Biblical Truth

[anon5216]

You may wanna answer these questions:

1. Do you believe that Peter and the rest of the Apostles were fallible men? Yes
2. Do you believe that the Apostles (who were fallible) preached through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? Sometimes - the dictionary definition I quoted earlier.

3.  Do you believe that the Holy Spirit can work through fallible men to write infallibly? No - not infallibly - free will and misinterpretation of the inspiration prevents that

4. Do you believe that the Holy Spirit can work through fallible men to decide infallibly? No - free will and misinterpretation of the inspiration prevents that
5. Do you believe that the Bible is an infallible collection decided by fallible men through the work of the Holy Spirit? No - not infallible or inerrant

Answering yes to all of the above may lead you to acknowledging the Bible as Inspired.
Inspired as using the dictionary definition is one thing - using the Christian modification/usage of the term is entirely another.

There were many writings and to correctly decide which ones originated from “these people” required the assistance of the Holy Spirit. As I noted above, I don’t believe those decisions were infallible.
The Church did not decide on her own. Further, these writings were written by fallible men who wrote in their own fallible style but through the help of the Holy Spirit.
And as such, we can’t consider these writings to be direct Divine transcriptions without error.

 

[anon5216]

You must ask yourshelf a question… If scripture is not the infallable word of God then who’s word is it? Beacuse if it is not his then it is somebody elses’s. I Trust God to protect
his word and to be nobody’s but his. A relvelation thru faith is how we know it to be aboslutely true.

God loves you…God bless

Why would God express His Word in extremely imprecise and easily misinterpreted human language in the first place?
God doesn’t speak in human language - humans created the myriad of human languages.

 

[anon5216]

But there is only ONE Truth! How can several individuals have different Truths? If Truth is defined according to an individual’s own definition then perhaps that’s why we have over 30,000 different denominations.

Truth is not something that can be expressed directly in human text.

It can be hinted at indirectly in many different ways however.

 

[anon5216]

Aryus

We say the Holy Bible is the infallible Word of God, primarily because the Man who makes these claims is God and being God He meant what He said.
But we can’t claim this unless we conclude that the Church He founded is infallible. It is the Church that made it possible the Bible to be inspired. St. Augustine said **“I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.” **

Based on my above claim, what grounds do they have? Do they have an interpretative authority? or it is their own?
We know Christianity begins with Christ. The Catholic Church is the only authority for 2,000 years and She’ll continue until the second coming of Jesus, her Founder. The Church is divinely protected from teaching error.

The Holy Bible is true because the One who revealed it is TRUE Himself.

Catholics don’t take the Holy Bible as the only source to prove the teaching of God. We rely on the **Church **Christ founded, to guide us in truth, as any good mother does and the Magisterium to continue teaching us the truth He has entrusted to His visible head of His Church, the successor of Peter.

All claims attributed to the Divine in biblical writings are second hand.
Jesus himself wrote down not one single word.

Consider that this may have been quite intentional precisely because words are not Truth itself, and arguing over what words supposedly are Truth itself becomes a ridiculous merry go round.

 

[anon5216]

Certainly we can agree that God is the principle author, but how can you say that Paul did not author (yes, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, but nonetheless used his thoughts, words, style, etc.) his letter to the Romans or to the Church in Corinth?

In Christ,
Irenaeus

Faith can certainly believe that God is the principle source of inspiration, but in no way did God actually write down any specific words anywhere.

 

[anon5216]

I’ll take your attention to these words “All scripture”. What is scripture?

Does the Bible mean any sacred scripture or does it mean any form of scripture?

It didn’t even say “Only Scripture” but it says “ALL scripture”. So what is scripture then and what is not? The four gospels are scripture but what about the gospel of Thomas, the gospel of Peter, the Gospel of Mary, the gospel of James, even the Book of Mormon, the Quran, the Book of Abraham, the book of Jasher, Bel and the Dragon, the Hermas Shepherd, the Canticles, the book of Psalms and the book of songs, Wisdom and the book of Proverbs etc? These are ALL SCRIPTURES and why not accept them as INSPIRED as 2 Tim 3:16 states “ALL SCRIPTURES are inspired by God”.

Non-Catholics may try in every way to refute this argument by saying that what’s in the Bible in only scripture but I don’t see any sense in it. It’s just doesn’t make sense at all.

Yesterday, a man discovered a piece of paper with ancient writings on it which translates “…a man of God is created in the image of God. As man now is, God once was; as God now is, man may be…” should this be also called scripture ?

Good point.
While the primary usage of the word “scripture” does refer to the accepted Christian sacred writings as collected and defined in the Bible, it does also carry the broader meaning of “sacred writing” in general.
(Just for the record, I personally don’t believe most of the OT qualifies).

 

[Elizabethteresa]

Such philosophical discussion. The Lord would like us to have the faith of babes. This is somewhere in the bible. I guess I am confused about why we sit and discuss interpretation and misinterpretation of God’s Holy Word, do we not agree with what it says? What points in the Scriptures do we not agree with? Discussion to question the Word of God only can be because you have issue with what it says? Scripture are letters to the believer in Christ Jesus. The main important point is that we know who are savior is…the scriptures are a key to understanding our GOD. Who HE is…His mercy…His love …and His ability to intervene…We all need more understanding. A concordance to understand the words in the Greek. All I know is, that Christ Jesus walked on this earth to teach me many things. He left His word so I would know that He is preparing a place for me… that He promises to help me get through the pains of this world and see me through to the end of my life…He then promises to bring me home and through Him alone I get home…2 Peter 3:10 speaks of a new heaven and new earth…2 Peter 3;14 Therefore, beloved , since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless, and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are somethings hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction… 17. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the error of unprincipled men and fall from your own steadfastness 18 but grow in grace and knowledge fo our Lord anf Savior, Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity.Amen
We are not scholars…I am not an intellectual…I am just a woman saved by the grace of GOD …my God I claim…my God I share…I just know that truth for me is in the bible… and again I say if you really want to know where to find it, that the BIBLE…the Book I must Believe before Leaving this Earth…then I say to you, ask the Lord for truth…ask God to show you the way and HE will reveal Himself…

2* Tim 4;4 I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: 2. preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove , rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. 3. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires…4. and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths…*

I can do nothing to change the perception of what is someone else’s truth, only the one true God can do that. we are all on a different path. I pray that you find the truth. All I know is that I was never good enough on my own accord…I tried, I just was not cut out…People think they are good. They do good things…and that this may be enough…Until I was presented with the truth in God’s word, something deep within me, was convicting me of this truth, that I am a sinner, and in need of saving to have the promises of eternity…All I know is that I heard that truth in the bible, I realized who I was and I repented of my sin…I asked Christ to lead me in my life and now how much LOVE this God of the scriptures in the bible has for me. TO die for me. Christ Jesus took my punishment on the cross for my sin, for He was blameless and sinless. That changed everything for me. There is no other God that has been introduced to HIs People that has promised eternity and knowing that you have it then the God of the Holy BIble. Jesus Christ is Lord and King, the alpha and omega. His name is Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Prince of Peace, Holy One, Lamb of God, Word of Life, King of Kings, Head of the Church, Son of Righteousness, Horn of Salvation, Resurrection and Life, The Alpha and OMega…God bless you…

 

[Norminha]

anon5216

Why would God express His Word in extremely imprecise and easily misinterpreted human language in the first place?

First of all, God by nature is pure simplicity; humans complicate things.
Have you noticed Jesus spoke in parables when addressing His followers?

God doesn’t speak in human language - humans created the myriad of human languages.

Well, if God did not speak human language, can you explain the reason we have Holy Scriptures?
**God **the Son, the Son of Man whose name is Jesus Christ spoke clearly the tongue of His followers.

 

[catholic4reason]

I recommend the following Biblical apology by William Craig…one of the best modern Catholic apologists… leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/rediscover2.html It should help clear up some things on the reliability of the Scriptures.

 

[Norminha]

elizabethteresa

John 3:16 ‘For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son that whomsoever believeth in HIm should not perish but have everlasting love.’

Absolutely!!

John 14:16 ’ I am the way, the truth and the light. NO man cometh to the father but by me.

Correct! I am the WAY, the TRUTH and the LIGHT said the Lord.

When we realize that the blood of Christ is the only reason we are righteous

Well, I would say we’ll continue to be sinners who repent and confess our sins, then go back to the state of grace perhaps to fall again. Jesus said “I came for sinners not for the righteous.”

Grace is getting something I do not deserve.

Grace is a gift from God for all. We must be predisposed to receive it, accordingly.

Is my duty to Christ to be Catholic

Yes, it is your duty to Christ to be Catholic; He commanded you and me. “Go into the whole world and proclaim the gospel to** every creature…”** (Mk 16-15)
Catholic means universal, it means the Church Christ founded on Peter is for everybody -the entire world.

and find true religion…no…my duty is the **share **the good news with others…Christ has set me free…

The leading qualities: hope, joy, confidence, love, patience, humility, purpose of amendment, and aspiration towards high ideals are the natural accessories of the urgency that through religion we live in friendly communion with God. Religion answers to the need so deeply felt in our hearts.

He has washed me clean…I am on a journey to be holy because Christ did that all for me…and you…

Yes, Jesus Christ paid your ransom and mine with His precious blood. With the grace of God we can attain holiness, indispensable requisite to enter into the Kingdom.

 

[irenaeus1]

Truth is not something that can be expressed directly in human text.

It can be hinted at indirectly in many different ways however.

Do you believe in God?

Do you believe that God could have become incarnate?

Do you believe that he could infallibly communicate with us through fallible men?

Just trying to understand where you are coming from.

 

[irenaeus1]

Quote:
Originally Posted by anon5216 forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
My intention in the previous post was to assert that the entirely fallible human CC leadership’s claims of infallibility (via the Holy Spirit) and related claims of inerrancy of defined scriptural writings are a human overlay that is itself not Truth.

I asked, “Is your assertion an infallible one?”
You replied, “I don’t claim infallibility for myself anymore than I accept those claims by any other human past or present - regardless of their title.”

So, in other words, you could be wrong in your statement…

 

[irenaeus1]

I stated, “Which is why the argument starts with the apostolic writings as historical witness accounts, not that the writings are the infallible Word of God.”
anon5216 replied, “It is also why you can’t conclude with the apostolic writings being anything more than human reflection on extraordinary experiences. Divine authorship simply is not a tenable claim.”

That does not follow. Are you claiming that God could not use fallible men to communciate his divine revelation?

 

[irenaeus1]

Originally Posted by anon5216

I’m not asserting the resurrection was falsified - simply that the first and second hand witnesses were not qualified to infallibly interpret their experiences - and neither are any titled successors.

You implied as much when you stated that “[w]illingness to die for one’s beliefs does not guarantee one’s beliefs are 100% correct,” which means that if they professed the resurrection to be true, although in reality, according to you, it wasn’t. How do you know that first and second hand witnesses are not qualified to infallibly interpret their experiences? They were willing to bet their life that they were interpreting their experiences correctly. And like I said previously, they were in the best position to know, for as St. Paul stated, these things have not escaped notice, for these things were not done in a corner **[paraphrase].

 

[irenaeus1]

anon5216
3. Do you believe that the Holy Spirit can work through fallible men to write infallibly? No - not infallibly - free will and misinterpretation of the inspiration prevents that
4. Do you believe that the Holy Spirit can work through fallible men to decide infallibly? No - free will and misinterpretation of the inspiration prevents that
5. Do you believe that the Bible is an infallible collection decided by fallible men through the work of the Holy Spirit? No - not infallible or inerrant

Wow… you really limit God’s ability. You do realize the free will does not necessitate error, don’t you? I mean ‘to err is human,’ but to be human does not necessarily mean to err.

 

[irenaeus1]

All claims attributed to the Divine in biblical writings are second hand.

And this necessarily makes it untrue? So unless God speaks to you directly through a burning bush or thunder and lightning… oh wait, that wouldn’t work either because God would be using a third party (in this case matter) to communicate. Also, even if Jesus did personally write down something, you as a reader would still claim that you were getting your information second hand, either because you as the reader were not there personally to receive said message directly from Jesus or because the copier of the writing is technically handing on what he supposed Jesus to have written. It is readily apparent that nothing will satisfy you because God can do nothing to present his divine revelation to you because, after all, as a fallible person, your eyes, ears, and mind could be misinterpreting the message you think you are receiving. Do I have this right?

 

[irenaeus1]

Faith can certainly believe that God is the principle source of inspiration, but in no way did God actually write down any specific words anywhere.

Did God not actually write down the Ten Commandments on tablets of Stone? What about the wall of the king’s palace in Daniel 5:5-31? Oh wait, you got me again, this is second hand information because I wasn’t there personally. And even if I was, my mere telling you about would still make it second hand information to you.

 

[anon5216]

Do you believe in God? Yes - I would hope my signature makes that clear enough.

Do you believe that God could have become incarnate? The Hindus certainly believe God has become incarnate on more than one occasion - they refer to such a manifestation as an Avatar.

Do you believe that he could infallibly communicate with us through fallible men? When God wants to infallibly communicate, I believe God does it directly - without the use of human speech - especially not fallible 2nd hand speech.

Just trying to understand where you are coming from.

 

[anon5216]

Quote:
Originally Posted by anon5216 forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
My intention in the previous post was to assert that the entirely fallible human CC leadership’s claims of infallibility (via the Holy Spirit) and related claims of inerrancy of defined scriptural writings are a human overlay that is itself not Truth.

I asked, “Is your assertion an infallible one?”
You replied, “I don’t claim infallibility for myself anymore than I accept those claims by any other human past or present - regardless of their title.”

So, in other words, you could be wrong in your statement…

That is a question you would more productively put to those who claim infallibility (yes, with the official disclaimers about when invoked and when valid - faith & morals and all that).

 

[anon5216]

I’m not asserting the resurrection was falsified - simply that the first and second hand witnesses were not qualified to infallibly interpret their experiences - and neither are any titled successors.