not the point you make.



Design of the text shows the Bible is the Word of God



I'm not sure what you mean here. All I know is the verses you quoted do not support your assertion that Word of God refers unambiguously to the canon of scripture.



Evidence of a supernatural system of messages in the Bible is proof it is the Word of God



Not clear what you mean here. There's the "Word of God" again. This again seems like circular reasoning. What exactly is a "supernatural system of messages?"



Predictive prophecy proves that the Bible is the Word of God



Yes, but most prophecy requires interpretation, no? There is not general agreement among Bible scholars on these interpretations. Most are very cryptic, and again, there is much post hoc speculation.

Anyway, you continue to avoid my questions, instead obfuscating the discussion by bringing up other topics. Please stick to my simple questions.



Only Holy Book in the world that authenticates it is from God



Not sure what you mean here...



God authored the Bible according to II Timothy 3:16 and II Peter 1:21



God inspired scripture. It doesn't say he "authored" it. But, again you avoid the question -- exactly what is referred to here as "scripture"? Do mean the canonical OT and NT texts we have today? Please expain how you can assert this?



Aristotle’s Dictum says to give the document the benefit of the doubt



So did God author Aristotle's writings as well? Why are you giving Aristotle such gravitas here?



The New Testament is the most authenticated document in the world. There are over 25,000 early mss of 99.5% accurate. W. F. Albright states there is no reason to date any book after 80 AD

Archeological discoveries prove the accuracy of the New Testament



There is a debate on these dates, but this is not the point. My point was how do we know to what 2 Tim 3:16 and other references to "scripture" are referring?

Ah, I see you're finally going to attempt to address my questions sequentially. Yay!!!



rogero wrote

Jack,

1) I thought that Jesus Christ, the Logos, was the Word of God?

He is. You did not read what I wrote.



Yes, I did read what you wrote. The "Word" of God (captial "W") refers to the Logos Christ, not a document. You did not defend that statement.

Also, perhaps another reader of this post with some knowledge of biblical languages can answer this question: Is there justification for capitalizing "Word" in the translated verses to which Jack refers in the OP? What is the rule for capitalization in translation?



2) Do you believe the NT references you quoted are referring to the Bible in its present form, since of course the canon of scripture was not together at the time of those writings. Ergo, how do you know that "Word of God" is referring to Bible?

Read the quotes. Context. You have to believe the Apostles and Jesus are liars to think the Bible is not true. There is ample evidence that supports the fact that we have a reliable witness. Why would you think God cannot deliver what we need to know as believers?



Jack, I read the quotes -- please stop being patronizing and wasting my and every reader's time! The rest of your paragraph does NOT address my question in the least. Jack, did you understand my question? I thought it was well-posed and unambiguous.

So, again -- what is being referred to by "scripture" in these OT references? Please try to give an answer this time!



3) Do you believe that the Bible can be read without interpretation, kind of like a computer manual?

No and yes. The Bible is interpreted by the Holy Spirit. Yes, it can be read like a computer manual if you know enough.



That's more than a bit of a hedge. So, if two people give two different interpretations that conflict, at least one of them is wrong -- so, we can tell whose is the "right" one (and thus led by the Holy Spirit) exactly how? This is circular reasoning and gives no insight into hermeneutics nor is it useful or heuristic. You've basically restated the question.

So, who "knows enough"? You? Be very careful of pride, Jack!



4) How do you square your belief in an old Earth and at least some biological evolution at the level of speciation with the standard Fundamentalist interpretation held by Bible believers like your friend Abigail?

I am not quite sure what Abigail believes and even if I thought I did, it would be better for her to answer for herself. It is not necessary for people to understand science to understand the Bible. God comes to where we are at, not where other people think we should be. It is not necessary to understand the Bible to understand science up to to a certain level.



She's a YEC (6Ka Earth), you're an OEC (1-1.5 Ga Earth with a continuous biosphere and speciation.) Yet, you're both inerrantists and think Genesis can be read in a plain, simple even to a child, obvious manner. Please explain how this is possible?

But if one does understand science, and finds that it conflicts with a particular interpretation of scripture, can one not use this scientific knowledge to aid in interpretation?

You final sentence indicates we need to have some Bible knowledge to understand science fully? That's a new one.




I have heard the term "Fundamentalist" much of my life. I do not know what you mean by "Fundamentalist" or "Standard Fundamentalist." Please explain. I can tell you that I am not a Protestant, Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Pentecostal, or non-denominational Christian. I suspect that you may not know what I might think. I am a Christian and almost have come to reject that term as it has been claimed by so many who are apostate. My consolation is that it is from the early ekklesia. I prefer the term believer. However, the people that do not know what a Christian believes won't understand that either. So, you tell me what a Fundamentalist is and what a Standard Fundamentalist is. I suspect I am neither. I used to object to terms such as "Conservative Christian" and "Liberal Christian." I have found most people have no clue as to what a conservative economist or a conservative politician might be like. People have begun to equate Marxist, Leninist, National Socialist, and Stalinist ideas with the term Liberal. Liberals are embracing all of these ideas and owning them without having a clue as to the origins of their ideas. Although there is much literature available that defines these things, people do not think. I used to be on the Executive Board of a union and I have been in management as a professional and learned what management versus labor issues have their grounding in socialist and capitalist ideas and ideals. Things have come a long way since the attempts to establish utopias such as the experiment at New Harmony or the go some of the intellectuals and American Transcendentalists of the early 1800's had at utopian collectivism. Scale and application matters in interpreting and defining systems and the ideas embraced whether they are socialist, national socialist, or communistic. Does one refer to the French Revolution when clarifying what is meant by egalitarianism, to New Harmony or to the Puritans? Just as I have not received a clear picture of what anyone on this forum means by the term "Evolution" I have similarly not seen what anyone means by the term "Fundamentalist." Is it the designation as defined by those who called themselves "Fundamentalists?" In what way would anyone define that term? Science is science and facts are facts. In tend toward preferring reality based factual information over anything close to it, while I realize absolute reality can only be known by Revelation. Still, mixing sodium chloride and water produces salt water. Then again, the ocean is said to be salt water but is much more complex with many more ions, colloidal suspensions, organic material, attritus, and detritus present



Diversion from topic noted. You have stated in other posts that you are a Fundamentalist and a fideist (don't have time to look for them now) but this is not the point.

By Fundamentalist here, I mean a Christian Biblical Inerrantist who believes his/her interpretation is the only correct one. There are more formal definitions of Fundy -- one adheres to the Fundamentals, etc., basically a movement in the early 1900s in reaction to Higher Criticism. You seem to fit that definition as well.

The point is you're a Biblical Inerrantist who believes the Bible can only be interpreted one way -- yours. Do you deny this?



In other words, you and she contradict each other's intepretation of Genesis, so at least one of you is wrong.

I would have to know what she believes before I could agree with you on this. Do you have a quote from her?



I just explained her view on origins. Ask her yourself if you're curious. She's not afraid to speak her opinion. :wink: Anyway, you can find numerous examples on TWeb of persons who are Biblical Inerrantist who insist that YEC is the only allowable reading of Genesis -- Jorge for example.

Anyway, you didn't answer my question, you just dodged the question and wasted more of our time.

Please try to answer this simple question!!! If there's only one interpretation inspired by the HS, how come you disagree with many other Inerrantist folks on Genesis?



rogero wrote,

Jack,

I would appreciate your trying to answer these questions. Also, the following:

5) Why would a Fundamentalist like you use a quote from the Deuterocanon? Do you consider that the inspired Word of God as well? I thought you Fundies called that the Pseudepigrapha ("false writings")?

What is a Fundamentalist in your view? Who said they are false and in what way? Please cite instances where they are false. Please submit valid evidence that refutes anything you assert is untrue.



See above... Fundamentalist = Biblical Inerrantist. That's a good enough working definition for you to try to answer the question. So, you think the Deuterocanon is inspired? Do you think it is part of the inerrant "Word of God"? I can't read your mind, so please answer -- yes or no?

I don't care whether you think the DC is inspired or not, I just want you to clarify the issue. If you say yes, then you are diverging from Fundamentalist in this area as well. Is part of your being led by the Holy Spirit as well?



6) Several verses you quoted (or cut 'n pasted) seem to indicate that the Word of God is not a book, but a being, God Himself, or words spoken by God.

I see you do not like it if I give evidence from other sources The Word of God is the Word of God. Jesus is the Word of God, He is referred to as the Memra in the targums, the same thing. The Word of God is the Revelation of God to us as spoken by the Prophets and directly revealed to Moses. The Word of God is a being, God and it is the written Revelation to us.



The bolded sentences make no sense to me. The first is a tautology, the second is saying the Word of God is the person of Christ, not the Bible.

I truly don't understand how the Word of God can be both. This is a muddling of concepts. It seems blasphemous to me to equate the Logos Christ with the physical book that is the Bible. This appears to be Bible worship, using the physical book and its words as a fetish. IMHO, this is heretical (and very very confusing!)



How are you sure these are referring to the extant canonical scriptures? See the following:

Context.



Huh? The canon of scripture did not exist at the time the NT was written. What context are you referring to???



Jack -- you really need to explain yourself in your own words instead of your short brittle statements followed by long cut 'n pastes of Bible commentators with whom you agree.

Why do you not accept the witness of others?



What others? Quoting people who agree with you does not strenghten your (or their!) case. You still didn't answer my question about the canon of scripture being what's referred to by "scripture" in the NT books.

Why don't you accept the witness of others who disagree with you? The value of the logical argument is exactly the same in either direction.



Maybe you persuade others with this style, but I have no idea how this techique is supposed to convince anyone of your Fundamentalist yet very non-standard (and to me, contradictory) views on the science and theology of origins.

What is not clear? I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. Those who believe should not be snagged into believing lies. People who do not believe have problems enough. If you do not believe then do not. I am not in charge of you. The only reason I have not wiped the dust from my feet is because of believers. I also hate to see such misconceptions about science, but that is minor. I cannot convince anyone of anything concerning the Bible. That is the work of the Holy Spirit. My job is to believe on Him whom the Father has sent.



Well, you sure seem to be trying to do the HS' work for him!

You are not clear about anything, Jack. As far as I can see you didn't answer any of the questions put to you. You just danced around them, restating what you said previously, and appealed to authorities with whom you agree.

What are you talking about in the bolded sentences? Believe what? Believe that you are correct? If that's what you mean, you are being extremely arrogant and prideful -- like you are the arbiter of what's true -- your interpretation of scripture is the only correct one.




Perhaps you could also return to the bumped thread in Natural Sciences where you were asked to explain what you mean by biological evolution.

I will




Thanks!



rogero,

You are just a quizzical kind of guy are you not Monsieur? You have managed to quiz when in doubt and avoid backing up anything you think. Since I have been on this forum the standard operating procedure is to immediately ask questions to defocus, you are not alone though. I notice it is a trend. So, since I have answered your questions that are then met with more questions and more questions, you can answer mine.



I've asked you questions for explanation. My questions have been focussed, not de-focussing. Your posts have been either confusing or flat-out arrogant assertions. Anyone who's read through your Cosmology spam can attest to that. I can't stand it when another Christian makes says stupid stuff. This started with your assertion that Earth was 1-1.5 Ga. You've made other wrong scientific statements, and when it comes to theology, you just bang away with your views and frustrate any attempts at explanation. You're idiotic conflation of the sciencve of evolution with the putative philosophies derived from it is another example of why you need to be opposed.



Are you a Christian? If not, then it does not matter what I answer.

The Gospel is foolishness to those who are perishing.



You are an arrogant SOB, Jack. This really hurt my feelings. How are you sure that you are a Christian?

Your interpretation of the Bible is foolishness, Jack -- what does that say to you?

Was the Gospel ever in question in my posts?

You really need to be careful what you say, Jack. Insults and cajoling can be fine in context, but implying that I'm not a Christian is not.



If you are a Christian, then you should know the Bible is the Word of God. Reading is fundamental, you know that, are you against reading? Jesus told the rich man that was in Hell roasting and no longer boasting that even if someone were sent from the dead his brothers would not believe because they did not believe Moses and the Prophets. They would end up in Hell just like him because they do not believe Moses and the Prophets. It is silliness to quibble about the Word of God. Jesus is God of Very God, Light of Very Light, He is Yahweh, He is the Word of God and gave the Word of God to us.

Do you know that?



I read the Bible daily, Jack. You are an arrogant man -- implying again in the above paragraph that yours is the only true interpretation. Shame on you!



If you think that the Bible is not true, what Scriptures do you reject? How do you know what is true and what to reject? That means you know more than Jesus because He thinks the Scriptures are true. He did not reject them. If you think you know more than God as you seem to claim, how come you think you do? I do not believe you know more than God. I know you do not know more than God. you need to know that if you do not. Inquiring minds want to know.

I had a Sunday School class taught to me by a Baptist, a staunch Baptist who does not know it but he is a staunch New Ager, apostate, New Ager. He thinks religion evolved, people evolved, and probably light bulbs evolved. He also was a definite disciple of those who are of the school of Higher Criticism. In other words he was apostate, but he sure likes to think he likes Jesus. He likes the idea of Jesus, but cautioned me against putting my faith in the Bible. He hissed that it is the "system." "There you go," I thought. I almost could not believe my ears. I would like to know if you are a New Ager? It is easy to characterize people with some help. The ideas seemingly do not matter to you, so we can dote on personalities for awhile to your amusement.

I have simply thought of you as a Christian without qualification. Now, since we are getting friendly enough you think you know if I am a Fundamentalist or not, and hang onto the ad hominem like a tick on a hound, I would like to know if you are a New Ager. It seems like the idea that all roads lead to God and life is like the spokes of a wheel and everyone will go to heaven no matter what we think, say or do is what a lot of people think on here. Whatever anyone believes is fine. Some people appear to be Christians in the same sense I am a Washington Redskins fan, like "block that kick," and "Go Jesus, sis-boom-bah, rah, rah, rah."

I used to work for a company that put into practice New Age ideas. Some of my fellow workers had Ascended Masters and others believed various things about the afterlife including but not limited to reincarnation. In any event the New Age jargon is a bit dated but here is a self-check for believers.



You've worn me out, Jack. Yes, I think the Bible is "true". All of it is theological truth, but not all of it is "true" as historical narrative. And, I don't believe that your assertion that the "Word of God" -- captial "W" refers to the current canon of scripture in toto.

But it requires interpretation. Your arrogant and prideful assertion is that your interpretation is the correct one.

...

I snipped your last cut 'n past. I am NOT a "New-Ager". I believe we are saved by the grace of Christ. I am a Trinitarian Christian with very "orthodox" Christology. Shame on you for you attempt at an ad hominem mischaracterization, guilt-by-association tack. Questioning my faith will not be tolerated, especially from someone as narrow-minded as you.

I will continue to oppose you, ask for clarifications, and point out where you're being illogical, redundant, or confusing.

Now, I look forward to your attempt to clarify you view on biological evolution.

God's Peace,

Roger

[lucaspa]

The Bible is the WORD of GOD, the whole thing, OT to NT. Thinking in terms of Evolution or whatever is helpful to arrive at conclusions about things in the biosphere and the rock record. I see people that are YEC, OEC, IGA and A&P on here. I would like to state that as a Christian the Bible comes first NO MATTER WHAT YOU THINK.
Jack, this is not the viewpoint of "as a Christian", but rather the viewpoint of Fundamentalists. Christians have long recognized that God has two books. As for putting the Bible first, no matter what, see the second quote in my signature to get the viewpoint of Christians.

I determined the relative age date for the oldest known amphibian in the world 30 years ago. SO WHAT!!!! And how did you do this?

This trashing the Bible seems to go on with people who claim Christ. Jack, in a discussion it is necessary to accurately understand the positions. No one is trashing the Bible. What we are "trashing" is a literal interpretation of the Bible. That is not the same as "the Bible". Do you understand that? Or are you going to keep ignoring the difference?

For one thing, the resolution of what we know of the Bible as God's Word and how it fits with science has to begin with the knowledge that the Bible is correct and it is Revelation. That is the place to start, not with the assumption science is going to disprove the Bible. Can science (God's Creation) disprove an interpretation of the Bible? For instance, the plain language of Luke 2:1 is that the whole world was enrolled. But we know that isn't true, don't we? From outside the Bible. So we know that an interpretation insisting on the plain reading is incorrect.

It is not a matter of me finding people that agree with me that the Bible is the Word of God. I knew that it is the Word of God from the first day I believed and received the Holy Spirit and Faith. Then you are contradicting the Bible, since only Jesus is the "Word of God". Says so in John 1.

You said that Gleason Archer did not count and besides most seminaries don't think the Pentateuch is the Word of God and the Bible is the Word of God. Again, you need to be accurate. What I said was that most seminaries taught that the Pentateuch was an edited document from 3 sources.

[qIuote] am posting this not because you are not satisfied but because I am very happy to give a reason for my Faith and testify that the Bible is the infallible, inerrant, inspired Word of God.[/quote] This is Fundamentalism. Which, I submit, is not Christian. It's a new religion that worships an inerrant Bible.

I know that Jesus is the Word... Jesus is the Word in the flesh and the Scriptures are also the Word of God. If you know that Jesus is the Word, why do you keep repeating the error that scriptures "are also the Word of God". Sounds like you simply won't relinquish your worship of an inerrant Bible.

The Bible gives testimony to the fact that it is the Word of God. Below are some examples: In all of your examples, KJV says "Word of God" is actually "word of God". Why do you lie about the Bible? www.blueletterbible.org (http://www.blueletterbible.org)

Just a small representative of the study of the term "Word of God" in a small representative of the books available could not be represented fully here. However, a few extracts of verses and notes below is a small start. In 73 books surveyed there are 6824 occurrences of the phrase "Word of God." Another set of 96 books including the works of the Ante-Nicene Fathers also had a frequent references to the Word of God. But do they use it as a capital "W"? I think not.I submit that you have changed them as you changed the Bible.

[lucaspa]

I have never claimed to be a fundy. But you are one. You fit the criteria. The Fundamentals are online at http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/6528/fundcont.htm Compare teh statements in them to the statements you made. They are identical. Now, if you don't like the label, then change your ideas so that they do not fit the criteria.

I did think about some things though. In fact there are lots of reasons to believe the Bible is the Word of God, just not enough time to post them all--or space. Jack, none of those are any more convincing than your first list. Also, before you can put out new 'evidence', you must refute the contention that "Word of God" is Jesus and not the Bible. How do you get around John 1? Do you just ignore it? Seems so. If the Bible is inerrant as you claim, how can you ignore such an important chapter?


Paul was commissioned by Jesus Christ Himself to take the Gospel to the Gentiles and was an Apostle speaking the Word of God under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.['quote] Here again you have "Word of God" be something different than the Bible. Paul didn't write down everything he said. So what is the "Word of God" here, because it is not the Bible.

Paul notes that the Law was given to Moses by Yahweh and that it was ordained by the Holy Angels of Yahweh. Jesus is the Captain, the LORD Sabaoth, the Lord of the Holy Angels. Yet Jesus in Mark 8 and Matthew 14 says Moses got parts of the Law wrong. So, if God gave the Law directly to Moses -- dictated it -- how did Moses get it wrong to put in the Pentateuch?

[quote]When Jesus was tempted in the wilderness by Satan, Jesus quoted Scripture. Jesus knew the Pentateuch is the Word of God and testifies powerfully to that fact. Excuse me, but your conclusion does not follow. Yes, Jesus quoted scripture, but it does not follow that the Pentateuch is therefore entirely the "Word of God". Nor does it follow that your interpretation of the Pentateuch is correct.

To deny the Word of God as being The Word of God is what the Higher Critics do and so think they know more than God. Jesus is God and He Himself delivered the Word of God to Moses. Where in the inerrant Bible in Exodus does it say "Jesus"? Nowhere. Now we have two capital letters "The Word of God". Again, please explain how the Bible can be "The Word" of God when John 1 clearly says that Jesus is the Word.


It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. In 1 Corinthians 7 Paul makes it clear that he is speaking for himself. Not God. So, is that chapter exempted as proceeding from the mouth of God? AGain, Jesus says that Moses got at least one of the Laws incorrect. Is that Law from the mouth of God? It seems to me that the Bible itself denies your cliams.

When you address my points in true discussion I will then move on to the rest of your points.

[lucaspa]

Bible declares God is omniscient Like rogero, I'd like to see chapter and verse. I haven't found them.

The Bible is 100% accurate Luke 2:1. Mark 8, Matthew 14.

The Bible has scientific foreknowledge chapter and verse.

Design of the text shows the Bible is the Word of God It is design of the text that showed that the Pentateuch had multiple authors and was a compiled document. Textual criticism of the gospels shows how the stories changed over time between the events and when each gospel was written. Compare the story of the man being lowered thru the roof to be healed in Mark (oldest gospel), Matthew, and Luke. The story changes. If God dictated the Bible, this would not be the case.

Evidence of a supernatural system of messages in the Bible is proof it is the Word of God The Bible Code???!!! You are not serious, are you? Inventions of people. Pick an arbitrary code and you can get a system of messages out of any text.

Predictive prophecy proves that the Bible is the Word of God Except that all the "prophecies" were written after the events. That doesn't count as prophecy.

Only Holy Book in the world that authenticates it is from God Excuse me, the the Quran is authenticated that it was dictated by Allah. The Book of Mormon is also supposed to be "authenticated" it is from God.

God authored the Bible according to II Timothy 3:16 and II Peter 1:21 Neither of those say God authored the Bible. Now you are bearing false witness against the Bible.

Aristotle’s Dictum says to give the document the benefit of the doubt ???? Aristotle never knew of the Bible. What happened to "proof" above?? If you have "proof", there is no doubt! Now you are grasping at straws and contradicting yourself.

The New Testament is the most authenticated document in the world. There are over 25,000 early mss of 99.5% accurate. W. F. Albright states there is no reason to date any book after 80 AD 2 Peter has to be after 90 AD since there were no collections of the letters of Paul until then. Albright is simply wrong.

Archeological discoveries prove the accuracy of the New Testament If that is the case, Jack, then archeological discoveries prove the accuracy of the Iliad! Should we worship Zeus? No archeological discovery proves any of the major theological claims of the NT.


2) Do you believe the NT references you quoted are referring to the Bible in its present form, since of course the canon of scripture was not together at the time of those writings. Ergo, how do you know that "Word of God" is referring to Bible?

Read the quotes. Context. You have to believe the Apostles and Jesus are liars to think the Bible is not true. There is ample evidence that supports the fact that we have a reliable witness. Why would you think God cannot deliver what we need to know as believers?
Ah, 2 different claims here? Rogero asked whether the phrase "word of God" was referring to the Bible, since "the Bible" did not exist when those words were written. You reply with a different claim that the Bible is not true. Apples and oranges.

Yes, in order for the theological claims in the Bible not to be true, the apostles and Jesus or the authors of the books have to be lying. But that is not the same as "word of God" referring to the Bible. Shame on you.

Finally, "delivering what we need to know as believers" does not equal the Bible is inerrant. After all, those engaged in Higher Criticism are believers, so even with the Bible not being inerrant, we have enough to believe.

In your OP, you said you believed not based on the Bible, but supposedly based on an interaction with the Holy Spirit. So you didn't even need the Bible at all to be a believer, did you? :smile: Contradict yourself again.

Jack, I don't think you had such a personal experience. If you did, you would not be fighting so hard for an inerrant Bible. So what if the Bible is not 100% accurate? You have all the proof you need in your personal experience. No, I think the only reason you argue so hard for an inerrant Bible is that you have no experience of God and must cling to an inerrant Bible as a drowning man to a lifejacket.

3) Do you believe that the Bible can be read without interpretation, kind of like a computer manual?

No and yes. The Bible is interpreted by the Holy Spirit. Yes, it can be read like a computer manual if you know enough. Where does the "know enough" come from? Inside the Bible or out?

4) How do you square your belief in an old Earth and at least some biological evolution at the level of speciation with the standard Fundamentalist interpretation held by Bible believers like your friend Abigail?

I am not quite sure what Abigail believes and even if I thought I did, it would be better for her to answer for herself. It is not necessary for people to understand science to understand the Bible. You missed rogero's point. Let me ask again: the standard Fundamentalist claim is that the Bible plainly says the earth is young and all kinds were created during Creation Week, which was a literal 144 hour period. Now, you say "the Bible" and resist any attempt by us to distinguish between "the Bible" and "interpretation of the Bible". So how is it that you and Abigail read the same the Bible -- Word of God -- and come to such different ideas on what the "Word of God" actually says?

Just as I have not received a clear picture of what anyone on this forum means by the term "Evolution" THat is untrue. Many of us, including me, have repeatedly posted what evolution means. Open your eyes.

I have similarly not seen what anyone means by the term "Fundamentalist."
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/6528/fundcont.htm
http://neovox.cortland.edu/vox/vox_87/vox_87.html
Open your eyes.

5) Why would a Fundamentalist like you use a quote from the Deuterocanon? Do you consider that the inspired Word of God as well? I thought you Fundies called that the Pseudepigrapha ("false writings")?

What is a Fundamentalist in your view? Who said they are false and in what way? Please cite instances where they are false. Please submit valid evidence that refutes anything you assert is untrue. Jack, those books were not included in the canon. Therefore, if the Word of God is the Bible, those aren't the Word of God. Why quote them? Again, your question is a nice duck, but that is all it is. Please stop running.

6) Several verses you quoted (or cut 'n pasted) seem to indicate that the Word of God is not a book, but a being, God Himself, or words spoken by God.

I see you do not like it if I give evidence from other sources The Word of God is the Word of God. Jesus is the Word of God, He is referred to as the Memra in the targums, the same thing. The Word of God is the Revelation of God to us as spoken by the Prophets and directly revealed to Moses. The Word of God is a being, God and it is the written Revelation to us. So, in contradiction to John 1, you maintain that the "Word of God" is many things. The Bible is only one of them. Is that a fair summary of your position?

If you are a Christian, then you should know the Bible is the Word of God. Reading is fundamental, you know that, are you against reading? As a Christian, once again John 1 tells us that there is only one "Word of God" and that is Jesus. How do you keep ignoring John 1?

Reading is fundamental, but are you sure you are interpreting what you read correctly? There are rules for interpretation:http://www.gospelcom.net/apologeticsindex/b11.html
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/b02.html
You are violating several of them.

It is silliness to quibble about the Word of God. Jesus is God of Very God, Light of Very Light, He is Yahweh, He is the Word of God and gave the Word of God to us. If Jesus is the "Word of God", then the Bible is NOT! You need to think your position thru more clearly. You keep contradicting yourself as you answer immediate concerns. Think of the bigger picture and try to build a position that is internally consistent.

If you think that the Bible is not true, what Scriptures do you reject? Again, three different things!
1. Is the Bible the "Word of God"?
2. Is the Bible 100% accurate?
3. Is the Bible true in some sense.

I reject a literal interpretation of Genesis 1-11. Notice I don't reject the chapters. I reject the interpretation that says they are historically accurate.

How do you know what is true and what to reject? That means you know more than Jesus because He thinks the Scriptures are true. Mark 8; Matthew 14. Jesus thinks some of the scriptures are wrong. He also taught that the interpretation of some of scriptures by the Pharisees was wrong.

How do we tell? We use everything we have. God's Creation, textual criticism, the Holy Spirit, our consciences, etc.

Jack, the OT and NT says it is OK to own slaves! Do we think that is OK now? Why not? Why did we reject owning slaves as moral? Jesus says that we cannot divorce. But we have decided that there are some situations where divorce is not even allowed but the only moral thing to do.

This is one of the parts that convinces me you have no personal interaction with God. You must follow the Bible as an absolute rulebook, because you have no conversation with God to guide you.

I had a Sunday School class taught to me by a Baptist, a staunch Baptist who does not know it but he is a staunch New Ager, apostate, New Ager. He thinks religion evolved, people evolved, and probably light bulbs evolved. Now you are rejecting evolution. Of course, you insult him by saying he thought "light bulbs evolved". False witness, Jack. Or doesn't the 9th Commandment mean anything?

He also was a definite disciple of those who are of the school of Higher Criticism. In other words he was apostate, How do you know he was apostate? What about you being apostate?

BTW, by your checklist, I'm not a New Ager.

[Jack777]

I see, I am not a Christian but a Fundamentalist. Whatever you think is what you think. Sorry I cannot answer so much rogero. You are a wise guy.

[rogero]

I see, I am not a Christian but a Fundamentalist. Whatever you think is what you think. Sorry I cannot answer so much rogero. You are a wise guy.

A Fundamentalist is a type of Christian. I see you are deficient in logical skills, and this may be a reasonable explanation for your inability to make cogent posts or profer coherent answers to focussed questions that are posed about your very "interesting" views.

Now, perhaps you can regale us with straightforward and non-elusive answers to the questions that Lucaspa and I have posed.

To reiterate, here's one for you: Do you believe that the Word of God as the Logos Christ of John 1 is the same as the "word" (lowercase "w") of God as referred to scripture? If so, are you saying that the Bible is Christ? Secondarily, why do you capitalize "word" in passages that don't refer to the Christ, when in fact scholarly Bible translators do not? (For example, my NASB does not, and it's considered a fairly "literal" or "formal equivalent" translation.)

If you read again through this thread, there is a list of other questions that you need to answer, but this is probably the most important (at least for your credibility on Tweb.)

God's Peace,

Roger

[Jack777]

Okay, okay,


I have not replied to this thread for a lot of reasons, but have intended to all along. Someone said the Bible is not the Word of God and also said that the Bible Codes have been disproven. I suspect that the person who made that assertion is not a cryptologist and has not reviewed the paper that was peer reviewed and published that prove the codes are real. If so, I would like to see the refutation that this person has done. One reason I am interested is that the charges that the codes are not real is false is that all of the charges have been shown for what they are, false assertions. I have listed some links below and had posted some or all of them before in another thread. I have also looked into this and while not a cryptologist by trade have become convinced that the codes are real. In any event please direct me to your refutation. The Bible Codes exist and are real. If you do not have a refutation and do not look at the links and read a few books about it I suspect you do not know and spoke out of turn.



Torah Code Refutation of Critics


"A Brief History of Codes Research" (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/history.htm)
Part 1 (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/ref1.htm), Part 2 (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/ref2.htm)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/variat/var_eng.htm#daterabi)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/paro_hb.htm)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/paro_hb.htm)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/paro_hb.htm)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/paro_hb.htm)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/paro_hb.htm)
"Of Science and Parody: A Complete Refutation of MBBK's Central Claim" (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/paro_hb.htm)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/emanuel/eman_hb.htm#CHAPI)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/emanuel/eman_hb.htm#CHAP2)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/persi2.htm)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/new_mc.htm)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/persi2.htm)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/persi4e.htm)
Part 1 (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/nations/nat_hb.htm)
Part 2 (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/nations/nations200_hb.htm)
section B of our paper (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/nations/nations200_hb.htm)
"Personalities of Genesis and Their Dates of Birth" (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/genesis/gen_hb.htm)
"A Replication of: The Second Sample of Famous Rabbinical Personalities" (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/ben/ben_hb.htm)
Research (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/research.htm)
The Refutation of the Attempts to Invalidate the Torah Codes (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/debate1.htm)
What's New (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/whatsnew.htm)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/response.htm)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/havlin.htm)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/wrr1/wrr1.htm)
click here (http://members.xoom.com/bcodes/)
click here (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/research.htm)
"New Statistical Evidence for a Genuine Code in Genesis" (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/emanuel/eman_hb.htm).
see also


Witztum, D., Beremez, Y. (2000). MBBK's Study of Variations (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/variat/var_eng.htm). Available here.
McKay, B. D. (2001). The Analysis of Variations – a reply to Doron Witztum. http://www.cs.anu.edu.au/ ~ bdm/dilugim
Witztum, D., Rips, E. and Rosenberg, Y. (1994). Equidistant Letter Sequences in the Book of Genesis (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/wrr/wrr1.htm). Statist. Sci. 9 No. 3 429-438.
Witztum, D., Rips, E. and Rosenberg, Y. (1986). Equidistant Letter Sequences in the Book of Genesis. Preprint.
Witztum, D., Rips, E. and Rosenberg, Y. (1988). Equidistant Letter Sequences in the Book of Genesis. Preprint.
McKay, B. D., Bar-Natan, D., Bar-Hillel, M. and Kalai, G. (1999). Solving the Bible Code puzzle. Statist. Sci. 14 No. 2 150-173.
Witztum, D. (2001). Smoke Screen: Concerning McKay's Response to our Article "Concerning the Choices of Dates for WRR's Rabbis Samples. Part A: Direct Optimization." (http://www.torahcodes.co.il/dat2_hb.htm) Available here.
If you think you need to challenge Witztum personally or have questions or want to discuss your refutation this is his address

Doron Witztum
P.O. Box 16409
Jerusalem, Israel

[rogero]

Okay, okay,


I have not replied to this thread for a lot of reasons, but have intended to all along. Someone said the Bible is not the Word of God and also said that the Bible Codes have been disproven. I suspect that the person who made that assertion is not a cryptologist and has not reviewed the paper that was peer reviewed and published that prove the codes are real. If so, I would like to see the refutation that this person has done. One reason I am interested is that the charges that the codes are not real is false is that all of the charges have been shown for what they are, false assertions. I have listed some links below and had posted some or all of them before in another thread. I have also looked into this and while not a cryptologist by trade have become convinced that the codes are real. In any event please direct me to your refutation. The Bible Codes exist and are real. If you do not have a refutation and do not look at the links and read a few books about it I suspect you do not know and spoke out of turn.

...


Jack,


I wanted you to try to answer the questions yourself. I noticed you didn't answer why you use Word of God (capital "W") when it references something other than the Logos Christ. I pointed out to you that the NASB, for example, uses the lowercase "w" in those cases.



Could you please try to answer that one?


R

[kofh2u]

1) Definite:

John1:1
1In the beginning was the (logos), Word, (unwritten Scripture), and the Word, (now the Bible), was with God (only, and unknown to men), and the Word, (our only medium by which to know God), was, (de facto), God. 2He, (the living Word to come), was with God in the beginning.

2) Application:

Matthew 11:27
"All things (concerning scripture) have been committed to me by my Father, (the Word). No one knows, (no one can identify), the Son except (by prophecies from) the Father, (the Word, which is God), and no one knows, (that is, correctly interprets), the Father, (the Word, which pre-existed written scripture), except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses (to open the scriptures), to reveal him, (the Word)."

[rogero]

1) Definite:

John1:1
1In the beginning was the (logos), Word, (unwritten Scripture), and the Word, (now the Bible), was with God (only, and unknown to men), and the Word, (our only medium by which to know God), was, (de facto), God. 2He, (the living Word to come), was with God in the beginning.

2) Application:

Matthew 11:27
"All things (concerning scripture) have been committed to me by my Father, (the Word). No one knows, (no one can identify), the Son except (by prophecies from) the Father, (the Word, which is God), and no one knows, (that is, correctly interprets), the Father, (the Word, which pre-existed written scripture), except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses (to open the scriptures), to reveal him, (the Word)."

So, is Christ the Logos or is the Bible the Logos? You've given at least three definitions of "Word" in the bolded phrases: the unwritten scripture, the Bible, God the Father, and "the living word to come" -- which I can only presume means Christ?

Thanks for confusing the issue even more.

So, back to Jack: do you believe that the Logos is the Christ and the Logos is the Bible? From this one can infer that you believe that Christ is the Bible.

[Jack777]

rogero,

I answered the question on the Bible Codes. What do you want? If you can disprove the statistical and cryptographic mathematics go for it. If you do not want to share your work here because you are waiting peer review from a publisher I understand. How did you refute the Bible Codes? I don't remember that even being an issue with you?

As far as Logos. Have you read the Targums and are you aware of Jewish "commentary" from the time of the Captivity to the time of Christ? If not you should.

Jesus is the Word of God.

The Bible is the Word of God. Please tell me you are not being purposely obtuse. You should have deduced that by now if you read any of my posts. Did you read them?

I will answer all of the questions as I can.

The word for "word" as rational and sentient in from Chaldean is memra which has as its root "mr." The Hebrew root is the same for davar. The origin of root for mr is the word in Egyptian for chisel, pronounced "mer." Memra is a doubling of the word chisel reflecting a process of cognition from sentient thought chiseled in the mind or on the heart to conveyance to expression in thought or in words. Just as Yahweh wrote the Ten Commandments on tables of stone (probably igneous/metamorphic rock by the way) He is the One Who writes the "natural law" on our hearts, chisels the law on our brains with those scratches, electro-chemico-physico pathways. Memra is the equivalent of the word that the Apostle John chose to describe Jesus, the Logos. The Logos is the Greek equivalent to Memra and the Memra was inserted in the Targums as descriptive of the manifestation of Yahweh to avoid anthropomorphisms. Jews at the time of Jesus understood the Messiah to be this Memra. One can safely say that Jesus is the Word of God and that the Bible is the Word of God with that on the heart having the same source as the Bible. The Apostles understood this as did the Jews.

[rogero]

rogero,

I answered the question on the Bible Codes. What do you want? If you can disprove the statistical and cryptographic mathematics go for it. If you do not want to share your work here because you are waiting peer review from a publisher I understand. How did you refute the Bible Codes? I don't remember that even being an issue with you?



You are correct, I didn't bring up Biblical codes. That was not my issue, although I believe it's a lot of hooey and right now I don't have the time to waste to go through 20 references -- the Word of God issue and some others were mine.



As far as Logos. Have you read the Targums and are you aware of Jewish "commentary" from the time of the Captivity to the time of Christ? If not you should.

Jesus is the Word of God.

The Bible is the Word of God. Please tell me you are not being purposely obtuse. You should have deduced that by now if you read any of my posts. Did you read them?



I have not read the Targums, but I do understand basic logic. If two things are equal to a third, then the first two are equal to each other. It's called transitivity. According to this, you believe that the Bible is Jesus.

I'm being obtuse??? You are quite the jokester!



I will answer all of the questions as I can.

The word for "word" as rational and sentient in from Chaldean is memra which has as its root "mr." The Hebrew root is the same for davar. The origin of root for mr is the word in Egyptian for chisel, pronounced "mer." Memra is a doubling of the word chisel reflecting a process of cognition from sentient thought chiseled in the mind or on the heart to conveyance to expression in thought or in words. Just as Yahweh wrote the Ten Commandments on tables of stone (probably igneous/metamorphic rock by the way) He is the One Who writes the "natural law" on our hearts, chisels the law on our brains with those scratches, electro-chemico-physico pathways. Memra is the equivalent of the word that the Apostle John chose to describe Jesus, the Logos. The Logos is the Greek equivalent to Memra and the Memra was inserted in the Targums as descriptive of the manifestation of Yahweh to avoid anthropomorphisms. Jews at the time of Jesus understood the Messiah to be this Memra. One can safely say that Jesus is the Word of God and that the Bible is the Word of God with that on the heart having the same source as the Bible. The Apostles understood this as did the Jews.

Does anyone out there follow this line of reasoning? I think you've just done the logical equivalent of proving that 1 + 1 = 3. Also, why is the "law chiseled on the heart" the same as the present canon of Scripture? This appears to be yet another conflation. Now we have Jesus = law chiseled on the heart (natural law) = the canon of Scripture. This may be clear to you, but it certainly seems like a tortured stretching of meanings beyond their intention.

Question for you, Jack -- why do Bible translators use "Word" for the Logos and "word" for scripture and other uses? Do you know more than them?

[kofh2u]

Jack777:
Jesus is the Word of God.

KOFHY:
This becames a matter of semantics. As you can see, rogero has trouble pinning down what exactly you mean. He suggests that it was not helpful to read the scripture I posted, and for the same reason, semantics.

Jack777:
The Bible is the Word of God.

KOFHY:
See what I mean?

1) The Bible is the Word of God.
2) Jesus is the Word of God.
3) And, 1John 1 says, ..." and tne Word was God,"...

Jack777:
Please tell me you are not being purposely obtuse.

KOFHY:
No, he has a very legitimate gripe here, how does this all add up in the real world. I mean, how would you explain this, if it can be explained, to a rational non-Christian?

Jack777:
[font=Verdana]The word for "word" as rational and sentient in from Chaldean is memra which has as its root "mr." The Hebrew root is the same for davar. The origin of root for mr is the word in Egyptian for chisel, pronounced "mer." Memra is a doubling of the word chisel reflecting a process of cognition from sentient thought chiseled in the mind or on the heart to conveyance to expression in thought or in words.
Jews at the time of Jesus understood the Messiah to be this Memra. One can safely say that Jesus is the Word of God and that the Bible is the Word of God with that on the heart having the same source as the Bible.

KOFHY:
Whereas I don't disagree here, you are basically saying that it is figurative, right?

Jesus in his "heart" is everything the Bible stands for... ?

That would be one way of looking at it, for sure.

How about if we add another way. Here at Tweb we see clearly that the written word is understood very differently by different readers. This was true in 32AD, too. The Pharisees disagreed with Jesus on interpretation, so in this it is clear now they had the wrong "Bible" and Jesus represented the "right Bible."

Here's what I mean:

John 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world (in that I set the meanings of scripture straight): he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness (of misconceived doctrine), but shall have (Truth), the light of life, (from the God of the living).
John 8:13 The Pharisees therefore said unto him, Thou bearest record of thyself, (not traditional dogma); thy record (of interpretation), is not true (which ours and our father's is).
John 8:14 Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, (referring not to ancient dogma nor writings), yet my record is true (and understandable to the large masses who hear me): for I know (the full scripture) whence I came, and whither (the meaning to which) I go; but ye cannot tell (the puzzle of scripture) whence I come, and whither I go (with its full message).




Psa78:2 I will open my mouth in a parable: I will utter dark sayings of old:

[Jack777]

kofh2u,

Let me see what I can do to splain some more.

No, I do not mean it is figurative. Jesus is the Word of God LITERALLY. Give me some time to see how I can get this across.


rogero,

kofu2 gave evidence that the Bible and Jesus is the Word of God. There is more.

Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.

And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart:

Deuteronomy 6:4-6

The words that were given to Moses and the Children of Israel were written down and they were to be in their hearts. The Commandments of Yahweh are the Commandments of Jesus. They were in two places, written on tables of stone and in the hearts of Moses and the people. God is Righteousness, He is the Commandments and all Perfection is contained in Him. He is omnipresent, everywhere at once. He is existence. It is a small matter to say that Jesus is the Logos, the sentient expression of His Word. The Bible is the Word of God and Jesus is the Word of God. To deny that is to deny part of the Gospel of the Apostle John. What does John say?

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:1

Jesus is the Word and the Word is God. He says that He dwells in our hearts and this is completely in harmony with the passages quoted above.

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.

II Peter 1:20-21

The Prophecy of the Old Testament is from God too. Moses was a Prophet and He is the one who gave Genesis and the rest of the books of the Pentateuch. He received Revelation from Yahweh, Jesus as the pre-incarnate Christ, and he was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Miriam too was inspired as were others. There are prophets and prophetesses that we do not know the names of that contributed to what we know in the Old Testament. Again, the Bible is the Word of God.


Presenting the evidence from the Bible and other sources that the Bible is the Word of God has had no effect. Jesus is the Word of God, the Logos. The Bible is the Word of God. If you choose to think I am stretching things or lying that is fine with me, but I am not. You think the Bible Codes are hooey and yet you do not want to see any evidence. I give you an explanation about the Bible as the Word of God and you get confused.

Let me ask you this. Do you think if Jesus is the Word of God that disqualifies Him from being Savior, Lord, LORD, LORD Sabaoth, and Redeemer?

[rogero]

...

rogero,

kofu2 gave evidence that the Bible and Jesus is the Word of God. There is more.

Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.

And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart:

Deuteronomy 6:4-6

The words that were given to Moses and the Children of Israel were written down and they were to be in their hearts. The Commandments of Yahweh are the Commandments of Jesus. They were in two places, written on tables of stone and in the hearts of Moses and the people. God is Righteousness, He is the Commandments and all Perfection is contained in Him. He is omnipresent, everywhere at once. He is existence. It is a small matter to say that Jesus is the Logos, the sentient expression of His Word. The Bible is the Word of God and Jesus is the Word of God. To deny that is to deny part of the Gospel of the Apostle John. What does John say?

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:1

Jesus is the Word and the Word is God. He says that He dwells in our hearts and this is completely in harmony with the passages quoted above.

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.

II Peter 1:20-21

The Prophecy of the Old Testament is from God too. Moses was a Prophet and He is the one who gave Genesis and the rest of the books of the Pentateuch. He received Revelation from Yahweh, Jesus as the pre-incarnate Christ, and he was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Miriam too was inspired as were others. There are prophets and prophetesses that we do not know the names of that contributed to what we know in the Old Testament. Again, the Bible is the Word of God.


Presenting the evidence from the Bible and other sources that the Bible is the Word of God has had no effect. Jesus is the Word of God, the Logos. The Bible is the Word of God. If you choose to think I am stretching things or lying that is fine with me, but I am not. You think the Bible Codes are hooey and yet you do not want to see any evidence. I give you an explanation about the Bible as the Word of God and you get confused.

Let me ask you this. Do you think if Jesus is the Word of God that disqualifies Him from being Savior, Lord, LORD, LORD Sabaoth, and Redeemer?

Nice try at an explanation, Jack -- but no cigar. Do you think there's a reason that all major Bible translations (KJV, NKJV, NASB, NRSV, NIV, etc.) make a distinction between the Christ as the personification of the Logos and the written word or words in general from God? The former is rendered "Word" the later is rendered "word."

Another question that you have not answered yet as far as I can see: Why are you equating the canonical Scriptures with the word (or "Word" if you like) of God? I have no idea how you can make this equivalence. The canon wasn't firm for centuries after the events recorded in the books we today call the NT. Also, how do you square your belief that the Deuterocanon (Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, whatever you want to call it) is also the word (Word?) of God? Where do you draw the line? How about the unscribed word that God has spoken to believers throughout the ages, and even does now, like when even the most humble believers feel God's presence when in prayer -- or even just glorying in the creation? Is this equivalent to Christ the Logos and/or the canon of Scripture?

Methinks you've created a jumbled up mish-mash for yourself. Hopefully by airing out your views, you will begin to see that you don't necessarily have some kind of special knowledge about these things, and that you will benefit from interaction with folks who don't agree with you. I certainly have benefitted from the same, although I admit it has been frustrating and even painful at times. Shucks, I've even learned a few things from you. :wink:

Your final paragraph is inflammatory misleading nonsense. I believe that Christ is the Logos of God, but I don't believe he is the same as the canonical scripture. Let me ask you this. If you think that Jesus Christ is the Logos and that the Bible is the Logos, does this mean you worship the Bible -- a Biblidolator as it were? For your sake, I certainly hope not! :pray:

R

[Lion]

I believe the Bible is the word of God but I do not believe in the false ideas that those who try to extract information by taking every nth letter. That is pure nonesense.

How was the Bible inspired? It wasn’t by some mechanical means where God guided the pen of the one writing. Sometimes God dictated the words, but most of the time the writer used his own words and wrote in his own style.

To put your own parenthetical meaning inserted in the words of scripture is to put your own thoughts and meaning into the plain scripture and distort the meaning. One can legitimately say what you think the text means, but it is not proper to tamper with the word of God.

[kofh2u]

In the spiritual sense, I include Lion's observation, IMO, too. No force commandeered the pen of the bible writer.
But, the deepest unconscious resources within the kingdom of the mind brought insights to the conscious mind of the writer.

Our mind contains all the phylogenetic history of our own species, and even is a storehouse of all the experiences of humankind transmitted to each individual. As the repository for all past experiences, it includes even our pre-human animal ancestry.
(Assumablely through the genetic processes.)

This Unconscious Mind awaken in Christ is the logos, and the Word that found its written expression in the hand that penned the Bible is all we mortals actually have available to us. For us, it is the Word as has been made available to us.

This "spiritual," non-material, mental aspect of the Word has a complementary analogy in the practical sense. The Word is God in these discussions, here, among us, in this sense.

As the ever "on-the-ready corps" of critics examine each and every statement made here, they judge the legitimacy and accuracy in accord with the ONLY acceptable ruler useful in such matters, The Word, as found in written form.

Rev. 2:27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron, (an undeniable
interpretation of scripture); as the vessels of a potter shall they be
broken to shivers, (so the verses, as the individual pieces of a massive
puzzle, shall they be separated out from one another): even as I
received of my Father, (the Word of the Old Testament).






Brackets! Ugh! Heresy! Blasphemy! No fair! Evil! Dumb! Cheat! Satanic!!! Unfair interpretive technique!!!

[Jack777]

kofu2,

The rich man said,

For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

Abraham saith unto him,

They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

And he said unto him,

If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Luke 16:28-31

Can I explain the Truth is the Truth as it is written to the satisfaction of a rational scientist? I don't know. I expect it is easier than explaining that the Truth is the Truth to an irrational scientist. But that is not my job as a Christian. I can present the Word of God to people, but the Holy Spirit is the One Who convinces people, not me. It is valid to explicate something from the Bible, draw out and present the Word of God to people and share what I know. God does not squeak and gibber or speak in secret from a dark place. We must have knowledge from His Word to understand things, true, and it seems fabulous to us, but that is not the same thing. The Holy Spirit is the Tutor, not me or anyone else. God is Righteousness and He speaks things that are True. He is the Perfect Orthogonal Straight-edge. That is not a guess. That is literally what He is, what the words in the original language mean. Righteousness is best translated as "Rightwiseness." Whatever a scientist observes or measures, is close, but not perfectly measured in all ways. We can know things that are True, but not in an exhaustive manner. Francis Schaeffer illustrates this to some degree.

The Prophet Isaiah wrote:

I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.

...Thus saith the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me.

...For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited:

I am the LORD; and there is none else.

I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth:

I said not unto the seed of Jacob, Seek ye me in vain:

I the LORD speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.

Isaiah 45:5-6, 11, 18-19

kofu2,

I notice something about quotations of Scripture and it is that putting down a verse and freely putting in an impression of what it could mean based on impressions of the way it strikes us in parentheses is not very good in terms of explication.

Example:

"Jesus wept." (Walla Walla, Washington).

Lion,

Try reading Jeffrey Satinover's Cracking the Bible Code if you are interested in finding out if the Bible Codes are valid. I provided enough links that you could begin to find out if the science is valid.

rogero,

The rich man said,

For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

Abraham saith unto him,

They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

And he said unto him,

If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Luke 16:28-31

I have no clue if I am smarter than whoever translated different versions of the Bible. I can only offer conjecture why they did what they did. My guess is that they did the best they could. There are only two versions of the Bible in English that are close to being reflective of the original languages, the King James Version and the Douay-Rheims. All other translations mistranslate the Pentateuch. It is not a matter of being smarter. Part of it is that they had no understanding of what they were doing. Most still do not. This is not a matter of intelligence though.

The Apostle John wrote:

Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls. Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:

Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.

...Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

I John 1:12, 22-23

Lactantius wrote:

The prophets, who were very many, proclaim and declare the one God; for, being filled with the inspiration of the one God, they predicted things to come, with agreeing and harmonious voice. But those who are ignorant of the truth do not think that these prophets are to be believed; for they say that those voices are not divine, but human.

Martin Luther taught:

If you are asked:

What do you mean by the words:

I believe in the Holy Ghost?

you can answer:

I believe that the Holy Ghost makes me holy, as His name implies.

But whereby does He accomplish this, or what are His method and means to this end?

Answer:

By the Christian Church, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. For, in the first place, He has a peculiar congregation in the world, which is the mother that begets and bears every Christian through the Word of God, which He reveals and preaches, [and through which] He illumines and enkindles hearts, that they understand, accept it, cling to it, and persevere in it. For where He does not cause it to be preached and made alive in the heart, so that it is understood...

John Wesley said:

It was, to give them (what none can deny to be essential to all Christians in all ages) the mind which was in Christ, those holy fruits of the Spirit which whosoever hath not, is none of his; to fill them with "love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness;" (Galatians 5:22-24;) to endue them with faith, (perhaps it might be rendered, fidelity), with meekness and temperance: to enable them to crucify the flesh, with its affections and lusts, its passions and desires; and, in consequence of that inward change, to fulfill all outward righteousness; to "walk as Christ also walked," in "the work of faith, in the patience of hope, the labor of love." (1 Thessalonians 1:3.)

Jonathan Edwards said:

There is no want of POWER in God to cast wicked men into hell at any moment. Men’s hands cannot be strong when God rises up. The strongest have no power to resist him, nor can any deliver out of his hands. — He is not only able to cast wicked men into hell, but he can most easily do it. Sometimes an earthly prince meets with a great deal of difficulty to subdue a rebel, who has found means to fortify himself, and has made himself strong by the numbers of his followers. But it is not so with God. There is no fortress that is any defense from the power of God. Though hand join in hand, and vast multitudes of God’s enemies combine and associate themselves, they are easily broken in pieces. They are as great heaps of light chaff before the whirlwind; or large quantities of dry stubble before devouring flames. We find it easy to tread on and crush a worm that we see crawling on the earth; so it is easy for us to cut or singe a slender thread that any thing hangs by: thus easy is it for God, when he pleases, to cast his enemies down to hell. What are we, that we should think to stand before him, at whose rebuke the earth trembles, and before whom the rocks are thrown down?

They DESERVE to be cast into hell; so that divine justice never stands in the way, it makes no objection against God’s using his power at any moment to destroy them. Yea, on the contrary, justice calls aloud for an infinite punishment of their sins. Divine justice says of the tree that brings forth such grapes of Sodom, "Cut it down, why cumbereth it the ground?" Luke 13:7. The sword of divine justice is every moment brandished over their heads, and it is nothing but the hand of arbitrary mercy, and God’s mere will, that holds it back.

They are already under a sentence of CONDEMNATION to hell. They do not only justly deserve to be cast down thither, but the sentence of the law of God, that eternal and immutable rule of righteousness that God has fixed between him and mankind, is gone out against them, and stands against them; so that they are bound over already to hell. John 3:18. "He that believeth not is condemned already." So that every unconverted man properly belongs to hell; that is his place; from thence he is, John 8:23. "Ye are from beneath:" And thither he is bound; it is the place that justice, and God’s word, and the sentence of his unchangeable law assign to him.

[rogero]

...
rogero,

The rich man said,

For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

Abraham saith unto him,

They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

And he said unto him,

If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Luke 16:28-31

I have no clue if I am smarter than whoever translated different versions of the Bible. I can only offer conjecture why they did what they did. My guess is that they did the best they could. There are only two versions of the Bible in English that are close to being reflective of the original languages, the King James Version and the Douay-Rheims. All other translations mistranslate the Pentateuch. It is not a matter of being smarter. Part of it is that they had no understanding of what they were doing. Most still do not. This is not a matter of intelligence though.

The Apostle John wrote:

Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls. Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:

Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.

...Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

I John 1:12, 22-23

Lactantius wrote:

The prophets, who were very many, proclaim and declare the one God; for, being filled with the inspiration of the one God, they predicted things to come, with agreeing and harmonious voice. But those who are ignorant of the truth do not think that these prophets are to be believed; for they say that those voices are not divine, but human.

Martin Luther taught:

If you are asked:

What do you mean by the words:

I believe in the Holy Ghost?

you can answer:

I believe that the Holy Ghost makes me holy, as His name implies.

But whereby does He accomplish this, or what are His method and means to this end?

Answer:

By the Christian Church, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. For, in the first place, He has a peculiar congregation in the world, which is the mother that begets and bears every Christian through the Word of God, which He reveals and preaches, [and through which] He illumines and enkindles hearts, that they understand, accept it, cling to it, and persevere in it. For where He does not cause it to be preached and made alive in the heart, so that it is understood...

John Wesley said:

It was, to give them (what none can deny to be essential to all Christians in all ages) the mind which was in Christ, those holy fruits of the Spirit which whosoever hath not, is none of his; to fill them with "love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness;" (Galatians 5:22-24;) to endue them with faith, (perhaps it might be rendered, fidelity), with meekness and temperance: to enable them to crucify the flesh, with its affections and lusts, its passions and desires; and, in consequence of that inward change, to fulfill all outward righteousness; to "walk as Christ also walked," in "the work of faith, in the patience of hope, the labor of love." (1 Thessalonians 1:3.)

Jonathan Edwards said:

There is no want of POWER in God to cast wicked men into hell at any moment. Men’s hands cannot be strong when God rises up. The strongest have no power to resist him, nor can any deliver out of his hands. — He is not only able to cast wicked men into hell, but he can most easily do it. Sometimes an earthly prince meets with a great deal of difficulty to subdue a rebel, who has found means to fortify himself, and has made himself strong by the numbers of his followers. But it is not so with God. There is no fortress that is any defense from the power of God. Though hand join in hand, and vast multitudes of God’s enemies combine and associate themselves, they are easily broken in pieces. They are as great heaps of light chaff before the whirlwind; or large quantities of dry stubble before devouring flames. We find it easy to tread on and crush a worm that we see crawling on the earth; so it is easy for us to cut or singe a slender thread that any thing hangs by: thus easy is it for God, when he pleases, to cast his enemies down to hell. What are we, that we should think to stand before him, at whose rebuke the earth trembles, and before whom the rocks are thrown down?

They DESERVE to be cast into hell; so that divine justice never stands in the way, it makes no objection against God’s using his power at any moment to destroy them. Yea, on the contrary, justice calls aloud for an infinite punishment of their sins. Divine justice says of the tree that brings forth such grapes of Sodom, "Cut it down, why cumbereth it the ground?" Luke 13:7. The sword of divine justice is every moment brandished over their heads, and it is nothing but the hand of arbitrary mercy, and God’s mere will, that holds it back.

They are already under a sentence of CONDEMNATION to hell. They do not only justly deserve to be cast down thither, but the sentence of the law of God, that eternal and immutable rule of righteousness that God has fixed between him and mankind, is gone out against them, and stands against them; so that they are bound over already to hell. John 3:18. "He that believeth not is condemned already." So that every unconverted man properly belongs to hell; that is his place; from thence he is, John 8:23. "Ye are from beneath:" And thither he is bound; it is the place that justice, and God’s word, and the sentence of his unchangeable law assign to him.

Jack, you are somethin' else! If you can't answer my question, just say so, or admit that you might be wrong (gasp!) -- but please do not give a long-winded sanctimonious sermon on condemnation. Gee whiz...

You really have problems focusing on any discussion that deviates in the slightest from your desired repetitive pontifications, don't you?

It's pretty sad...

R

P.S. You want to take another crack at explaining how biological evolution does not occur in a billion-year old biosphere with mass, not total, extinctions (so there is continuity)? The Ga+ continuous non-evolutionary biosphere (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=47758) thread is still open for you.

Hopefully, your explanation will not include Hitler. :lol:

[Jack777]

Poor reading comprehension skills eh?

Look, what level of secondary school did you reach? If you will read your Bible a lot everyday, it will overcome this.

[rogero]

Poor reading comprehension skills eh?

Look, what level of secondary school did you reach? If you will read your Bible a lot everyday, it will overcome this.

You are such a frustrating old fool, Jack. You didn't answer the question about why use insist on calling both Christ and the Bible the Word (capital W) of God, instead choosing to preach to us. If you can't explain this view, I will have to conclude you are a blasphemous idolator. You equate Christ with the Bible and you worship the Bible. It's a shame...

I am sick to death of your irrelevant, boring, long-winded, and pompous posts. You've made it amply clear that you have no desire to dialogue but rather wish to regale any who will listen with your crankish tiresome tripe.

Now, are you going to make an honest attempt to answer the questions posed to you, both on theological and scientific issues? I'll remind you again of the Natural Science thread (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=47758) that has a question you've failed to address. The question should be pretty easy to answer, what with your deep geology background and that English degree.

[Jack777]

I would like to know why you do not understand what I wrote. None of what you have said about me is true. If it is not education, what is it then? Why are you accusing me of things that are not true?

[rogero]

I would like to know why you do not understand what I wrote. None of what you have said about me is true. If it is not education, what is it then? Why are you accusing me of things that are not true?

You're right -- I don't understand this last post of yours at all.

What did I accuse you of that is not true? You believe the Bible is the Word of God and you believe that Christ of the Word of God. Your insistence on the capital "W" for both (even though all Bible translators do not) indicates you think they are the same thing. Ergo, you believe that the physical Bible is the Christ. Thus, you are a Bible worshipper and a blasphemer. The logic is fairly straightforward. If you can't understand that simple thing -- is it your education, if not then what is it?

And in this statement of yours...



I have no clue if I am smarter than whoever translated different versions of the Bible. I can only offer conjecture why they did what they did. My guess is that they did the best they could. There are only two versions of the Bible in English that are close to being reflective of the original languages, the King James Version and the Douay-Rheims. All other translations mistranslate the Pentateuch. It is not a matter of being smarter. Part of it is that they had no understanding of what they were doing. Most still do not. This is not a matter of intelligence though.



you imply that have "understanding" of these translation issues while the bible translators do not. Did you get this special understanding from God? Are you suffering under the heavy burden of the sin of pride as well? It would appear so.

[Jack777]

I am not a Bible worshipper. Biblical idolatry is not what I am talking about. I did not suspect you would mistake something like that. I do not see how you can think that. Your conclusion is not logical.

No, my understanding is not very hard to see, it is simple really.

Now, if you disagree please let me know because I am going to proceed as if you do.

Language is important. Can we agree on that?

Okay.

Reading things that are written down is how to understand the meaning of something written.

In other words, if I do not read a book then I could not know what was written in it.

If I skim over a book in reading it and it has a lot of information that is vital to understanding something and it is actually very complex, there are only two possibilites that matter TO ME.

One possibility is that I may miss some detail that proves to be important if I do not read to understand what was written.

The other possibility is that I will miss the overall understanding of the book as a whole.

Let me give an example to illustrate this.

I read about 1200 pages of Gulag Archipelago and then a light went on in my head and a huge understanding was discovered to have been gained through the writing up to that point, an "aha" experience, an epiphany based on what I had read. Solzhenitsyn intended the reader to gain insight and understand what he had written.

Now, can we agree that reading a book or any message written down involves understanding what was written?

Have you read something and then re-read it and noticed that you consciously picked up some meaning that had been missed before? If not, that does happen to people.

It was considered a measure of cognitive ability to be able to read something and understand it. This was/is called "reading comprehension." Maybe educators do not care about that anymore, I dunno.

I would be interested to know if I have your agreement on understanding what is read is important before we go any further.

[rogero]

I am not a Bible worshipper. Biblical idolatry is not what I am talking about. I did not suspect you would mistake something like that. I do not see how you can think that. Your conclusion is not logical.

No, my understanding is not very hard to see, it is simple really.



Sorry, you're confusing again. What do you mean by "my understanding is not very hard to see..."? What understanding -- that one should use a capital "W" in the Word of God when referring to scripture? If so, that's not clear at all. That's the whole point of my query -- that and exactly how you think that references within scripture to the word of God are actually referring to the canonical (and deuterocanoncial???) scriptures.



Now, if you disagree please let me know because I am going to proceed as if you do.



Fair enough, that's what I explained in the previous paragraph.



Language is important. Can we agree on that?

Okay.



I realize it is. Do you? Clear communication is especially important on weighty issues, whereas hot air, wordsmithing, and rhetoric is not. Unfortunately, you specialize in the latter.



Reading things that are written down is how to understand the meaning of something written.



Wow! Thanks for that deep revelation. I never realized that before, stupid me! :blush:



In other words, if I do not read a book then I could not know what was written in it.



Duh..., yup! :duh:



If I skim over a book in reading it and it has a lot of information that is vital to understanding something and it is actually very complex, there are only two possibilites that matter TO ME.

One possibility is that I may miss some detail that proves to be important if I do not read to understand what was written.

The other possibility is that I will miss the overall understanding of the book as a whole.



I managed to get through graduate school in maths. I'm fully aware of reading slowly and closely. Certainly you're not being patronizing here, young man, since I have a hard time understanding your points of view? Perhaps your communication skills leave something to be desired -- or maybe you're being intentionally obtuse.



Let me give an example to illustrate this.

I read about 1200 pages of Gulag Archipelago and then a light went on in my head and a huge understanding was discovered to have been gained through the writing up to that point, an "aha" experience, an epiphany based on what I had read. Solzhenitsyn intended the reader to gain insight and understand what he had written.

Now, can we agree that reading a book or any message written down involves understanding what was written?



Golly, Mr. Jack, yup yup, I think I can agree on that...:ahem:



Have you read something and then re-read it and noticed that you consciously picked up some meaning that had been missed before? If not, that does happen to people.



Yes, all the time. Alas, it hasn't happened to me with your chef-d'oeuvre.




It was considered a measure of cognitive ability to be able to read something and understand it. This was/is called "reading comprehension." Maybe educators do not care about that anymore, I dunno.

I would be interested to know if I have your agreement on understanding what is read is important before we go any further.

Yes, master.

It appears the your point is that you've read the Bible more times and more closely than other people, ergo you have picked up insights that the hoi-poloi and even the Bible translators have not. Are we in agreement on that before we go any further?

If this is case, then your assertion that the Bible (canon and deuterocanon??) is Word of God (capital "W") is valid because of your vast and deep study of the book. In a previous post you alluded to the Holy Spirit leading in this pursuit (examples of Luther, Lactantius, etc.), so that your interpretation is approved due to your closer relationship to the HS than most of the rest of us. Are we in agreement on that before we go further?

R

[Jack777]

Nope, you missed where I am going with this. I am trying to stay on topic. I am not the topic. You question me and think you have redefined the topic. The topic is the Word of God--not me. I am trying to find out why you do not think that the Bible is not the Word of God, where it comes from.

Briefly, My statement about the translations that do not include the original words and structure represented in translation is no mystery. The KJV does, most others do not. It does not take Charlie Chan to figure out.

Neil was right about Jesus and I have not spoken to that since you seem to have more questions than that.

Anyway, I am glad to try and dispell some things or explain what I mean, but keep in mind the topic is the Word of God, not me. I have to speak from my voice as it is the one I have. That does not make the topic me though. I would like to know exactly what you think the Bible is. At this point it seems you may not think it is a book. It is though.
The Greek word for law is the same root word for Logos. The Law is written on our hearts and in our minds if we are united in Christ Jesus and the Apostle Paul says that we are now not under condemnation. The Law is the Word and the Word is Jesus, Who came in the flesh as fully man and fully God. Our unity is in Christ Jesus, we are united in Christ Jesus. A favorite way to deny the witness of the believer is to say that we use circular reasoning. What they misidentify as circular reasoning is the expression of unity in Jesus. Another mistake that is made is to think we are God because the Scriptures say that God will be all in all. Missing the point that Jesus is God or rejecting Jesus as God the Son leads to this being possible. It is one more layer of a veil over the hearts of those who for whom God gave His Son so they might have Life Eternal. It does not penetrate quite to us that Jesus is the Creator and planned the Universe before He Created it. Jesus is the Creator and many were martyred that understood this. Who is it that Satan would have us believe that he is? He wants us to think that he is like the Most High or is the Most High, so he says that we will be like gods. There is no God besides God.

Flat out, I stated that many people were martyred for the sake of the Creator and that Genesis 1:1 is the most important thing to understand. If I do not know that God created the Universe, I know nothing except facts about a small part of what there is to know in the Universe. If I do not know God there is little chance to none that I can know anything of His Kingdom or His Righteousness. Knowing a few facts to make a living is fine, except I will not know much about the Creator, which will keep me from knowing Him. Jesus said that many of us will come to Him and say that we have done all sorts of great things in His Name and say to Him, "Lord, Lord." He will say to leave His Presence and that He never knew us. How can that be? He will say,

"I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

That couldn't apply to me, or could it? This should go into one of those books about Bible difficulties, those hard passages that make people go, "ahhh... ummmm...." If there is no such thing as sin and iniquity as I am led to believe by some, or if I wink at doing evil and think doing evil has ceased to be possible for some reason, maybe I would not know exactly what is meant by that statement. Dietrich Bonheoffer wrote about "easy believism." He was hanged at the Nazi concentration camp at Flössenberg in 1945 and not popular with everyone. He was spot on about believing not being easy as it turns out. I might or might not agree with all of his theological ideas, but there are certain places that we find concord and he lived out his convictions. I don't go to his books to find out what God thinks though. I clearly must come to a point where I count the cost of my discipleship. That implies, and is explicitly true of me, being able to know what the cost is, how to count the cost, and learn more as new situations present themselves. That is why the Good News is such good Good News. There is a way and Jesus is that Way. When He ascended He left behind people that knew about this who in turn wrote about it and a body of literature known as the Old Testament. He also sent His Holy Spirit to us, to each believer so we could know which way is up and which way is down. Personally, the Bible did not make a bit of sense to me before I became a believer. I was sent a man who believed the Bible and informed me of what I needed to know. I learned that the Bible is true and the Holy Spirit will tell me what I need to know. I heard with understanding and have been thankful ever since. Key to this is that I believed that Jesus died for my sins and paid for them once and for all and that He is Lord and Savior. I will add that had I never picked up the Bible or listened to a preacher, I would not have learned much. I learned to listen to the Holy Spirit from the start and have gotten better at listening and hearing with intelligence since. Some days it seems less. As it turns out, things happen in my life on a continuing basis. That seems natural enough to me, but I have found that not all things I encounter are good things that I like. Compounding this is the fact that not everything I think to say or do is good. I found out that everyone is in the same boat and the Bible says we have all sinned, it is not just me and it helps to know that.

One thing I have noticed is that knowing the Bible is the Word of God is essential and the LORD has gone to great lengths to prove Himself and His Word to me. Asking Phil or Donna about things didn't seem to help and seemed as in the dark about things as I am. Having the heads up on the Bible being true kept me from being puzzled that Phil and Donna were not especially in the know because what God thinks about things is right there in my Bible. I found the Holy Spirit to be there to tutor me and my only restraint on learning came from me. As it turns out, I found for me, that being stubborn and hard headed is not a plus on some things. I read about the Children of Israel and it was somewhat comforting to know that there at least people in the past who are as stubborn and hard headed as me. Stiff-necked seems to sound a resonance within me that I can identify with most often. I thought for awhile that would go away, but it didn't. Crucifying the flesh, means my flesh. Living by Faith is me living by Faith, not someone else. Being confronted with being horribly flawed it hardly seems possible that I might ever have something to say. I tried to put in a word here and there from time to time and found that a lot of people do not care what I think. That is actually good though because it does not matter what I think, it matters what God thinks. That dictum about departing from Jesus becomes a bit more understandable when I realize that it applies to me. I work iniquity, not those other people. He says that I work iniquity. True, there might be other people who do so, but on That Day, if He says it to me, it will apply to me. I am positive that we won't be breaking out a keg and partying about it if those to whom it is said depart from God.

[rogero]

Doug,

I thought we could have a productive conversation. Apparently we can not. All you want to do is talk to yourself, sanctimoniously preach off-topic drivel, and blow your own horn.

AFAICS, you have given no evidence why the capital "W" should be used in referencing the word of God in a context other than the person of Christ. Also, you have given no support of why the RC Deuterocanon should also be included in your inclusive "Word of God" reference. How about the leading of the HS in the answer to prayer of the simplest believer -- ain't that the Word of God as well? No answers from you, Doug Ochsenbein -- just boring subterfuge.

Merely a gentle suggestion -- if you wish to engage me (or anyone else who is actually interested in an answer!) further, it might be instructive for you to use short succinct and to the point answers that actually address the specifics of the question at hand.

Enjoy your life, Doug. You know that you're right about God's Word and right-wing politics and whatever issue you put forth on. That's the important thing, isn't it? Wouldn't it be nice if other folks (besides your friends and your Sunday School classes) agreed with you or actually gave a fig?

R

P.S. BTW, on a different topic, but one still unanswered by you -- how can biological evolution not occur in a billion-year old biosphere with occasional mass extinctions? Have you given thought to returning to that NS thread (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=47758) and explaining yourself -- and your despicable Nazi extermination icon???

[Jack777]

I do not like people to not use my screen name and you must know it is bad form on the internet.

I sense that you do not get what I am saying. I gave you evidence, you just do not like it.

Okay, tell what it is you want to know? Why is the Word of God with a big W?
It is because of Whose words it is. Besides that, tell me what is it you want to know?

Anyway, Neilunreal is right about the Word of God being written on our hearts. I figured everone knew that, but maybe not.

The New Covenant is found in the writing of the Word of God as recorded by the Prophet Jeremiah. What did God say?

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Jeremiah 31:31-34

So, the Law is written on our hearts and in our minds. This is the Word of God and Who is the Word of God but Jesus, the Messiah.

Not taking the Bible seriously has a cost. Not studying the Bible has a cost as well. No one has to have any advanced education or a special knowledge of things to be able to read the Bible. There are so many study aids that can easily be obtained in a Christian bookstore that we can learn a lot without help from a teacher. In some cases, more. Nelson has a CD that has a lot of books on it, including a concordance, dictionary of Greek and Hebrew words, and different versions of the Bible. AGES software has good CDs as well. A local branch of the library is about two blocks from my place and I can walk up there and find all kinds of resources. You can buy a lot of great books online that are used and do not cost very much. Learning to look up cross references and associate word studies and then themes is helpful. It does not take a college degree, it takes elbow grease. I listened to a survey that found an extremely high percentage of students entering seminary each year know little about the Bible. 98% of English teachers advocate teaching the Bible in public schools because their students are clueless about the references in literature to the the Bible. As long as someone can read, that person has a chance at learning a lot about the Bible. The idea that we need an expert for everything keeps us from looking at the Bible for ourselves, reading and studying it daily. The greatest stumbling block is the clarion call from many theologians and educators to think the Bible is not true. If it isn't true and just a matter of one opinion versus another, why bother? Right away it becomes a matter of one school of thought versus another rather than the Bible that is important. This helps to keep people employed for awhile and divides congregations if opinion of people trumps the opinion of God. Why would anyone study science if it is all a bunch of opinion? You can stay at home and watch the grass grow and come up with ideas that will make you happy if science is opinion. The fact is that science has things to learn that are fact, that are useful and that are knowable. The same thing is true for the Bible. "Does HCl really dissolve a carbonate rock?" is not some nagging question that can never be answered. Take some and put it on a rock and you can see if it does or not. Is Jesus the Creator? Read the Bible and you can see if He is or not. It might take awhile to know some things for yourself. Part of learning is being ready to learn it too.

I was in an English class and we had to learn the Greek and Roman gods and goddesses, which was fine with me. Some of the students began questioning the teacher about having to do so. They did not want to do it because they couldn't just fake it, they had to know facts. She answered their questions well, but it was obvious they did not want to do the work and it did not interest them. A lot of learning does not make sense to us or seems "unfair" to some to have to learn. There is a cost in not knowing about a lot of things. It probably seems unfair or people have been beaten to death with some idea or made to feel stupid or inadequate and the mind balks at learning about it. The thing to do is stay away from people that engender those reactions and look at the Bible on its merit and know that it is true. I learn things all the time and think it is pretty unique and find that the new thing I just learned is old hat to someone else. But it was me that learned it, it does not do me any good if I do not know it even though someone else does. Knowing the Bible matters and knowing it is the Word of God matters. I knew from the start I would not know as much as God does about things before I started to read it. In fact, I realized I knew hardly anything at all about the Bible. The more I learn the more I realize I know hardly anything compared to what there is to know. I am fine about that.

There are "theologies" springing up that are about how we can pretty much do as we want as long as we love generously or are wildly inclusive. There is nothing new under the sun though. On the cusp of deciding to leave the Faith and strike out in opposition to the witness of the Scriptures it seems the padding of orthodox Christianity will remain. Actually, that will go to the furthurest reaches away from me along with the Faith in my life. Borrowing on the capital of orthodox Christianity while doing as I see fit only serves personally to sanitize my evil deeds in a kind of denial and anesthetize me to the alarm I should listen to as I creep a little bit here and there away from God. The kind of legalism that is abusive and harsh does the same thing and I can feel if I am doing this and that, or believe this and that, then all must be well with my soul. Not so.

In Genesis 1:1 is presented the Creator of the Universe and people said it was kind of important but not too important and that no one died rather than deny the Creator. Every martyr died rather than deny Jesus. I gave witness to the fact that people held as fundamental that our God is the Creator and even a specific example of martyrdom was said to be a stupid example. Mocking even the death of one who died for the sake of Jesus, our Creator to deny the Christ and deny the Creator is a mistake. I got a lecture about how childish it is to understand the Bible and believe it. The same questioned if I knew anything about science after I had plainly said that I do. The person who proceeded to teach me of not knowing anything has not even gotten past the first of study in science and figures since he does not know the Bible no one else does.

As I said, that knowledge of science is dung compared to my Salvation, so it matters little if someone who knows nothing wants to claim superior knowledge and take up for those who deny the Creator. You do not have to choose between knowing a few facts from doing science and being a believer. That is what is called a strawman argument from what I understand. To me it is inconceivable that anyone would get buffaloed by such a stupid idea. Then, I remember, evolution was to dethrone God and it makes sense that the "debate" has validity. What it is comes down to a way of keeping people from trusting God. Almost everything written on the natural sciences section proves that. It is as if me knowing how to turn the key in the ignition to start my car qualifies me to deny the existence of God. A few scraps of the knowledge of man is nothing compared to what there is to know. It is no wonder God says that He will laugh at the destruction of those who mislead people and seek to break asunder the bands, rebelling against Him. I used to wonder what part about that was humorous, now I know.

One ridiculous thing after another pours out after another to prove that we know so much about "science." Those who seek to dethrone God by declaring they know that there are atoms or that genetic information is passed along in a certain way must seem pretty funny to the One Who Lives and knows every thought of the heart. Did you know that the heart reacts to every thought? If you took the time you could identify the thoughts and the reactions and sooner or later know what the reactions of the heart mean and know the thought that produced it? Just a thought. We understand that the heart is our inmost being, the very center of who we are and do not usually think of the heart literally as having "thoughts." In some way the heart does have its own thoughts though. Is it that you immediately sought to deny that the Bible is the Word of God because literally the heart is not part of the central nervous system as we understand it? After all it says in the Bible that God knows the thoughts of the heart and if the Bible says that, well, you sure can't go along with the Bible now can you?

I stated that Abraham told the rich man that if some people would not believe Moses and the Prophets then even if one came back from the dead they would not believe. Abraham was saying the Old Testament is true, not just a set of stories, or truth-telling myth. While it is true that you and I would do well to know that and Jesus told the story of someone who wished that they had, it was not to condemn anyone. I cannot condemn anyone. Jesus did not condemn people by telling that story. He came to give us a chance at not being condemned. My purpose was to provide one of several examples of why the whole Bible is true and that it is the Word of God. If you refuse to see and refuse to hear, then what can I do one way or another. You just do not like the story and what it proves to you. If you don't like the story, then you feel you can reject it because delicate sensibilities have been violated. I am sure the Pharisees felt their delicate sensibilities were taxed on more than one occasion when Jesus and John the Baptist referred to them as being in the snake family or said that their father is the father of lies. It is not me that offends, it is Jesus, He is the skandalon, the stumbling stone. He is also the Word.

[rogero]

Wow, another big load of irrelevancies from the Jackster!

I do not like people to not use my screen name and you must know it is bad form on the internet.



Sorry if that offended you, Jack, but you've made the URL to your webpage public, and your Christian name is clearly evident on that page. Sometimes it's constructive to talk to a real person, rather than a someone hiding behind a pseudonym, especially someone as prideful as you.



I sense that you do not get what I am saying. I gave you evidence, you just do not like it.

Okay, tell what it is you want to know? Why is the Word of God with a big W?
It is because of Whose words it is. Besides that, tell me what is it you want to know?

Anyway, Neilunreal is right about the Word of God being written on our hearts. I figured everone knew that, but maybe not.



I get what you're saying, I thnk I understand the "evidence" you gave, but it not support your assertion.

There is no justification for using capital W for the Word of God in the scripture passages that do not refer to the Christ. No Bible translations refer these passages the way you do -- even the KJV!

Your continual harping on how important Scripture is does nothing to support your view. It is clearly YOUR view, and that's just fine and dandy if that's what you want to believe, but please don't get all high-and-mighty and act like your view must be accepted by all. Also, I haven't seen a good reason why what you're touting is NOT Bible worship.

Your conflation of the Logos Christ and the word of God written on the heart with the physical book that is the canonical scripture is simply not acceptable to me, nor have you justified it.



The New Covenant is found in the writing of the Word of God as recorded by the Prophet Jeremiah. What did God say?

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Jeremiah 31:31-34

So, the Law is written on our hearts and in our minds. This is the Word of God and Who is the Word of God but Jesus, the Messiah.

Not taking the Bible seriously has a cost. Not studying the Bible has a cost as well. No one has to have any advanced education or a special knowledge of things to be able to read the Bible. There are so many study aids that can easily be obtained in a Christian bookstore that we can learn a lot without help from a teacher. In some cases, more. Nelson has a CD that has a lot of books on it, including a concordance, dictionary of Greek and Hebrew words, and different versions of the Bible. AGES software has good CDs as well. A local branch of the library is about two blocks from my place and I can walk up there and find all kinds of resources. You can buy a lot of great books online that are used and do not cost very much. Learning to look up cross references and associate word studies and then themes is helpful. It does not take a college degree, it takes elbow grease. I listened to a survey that found an extremely high percentage of students entering seminary each year know little about the Bible. 98% of English teachers advocate teaching the Bible in public schools because their students are clueless about the references in literature to the the Bible. As long as someone can read, that person has a chance at learning a lot about the Bible. The idea that we need an expert for everything keeps us from looking at the Bible for ourselves, reading and studying it daily. The greatest stumbling block is the clarion call from many theologians and educators to think the Bible is not true. If it isn't true and just a matter of one opinion versus another, why bother? Right away it becomes a matter of one school of thought versus another rather than the Bible that is important. This helps to keep people employed for awhile and divides congregations if opinion of people trumps the opinion of God. Why would anyone study science if it is all a bunch of opinion? You can stay at home and watch the grass grow and come up with ideas that will make you happy if science is opinion. The fact is that science has things to learn that are fact, that are useful and that are knowable. The same thing is true for the Bible. "Does HCl really dissolve a carbonate rock?" is not some nagging question that can never be answered. Take some and put it on a rock and you can see if it does or not. Is Jesus the Creator? Read the Bible and you can see if He is or not. It might take awhile to know some things for yourself. Part of learning is being ready to learn it too.



Why do you think that not agreeing with your "W" for the scripture view is "not taking the Bible seriously"? FYI, I read scripture and pray every day. I've read the NT a dozen times, and the OT three times -- and I plan many more iterations in as many different translations as I can get hold of. Your implication that I don't read or care about scripture is despicable hubris on your part. This is more of your sanctimonious arrogance showing through, Jack.

You really do think you have more spiritual insight than the translators of Scripture -- isn't that right, Jack?

All Christians believe in Creation, Jack, so knock off the implication that those who don't take a 6day/24hr 6Ka "recreation" view are rejecting the Creator. Sheesh, this is so tiresome!!!



I was in an English class and we had to learn the Greek and Roman gods and goddesses, which was fine with me. Some of the students began questioning the teacher about having to do so. They did not want to do it because they couldn't just fake it, they had to know facts. She answered their questions well, but it was obvious they did not want to do the work and it did not interest them. A lot of learning does not make sense to us or seems "unfair" to some to have to learn. There is a cost in not knowing about a lot of things. It probably seems unfair or people have been beaten to death with some idea or made to feel stupid or inadequate and the mind balks at learning about it. The thing to do is stay away from people that engender those reactions and look at the Bible on its merit and know that it is true. I learn things all the time and think it is pretty unique and find that the new thing I just learned is old hat to someone else. But it was me that learned it, it does not do me any good if I do not know it even though someone else does. Knowing the Bible matters and knowing it is the Word of God matters. I knew from the start I would not know as much as God does about things before I started to read it. In fact, I realized I knew hardly anything at all about the Bible. The more I learn the more I realize I know hardly anything compared to what there is to know. I am fine about that.

There are "theologies" springing up that are about how we can pretty much do as we want as long as we love generously or are wildly inclusive. There is nothing new under the sun though. On the cusp of deciding to leave the Faith and strike out in opposition to the witness of the Scriptures it seems the padding of orthodox Christianity will remain. Actually, that will go to the furthurest reaches away from me along with the Faith in my life. Borrowing on the capital of orthodox Christianity while doing as I see fit only serves personally to sanitize my evil deeds in a kind of denial and anesthetize me to the alarm I should listen to as I creep a little bit here and there away from God. The kind of legalism that is abusive and harsh does the same thing and I can feel if I am doing this and that, or believe this and that, then all must be well with my soul. Not so.



I'm clueless as to how this lecture is relevant to the questions in this thread.



In Genesis 1:1 is presented the Creator of the Universe and people said it was kind of important but not too important and that no one died rather than deny the Creator. Every martyr died rather than deny Jesus. I gave witness to the fact that people held as fundamental that our God is the Creator and even a specific example of martyrdom was said to be a stupid example. Mocking even the death of one who died for the sake of Jesus, our Creator to deny the Christ and deny the Creator is a mistake. I got a lecture about how childish it is to understand the Bible and believe it. The same questioned if I knew anything about science after I had plainly said that I do. The person who proceeded to teach me of not knowing anything has not even gotten past the first of study in science and figures since he does not know the Bible no one else does.



You're correct, Jack -- your example of martyrdom for the sake of not "denying the Creator" was stupid, and still is. I can't believe you're bringing up this nonsense again.

Maybe it's time for you to apologize right here and now to all Christians on this board who do not accept you particular view as to how Creation happened as per your inspired and oh-so-wise interpretation of Genesis? C'mom, Jack -- it would be very cathartic.



As I said, that knowledge of science is dung compared to my Salvation, so it matters little if someone who knows nothing wants to claim superior knowledge and take up for those who deny the Creator. You do not have to choose between knowing a few facts from doing science and being a believer. That is what is called a strawman argument from what I understand. To me it is inconceivable that anyone would get buffaloed by such a stupid idea. Then, I remember, evolution was to dethrone God and it makes sense that the "debate" has validity. What it is comes down to a way of keeping people from trusting God. Almost everything written on the natural sciences section proves that. It is as if me knowing how to turn the key in the ignition to start my car qualifies me to deny the existence of God. A few scraps of the knowledge of man is nothing compared to what there is to know. It is no wonder God says that He will laugh at the destruction of those who mislead people and seek to break asunder the bands, rebelling against Him. I used to wonder what part about that was humorous, now I know.

One ridiculous thing after another pours out after another to prove that we know so much about "science." Those who seek to dethrone God by declaring they know that there are atoms or that genetic information is passed along in a certain way must seem pretty funny to the One Who Lives and knows every thought of the heart. Did you know that the heart reacts to every thought? If you took the time you could identify the thoughts and the reactions and sooner or later know what the reactions of the heart mean and know the thought that produced it? Just a thought. We understand that the heart is our inmost being, the very center of who we are and do not usually think of the heart literally as having "thoughts." In some way the heart does have its own thoughts though. Is it that you immediately sought to deny that the Bible is the Word of God because literally the heart is not part of the central nervous system as we understand it? After all it says in the Bible that God knows the thoughts of the heart and if the Bible says that, well, you sure can't go along with the Bible now can you?

I stated that Abraham told the rich man that if some people would not believe Moses and the Prophets then even if one came back from the dead they would not believe. Abraham was saying the Old Testament is true, not just a set of stories, or truth-telling myth. While it is true that you and I would do well to know that and Jesus told the story of someone who wished that they had, it was not to condemn anyone. I cannot condemn anyone. Jesus did not condemn people by telling that story. He came to give us a chance at not being condemned. My purpose was to provide one of several examples of why the whole Bible is true and that it is the Word of God. If you refuse to see and refuse to hear, then what can I do one way or another. You just do not like the story and what it proves to you. If you don't like the story, then you feel you can reject it because delicate sensibilities have been violated. I am sure the Pharisees felt their delicate sensibilities were taxed on more than one occasion when Jesus and John the Baptist referred to them as being in the snake family or said that their father is the father of lies. It is not me that offends, it is Jesus, He is the skandalon, the stumbling stone. He is also the Word.

What a disgraceful attitude about the concept of truth in general. You've made it quite clear in your five months of posting on Tweb that you don't care about science -- unless of course it can used to support your nutty points of view.

For example, you claim experience in geology. Yet, you claimed that Earth is 1-1.5 Ga. When asked to defend it, you said you read it somewhere. That Earth is circa 4.5 Ga is mentioned in any freshman geology text -- with evidence. You mentioned your experience with microfossils and even claimed some original research. You apparently base your view that Earth is ancient (more than 10Ka) on your science background -- yet now you say that science is "dung" compared with scripture. Why then don't you take the "plain simple-even-to-a-child" view of most of the Fundies around here that the Earth and Cosmos are less than 10Ka. It's "obvious" from Scripture, no? Certainly, you're not basing an contrary claim on Science???

If you want to keep posting your inconsistent viewpoints here, then you can count on resistance from me. Quite frankly, I believe most folks here ignore your super-spiritual ramblings, but I can't allow your unsubstantiated and crankish nonsense to pass. I will continue to ask questions and oppose your inconsistencies as time allows.

So, here's a synopsis of the questions you've been asked that you've either avoided or proferred rambling nonsense in reply:

1) Why do you use capital "W" for the "Word of God" in the scripture passages you quoted above when the Word is other than the Logos Christ?

2) What document are you referring to as "Scripture"? Do you mean the canonical 66 books, in a particular translation perhaps (you've alluded to the KJV1611 and the Douay-Rheims), or do you expand this to include the RC Deuterocanon? How about the EO Deuterocanon -- Psalm 151, e.g.?

I know you think science is dung and use this to avoid giving straight answers about Earth's history, but surely you can render some precision on the canon issue, as important as you deem the Word of God as a physical book to be!

3) Related to (2), why do you think, e.g., II TIm. 3:16 is referring to the canonical (and deuterocanon?) even though these were not decided upon for several hundred years?

These are off the topic of this thread, but relevant to your credibility and consistency in general:

4) I know that you think science is "dung" compared with Scripture, but you could at least try to explain your views on how speciation can occur after mass extinctions without biological evolution?

5) Please explain your continual use of Nazi themes to disparage the science of biologcal evolution. Is there some reason to believe that the historical truth or falsity of a phenomenon can be established by the (putative) philosophies/theologies/social consequences derived from it???

[Jack777]

Goodness, you are sure giving me what for.

I did not say science is dung. You do not understand what I meant. Paul said that his background was in similar straits compared to the revelation of God to him. This is most enlightening.

I see that since you do not agree you are still questioning my credibility to get the focus off of the topic. Who cares what my credibility is?

I see you are sensitive and this must be good for you to fly off the handle. I am not sure if you have understood anything I have said.

You are having a good time twisting what I have said and that is fine. I do not believe in a 6 day creation period by the way. I am answering your question about why I think the Word of God is the Word of God, but you just use what I say to find fault. That is fine and dandy too. It is a tried and true way of ignoring what is before your eyes?


So, tell me, do you think that the Bible is the inerrant and inspired Word of God?

Do you think the Bible was written down by people that either heard it first hand from the voice of God, or the Holy Spirit gave them what to say?

Yahweh talked to Moses face to face, do you believe that?

Do you know that it is Jesus Who is the Creator and Redeemer?

How many times were you martyred and was it stupid?

[rogero]

You're making this too much for me, Jack! Don't you know that opposing a bloviating sanctimonious gasbag like you is a real pleasure? You make yourself such an easy target. Now, if you just would admit that you might be wrong about just one little thing, I might let up a bit on ya!

Hey, here's a thought -- why don't you try answering the questions I brought up in my last post? And, I mean in a concise, focussed, and non-obtuse manner. Does anyone out there think my questions aren't concise enough? If not, then please help me out!

Goodness, you are sure giving me what for.



Dang straight, and it's been great entertainment for me, and hopefully, for others! You could end this debacle by actually answering my simple focussed questions.

Naw -- you'd rather blow more hot air and attempt to show everyone how spiritual you are.



I did not say science is dung. You do not understand what I meant. Paul said that his background was in similar straits compared to the revelation of God to him. This is most enlightening.



Yes you did in a relative sense -- science relative to scripture is dung. Do you deny this?

I have no idea what your point is about Paul. This is definitely not most enlightening -- as is the norm for your worthless time-wasting posts.



I see that since you do not agree you are still questioning my credibility to get the focus off of the topic. Who cares what my credibility is?



Why wouldn't anyone think that the credibility of the poster is unimportant? Confused... (as usual!!!)



I see you are sensitive and this must be good for you to fly off the handle. I am not sure if you have understood anything I have said.



I've understood everything you've written and have come to my conclusions honestly. Stop trying to impune my perceptive ability. This tact won't work for me or anyone else.



You are having a good time twisting what I have said and that is fine. I do not believe in a 6 day creation period by the way. I am answering your question about why I think the Word of God is the Word of God, but you just use what I say to find fault. That is fine and dandy too. It is a tried and true way of ignoring what is before your eyes?



I don't twist anything you've said. It's clear for all to see. You believe in an ancient Earth and Cosmos and the biosphere was destroyed by a NEO 10Ka or so years ago and the re-creation proceeded as per a literalist reading of Genesis 1-3. If this is not the case, then it's your narrative abilities that are at fault, not my perception. Could you please be honest and unobtusive for once?



So, tell me, do you think that the Bible is the inerrant and inspired Word of God?



"Inerrant" and "Infalliable" are loaded words used by fidestic Fundies like you. I believe that scripture is inspired and speaks spiritual truth to all humanity. I don't believe it must be held to complete historical and scientific accuracy. Do you???

BTW, what do you mean by the Bible? The 66 canonical books? The RC Deuterocanon? You have never answered that question, you sneaky little rhetorician. Well, what of it???



Do you think the Bible was written down by people that either heard it first hand from the voice of God, or the Holy Spirit gave them what to say?

Yahweh talked to Moses face to face, do you believe that?



Yup.



Do you know that it is Jesus Who is the Creator and Redeemer?



Yup -- I've said that numerous times before, you disingenous dimwit. Stop trying to impune that I'm not as good a Christian as you, Jack. Truly disgusting tactics...



How many times were you martyred and was it stupid?

How many times were you martryed, you numbnut? Again, stop trying to detract from the point of the thread.

Are you ready to answer the questions from my last post or not??? The Tweb world (or at least a half-dozen mildly interested lurkers) await your (reasoned??) response.

R

[Jack777]

I am not alone in saying that the Bible is the Word of God. I am not an Anglican, part of the Church of England or part of the Episcopal Church, but thinking as I do is not odd and certainly is not original with me. I think if someone carefully considered each of the excerpts given below in all fairness he or she would conclude that a long time before I was born others thought as I do.

How does The Westminster Confession of Faith refer to the Bible?

Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the books of the Old and New Testaments, which are these,

Then, all the books of the Bible are listed.

What does The Westminster Confession of Faith have to say about the Bible?

The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man, or Church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God. (2 Pet. 1:19,21, 2 Tim. 3:16, 1 John 5:9, 1 Thess. 2:13)

Does it have any other opinion on the Bible?

We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the Church to an high and reverend esteem of the Holy Scripture. (1 Tim. 3:15) And the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole (which is, to give all glory to God), the full discovery it makes of the only way of man’s salvation, the many other incomparable excellencies, and the entire perfection thereof, are arguments whereby it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God: yet notwithstanding, our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts. (1 John. 2:20, John 16:13–14, 1 Cor. 2:10–12, Isa. 59:21)

Is it especially important to think one way or another about the Bible?

The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which, at the time of the writing of it, was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and, by His singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; (Matt. 5:18) so as, in all controversies of religion, the Church is finally to appeal unto them. (Isa. 8:20, Acts 15:15, John 5:39,46) But, because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have right unto, and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded, in the fear of God, to read and search them, (John 5:39) therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, (1 Cor. 14:6,9,11–12,24,27–28) that, the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship Him in an acceptable manner; (Col. 3:16) and, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, may have hope. (Rom. 15:4)

The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself: and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly. (2 Pet. 1:20–21, Acts 15:15–16)

What about the Bible in matters of a civil nature?

The name of God only is that by which men ought to swear, and therein it is to be used with all holy fear and reverence. (Deut. 6:13) Therefore, to swear vainly, or rashly, by that glorious and dreadful Name; or, to swear at all by any other thing, is sinful, and to be abhorred. (Exod. 20:7, Jer. 5:7, Matt. 5:34,37, James 5:12) Yet, as in matters of weight and moment, an oath is warranted by the Word of God, under the new testament as well as under the old; (Heb. 6:16, 2 Cor. 1:23, Isa. 65:16) so a lawful oath, being imposed by lawful authority, in such matters, ought to be taken. (1 Kings 8:31, Neh. 13:25, Ezra 10:5)

Does the Bible have anything authoritatively to say about us in other matters?

No man may vow to do any thing forbidden in the Word of God, or what would hinder any duty therein commanded, or which is not in his own power, and for the performance whereof he hath no promise of ability from God. (Acts 23:12,14, Mark 6:26, Numb. 30:5,8,12–13) In which respects, popish monastical vows of perpetual single life, professed poverty, and regular obedience, are so far from being degrees of higher perfection, that they are superstitious and sinful snares, in which no Christian may entangle himself. (Matt. 19:11–12, 1 Cor. 7:2,9, Eph. 4:28, 1 Pet. 4:2, 1 Cor. 7:23)

Well, what about churches?

It belongeth to synods and councils, ministerially to determine controversies of faith, and cases of conscience; to set down rules and directions for the better ordering of the public worship of God, and government of His Church; to receive complaints in cases of maladministration, and authoritatively to determine the same: which decrees and determinations, if consonant to the Word of God, are to be received with reverence and submission; not only for their agreement with the Word, but also for the power whereby they are made, as being an ordinance of God appointed thereunto in His Word. (Acts 15:15,19,24,27–31, Acts 16:4, Matt. 18:17–20)

Westminster Assembly, The Westminster Confession of Faith, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1995.

The Westminster Larger Catechism has a lot of questions and answers that are handy to see if other people have thought this before. In fact, they are good to come to understand. Before I can even begin to explicate anything, maybe it is well to come to know that the Bible being the very Word of God is not an unusual idea. Here is one take on it. I must say that each answer is based on the Bible and was written down before I was born.

Question 3

What is the word of God?

Answer

The holy scriptures of the Old and New Testament are the word of God, (2 Tim. 3:16, 2 Pet. 1:19–21) the only rule of faith and obedience. (Eph. 2:20, Rev. 22:18–19, Isa. 8 :20, Luke 16:29,31, Gal. 1:8–9, 2 Tim. 3:15–16)

Question 4

How doth it appear that the scriptures are of the word of God?

Answer

The scriptures manifest themselves to be the word of God, by their majesty (Hos. 8:12, 1 Cor. 2:6–7,13, Ps. 119:18,129) and purity; (Ps. 12:6, Ps. 119:140) by the consent of all the parts, (Acts 10:43, Acts 26:22) and the scope of the whole, which is to give all glory to God; (Rom. 3:19,27) by their light and power to convince and convert sinners, to comfort and build up believers unto salvation: (Acts 18:28, Heb. 4:12, James 1:18, Ps. 19:7–9, Rom. 15:4, Acts 20:32) but the Spirit of God bearing witness by and with the scriptures in the heart of man, is alone able fully to persuade it that they are the very word of God. (John 16:13–14, 1 John 2:20,27, John 20:31)

Question 72 is understood and the answer is given

Justifying faith is a saving grace, (Heb. 10:39) wrought in the heart of a sinner by the Spirit (2 Cor. 4:13, Eph. 1:17–19) and word of God, (Rom. 10:14–17) whereby he, being convinced of his sin and misery, and of the disability in himself and all other creatures to recover him out of his lost condition, (Acts 2:37, Acts 16:30, John 16:8–9, Rom. 5:6, Eph. 2:1, Acts 4:12) not only assenteth to the truth of the promise of the gospel, (Eph. 1:13) but received and rested upon Christ and his righteousness, therein held forth, for pardon of sin, (John 1:12, Acts 16:31, Acts 10:43) and for the accepting and accounting of his person righteous in the sight of God for salvation. (Phil. 3:9, Acts 15:11)

Question 76 is understood and the answer is given

Repentance unto life is a saving grace, (2 Tim. 2:25) wrought in the heart of a sinner by the Spirit (Zech. 12:10) and word of God, (Acts 11:18,20–21) whereby, out of the sight and sense, not only of the danger, (Ezek. 18:28,30,32, Luke 15:17–18, Hos. 2:6–7) but also of the filthiness and odiousness of his sins, (Ezek. 36:31, Isa. 30:22) and upon the apprehension of God’s mercy in Christ to such as are penitent, (Joel 2:12–13) he so grieves for (Jer. 31:18–19) and hates his sins, (2 Cor. 7:11) as that he turns from them all to God, (Acts 26:18, Ezek. 14:6, 1 Kings 8:47–48) purposing and endeavouring constantly to walk with him in all the ways of new obedience. (Ps. 119:6,59,128, Luke 1:6, 2 Kings 23:25)

Question 156

Is the word of God to be read by all?

Answer

Although all are not to be permitted to read the word publicly to the congregation, (Deut. 31:9,11–13, Neh. 8:2–3, Neh. 9:3–5) yet all sorts of people are bound to read it apart by themselves, (Deut. 17:19, Rev. 1:3, John 5:39, Isa. 34:16) and with their families: (Deut. 6:6–9, Gen. 18:17,19, Ps. 78:5–7) to which end, the holy scriptures are to be translated out of the original into vulgar languages. (1 Cor. 14:6,9,11–12,15–16,24,27–28)

Question 157

How is the word of God to be read?

Answer

The holy scriptures are to be read with an high and reverent esteem of them; (Ps. 19:10, Neh. 8:3–6,10, Exod. 24:7, 2 Chron. 34:27, Isa. 66:2) with a firm persuasion that they are the very word of God, (2 Pet. 1:19–21) and that he only can enable us to understand them; (Luke 24:45, 2 Cor. 3:13–16) with desire to know, believe, and obey the will of God revealed in them; (Deut. 17:19–20) with diligence, (Acts 17:11) and attention to the matter and scope of them; (Acts 8:30,34, Luke 10:26–28) with meditation, (Ps. 1:2, Ps. 119:97) application, (2 Chron. 34:21) self-denial, (Prov. 3:5, Deut. 33:3) and prayer. (Prov. 2:1–6, Ps. 119:18, Neh. 8:6,8)

Question 158

By whom is the word of God to be preached?

Answer

The word of God is to be preached only by such as are sufficiently gifted, (1 Tim. 3:2,6, Eph. 4:8–11, Hosea 4:6, Mal. 2:7, 2 Cor. 3:6) and also duly approved and called to that office. (Jer. 14:15, Rom. 10:15, Heb. 5:4, 1 Cor. 12:28–29, 1 Tim. 3:10, 1 Tim. 4:14, 1 Tim. 5:22)

Question 159

How is the word of God to be preached by those that are called thereunto?

Answer

They that are called to labour in the ministry of the word, are to preach sound doctrine, (Tit. 2:1,8) diligently, (Acts 18:25) in season and out of season; (2 Tim. 4:2) plainly, (1 Cor. 14:19) not in the enticing words of man’ s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit, and of power; (1 Cor. 2:4) faithfully, (Jer. 23:28, 1 Cor. 4:1–2) making known the whole counsel of God; (Acts 20:27) wisely, (Col. 1:28, 2 Tim. 2:15) applying themselves to the necessities and capacities of the hearers; (1 Cor. 3:2, Heb. 5:12–14, Luke 12:42) zealously, (Acts 18:25) and fervent love to God (2 Cor. 5:13–14, Phil. 1:15–17) and the souls of his people; (Col. 4:12, 2 Cor. 12:15) sincerely, (2 Cor. 2:17, 2 Cor. 4:2) aiming at his glory, (1 Thess. 2:4–6, John 7:18) and their conversion, (1 Cor. 9:19–22) edification, (2 Cor. 12:19, Eph. 4:12) and salvation. (1 Tim. 4:16, Acts 26:16–18)

Question 160

What is required of those that hear the word preached?

Answer

It is required of those that hear the word preached, that they attend upon it with diligence, (Prov. 8:34) preparation, (1 Pet. 2:1–2, Luke 8:18) and prayer; (Ps. 119:18, Eph. 6:18–19) examine what they hear by the scriptures; (Acts 17:11) receive the truth with faith, (Heb. 4:2) love, (2 Thess. 2:10) meekness, (James 1:21) and readiness of mind, (Acts 17:11) as the word of God; (1 Thess. 2:13) meditate, (Luke 9:44, Heb. 2:1) and confer of it; (Luke 24:14, Deut. 6:6–7) hide it in their hearts, (Prov. 2:1, Ps. 119:11) and bring forth the fruit of it in their lives. (Luke 8:15, James 1:25)

Question 186

What rule hath God given for our direction in the duty of prayer?

Answer

The whole word of God is of use to direct us in the duty of prayer; (1 John 5:14) but the special rule of direction is that form of prayer which our Savior Christ taught his disciples, commonly called The Lord’ s prayer. (Matt. 6:9–13, Luke 11:2–4)

Westminster Assembly, The Westminster Larger Catechism, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1995.

[rogero]

Jack, I think you should look up the definition of "succinct." :lol:

I am not alone in saying that the Bible is the Word of God. I am not an Anglican, part of the Church of England or part of the Episcopal Church, but thinking as I do is not odd and certainly is not original with me. I think if someone carefully considered each of the excerpts given below in all fairness he or she would conclude that a long time before I was born others thought as I do.



Fine. I'll admit right here and now that I don't have a severe problem with the rhetorical hyperbole of referring to the book that we call the Bible as the Word of God. I do realize that this terminology does contain aspects of hyperbole, but that's fine.

My main objection, if you or any lurker would read through this increasingly tiresome thread, was to your use of the capital "W" in scripture passages that are not referring to the Logos Christ. I pointed out that all the Bible translations render these with the lowercase "w". At some point you intimated that you have more spiritual aptitude than most common folks -- even the Bible translators. You still, in my perception, have not defended that point.



...
Westminster Assembly, The Westminster Larger Catechism, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1995.

I just gave up after a few irrelevant quotes. Man, are you ever a tiresome bore!

So, I can apparently take from the above that you have relented on the use of the capital "W" for the "word of God" in Bible passages that are not referring directly to the Logos Christ, since the quotations from the Westminster Confession use this convention? Thanks for admitting you were wrong on this, although it was in the most dreadfully boring and cryptic way.

Did you answer the question about what documents you consider to be the word of God? The WC indicates the 66 books of the standard Protestant canon. Why then did you quote Sirach in your OP with the Word of God with a capital "W"? Stay focussed, Jack, I have confidence that you can eventually answer these questions in your own words -- and with a minimum of preaching.

[Jack777]

rogero,

You really should have read all of the quotes. They refer to Bible passages that support the Church of England on their take on it. I will get to explication, but you should read things instead of refusing to do that and then claim I have not begun to prove my point.

I am glad you have been enjoying this thread. It is just this sort of thing that brings people closer. I appreciate your continued interest and I am happy that perceive that you have added an entertaining aspect with your feedback, so thank you. I am sure that you are correct about being able to entertain others as you suspect. It is extremely interesting to me and I would like your permission to quote you sometime. Please reply affirmatively or negatively if you would. I had planned to answer some of the other posts when I could, but frankly, I seem to be concentrating on your concerns. Of course it is difficult to address some of your problems and I feel this is not the place to do so at this time. I apologize for not replying to some things to others by the way and do appreciate the comments. I am not clear on the other apology that you feel I owe to fellow Christians. Do you think I should adopt a YEC policy to please them or the reverse? I will continue to follow the Bible's lead on what is written there, which introduces another point or so.

kofu2 and NeilUnreal both had appropriate comments and I would like to expand on them. Maybe the following might help illustrate their points. I hope that this helps. As a Christian, this is essential to know.

Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

I Peter 1:23

Do you think Peter is referring to Jesus Christ as the Word of God here? I am sure you now see that this does not mean that He is the Bible quite as you put the question.

There are two kinds of knowledge. There is the knowledge that creatures can know about the Creation. That is theoretically within our grasp, though not exhaustively. The Creation is too big for us to encompass. At this point in time we barely know anything about the planet we live on compared to what is possible to know. Still, the knowledge we can possess is big for us, though small in comparison to that which is knowable. The other kind of knowledge is that from our Creator about Him and the Creation that He created. In between these two classes of knowledge people think there is another, yet there is not. Things we call "supernatural" are often thought of as "spiritual." Yet there are only two kinds of knowledge. The supernatural realm may be perceived to be spiritual, yet it is merely parts of the Creation that we do not have access to readily because of its dimensionality being different than our fleshly state of being. In fact God revealed in the Bible that we should not have anything to do with "spirits," familiar spirits, and things that deceive us into thinking they are something they are not and we decide are spiritual and not created.

The Bible is the written Word of God, His Revelation to us. If it were not crucial to our walk in Faith, we would not have it as such. It is not like any other book or collection of books in the world. It is written so that even a child can understand it, yet its great Revelation is hidden from those who do not believe. Before I became a believer, the Holy Spirit led me to read a passage in the Psalms and opened my eyes to it and be comforted. Time after time the Holy Spirit has opened the eyes of my heart and shown me in a way that is beyond my ability to describe adequately, that I can trust God and His Word. That passage rang true in a way no other words had before. Some time after, I became a believer and knew exactly why.

Jerome Smith lists things that come with Salvation in his comments on Hebrews 6:9. One of the things is "a continuing hunger for and increasing knowledge of the written Word of God." This is true and we often encounter people who do not hold the Bible to be true. While claiming the Name of God and pretending to a knowledge of the Bible as preachers, they think the Bible is partially true or a handy thing to use to get their way. People who are deceived that portray themselves to be professors of the Faith can lead people way away from God without knowing it. We are well capable of misleading ourselves if we do not find increasing knowledge of the written Word of God.

Smith suggests that new believers read one chapter of I John Monday through Friday every week for an entire month to begin to learn and master its contents.1 He had spent 30 years preparing notes that he assembled on the Bible and provides a wealth of cross references and explanations that provide an aid to study. His belief as evidenced by his book, is that the believer should know the Word of God and he knew it to be the inerrant, inspired and infallible Word of God. When I believed I received Salvation and the knowledge that the Bible is true. I knew that the Holy Spirit would tutor me and lead me into my understanding of the Bible. The Holy Spirit inspired, breathed the Word of God into the writers. The writers of the Bible were not inspired innately, they were given Revelation by God by His Holy Spirit. They received the knowledge of God because they were chosen by God to receive it, not because of any merit on their part or any powers of reason. The Word of God and His Holy Spirit give the power of reason, logic, merit, perfection and Righteousness to the words they recorded. The words were recorded for the benefit of those who believe and receive Faith. Faith is a gift as much as anything else and does not come from our belief, but because we believe. The Bible stresses the importance of knowing the Word of God. I spent a lot of time learning the things in the Bible without any study aids and know that He will let us know what He wants us to know as believers. Hiding the Word of God in our hearts, memorizing Scripture, coming to know what it means and seeing its application in our lives personally are part of learning the will of God for us individually. It is important in coming to know God, what He is like and what He thinks. Hal Lindsay stated that we need to see things through God's eyes and not our own. That does not happen overnight for all of us, but we can come to see things as He sees them to some extent. It requires us to believe on Him, for that is our work, believing on Him, believing that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God and God the Son. We come to know that Jesus is Creator and Redeemer, Savior and Lord and that He is our hiding place, our refuge and our strength. We think that we can survive on our own until we find out otherwise.

Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.

II Corinthians 3:3

This is a daily devotion written by Hoekstra that is appropriate to answering if the Bible is the Word of God and if Jesus is the Word of God.

Living Letters of Christ

You are manifestly an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart. (II Corinthians 3:3)

Another significant characteristic resulting from living by grace is that we become living letters of Christ. "You are manifestly an epistle of Christ." The Lord wants to turn our lives into a "walking and talking letter of Him." He wants to make us a living explanation of who Christ is and all that He offers. What a great opportunity this presents. As we go about our daily responsibilities, others are often "reading our lives." While they are observing us, they can actually be learning of the truth and love of our Lord Jesus, as He is working in and through our lives. Although this may sound like too much to hope for, the Lord declares in His word that this process can become very clear to those who are watching us: "You are manifestly [that is, "to be plainly recognized as"] an epistle of Christ."

Remember, this is what is available for "ministers of the new covenant" (II Corinthians 3:6). This is what happens in those who live by the grace of God. This is something that God does in us, not something we manufacture for Him. Certainly, people are involved in the process. We become fully engaged by humbly and dependently seeking after the Lord who wants to work in us. Others also get involved by ministering to us. "You are manifestly an epistle of Christ, ministered by us." Paul had ministered God's truth to these saints at Corinth. Yet, these living letters of Christ were not being written by ink, as ordinary letters would be. "You are manifestly an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God." God's Holy Spirit was at work writing the letters that their lives were becoming.

Notice where the Lord was inscribing these living letters: "[i]not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart." The old covenant message of law was written on stones. The new covenant message of grace is written on the hearts of all who will walk in humble dependence upon God. This heavenly work changes us from the inside out, making us living letters of Christ!

Dear God of all grace, I humbly admit that I need to be more and more changed into a living letter of Christ. So often, those who read me see only me. I ask You in faith to inscribe the character of Christ upon my heart, that others may see Him in my daily walk, Amen.

Hoekstra

Knowing the Word of God is important and has been from long before the first visit of Jesus.

Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.

Deuteronomy 6:4-7

This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.

Joshua 1:8

But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night. And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.

Psalm1:2-3

Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. Your eyes have seen what the LORD did because of Baalpeor: for all the men that followed Baalpeor, the LORD thy God hath destroyed them from among you.

Deuteronomy 4:2-3

What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

Deuteronomy 12:32

My son, forget not my law; but let thine heart keep my commandments: For length of days, and long life, and peace, shall they add to thee. Let not mercy and truth forsake thee: bind them about thy neck; write them upon the table of thine heart: So shalt thou find favour and good understanding in the sight of God and man. Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.

Proverbs 3:1-6

The Apostles recognized the importance of the Word of God.

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

Acts 17:11-12

Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

I Peter 1:2

Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord

II Peter 1:2

Mercy unto you, and peace, and love, be multiplied.

Jude 1:2

II Peter 1:2 -

Be multiplied (plēthuntheiē). First aorist passive optative of plēthunō in a wish for the future

Robertson

That is, grace and peace abound to us, or may be expected to be conferred on us abundantly, if we have a true knowledge of God and of the Saviour.

Barnes

1 The book of 1 John would make a most suitable place for the new Christian to begin the study of God’s Word. Read a chapter each day of 1 John on Monday through Friday every week for an entire month in order to begin to learn and master its contents. From time to time look up the cross references given in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge for a favorite or striking verse encountered in that day’s reading. The book of 1 John, in discussing the several characteristics of true believers (1 J 5:13n), incidentally mentions many additional things that accompany salvation.

Jerome H. Smith, editor, The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge [computer file], electronic edition of the Revised Edition of The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, Logos Library System, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson) 1997, c1992 by Jerome H. Smith.

rogero,
Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

I Peter 1:2

[rogero]

rogero,

You really should have read all of the quotes. They refer to Bible passages that support the Church of England on their take on it. I will get to explication, but you should read things instead of refusing to do that and then claim I have not begun to prove my point.

I am glad you have been enjoying this thread. It is just this sort of thing that brings people closer. I appreciate your continued interest and I am happy that perceive that you have added an entertaining aspect with your feedback, so thank you. I am sure that you are correct about being able to entertain others as you suspect. It is extremely interesting to me and I would like your permission to quote you sometime. Please reply affirmatively or negatively if you would. I had planned to answer some of the other posts when I could, but frankly, I seem to be concentrating on your concerns. Of course it is difficult to address some of your problems and I feel this is not the place to do so at this time. I apologize for not replying to some things to others by the way and do appreciate the comments. I am not clear on the other apology that you feel I owe to fellow Christians. Do you think I should adopt a YEC policy to please them or the reverse? I will continue to follow the Bible's lead on what is written there, which introduces another point or so.

kofu2 and NeilUnreal both had appropriate comments and I would like to expand on them. Maybe the following might help illustrate their points. I hope that this helps. As a Christian, this is essential to know.

Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

I Peter 1:23

Do you think Peter is referring to Jesus Christ as the Word of God here? I am sure you now see that this does not mean that He is the Bible quite as you put the question.

There are two kinds of knowledge. There is the knowledge that creatures can know about the Creation. That is theoretically within our grasp, though not exhaustively. The Creation is too big for us to encompass. At this point in time we barely know anything about the planet we live on compared to what is possible to know. Still, the knowledge we can possess is big for us, though small in comparison to that which is knowable. The other kind of knowledge is that from our Creator about Him and the Creation that He created. In between these two classes of knowledge people think there is another, yet there is not. Things we call "supernatural" are often thought of as "spiritual." Yet there are only two kinds of knowledge. The supernatural realm may be perceived to be spiritual, yet it is merely parts of the Creation that we do not have access to readily because of its dimensionality being different than our fleshly state of being. In fact God revealed in the Bible that we should not have anything to do with "spirits," familiar spirits, and things that deceive us into thinking they are something they are not and we decide are spiritual and not created.

The Bible is the written Word of God, His Revelation to us. If it were not crucial to our walk in Faith, we would not have it as such. It is not like any other book or collection of books in the world. It is written so that even a child can understand it, yet its great Revelation is hidden from those who do not believe. Before I became a believer, the Holy Spirit led me to read a passage in the Psalms and opened my eyes to it and be comforted. Time after time the Holy Spirit has opened the eyes of my heart and shown me in a way that is beyond my ability to describe adequately, that I can trust God and His Word. That passage rang true in a way no other words had before. Some time after, I became a believer and knew exactly why.

Jerome Smith lists things that come with Salvation in his comments on Hebrews 6:9. One of the things is "a continuing hunger for and increasing knowledge of the written Word of God." This is true and we often encounter people who do not hold the Bible to be true. While claiming the Name of God and pretending to a knowledge of the Bible as preachers, they think the Bible is partially true or a handy thing to use to get their way. People who are deceived that portray themselves to be professors of the Faith can lead people way away from God without knowing it. We are well capable of misleading ourselves if we do not find increasing knowledge of the written Word of God.

Smith suggests that new believers read one chapter of I John Monday through Friday every week for an entire month to begin to learn and master its contents.1 He had spent 30 years preparing notes that he assembled on the Bible and provides a wealth of cross references and explanations that provide an aid to study. His belief as evidenced by his book, is that the believer should know the Word of God and he knew it to be the inerrant, inspired and infallible Word of God. When I believed I received Salvation and the knowledge that the Bible is true. I knew that the Holy Spirit would tutor me and lead me into my understanding of the Bible. The Holy Spirit inspired, breathed the Word of God into the writers. The writers of the Bible were not inspired innately, they were given Revelation by God by His Holy Spirit. They received the knowledge of God because they were chosen by God to receive it, not because of any merit on their part or any powers of reason. The Word of God and His Holy Spirit give the power of reason, logic, merit, perfection and Righteousness to the words they recorded. The words were recorded for the benefit of those who believe and receive Faith. Faith is a gift as much as anything else and does not come from our belief, but because we believe. The Bible stresses the importance of knowing the Word of God. I spent a lot of time learning the things in the Bible without any study aids and know that He will let us know what He wants us to know as believers. Hiding the Word of God in our hearts, memorizing Scripture, coming to know what it means and seeing its application in our lives personally are part of learning the will of God for us individually. It is important in coming to know God, what He is like and what He thinks. Hal Lindsay stated that we need to see things through God's eyes and not our own. That does not happen overnight for all of us, but we can come to see things as He sees them to some extent. It requires us to believe on Him, for that is our work, believing on Him, believing that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God and God the Son. We come to know that Jesus is Creator and Redeemer, Savior and Lord and that He is our hiding place, our refuge and our strength. We think that we can survive on our own until we find out otherwise.

Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.

II Corinthians 3:3

This is a daily devotion written by Hoekstra that is appropriate to answering if the Bible is the Word of God and if Jesus is the Word of God.

Living Letters of Christ

You are manifestly an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart. (II Corinthians 3:3)

Another significant characteristic resulting from living by grace is that we become living letters of Christ. "You are manifestly an epistle of Christ." The Lord wants to turn our lives into a "walking and talking letter of Him." He wants to make us a living explanation of who Christ is and all that He offers. What a great opportunity this presents. As we go about our daily responsibilities, others are often "reading our lives." While they are observing us, they can actually be learning of the truth and love of our Lord Jesus, as He is working in and through our lives. Although this may sound like too much to hope for, the Lord declares in His word that this process can become very clear to those who are watching us: "You are manifestly [that is, "to be plainly recognized as"] an epistle of Christ."

Remember, this is what is available for "ministers of the new covenant" (II Corinthians 3:6). This is what happens in those who live by the grace of God. This is something that God does in us, not something we manufacture for Him. Certainly, people are involved in the process. We become fully engaged by humbly and dependently seeking after the Lord who wants to work in us. Others also get involved by ministering to us. "You are manifestly an epistle of Christ, ministered by us." Paul had ministered God's truth to these saints at Corinth. Yet, these living letters of Christ were not being written by ink, as ordinary letters would be. "You are manifestly an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God." God's Holy Spirit was at work writing the letters that their lives were becoming.

Notice where the Lord was inscribing these living letters: "[i]not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart." The old covenant message of law was written on stones. The new covenant message of grace is written on the hearts of all who will walk in humble dependence upon God. This heavenly work changes us from the inside out, making us living letters of Christ!

Dear God of all grace, I humbly admit that I need to be more and more changed into a living letter of Christ. So often, those who read me see only me. I ask You in faith to inscribe the character of Christ upon my heart, that others may see Him in my daily walk, Amen.

Hoekstra

Knowing the Word of God is important and has been from long before the first visit of Jesus.

Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.

Deuteronomy 6:4-7

This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.

Joshua 1:8

But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night. And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.

Psalm1:2-3

Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. Your eyes have seen what the LORD did because of Baalpeor: for all the men that followed Baalpeor, the LORD thy God hath destroyed them from among you.

Deuteronomy 4:2-3

What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

Deuteronomy 12:32

My son, forget not my law; but let thine heart keep my commandments: For length of days, and long life, and peace, shall they add to thee. Let not mercy and truth forsake thee: bind them about thy neck; write them upon the table of thine heart: So shalt thou find favour and good understanding in the sight of God and man. Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.

Proverbs 3:1-6

The Apostles recognized the importance of the Word of God.

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

Acts 17:11-12

Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

I Peter 1:2

Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord

II Peter 1:2

Mercy unto you, and peace, and love, be multiplied.

Jude 1:2

II Peter 1:2 -

Be multiplied (plēthuntheiē). First aorist passive optative of plēthunō in a wish for the future

Robertson

That is, grace and peace abound to us, or may be expected to be conferred on us abundantly, if we have a true knowledge of God and of the Saviour.

Barnes

1 The book of 1 John would make a most suitable place for the new Christian to begin the study of God’s Word. Read a chapter each day of 1 John on Monday through Friday every week for an entire month in order to begin to learn and master its contents. From time to time look up the cross references given in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge for a favorite or striking verse encountered in that day’s reading. The book of 1 John, in discussing the several characteristics of true believers (1 J 5:13n), incidentally mentions many additional things that accompany salvation.

Jerome H. Smith, editor, The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge [computer file], electronic edition of the Revised Edition of The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, Logos Library System, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson) 1997, c1992 by Jerome H. Smith.

rogero,
Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

I Peter 1:2

Wow! I'm continually amazed at the abundance of cut-n-paste material that you have at your disposal. Not having a life may really have some advantages.

You still did not address my questions.

1) Why do you use the capital "W" in reference to the word of God in Bible verses that do not indicate the Logos Christ? I've pointed out to you that that all major Bible translations (even the beloved Textus Receptus derived KJV1611) use the appropriate case convention in their rendering of the scriptural passages.

2) Exactly what are you referring to as the Word of God? The 66 book Protestant canon? The additional books from the Septuaguint-derived RC Deuterocanon? All other inspired opuses -- the Nicene Creed for example?

This is an intentionally short post. I want you to stay focussed. Is that possible? Do you have the ability to answer the two simple microtomicly focussed questions I've posed?

BTW, I've already accepted Christ as my Saviour, and I don't need any irrelevant sanctimonious preachy BS from you. Got it? Ok. ... then proceed.

R

[Jack777]

I find it interesting that having study tools about Christianity suggests to you that I do not have a life. Do you think it is wrong to know things about the Bible or makes me substandard in some way? Isn't there anything you like? If you played golf, wouldn't you have golf clubs.

Well, you asked. I am getting to the end here I hope. You then realize that I am not unique to think that the big w is okay? Do you understand that if I am not thorough that you will then decide that I am not proving my point? I am not being preachy. You want proof about something or not???

[rogero]

I find it interesting that having study tools about Christianity suggests to you that I do not have a life. Do you think it is wrong to know things about the Bible or makes me substandard in some way? Isn't there anything you like? If you played golf, wouldn't you have golf clubs.

Well, you asked. I am getting to the end here I hope. You then realize that I am not unique to think that the big w is okay? Do you understand that if I am not thorough that you will then decide that I am not proving my point? I am not being preachy. You want proof about something or not???

Answer questions #1 and #2 in post #44 in this thread. Use no external resources and answer in your own words (Words??).

I asked simple and focussed questions. Answer them succinctly and your own words -- this is nothing I would not expect out of an undergraduate writing a basic term paper. Why can't you do it?

This is all very instructive.

R

[Jack777]

Oh I see, I answered already, you just do not like my answer. Let me think about how to put it.

I think you like instruction.

May I quote you in the future?

[rogero]

Oh I see, I answered already, you just do not like my answer. Let me think about how to put it.

No, you did NOT answer! If you did, then please supply a link to the post(s) that give your "answers". If you cannot, I will assert that you are a liar. How does that float your boat, Jacko???

R

[Jack777]

I just love your turn of phrase. Jacko is funny stuff. I think calling people Bucko is funny too. Well, I would certainly hate for you to call me a liar or even assert it. Then again, I really have no control over the actions of others no matter how much I might wish to positively influence people. Sigh...

[Jack777]

May I quote you if I cite you as a source or keep you anonymous as you prefer?

[maudman]

I have not read all of this thread, But I read some things, So may I ask has the word of God thing been answered or solved, Could one of You Rogero or Jack777 or both explain in a short paragraph what your finding have concluded.

The post were quite long and I found them sometimes hard to follow where thing were going or what was actually determined.

peace be with you Guy's

[rogero]

I just love your turn of phrase. Jacko is funny stuff. I think calling people Bucko is funny too. Well, I would certainly hate for you to call me a liar or even assert it. Then again, I really have no control over the actions of others no matter how much I might wish to positively influence people. Sigh...

Please attempt to answer my questions, or provide a link if you believe you've answered them already. Your stalling tactics are not impressive.

R

[Jack777]

maudman,

The 66 books of the Protestant canon attest to them being the Word of God. They contain internal attestations to this being so.

I am interested in answering you as well as I can, but could you ask specifically what it is that gives the presenting reason for your question. Many Christians count on certain predicates and givens that are not givens for instance, without qualification to someone who is not a Christian for instance and I would like to answer as accurately as possible.

Peace of Christ rest on you maudman.

This is not too long I hope and until you ask me some questions so I can get an idea of what you want to know, this may help to give you an idea.

"To have these things always in remembrance." Peter is saying that, in the light of his approaching death, he wants to bring before us certain things to keep in remembrance.

Peter has already told us that we are to make our calling and election more sure, and he wants us to know that we have an authority on which we can depend. Somebody is going to raise the question, "How do you know that the Bible is really the Word of God?"

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

II Peter 1:16

This is something that is very important for us to see.

"We have not followed cunningly devised fables." The Bible is not a pack of lies. The Bible is not a fairy story. The Bible is not a myth. The Bible is historical and factual. If you are sincere and want to give up your sins, God will make it real to you. If there is a veil over your eyes, it is not because you are mentally blind; it is because you do not want to give up your sins. When you and I are willing to do that, God will make the Bible real to us.

"But were eyewitnesses of his majesty." Now, I tell you, that is just a little disconcerting. When did Simon Peter see the power and coming of Jesus Christ?

He will make it clear that he is referring to the transfiguration of Jesus Christ.

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.

And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount

II Peter 1:17–18

Obviously, Peter is referring to the Transfiguration. We need to understand the significance of this event. What did Jesus mean in Matthew 16:28? "Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." This has led some people to claim that the Kingdom was well established at this point. (It is unfortunate that we have a chapter break at this point in Matthew’s account—remember that in the original manuscripts there are no chapters.) The account continues: "And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, and was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light" (Matt. 17:1–2).

The transfiguration of Jesus Christ was a miniature picture of the Kingdom. Moses and Elijah appeared there with Christ. Moses represents the Law in the Old Testament. Elijah represents the prophets in the Old Testament. What were they discussing? They were discussing Christ’s decease, His exodus, His passing from the room of this world into the presence of the Father. That is what they had written about in the Old Testament, and that is what they were talking about at the Transfiguration. Then there were the three disciples present to observe the Transfiguration. They represent the living saints. Moses and Elijah represent the dead saints of the Old Testament. The church was not yet in existence, but the three disciples who were there would constitute the beginning of that body of believers which is the church. They would be the apostles. So the Transfiguration gives us a miniature picture of the Kingdom.

Immediately after the Transfiguration, Jesus Christ and the disciples came down from the mount, and there they found a man with a demonized son. The other disciples could do nothing to help the boy. The observing people were jeering and ridiculing the disciples. That is a picture of the present day. The Kingdom is in abeyance. Jesus Christ is at the right hand of God, and all the Old and New Testament saints who have gone before are with Him. While down here on this earth we are living in a demonized world. If you doubt this, all you have to do to be convinced is to read your newspaper or watch your television newscast. The world is in a terrible mess. The church, which ought to have a message of hope and power for the world, is not helping this demonized world. As a result, the church is being ridiculed—and in one sense, rightly so—because the church is not about the Father’s business as it should be.

Now Simon Peter has said that he was with the Lord Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration. He was one of the eyewitnesses. Then he says this strange thing:

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

II Peter. 1:19

"We have also a more sure word of prophecy"—when he uses the word prophecy he doesn’t necessarily mean the prediction of the future, although he includes that. He means the entire Word of God, because he speaks of the Scriptures as having been spoken by God. And the prophets, as he will make it clear in the next verse, were more than amanuenses who took dictation from God; rather, they expressed their own feelings and thoughts. Nevertheless, God was able to transmit His complete will and word through the men who wrote Scripture. This is the thing that makes it a miraculous Book. You see, the Word of God is not only divine; it is human, very human. It is like the Lord Jesus who was both God and man. The Bible is a God-book and a man-book. It deals with human life, right down where you and I live and move and have our being, yet it is God speaking to man in a language that is understandable to him.

A great many people think, "Oh, if only I could have been with Peter. If only I could have seen those things." Friend, you have something even better. You have the Word of God. It will speak directly to you if you will open your heart and allow it to speak. The Word of God is better than seeing and hearing.

"We have also a more sure word of prophecy"—rather "the word of prophecy is made more sure."

"A light that shineth in a dark place." The Word of God is a light, a lamp, a source of light, like the sun in the sky. It is a centrifugal force. As the sun gives out its light, throwing it out to the universe, so the Word of God sends out a light, a force, and a power. It is the only tangible supernatural thing that we have in this world today. The Word of God is the only physical miracle that we have from God in this hour in which we live.

It will be that until Jesus comes—"until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts." Jesus is called the Bright and Morning Star in Revelation 22:16. Until He comes, His Word is the centrifugal force going throughout the world and drawing men away from the world system and putting them into the arms of God. What a picture we have here!

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation

II Peter 1:20

"Knowing this first." Simon Peter says that this is the first thing we are to know. The word knowing is a knowledge that comes, not only from the Word of God, not only from facts that can be ascertained—if you have an honest heart, you can find out whether the facts in the Bible are accurate or not—but these are things which you can know by the Holy Spirit’s making them real to you. As I have said before, I have long since passed the stage when I wanted the Bible proved to me. When I was in college, I did want the Bible proved to me; and if I found that archaeology had dug up a spadeful of dirt somewhere that proved a fact in the Bible, I would clap my hands like a little child and shout, "Wonderful!" I don’t do that anymore. I don’t need a spadeful of turned-up dirt to prove the Bible to me. The Spirit of God Himself has made the Word of God real to my heart. I know there is a transforming power in God’s Word. I get letters from all over the world which testify to that fact. There is power in the Word of God. This is something that we can know, and the facts, confirmed by the Holy Spirit, make it real to us.

"No prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." What Peter is saying here is that no portion of the Scripture is to be interpreted apart from other references to the same subject. That is the reason I put up such an objection to this idea of pulling out one little verse of Scripture and building a doctrine on that one verse. If you cannot get the whole body of Scripture to confirm your doctrine, then you had better get a new doctrine, my friend.

I think a good illustration is the difference between riding in a good, solid, four-wheeled wagon and on a unicycle. If you have ever seen a person ride on that one wheel of a unicycle, you have noted that he does a lot of twisting and turning and maneuvering around to stay balanced on that one wheel. In the circus I once saw a man riding way up high on a unicycle, and all of a sudden it went out from under him, and he fell backwards. Believe me, he had a bad fall. And I thought, Oh, how many Christians are like that today. They base what they believe on a single verse. While it is wonderful to have one marvelous verse of Scripture, if it tells a great truth, there will be at least two or three verses and usually a whole chapter on it somewhere in the Bible. Simon Peter is telling us that no passage of Scripture should be interpreted by itself. We need to confirm it with other Scriptures.

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

II Peter 1:21

"For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man." Obviously he is referring to Old Testament prophecy. It didn’t come by the will of man. That is, Isaiah, for example, did not sit down saying, "I think I’ll write a book because I need some money. I’ll send it to the publisher, and he will send me an advance check, and then I’ll get royalties for it." That is the reason some men write in our day, but that is not the way Isaiah did it. Listen to Peter: "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man." The prophecy of Isaiah was not something that Isaiah thought up.

"But holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." "Holy men" does not mean that the writers were some superduper saints. It means holy in the sense of being set apart for this particular office. If you are a holy Christian, it means that you are set apart for Jesus Christ. Holy means "to be set apart."

"As they were moved by the Holy Ghost [Spirit]" is a delightful figure of speech. The Greek actually portrays the idea of a sailing vessel. The wind gets into those great sails, bellies them out, and moves the ship along. That is the way the Holy Spirit moved these men.

Here in California we have a yacht regatta each year. The yachts line up and start for Honolulu, Hawaii, to sail in around Diamond Head. (A man must be rich enough to own such a sailing yacht and to have the time to enter such a regatta.) Some time ago a doctor performed an operation on me one day, and the next day he was off sailing to Honolulu! When he got back, I was asking him about it. He told me that they have an extra sail which they put out when they get a good wind and that moves the boat right along. Well, this is exactly what Peter is saying in this verse of Scripture. These men who were set apart for the writing of the Scriptures were moved along by the Spirit of God.

Now let me remind you that this is Peter’s swan song, and, like Paul in his swan song, he emphasizes the importance of the Word of God for the days of apostasy. Paul said, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God …" (2 Tim. 3:16), and Peter is saying that the writers of Scripture were moved along by the Holy Spirit. The thought is the same. It is wonderful to see how God could take each man and use him, without changing his style or interfering with his personality, to write His Word so that His message comes across. While Paul the apostle wrote eloquent Greek, Peter the apostle—since he was a fisherman and Greek was his second language—wrote Greek that was not quite as good. Yet God used both of these men to write exactly what He wanted to say—so much so that, if God spoke out of heaven today, He would have to repeat Himself, because He already has said all that He has to say to mankind. God has gotten His Word to us through men of different personalities and different skills. For this reason I call it a man-book and a God-book.

The written Word, like the Lord Jesus, the living Word, is both human and divine. The Lord Jesus could weep at a grave, but He could also raise the dead. He could sit down at a well because He was tired and thirsty, but He could also give the water of life to a poor sinner. He could go to sleep in a boat, but He could also still the storm. He was a man, but He was God also. And the Bible is both human and divine.

Simon Peter is telling us that we have "a more sure word of prophecy." He puts a sure rock under our feet. The Scriptures are something that we can have confidence in. No wonder the Word of God has been attacked more than anything else. If the enemy can get rid of the foundation, he knows that the building will come crashing down.

It is sheer nonsense for a preacher to stand at a pulpit and preach a sermon showing that he does not believe that the Bible is the Word of God. That, to my judgment, is as silly as the poor fellow in the insane asylum whom a visitor saw using a pickax on the foundation at the corner of the dormitory in an attempt to destroy the foundation. The visitor, wanting to be sympathetic, asked the man with the pickax,

"What are you doing?"

"I’m digging away the foundation. Can’t you see?"

"Yes, but don’t you live in this building?"

"Of course I do, but I live upstairs."

For a preacher to discredit the Word of God is equally as insane. My friend, the Scriptures as we have them are a solid foundation on which to rest our faith.

J. Vernon McGee, Thru the Bible Commentary [computer file], electronic ed., Logos Library System, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson) 1997, © 1981 by J. Vernon McGee.

[rogero]

I have not read all of this thread, But I read some things, So may I ask has the word of God thing been answered or solved, Could one of You Rogero or Jack777 or both explain in a short paragraph what your finding have concluded.

The post were quite long and I found them sometimes hard to follow where thing were going or what was actually determined.

peace be with you Guy's

Thank you for taking an interest, Maudy.

I have been trying to get answers to two simple questions brought up in conjunction with the OP. These questions regard a clarification of Jack's views.

1) Exactly what does he mean by the Word of God in reference to the Bible? Does he mean just the 66 books of the Protestant Canon -- like he answered in his last post, or does he include other deutercanonical works, like he implies in the OP where he quotes from the book of Sirach? He hasn't answered that question, AFAICS. Maybe you can find where he did.

2) What is his justification for using the capital "W" in scripture passages where the "word of God" is not referring the Logos Christ? I pointed out that Bible translators use a lowercase "w" in those cases, such as I Samuel 9:2 quoted by Jack in the OP (note the capital W) ---

And as they were going down to the end of the city, Samuel said to Saul, Bid the servant pass on before us, (and he passed on,) but stand thou still a while, that I may shew thee the Word of God.

Here's the same verse in various translations:



And as they were going down to the end of the city, Samuel said to Saul, Bid the servant pass on before us, (and he passed on), but stand thou still a while, that I may shew thee the word of God. (KJV)

As they were approaching the edge of town, Samuel said to Saul, "Tell the servant to go on ahead of us, but stay here yourself for the moment, that I may give you a message from God." (NAB)

As they were going down to the edge of the city, Samuel said to Saul, "Say to the servant that he might go ahead of us and pass on, but you remain standing now, that I may proclaim the word of God to you." (NASB)

As they were going down to the edge of the town, Samuel said to Saul, "Tell the servant to go on ahead of us"-and the servant did so-"but you stay here awhile, so that I may give you a message from God." (NIV)

As they were going down to the outskirts of the city, Samuel said to Saul, "Tell the servant to go on ahead of us." And he went on. "But you stand here awhile, that I may announce to you the word of God." (NKJV)

As they were going down to the outskirts of the city, Samuel said to Saul, "Tell the servant to pass on before us, and when he has passed on, stop here yourself for a while, that I may make known to you the word of God." (ESV)

And as they were going down to the outskirts of the city, Samuel said to Saul, Bid the servant pass on before us--and he passed on--but you stand still, first, that I may cause you to hear the word of God. (Amplified Bible)



Jack had no answer for this, but implied that his wisdom and insight was more astute than the Bible translators. I guess one of my main points is to see if Jack777 will admit even the possibility that he could be wrong about something scriptural.

God's Peace to you, Maudy!

Roger

[Jack777]

Boy howdy rogero, you sure proved the Bible is wrong.

[rogero]

Boy howdy rogero, you sure proved the Bible is wrong.

Jack, of all the confusing, cryptic, and irritating detritus that you've posted, this is perhaps the worst. How does what I posted in any way "prove the Bible is wrong?" Or even more importantly, how could anyone in one's right mind interpret what I wrote as an attempt to "prove the Bible wrong?" Yes, I was attempting to show that you were wrong or at least confusing. Do you think that you are the Bible now??? :lol:

I know it's probably futile to ask this but, Jack, could you possibly give a succinct answer to the two questions I posed in my last post (#54)?

Maudy -- do you have any comment on this?

R

[Jack777]

You sure are a sorehead sometimes rogero.

Tell me how I am wrong and about what?

[rogero]

You sure are a sorehead sometimes rogero.

Tell me how I am wrong and about what?

I said you haven't answered my two focussed questions in my next to last post. Your inability to answer these could certainly be construed as you being "wrong". Why do you insist on being such a frustrating obfuscator?

You were certainly wrong about the inference in your most recent post -- "Boy howdy rogero, you sure proved the Bible is wrong."

Why can't you clarify your assertions succinctly in your own words without a tedious cut-n-paste of material you've accumulated over your long years? Your MO is provide either this or some short brittle piece of subterfuge.

Now, if you would -- please address the questions I posed in my penultimate post.

R

[maudman]

Jack, of all the confusing, cryptic, and irritating detritus that you've posted, this is perhaps the worst. How does what I posted in any way "prove the Bible is wrong?" Or even more importantly, how could anyone in one's right mind interpret what I wrote as an attempt to "prove the Bible wrong?" Yes, I was attempting to show that you were wrong or at least confusing. Do you think that you are the Bible now??? :lol:

I know it's probably futile to ask this but, Jack, could you possibly give a succinct answer to the two questions I posed in my last post (#54)?

Maudy -- do you have any comment on this?

R

Sorry Guy's I have been kinda swamped.

I will try to give a brief statement about what I think I see. Jack you can correct me if I'm worng about this as I'm sure you will. Rogero primary argument in one part is about your theological position. W vrses w and he is asking Why their is no distinguishing, but I think you know this as far as the term Logo's is concerned. RogO is making a Point of the lack distiction in your quotes between the two.

Jack are you saying there is no distinction between the message of God sometimes translated word of God and the Logo's (The Word) with God was God is God of John? Cause one is the Entity within itself and it say's in the "beginnging" was the WORD the other is a message of written text.
Are you saying that the bible is this word in its beginning and this logos only relates to scripture or is their another reason for equating the two.

Rogero is correct that Scholars and theologian distingish between them. Can you give him a short answere why you make no distiction or was it just Bold typo's that you really didn't mean to be taken that way.

Sorry I haven't got time for any more. I will hit this harder this weekend.

[Jack777]

Thanks for replying maudman,

I will get back to your question as soon as I can. Hope you have a good week.

rogero,

Check in later. Exactly why is there a problem with using a capital W for the verses you posted?

Thanks in advance.

[rogero]

Thanks for replying maudman,

I will get back to your question as soon as I can. Hope you have a good week.

rogero,

Check in later. Exactly why is there a problem with using a capital W for the verses you posted?

Thanks in advance.

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I asked why you chose to use the capital W when the best Bible scholars and translators (which I presume to be experts on the original languages and the historical and cultural contexts) do not, and in particular when "word" is not referring the Logos Christ. Why are you trying so hard to dodge this exceedingly simple and focussed question?

R

[rogero]

Jack,

Please re-read your post #55 and my reply in post #56. I would like you either to explain your response in #55 or apologize.

Thanks, and God's Peace.

Roger

[Perry]

I do not believe in a 6 day creation period by the way.

You'll be ok, Jack. Keep listening to Chuck Missler, and h'll help you with that. Rogero could use some Misslering.

[rogero]

You'll be ok, Jack. Keep listening to Chuck Missler, and h'll help you with that. Rogero could use some Misslering.

Perry,

Could you expand on this, give a reference perhaps?

Is this the deepest observation you could profer after reading (presumably) through this thread?

What's your take on the Word/word of God issue we're discussing?

R

[Perry]

www.khouse.org is Missler's site. The W's you're arguing about, are they the same words in the original languages? Or are there different words for "word" in Hebrew and Greek? As far as caps go, all Capping of personal pronouns when referring to God are English translational caps, the apostles didn't cap when they wrote Him, for instance, refering to God.

ps, I skimmed some of the thread, may have messed a lot.

[rogero]

www.khouse.org (http://www.khouse.org) is Missler's site. The W's you're arguing about, are they the same words in the original languages? Or are there different words for "word" in Hebrew and Greek? As far as caps go, all Capping of personal pronouns when referring to God are English translational caps, the apostles didn't cap when they wrote Him, for instance, refering to God.

ps, I skimmed some of the thread, may have messed a lot.

You're darn right that you "messed" a lot. Can you or Missler explain why all the Bible translators make this distinction in capitalization? Is it possible that they are trying to make (the obvious?) distinction between "words" from God (or messages) and the "Word" of God, the personal Logos Christ?
Do you have a specific link within Missler's website that you'd like us to peruse?

If you can't see this basic distinction (word of God as messages from God or Word of God as the personification of the Logos Christ), then I fear for your faith, or at least the basis of your faith. You're surely not a Biblidolator, are you?

[Iktovian]

to mr agent jack:
your posts are too long

[maudman]

www.khouse.org is Missler's site. The W's you're arguing about, are they the same words in the original languages? Or are there different words for "word" in Hebrew and Greek? As far as caps go, all Capping of personal pronouns when referring to God are English translational caps, the apostles didn't cap when they wrote Him, for instance, refering to God.

ps, I skimmed some of the thread, may have messed a lot.


Perry You are right that the English translated that way, But Roger is right,

Their are words that are translated with caps for a reason, and it sometimes goes beyond the article and particle in the translation, as articles and particles were sometimes invoked, to narrow the meaning from a braud to a particlular, When done, it often is used in relation to YVHV or God. It sometime translates the action of verbs in relation to an action of YVHV or God, Sometime used to distinguish things like covenant peoples from other things, Sometimes it seems translators were inconsistant, And I'm not sure Why? But it is a form of interpretaion of the scholars themselves, And we shouldn't ignore those things.

Peace be with you Perry

[Jack777]

Hi Perry,

The English is responsible for the capital letters being used. In fact the original Hebrew was written down without spaces or punctuation. The Aramaic version of Hebrew that is closest to Modern Hebrew was not used until after the time of Moses. Proto Sinaitic Hebrew looked a lot like Canaanite in about 1500 BC. You are very on point to have asked about the capital letters.

maudman has a point about using capitals in English. Some would reserve it only for a being as a physical entity or in the case of God as spirit. Hebrew writers that included a kind of shorthand commentary in with translations known as Targums met with and dealt with the periphery of what is the "Word of God" as has become the issue here. Some would definitely reject the Chaldee word for "word" as referring to a being of any sort. So, a Hebrew precedent for my using a "W" instead of a "w" referring to a different understanding of what constitutes a state of being is what is being argued by others, if I take their concerns correctly. Bible translators did not use the "W" in some passages of Scripture that I have no problem with seeing as a valid expression of God.

Thanks for asking.

maudman,

Yes, Jesus is the Message as well.

He is the Pentateuch as it was given to Moses as an example. Do I know that scholars disagree with me?

Yes.

Iktovian,

Thanks for the feedback.

rogero, I will read my posts and copy them and see what is the matter. Thanks.

:smile:

[Perry]

Hey Rogero, maybe you'd be interested in listening to this series, "how we got our bible" by Chuck Missler, who I like so much that you'll just have to hate him (but not necessarily with a capital H). You're smarter than me, and can probably listen to him WHILE doing other things on yer 'puter at the same time, which I cannot do.

http://www.khouse.org/6640/BP084/

p.s. Don't think I haven't noticed your avoidance of my question as to how you managed to get my great grandmother on last month's Nat Geo cover.

[rogero]

Hey Rogero, maybe you'd be interested in listening to this series, "how we got our bible" by Chuck Missler, who I like so much that you'll just have to hate him (but not necessarily with a capital H). You're smarter than me, and can probably listen to him WHILE doing other things on yer 'puter at the same time, which I cannot do.

http://www.khouse.org/6640/BP084/

p.s. Don't think I haven't noticed your avoidance of my question as to how you managed to get my great grandmother on last month's Nat Geo cover.

Would you care to summarize a few of the unique conclusions of Mr. Missler? I.e., how these differ from other Bible scholars, and in particular how these are germane to this thread?

Some questions for ya -- is Missler KJV only? Are you? What is your POV on the RC deuterocanonical books, such as Sirach as quoted by our friend Jack in the OP? Do you think these OT books that exist only in Greek form (in the Septuaguint) are the Word of God as well? Personally, I find them interesting and useful at times and I believe the HS can speak through those as well -- although there is a reason for calling them the "second" canon.

I'd like to see some positive input from a person of your obviously deep and sincere faith -- it will be edifying to all readers.

R

P.S. Regarding your P.S. -- if the Nat'l Geographic cover truly is of your recent ancestor, then that may 'splain some things -- in view of the chimp-sized cranium of H. floresiensis. Sorry, Perry -- but you left yourself wide open for that one! :lol:

[Jack777]

Perry,

rogero is trying to say in his adorable way that he thinks we are stupid and he is much smarter than us little people. Also, he is trying to defocus and answers for other people like I am doing now for him. He could care less what Missler or anyone else thinks about the Bible, he is baiting you. rogero really has not done anything germane to this thread except keep it going. He and the other great minds will keep up trying to be nasty to you, so don't let him bother you.

[Perry]

Perry,

rogero is trying to say in his adorable way that he thinks we are stupid and he is much smarter than us little people. Also, he is trying to defocus and answers for other people like I am doing now for him. He could care less what Missler or anyone else thinks about the Bible, he is baiting you. rogero really has not done anything germane to this thread except keep it going. He and the other great minds will keep up trying to be nasty to you, so don't let him bother you.

I was going to suggest to you, in one of your posts you referred to Rogero as a wise guy...it's ok to call him a wise@$$. He is smarter than me. Doesn't mean he's right, and I don't let him bother me.

[maudman]

I don't think it is cause RogerO thinks he is smarter than anybody else, His questions are often Good questions, I think sometimes he's a little Tirsh about how he asks them. He's often see's the same things from people and his bluntness has an adverse effect.

But sometimes if you would respond directly to his question and not dance around it as he see's it. I find he responds very well to an honest response. Sometimes he gets frustrated a little with the mind games and Sometimes I don't blame him.

People that defend interpretations often say strange things for justifacation and we should seek to defend the bible not our interpretation of it. We should be looking into the bible and asking ourselves whats wrong with what I believe not sayinfg how can I make the bible mean what I think.

Peace be with you Guy's

[Jack777]

Thanks maudman, I think rogero gets frustrated when someone notice his mind games and do not let him get away with them is the problem. I understand a lot of good people are control freaks and I am sure he is a dear saint. That does not mean I have to play the foil.


Thanks, Perry, I appreciate your take. I think decorum and political correctness trumps truth for a lot of people and that is part of what gives him some steam to do as he does. Anytime the truth is not welcome without censorship, you know it ahead of time. He knows that. I got my avatar censored again and am not allowed to put another up. That is the second time. Freedom of speech is limited even on the internet for people's own good sometimes. If I am not around much longer you will know why. If this post does not get censored....

[Perry]

I understand a lot of good people are control freaks and I am sure he is a dear saint.

I wouldn't call Rojjjee a control freak. Then again, I wouldn't call him a dear saint...

If I am not around much longer you will know why. If this post does not get censored....

C'mon now Jack...we're just beginning to have some fun here. Don't take your toys and go home.


I think decorum and political correctness trumps truth for a lot of people...

Something may well be trumping truth for Roojjjjerro, but it sure ain't decorum.

I bet if you change your 7's to 666 nobody will censor you. :smile:

[Jack777]

Well, I am still here minus an avatar still.

rogero is precious in the sight of our Lord, soooooo, ipso facto ipse dixit, res judicata and other assorted Latin words: Viola, he is a dear saint.

[Jorge]

Ditto. I believe the only Word of God is Christ, and the only place that Word is ever written is on the heart.

-Neil
Just passing through - I'm in the middle of my (too) lengthy travels. I couldn't let this utter nonsense and cultish doctrine by NeilUnreal go unchecked. Pay attention NU:

When Christ was thrice tempted by Satan, He thrice responded "It is written ...". What "written" was He referring to? You either don't know your Scriptures or you've opted to follow your own fabrications, NU.
Yes, Jesus Christ is the Logos, etc ... but there is also a word (Word) of God that was revealed to us and that word (Word) was written as per God's will - we know this in English as the Holy Bible, AKJV 1611.

Now go do some serious studying, will ya. See you all in 2-3 weeks. Be good! :smile:

Jorge

[Jack777]

He said, "I know."

I said, "Do ya?"

Van Morrison1

rogero,

You have pointed out several times that scholars do not agree about the "W" being used to refer the Bible in "Word" as "Word of God." I had posted the following which is from The Westminster Confession of Faith, which uses the "W" upper case in referring to the Bible. Obviously, some people think the Word of God as referring to the Bible is valid. You then asked again about the upper case versus the lower case letter "w" as being valid after I posted this. You did admit that you did not read my post and kept on pushing, insisting that I have not answered your questions, although I have. You even threatened to call me a liar (horrors). The Church of England translated all 66 books of the Protestant Canon plus the Apocryphal books under the direction of King James and that is my preferred translation. I would think that you would allow that your question about the case of the letter "W" had been answered multiple times even though you kept insisting I answer. I posted the following, which you chose not to read:
"'Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the books of the Old and New Testaments, which are these,'

Then, all the books of the Bible are listed."

So, the questions that you asked were answered because the 66 books of the Protestant Canon are then listed, but not the Apocrypha. I do not mind answering your questions, it is just that if you refuse to even read what I have answered before or look at the references and links I give, it seems you would guess that giving the same answer over and over to the same question over and over that you do not read is extended trolling intended to highjack a thread in some people's eyes.

He said, I don't know man, uh, she's kinda funny...ya know?"

I said, "I know, everybody funny, now you funny too."

George Thorogood and The Destroyers3

I know some people would say about you that "He's a smooth operator." 4

I still haven't gotten to the apologia you requested, and some of your other questions in detail, as I need to look up those posts for you.

Oh, a question for you.

Have you ever noticed that in the song by George Thorogood and the Destroyers, One Bourbon, One Scotch, One Beer, that the quintessential elements of blues and rock meet in a profound moment with the same elements that are voiced in piano by Jim Morrison and The Doors? The reason I ask is that in one of the better guitar riffs of the past century (Grateful Dead notwithstanding) the guitar work of George Thorogood is strikingly reminiscent of Jim Morrison. Music has a language does it not? Maybe one of the most sentient forms of expression without words as we think of words, but "words" all the same, just not the Word of God

.



1Van Morrison, The Back Room, 4:09.6 to 4:13.6 minutes, Brown Eyed Girl, ©1997 Sony Music Entertainment, Inc.

2Westminster Assembly, The Westminster Confession of Faith, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1995.

3George Thorogood and The Destroyers, One Bourbon, One Scotch, One Beer, 2:21.75 to 2:32.0, written by John Lee Hooker, ©1967 ARC Music Corp. (BMI), The Baddest of George Thorogood and The Destroyers, ©1992 EMI Research Group.

4Sade, Smooth Operator, 1:54.2 to 1:57.5, Diamond Life, words and music by Adu and St. John, ©1985 CBS, Inc.

[Perry]

JORJE! Where you been? You need a laptop so you don't leave us hanging while you travel.

[Jack777]

Jorge,

what he said.

[rogero]

He said, "I know."

I said, "Do ya?"

Van Morrison1

rogero,

You have pointed out several times that scholars do not agree about the "W" being used to refer the Bible in "Word" as "Word of God." I had posted the following which is from The Westminster Confession of Faith, which uses the "W" upper case in referring to the Bible. Obviously, some people think the Word of God as referring to the Bible is valid. You then asked again about the upper case versus the lower case letter "w" as being valid after I posted this. You did admit that you did not read my post and kept on pushing, insisting that I have not answered your questions, although I have. You even threatened to call me a liar (horrors). The Church of England translated all 66 books of the Protestant Canon plus the Apocryphal books under the direction of King James and that is my preferred translation. I would think that you would allow that your question about the case of the letter "W" had been answered multiple times even though you kept insisting I answer. I posted the following, which you chose not to read:
"'Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the books of the Old and New Testaments, which are these,'

Then, all the books of the Bible are listed."

So, the questions that you asked were answered because the 66 books of the Protestant Canon are then listed, but not the Apocrypha. I do not mind answering your questions, it is just that if you refuse to even read what I have answered before or look at the references and links I give, it seems you would guess that giving the same answer over and over to the same question over and over that you do not read is extended trolling intended to highjack a thread in some people's eyes.

He said, I don't know man, uh, she's kinda funny...ya know?"

I said, "I know, everybody funny, now you funny too."

George Thorogood and The Destroyers3

I know some people would say about you that "He's a smooth operator." 4

I still haven't gotten to the apologia you requested, and some of your other questions in detail, as I need to look up those posts for you.

Oh, a question for you.

Have you ever noticed that in the song by George Thorogood and the Destroyers, One Bourbon, One Scotch, One Beer, that the quintessential elements of blues and rock meet in a profound moment with the same elements that are voiced in piano by Jim Morrison and The Doors? The reason I ask is that in one of the better guitar riffs of the past century (Grateful Dead notwithstanding) the guitar work of George Thorogood is strikingly reminiscent of Jim Morrison. Music has a language does it not? Maybe one of the most sentient forms of expression without words as we think of words, but "words" all the same, just not the Word of God

.



1Van Morrison, The Back Room, 4:09.6 to 4:13.6 minutes, Brown Eyed Girl, ©1997 Sony Music Entertainment, Inc.

2Westminster Assembly, The Westminster Confession of Faith, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1995.

3George Thorogood and The Destroyers, One Bourbon, One Scotch, One Beer, 2:21.75 to 2:32.0, written by John Lee Hooker, ©1967 ARC Music Corp. (BMI), The Baddest of George Thorogood and The Destroyers, ©1992 EMI Research Group.

4Sade, Smooth Operator, 1:54.2 to 1:57.5, Diamond Life, words and music by Adu and St. John, ©1985 CBS, Inc.

Jack, you continue to be an obnoxious blowhard. Stop implying that I don't read what you write. So, the Westminster Confession uses W when referring to scripture in toto. So what? Many people do. My question was about the translation of word/Word within scripture itself, which all translations render with the lowercase w when not referring to the Logos Christ.

Also, do I take it that you consider the Deutercanon as the Word of God as well? I wish you could answer a question succinctly without a flowery dissertation. I see you like the KJV1611 best. Do you realize its translators also use the lowercase w convention?

R

P.S To all: I'm on vacation and have had limited Internet access for the past week and this limitation will exist through this weekend.

[rogero]

...

maudman,

Yes, Jesus is the Message as well.

He is the Pentateuch as it was given to Moses as an example. Do I know that scholars disagree with me?

Yes.



So, Jesus is the Pentateuch? Thanks for sharing this. we're all entitled to our opinions, and IMO if this what you believe, you are a blasphemous idolator. But that's fine -- I'm ok, you're ok! :lol:



rogero, I will read my posts and copy them and see what is the matter. Thanks.



Well, nothing is the matter for you. I thought I made my complaints/queries quite plain. If you answered simple focussed questions in a non-obfuscatory manner, we would save the lurkers lots of heartbeats.


:smile:[/QUOTE]
:lol:

[rogero]

Jack,

Please re-read your post #55 and my reply in post #56. I would like you either to explain your response in #55 or apologize.

Thanks, and God's Peace.

Roger

YooHoo, Jack... I'm still waiting for a response from you to my simple and focussed question.

Please read posts #54, #55, and #56 of this thread, then please either explain yourself or apologize. It's a very very simple request. I have the utmost confidence that you can handle it.

R

[Jack777]

rogero, you are so funny sometimes.


Having purposed, He brought us forth by the Word of truth, for us to be a certain firstfruit of His creatures.
James 1:18 (LITV)



With a certain glee, those who like to have it their way as if reading the Bible has the same significance as going to MacDonald's for a meal, fight against the authority of God and the Scriptures that He has given to us. These people call themselves "Higher Critics," and linger about in seminaries as if they might come in handy for something. The only professor I have had any experience with who followed the Higher Critics sought to mock any serious consideration of the Scriptures as being true. He seemed dedicated to making sure that people in Sunday School classes he taught came away with the notion the Bible cannot be trusted and that people who take it seriously are laughable. The church that he attends was different 20 years ago than it is now. The people are very nice, but now it is important to question the Bible and make it secondary to the doctrines of men. On certain issues important to the world today, the Bible is held to be wrong. The retired professor does come in handy as it turns out because he is able to affirm apostasy is fine.

Green translates logos here with an uppercase "W." This is interesting in that the passage refers both to Jesus and the message of the Gospel. Likewise, God is "truth" and he could as easily translated the "t" with an uppercase "T." By convention, most scholars have translated the Word of God without the uppercase "W" when referring to the message, the information. There are exceptions to this as above. Most scholars consider the Bible as the Word of God with an uppercase "W."

In one commentary "Word of God" occurs 2871 times and an uppercase "W" and "G" is alway s used.. In the King James Authorized Version of the Bible the phrase "Word of God occurs 49 times and one time in the Apocrypha. In a collection of commentaries and Bibles there are 4264 occurrences of the phrase "Word of God."

Taking representatives from each collection it is clear that the Word of God is not an unusual phrase in English apart from its use in the Bible. The validity of God's Word known as the "Bible" is reflected in these two small examples. It is quite something that understanding that many who believe the Bible are not unique in knowing the Bible is inerrant and inspired and that we refer to the Bible with reverence. It is also interesting that holding the Bible to be true or holding it to be conditionally true, or even fiction does not take away the fact that it is an extant document deserving of respect by giving it a proper name. Any other name besides "Bible" is questioned whether or not it should command respect as coming from God when Scripture refers to the source as God. Conversely, one way to try and shake the Faith of people is to contend with us over the use of the word "Bible" and point out is comprised of many books as if that were some way to condemn the Bible and us. The gradation of efforts to discredit the Bible vary according to what detractors of the Bible's veracity think will work. The again, should any of us be unprepared to give an answer for our Hope, even if matters of punctuation and capitalization seem to show us up as uneducated fools and rustics? We know that whether or not we have a bit of formal education or much, the Bible remains the inerrant and inspired Word of God. I am quite happy to be described as deficient in learning, as this is true of me. I readily admit to being ignorant. There is so much I do not know. Looking out into the night sky gives some idea of things I will never know while on this earth. However, I am convinced that my ignorance should not be used as an excuse as never getting off of square one.

So, the deadly and threatening accusation hurled at all of Christendom which comes in the form of a question ever the same as it was "hath God said?" comes in all shapes and sizes. There are so many inventive ways to accuse ranging from quantum mechanics to capitalization. The two examples that follow confirm that some, many even, must have noticed the the Bible is special.

Luther writing about the Bible had this to say:

"Besides, it is an exceedingly effectual help against the devil, the world, and the flesh and all evil thoughts to be occupied with the Word of God, and to speak of it, and meditate upon it, so that the First Psalm declares those blessed who meditate upon the law of God day and night.

For, indeed, non-Christians can also cease from work and be idle, just as the entire swarm of our ecclesiastics, who stand daily in the churches, singing, and ringing bells but keeping no holy day holy, because they neither preach nor practice God’s Word, but teach and live contrary to it. For the Word of God is the sanctuary above all sanctuaries, yea, the only one which we Christians know and have.

Therefore I would be very glad (I say it again) if men would open their eyes and ears and take this to heart, lest some time we may again be led astray from the pure Word of God to the lying vanities of the devil.

For those only are called spiritual fathers who govern and guide us by the Word of God; as St. Paul boasts his fatherhood 1 Corinthians 4:15, where he says: In Christ Jesus I hove begotten you through the Gospel.

Here we have again the Word of God whereby He would encourage and urge us to true noble and sublime works, as gentleness patience, and, in short, love and kindness to our enemies, and would ever remind us to reflect upon the First Commandment, that He is our God, that is, that He will help, assist, and protect us, in order that He may thus quench the desire of revenge in us.

Besides the Word of God must suffer in the most shameful and malicious manner, being persecuted blasphemed, contradicted, perverted and falsely cited and interpreted. But let this pass; for it is the way of the blind world that she condemns and persecutes the truth and the children of God, and yet esteems it no sin.

If you are asked: What do you mean by the words: I believe in the Holy Ghost? you can answer: I believe that the Holy Ghost makes me holy, as His name implies. But whereby does He accomplish this, or what are His method and means to this end? Answer: By the Christian Church, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. For, in the first place, He has a peculiar congregation in the world, which is the mother that begets and bears every Christian through the Word of God, which He reveals and preaches, [and through which] He illumines and enkindles hearts, that they understand, accept it, cling to it, and persevere in it. 2

In the Introduction to The Institutes of the Christian Religion, the Bible is referred to as the Word of God.

"For what would be a better harbinger of another Reformation than widespread recourse to the earnest and sober study of the Word of God which would be evinced by the readiness carefully to peruse The Institutes of the Christian Religion.

One feature of Calvin’s exegetical work is his concern for the analogy of Scripture. He is always careful to take account of the unity and harmony of Scripture teaching. His expositions are not therefore afflicted with the vice of expounding particular passages without respect to the teaching of Scripture elsewhere and without respect to the system of truth set forth in the Word of God." 3

(LITV) Literal Translation of the Holy Bible, copyright © 1976-2000 by Jay P. Green, Sr. All rights reserved.

1 J. I. Packer, Knowing God, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL, © 1973 J. I. Packer.

2 Martin Luther, The Large Catechism, in electronic edition of Books For The Ages, Translators, F. Bente and W. H. T. Dau, AGES Software Albany, OR USA Version 2.0 © 1996, 1997 AGES Software.

3 John Murray, "Introduction," Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin, updated Electronic Edition with footnotes by Robert J. Dunzweiler, Translator, Henry Beveridge, Original Translator, Thomas Norton, public domain.

[rogero]

rogero, you are so funny sometimes.


Having purposed, He brought us forth by the Word of truth, for us to be a certain firstfruit of His creatures.
James 1:18 (LITV)



With a certain glee, those who like to have it their way as if reading the Bible has the same significance as going to MacDonald's for a meal, fight against the authority of God and the Scriptures that He has given to us. These people call themselves "Higher Critics," and linger about in seminaries as if they might come in handy for something. The only professor I have had any experience with who followed the Higher Critics sought to mock any serious consideration of the Scriptures as being true. He seemed dedicated to making sure that people in Sunday School classes he taught came away with the notion the Bible cannot be trusted and that people who take it seriously are laughable. The church that he attends was different 20 years ago than it is now. The people are very nice, but now it is important to question the Bible and make it secondary to the doctrines of men. On certain issues important to the world today, the Bible is held to be wrong. The retired professor does come in handy as it turns out because he is able to affirm apostasy is fine.

Green translates logos here with an uppercase "W." This is interesting in that the passage refers both to Jesus and the message of the Gospel. Likewise, God is "truth" and he could as easily translated the "t" with an uppercase "T." By convention, most scholars have translated the Word of God without the uppercase "W" when referring to the message, the information. There are exceptions to this as above. Most scholars consider the Bible as the Word of God with an uppercase "W."

In one commentary "Word of God" occurs 2871 times and an uppercase "W" and "G" is alway s used.. In the King James Authorized Version of the Bible the phrase "Word of God occurs 49 times and one time in the Apocrypha. In a collection of commentaries and Bibles there are 4264 occurrences of the phrase "Word of God."

Taking representatives from each collection it is clear that the Word of God is not an unusual phrase in English apart from its use in the Bible. The validity of God's Word known as the "Bible" is reflected in these two small examples. It is quite something that understanding that many who believe the Bible are not unique in knowing the Bible is inerrant and inspired and that we refer to the Bible with reverence. It is also interesting that holding the Bible to be true or holding it to be conditionally true, or even fiction does not take away the fact that it is an extant document deserving of respect by giving it a proper name. Any other name besides "Bible" is questioned whether or not it should command respect as coming from God when Scripture refers to the source as God. Conversely, one way to try and shake the Faith of people is to contend with us over the use of the word "Bible" and point out is comprised of many books as if that were some way to condemn the Bible and us. The gradation of efforts to discredit the Bible vary according to what detractors of the Bible's veracity think will work. The again, should any of us be unprepared to give an answer for our Hope, even if matters of punctuation and capitalization seem to show us up as uneducated fools and rustics? We know that whether or not we have a bit of formal education or much, the Bible remains the inerrant and inspired Word of God. I am quite happy to be described as deficient in learning, as this is true of me. I readily admit to being ignorant. There is so much I do not know. Looking out into the night sky gives some idea of things I will never know while on this earth. However, I am convinced that my ignorance should not be used as an excuse as never getting off of square one.

So, the deadly and threatening accusation hurled at all of Christendom which comes in the form of a question ever the same as it was "hath God said?" comes in all shapes and sizes. There are so many inventive ways to accuse ranging from quantum mechanics to capitalization. The two examples that follow confirm that some, many even, must have noticed the the Bible is special.

Luther writing about the Bible had this to say:

"Besides, it is an exceedingly effectual help against the devil, the world, and the flesh and all evil thoughts to be occupied with the Word of God, and to speak of it, and meditate upon it, so that the First Psalm declares those blessed who meditate upon the law of God day and night.

For, indeed, non-Christians can also cease from work and be idle, just as the entire swarm of our ecclesiastics, who stand daily in the churches, singing, and ringing bells but keeping no holy day holy, because they neither preach nor practice God’s Word, but teach and live contrary to it. For the Word of God is the sanctuary above all sanctuaries, yea, the only one which we Christians know and have.

Therefore I would be very glad (I say it again) if men would open their eyes and ears and take this to heart, lest some time we may again be led astray from the pure Word of God to the lying vanities of the devil.

For those only are called spiritual fathers who govern and guide us by the Word of God; as St. Paul boasts his fatherhood 1 Corinthians 4:15, where he says: In Christ Jesus I hove begotten you through the Gospel.

Here we have again the Word of God whereby He would encourage and urge us to true noble and sublime works, as gentleness patience, and, in short, love and kindness to our enemies, and would ever remind us to reflect upon the First Commandment, that He is our God, that is, that He will help, assist, and protect us, in order that He may thus quench the desire of revenge in us.

Besides the Word of God must suffer in the most shameful and malicious manner, being persecuted blasphemed, contradicted, perverted and falsely cited and interpreted. But let this pass; for it is the way of the blind world that she condemns and persecutes the truth and the children of God, and yet esteems it no sin.

If you are asked: What do you mean by the words: I believe in the Holy Ghost? you can answer: I believe that the Holy Ghost makes me holy, as His name implies. But whereby does He accomplish this, or what are His method and means to this end? Answer: By the Christian Church, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. For, in the first place, He has a peculiar congregation in the world, which is the mother that begets and bears every Christian through the Word of God, which He reveals and preaches, [and through which] He illumines and enkindles hearts, that they understand, accept it, cling to it, and persevere in it. 2

In the Introduction to The Institutes of the Christian Religion, the Bible is referred to as the Word of God.

"For what would be a better harbinger of another Reformation than widespread recourse to the earnest and sober study of the Word of God which would be evinced by the readiness carefully to peruse The Institutes of the Christian Religion.

One feature of Calvin’s exegetical work is his concern for the analogy of Scripture. He is always careful to take account of the unity and harmony of Scripture teaching. His expositions are not therefore afflicted with the vice of expounding particular passages without respect to the teaching of Scripture elsewhere and without respect to the system of truth set forth in the Word of God." 3

(LITV) Literal Translation of the Holy Bible, copyright © 1976-2000 by Jay P. Green, Sr. All rights reserved.

1 J. I. Packer, Knowing God, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL, © 1973 J. I. Packer.

2 Martin Luther, The Large Catechism, in electronic edition of Books For The Ages, Translators, F. Bente and W. H. T. Dau, AGES Software Albany, OR USA Version 2.0 © 1996, 1997 AGES Software.

3 John Murray, "Introduction," Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin, updated Electronic Edition with footnotes by Robert J. Dunzweiler, Translator, Henry Beveridge, Original Translator, Thomas Norton, public domain.

Good Lord, Jack -- can't you for once answer a simple focussed and unobtuse question in your own words (Words?)?

Just curious here --- how much time did it take you to accumulate this spam database of yours? How much of God's precious gift of time and life did you miss out on to archive all this stuff -- and just to spring on a poor innocent unsuspecting slob like me at the most opportune moment? Well, all of us here have to admire your tenacity, if not your reasoning abilities or logic skills.

R

P.S. The verse you quoted uses the lowercase "w", e.g. in the NIV: "18He chose to give us birth through the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created."

[Jack777]

rogero,

You are always such a comfort and so affirming. Thanks.

[rogero]

rogero,

You are always such a comfort and so affirming. Thanks.

I'm only interested in truth, Jack -- something you seem to define egocentrically. I do have a confession -- it is really too much fun showing the utter inconsistencies of pompous blowhards like you.

Now, would you please come to Natural Sciences and defend your scientific arguments against biological evolution? There's an active thread there just itching for your profound input.

C'mon, Jack -- pretty please?!

R :wink:

[Jack777]

rogero,

Your clever wit and obvious superior intelligence has served you well. However, you give me the proof you got, like the actual people what came before Homo sapiens. You cannot do it because you have none and there are none. Ta-da. So, you riddle me Riddler.

[rogero]

rogero,

Your clever wit and obvious superior intelligence has served you well. However, you give me the proof you got, like the actual people what came before Homo sapiens. You cannot do it because you have none and there are none. Ta-da. So, you riddle me Riddler.

My intelligence is obviously not superior to yours. That should be clear to all. :lol: No, I mean -- really...

Now, if you'd like to discuss evidence for human evolution (which is what I suppose you mean by your final three sentences), then please do come to Natural Sciences and discuss the same. As usual, when you can't answer a question, or want to divert from the discussion, you profer despicably misleading and dismissive screed.

BTW, I'd love to know what you mean by "actual people before Homo sapiens...". (Point of information, the Linnean taxonomic classification of genus/species is always either underlined or italicized.)

[rogero]

:bump:

Did you miss this, Jack? :wink:


YooHoo, Jack... I'm still waiting for a response from you to my simple and focussed question.

Please read posts #54, #55, and #56 of this thread, then please either explain yourself or apologize. It's a very very simple request. I have the utmost confidence that you can handle it.

R

[Jack777]

Oh alright...

Jesus is the Word is the Pentateuch

rogero,

It would be easy to overlook your charges of me being a Bible idolater or a blasphemous idolater. I think that when someone hears something that they are unfamiliar with or read things that seem different to them it is only natural to balk sometimes. I told you what I think and you launch a bit of whimsy to stir things up and an ad hominem attack. I am not as you say I am. You would do better to admit you do not understand what I said. I suspect that maybe you might ask me about exactly what it is that you do not understand.

Let me ask you, what did Jesus mean by the following? Also, read the words that follow from Paul and the further testimony of Jesus. Paul said that he addressed the people as ones who are wise.

Then Jesus said unto them,

Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum.

John 6:53-59

I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

Acts 10:15-17

And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said,

Take, eat; this is my body.

And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying,

Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.

And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives.

Matthew 26:26-30

And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said,

Take, eat: this is my body.

And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it. And he said unto them,

This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God.

And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives.

Mark 14:22-26

And he said unto them,

With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer: For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.

And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said,

Take this, and divide it among yourselves: For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.

And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying,

This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

Likewise also the cup after supper, saying,

This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

Luke 22:15-20

For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

I Corinthians 11:23-29

The Lord’ s supper is a sacrament of the New Testament, (Luke 22:20) wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine according to the appointment of Jesus Christ, his death is shewed forth; and they that worthily communicate feed upon his body and blood, to their spiritual nourishment and growth in grace; (Matthew 26:26–28, I Corinthians 11:23–26) have their union and communion with him confirmed; (I Corinthians 10:16) testify and renew their thankfulness, (I Corinthians 11:24) and engagement to God, (I Cor. 10:14–16,21) and their mutual love and fellowship each with the other, as members of the same mystical body. (I Corinthians 10:17)

Westminster Assembly, The Westminster Larger Catechism, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1995.

[Perry]

Hey Rogero, It's Thursday, May 19. McGee (yes, I'm aware he's dead) wa particularly goos again today, couldn't help but think of you. He went to a theistic evolutionary siminary, you know. Today's message was on the pride of life. www.ttb.org . Let me know what you think.

[rogero]

Hey Rogero, It's Thursday, May 19. McGee (yes, I'm aware he's dead) wa particularly goos again today, couldn't help but think of you. He went to a theistic evolutionary siminary, you know. Today's message was on the pride of life. www.ttb.org (http://www.ttb.org) . Let me know what you think.

Unless you're willing to provide a thesis and synopsis, I'm not the least bit interested in what a fella who's been dead a decade-and-a-half has to say about anything. If you think this guy has such a compelling argument, then please do present it here.

P.S. I don't know what "wa particularly goos again today" means. Could you provide a translation? Thanks, old buddy!

[rogero]

Oh alright...

Jesus is the Word is the Pentateuch

rogero,

It would be easy to overlook your charges of me being a Bible idolater or a blasphemous idolater. I think that when someone hears something that they are unfamiliar with or read things that seem different to them it is only natural to balk sometimes. I told you what I think and you launch a bit of whimsy to stir things up and an ad hominem attack. I am not as you say I am. You would do better to admit you do not understand what I said. I suspect that maybe you might ask me about exactly what it is that you do not understand.

Let me ask you, what did Jesus mean by the following? Also, read the words that follow from Paul and the further testimony of Jesus. Paul said that he addressed the people as ones who are wise.

Then Jesus said unto them,

Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum.

John 6:53-59

I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

Acts 10:15-17

And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said,

Take, eat; this is my body.

And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying,

Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.

And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives.

Matthew 26:26-30

And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said,

Take, eat: this is my body.

And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it. And he said unto them,

This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God.

And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives.

Mark 14:22-26

And he said unto them,

With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer: For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.

And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said,

Take this, and divide it among yourselves: For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.

And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying,

This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

Likewise also the cup after supper, saying,

This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

Luke 22:15-20

For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

I Corinthians 11:23-29

The Lord’ s supper is a sacrament of the New Testament, (Luke 22:20) wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine according to the appointment of Jesus Christ, his death is shewed forth; and they that worthily communicate feed upon his body and blood, to their spiritual nourishment and growth in grace; (Matthew 26:26–28, I Corinthians 11:23–26) have their union and communion with him confirmed; (I Corinthians 10:16) testify and renew their thankfulness, (I Corinthians 11:24) and engagement to God, (I Cor. 10:14–16,21) and their mutual love and fellowship each with the other, as members of the same mystical body. (I Corinthians 10:17)

Westminster Assembly, The Westminster Larger Catechism, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1995.

So, I guess you're explaining instead of apologizing then? My request (that you seemed to ignore) was to explain your snippy answer to my post on the use the lowercase "w" by all Bible translators.

Do you have an answer to my request? Do you have the spheroids to address my question? Here it is again, in a very focussed form -- re-read my posts #54. Please explain your snippy answer in #55. Can you do that for an old friend, Jack ol' buddy, ol' pal?

R

P.S. Regarding your current post -- I accept the true presence of Christ in the Sacraments. Are you a sacramentalist as well? If so, we have a lot in common.

[Perry]

Unless you're willing to provide a thesis and synopsis, I'm not the least bit interested in what a fella who's been dead a decade-and-a-half has to say about anything. If you think this guy has such a compelling argument, then please do present it here.

P.S. I don't know what "wa particularly goos again today" means. Could you provide a translation? Thanks, old buddy!

I meant was good again today. Us carpenters are all thumbs on a keyboard. :tongue: There was no crazy evidence, I just thought about you, thought you'd enjoy, maybe even benefit from it (ole buddy). Man was created on a high plain, he didn't live like an animal long ago; why go back 100,000 years looking for examples of man living like an animal? Just go downtown L.A. where he's living like an animal right now. He doesn't look like an animal, like the artists' renditions of cavedudes, but animals don't get drunk and beat their wives, aren't homosexuals, etc. He hasn't evolved, but quite the opposite.

[rogero]

I meant was good again today. Us carpenters are all thumbs on a keyboard. :tongue: There was no crazy evidence, I just thought about you, thought you'd enjoy, maybe even benefit from it (ole buddy). Man was created on a high plain, he didn't live like an animal long ago; why go back 100,000 years looking for examples of man living like an animal? Just go downtown L.A. where he's living like an animal right now. He doesn't look like an animal, like the artists' renditions of cavedudes, but animals don't get drunk and beat their wives, aren't homosexuals, etc. He hasn't evolved, but quite the opposite.'

Carpentry is a noble occupation. Don't disparage it. Most carpenters can use a keyboard with more dexterity than moi.

But, with that little tidbit dispensed with, I fail to see the point of your post. Humans are animals, aren't they? What do mean that "Man was created on a high plain"? Do you mean at a high elevation? Confused...

BTW, if I'm not mistaken (and that is a grand tautology :smile:), there are some animals that are homosexual. But what does this have to do with the price of tea in China or with this thread?

In a similar vein, what's your explanation of "cavedudes"? Are they human or not? Are they subject to the grace of Christ, or not?

This is all very confusing.

Your buddy,

Roger the Dodger

[maudman]

What is the first chapter of John really trying to say? I think John is answering one of life most basic fundamental realities. I think John 1:14 are some of the most Profound statements in the bible and I think have a more fundamental meaning for what we call life.

I think it is pertinent that we stop and ask ourselves, what is life itself?

I think as men we struggle to rationalize things in and about life because we fail to see ourselves in the proper perspective in a relationship with it. For the most part we suffer from the old zen thought puzzle, “How do you know what you’ve found? When you don’t know what it is your looking for.
People often say do you know God or the Lord and yet few, really can tell you honestly. Many will act like they really do have a personal relationship with him and yet few can tell you with clarity what it’s all about? Like the wind we sometimes Blow, not knowing truly what we are saying. Or how it will truly effect what we don’t know or have read in the scriptures. Or that there is a relationship between certain verses of scripture that has gone unnoticed or just plain unrecognized. Because we need more information or we need to better understand the information that we have.

If you could define life in the most simplest of terms how would it appear in our reasoning’s.



People sometimes look at life from a biological perspective. When this is done the axioms and inferences tend to stem from a vocabulary that spring from empirical basis. People rationalize things in their relationship to one another in a logical progression. (input ,output). They often use empirical methods to verify the spiritual epiphany.
It doesn’t matter whether you are a scientist or a religionist all what we call logical or rational is rooted and springs forth from a process that isn’t verifiable by any empirical method we often use empirical methods to verify a spiritual awakening or awareness’s. They are deductions made from the cause and effect in thesis, anti-thesis to a synthesis. It is an attempt to collapse the wave function or fix a moment whether in a quantum event of the empirical or a spiritual observation which is also a quantum event of information.

Any rationalizing is a process set in motion as forces whether empirical or spiritual. Forces that force the mind to make sense of the event that draws one to better understand. It is the universal “default” of our conscious to ask the question WHY!!!. We are basically creatures of intuitive provocation. When Rene Descartes said I think therefore I am, he was only half right!!! I may go into this a little later, but it basically demonstrates one thing about what we have come to understand about life. The rationalizing of Life is to a greater or lesser degrees linked to one’s vocabulary which is a symphony of words that defines or rationalizes in suspension of consciousness ones esthetic intuitions.

Is John the 1st chapter insight into that which we call life or the incarnation of the written word of the Bible? Or is it both?

It is in fact both and those that say it is only one or the other are wrong. Christ was the fulfillment of a prophetic revelation of past written record or documents dictated by God. But it also said that he came that we may have life and have it more abundantly. So Christ came as a revelation of a Vocabulary that was yet unseen or put into words. Although the Alpha and Omega is written with a context of a beginning and ending it is also a inference into the fact that life is directly link to the Word or expression of something that begins with “in the Beginning” which is a moment of expression of a spiritual force in a vocabulary or symphony of words or revelation of mind. Life is a relationship of words and through Christ we have a more abundant vocabulary.

So Christ is in fact the reality of a Vocabulary yet realized and it is an evolutionary revelation.

If we will allow ourselves to stop and think for a moment, and consider things around us?


Look at everything around us. It is in fact a suspended state of vocabulary or symphony of words. All the tangible objects that we find ourselves intertwined with were in fact, Ideas in the minds of peoples through a process which was determined by someone else’s ideas are transformed into a tangible reality of which the origin’s was a spiritual epiphany. Design and engineering is a spiritual process of a relationship of words. These words that arise or created are necessary to define or clarify intuitive provocation.

Now consider the first verses of John :1 that all things (all Things!!!! Things!!!! Things!!!) are made by this Word and with out him was not anything made that was made. And this Word was God with God and is God. And this Word lights every man which came into this world. All men are from birth incarnated with this light which is what makes life because in this light is life. But this life also showed us that to have eternal life we must follow him and his example. That we through and because of him( the deification of vocabulary) the Christ we are to do the will of the Father as he showed, We sacrifice our vocabulary for his ( his words become ours). We are Christ’s because like him we choose to do the will of the Father. Christ’s testimony was true because He chose to do not his own will but the will of the Father.

So when you lay down at night contemplating things or wake up in the morning contemplating things and all the day long meditate on things “”that is the life that was in the beginning””, Yes it is possible to not see the forest because of the trees.


Peace be with you all,

[Jack777]

rogero,

I did look at the posts and cannot figure out the basis for a needed apology. Could you explain?

[rogero]

rogero,

I did look at the posts and cannot figure out the basis for a needed apology. Could you explain?

I asked you to explain or apologize. The point of contention seems pretty clear. Please read my post #54, then your response in #55. How was I trying in post #54 to "prove the Bible wrong"?

I'm not going to let you dodge this one.

R

[Jack777]

I see, what do you not understand?

[rogero]

I see, what do you not understand?

Will you please answer my point instead of doing this silly dance? Your routine is really getting to be old.

How could my post #54 be perceived by anyone in his/her right mind to be "trying to prove the Bible wrong?"

Please concentrate this time and try to give an intelligent answer!

R

[Jack777]

Okay.

[rogero]

Okay.

Well, Jacko -- it's been four days. Is that a long enough time for your cogitation?

Here's my question again:



How could my post #54 be perceived by anyone in his/her right mind to be "trying to prove the Bible wrong?"



R

[rogero]

Jack,

You had time to start two new threads (one of which is very long) in Cosmogony in the last two days. If you have time for that, why don't you time to answer my simple question?

R

[rogero]

Jack,

You had time to start two new threads (one of which is very long) in Cosmogony in the last two days. If you have time for that, why don't you time to answer my simple question?

R

Ok, Oxlegs, I think you've had plenty of time for to compose a response. It's noted that you had time to start another long thread this morning ("First Things"). If you don't answer by this weekend, I will assume that you are lying troll -- or perhaps just suffering from some form of dementia. Point of concern: have you had your carotid arteries checked recently? There is some indication of impediment of blood flow to the brain.

R

[Jack777]

Lighten up Dr X, sheesh.

[rogero]

Lighten up Dr X, sheesh.

Please give a reasonable answer. You are a reasonable person, are you not?