Is it a true God or our own construct of "god" in the Bible?

[curious_cath]

The Scriptures testify this about themselves

But that would be a tautology, raising even more questions just as you also say.

So, what revelation was present for those millenia?

History, culture, warfare and belief, tradition and incomplete religious understanding were churning all around in the whole region for an extended period of time! Until a new quality of faith with its documents written down came out of it, as the butter is coming out of the cream after churning.

It also precludes the gift of infalliblity, where God prevents humans from making an error

Infallibility? Is it not a gift of the Pope only in faith-related declarations? I have never heard infallibility in the context of the writers of the Scripture.

God revealed Himself to us within historical, cultural, and linguistic context. We will not be able to understand what is written without that context.

Yes, but in the end we would like to have a grasp of God as He is, apart from the accidental circumstances of history, etc. This God is only revealed in Jesus.

 

[guanophore]

But that would be a tautology, raising even more questions just as you also say.

No, it is not. It is the source bearing testimony to itself. If this were not valid, our entire legal system would be invalid. A witness is able to attest to himself. It is not “saying the same thing twice”.

History, culture, warfare and belief, tradition and incomplete religious understanding were churning all around in the whole region for an extended period of time! Until a new quality of faith with its documents written down came out of it, as the butter is coming out of the cream after churning.

Ok, but does that mean that God did not guide the result?

Infallibility? Is it not a gift of the Pope only in faith-related declarations? I have never heard infallibility in the context of the writers of the Scripture.

No, of course not! Infallibility is the gift of the Holy Spirit that protects God’s chosen people from error. If the writers of the Scripture did not benefit from this gift (millenia before “popes”] then we could not accept the Old Testament as the Word of God!

All the writers of Scripture enjoyed the gift of infallibility.

I have never heard infallibility in the context of the writers of the Scripture.

Without this gift, they would have been subject to human error. God protects His Word so that it accomplishes the purpose for which He has sent it.

Yes, but in the end we would like to have a grasp of God as He is, apart from the accidental circumstances of history, etc. This God is only revealed in Jesus.

No, God has revealed Himself in Creation since the beginning of time. Jesus is the apex of that, but not the “only” revelation by God of Himself.

 

[curious_cath]

All the writers of Scripture enjoyed the gift of infallibility.

As I read it is only the Word of God as a whole and coherent teaching that is infallible, not individual writers of the Scripture. Especially not the writers of the Old Testament like the composers of Biblical poetry (psalms, proverbs) which is a specific art form incorporating folk and popular wisdom. The 100% apostolic origin of the New Testament can be questioned. Look at the synoptic gospel writers as Luke and Mark who were not apostles.

What is infallible in the Bible is the fall of Jesus on the way of the cross to Golgotha. Together with His suffering, death and resurrection. Everything He revealed through these things is infallible, revealing to us the true loving and merciful nature of God in salvation. He is the First Revelator superseding all. The church and its Pope are infallible precisely up to the extent of being able to express this infallible truth of Jesus.

Without this gift, they would have been subject to human error.

Aren’t they? Even if human perception is not necessarily error, it would make a stamp on the outcome. All in all, human hands guided by God would point to God but not necessarily express the accurate character of God. We see serious disagreement and discrepancies among the 4 gospels regarding the story and teaching of Jesus.

God has revealed Himself in Creation since the beginning of time.

Yes, in some sense for sure. You may talk about the language of creation as an infallible language. But who can claim, beyond God himself, to speak and understand fluently the language of creation?

 

[guanophore]

As I read it is only the Word of God as a whole and coherent teaching that is infallible, not individual writers of the Scripture.

I don’t know what you are reading, but the books of Scripture were written over a long period of time by a number of different persons. Either the products of their writing were scripture at the moment they were penned, or they were never God Breathed.

Infallibility is a gift that prevents error. The writers of Scripture were gifted with it while they were writing.

Especially not the writers of the Old Testament like the composers of Biblical poetry (psalms, proverbs) which is a specific art form incorporating folk and popular wisdom.

What are you saying? God is not able to produce poetry and proverbs that are without error?

The 100% apostolic origin of the New Testament can be questioned.

Ok. Go ahead.

. Look at the synoptic gospel writers as Luke and Mark who were not apostles.

What are you saying? That persons who wrote, who were not Apostles, did not document what the Apostles taught?

What is infallible in the Bible is the fall of Jesus on the way of the cross to Golgotha.

I think you are confused. This is not found anywhere in Scripture.

Everything He revealed through these things is infallible, revealing to us the true loving and merciful nature of God in salvation.

I would like to know how you know of the true loving, merciful nature of God?

The church and its Pope are infallible precisely up to the extent of being able to express this infallible truth of Jesus.

I am sorry, I think you lost me here.

Aren’t they?

Not when they are writing Scripture.

Even if human perception is not necessarily error, it would make a stamp on the outcome.

Yes. All the God Breathed writings reflect the human culture of the writers and bear the stamp of their humanity.

All in all, human hands guided by God would point to God but not necessarily express the accurate character of God.

Certainly this is true if you reject the action of the Holy Spirit.

We see serious disagreement and discrepancies among the 4 gospels regarding the story and teaching of Jesus.

No.

You may talk about the language of creation as an infallible language.

I don’t think I said that?

But who can claim, beyond God himself, to speak and understand fluently the language of creation?

I don’t believe this was ever claimed. Fluency is not a requirement to understand or perceive the divine nature.

 

[curious_cath]

God is not able to produce poetry and proverbs that are without error?

Certainly, He is! But the psalms and proverbs are human art forms. They were in oral tradition for a long time, occasionally changed, re-worded or modified, until they were written down by some human hand.

This is not found anywhere in Scripture.

21 A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross. 22 They brought Jesus to the place called Golgotha (which means “the place of the skull”). 23 Then they offered him wine mixed with myrrh, but he did not take it. 24 And they crucified him. Dividing up his clothes, they cast lots to see what each would get. (Mark 15)

I would like to know how you know of the true loving, merciful nature of God?

I would not know it without Jesus!

 

[guanophore]

the psalms and proverbs are human art forms. They were in oral tradition for a long time, occasionally changed, re-worded or modified, until they were written down by some human hand.

Can you produce any sources that support this position?

Can you give any scholarship that refutes what the Psalms say of themselves?

Can you contradict what Jesus said about the Psalms being inspired by God?

21 A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross. 22 They brought Jesus to the place called Golgotha (which means “the place of the skull”). 23 Then they offered him wine mixed with myrrh, but he did not take it. 24 And they crucified him. Dividing up his clothes, they cast lots to see what each would get. (Mark 15)

Sorry, you lost me here. What does this passage have to do with God revealing Himself through creation?

I would not know it without Jesus!

Ok, then how did you come to know Jesus?

 

[Shakuhachi]

Either the products of their writing were scripture at the moment they were penned, or they were never God Breathed.

Am I hearing you say that when a person sat down to write something that later became party of the Bible, God took over their minds and filled it with supernatural knowledge? Is that what you believe divinely inspired means?

 

[ericc]

Do you that kind of folk art you have on your kitchen wall as a cover? These covers usually have similar blessings embroidered on them that are being shared by everyday folks in their everyday lives.

  Pinterest

I don’t. That is a Biblical verse. I know some people may frame those up and hanged on walls. However, I don’t see any evidence provided that the verse originated from folklore. If the folklore existed before the verse, we may have reason to believe the folklore story.

Do you have the evidence? If you don’t your assertion is mere supposition for the time being. I am actually interested to know what kind of Jewish folklore exist. For an ancient race, there should be some. But knowing how much they revere God, I’d find it very doubtful God’s words being used in a careless or playful manner. From what I gathered, they don’t put those verses on the temple walls. Gentiles may do that though. Probably the folklore accusation is a very recent invention.

 

[curious_cath]

Probably the folklore accusation is a very recent invention.

It is not accusation. Folklore is similar to oral tradition. There are overlaps. Perhaps. the two mean the same thing: texts passed down orally from one generation to the next.

 

[ericc]

He did not have to comment on all books. He simply overrode it all, by his teaching and his self-sacrificing love. Here are 5 famous strikes He meted out on the teaching of the Pentateuch:

You need to re-read my previous quote: Mat 5:17 he told us “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” So what did he do? He enhanced them.

“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment."

He added to it, not invalidated it.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

He enhanced it, actually increased the provision coverage.

“It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery."

Jesus made it even more difficult to divorce. Used to be easy but he enhanced the difficulty of justifying getting the divorce.

“Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’ But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King."

I can’t see how he invalidated it. He didn’t say the oaths were no good but not to take oath taking lightly.

You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also."

Did he say retaliation is no longer valid? He didn’t. But you have to ask yourself the purpose of him asking you to turn the other cheek. I am sure he didn’t mean that if someone is killing you, you resist retaliating till you are dead. Or one shouldn’t resist if one is being raped. Or one shouldn’t resist if an intruder is harming your family.

The examples that you quoted as invalidating the old laws are simply incorrect. They actually harm your case. Otherwise Jesus would be contradicting himself.

 

[ericc]

It is not accusation. Folklore is similar to oral tradition. There are overlaps. Perhaps. the two mean the same thing: texts passed down orally from one generation to the next.

So show the evidence when that folklore started. Just one instance of that verse in a folklore setting will do. One that precedes the verse of course. For you to believe so strongly in the folklore, you must have some basis. So disclose your source for the folklore. You are the person that said that was folklore so back it up.

 

[goout]

goout:

God speaks only one and final Word, Jesus Christ, and all of scripture points to Him and must be read through him.

Wow, this is a very powerful claim! Does it mean that everything in the Bible makes sense only through Jesus? I could certainly go along with that. I tried to say something similar by calling Jesus the First Revelator.

All things are in Christ. Christ is the “unsealer of the scrolls” of Revelations.
First revelator? Yea I suppose so. God’s full and final Word. Co-eternal Son of God. So in that respect “first” does not work as the Trinity is outside time.
But I think First Revelator is a good expression of it, even though the OT is first revelation in history. Christ comes to human flesh later in history.

Christ does not contradict scripture, he fulfills it, gives it it’s full meaning and life.

curious_cath
This looks the same to me as overriding a false image of God in our minds and hearts.

I don’t think the word override works in regard to the OT. But Christ is the full and true image of God as he pleased to reveal himself. So he does wipe away false images.

 

[curious_cath]

The examples that you quoted as invalidating the old laws are simply incorrect.

I did not say these invalidate the old law. I said that they override it. Everything has a new meaning with Christ.

 

[curious_cath]

So show the evidence when that folklore started.

Oral tradition is actually one form of folklore. Thanks for helping this to find out.

 

[TheOldColonel]

The nature of God will always, even in heaven, remain mysterious. The Bible is a collection of works expressing genuine experiences of God breaking into human history for the purpose of our salvation. It is not a book on God’s anatomy or nature or the inmost secrets of God’s being. Human concepts, by necessity, have been applied to those genuine experiences of the true God. It should not surprise us that the image of God varies from story to story. Yet, such variety does not negate the genuine experences of the true God who inspired the Bible.

 

[curious_cath]

the image of God varies from story to story

But I have great difficulty when this image emanates laws that kill people. When someone dies, it is irreversible in our world. You cannot say later, oops, my bad…! That person died and cannot be brought back until the end times. So you really have to get a hard look on a bad law that kills. What is behind it? An inadequate image of God? Of just the blood thirsty nature of humankind?

 

[guanophore]

Am I hearing you say that when a person sat down to write something that later became party of the Bible, God took over their minds and filled it with supernatural knowledge? Is that what you believe divinely inspired means?

It has not been described that way. God does not “take over” people, but human beings, moved by the Holy Spirit, wrote what God wanted to reveal about Himself. Yes, it is a supernatural knowledge that human beings cannot attain by themselves. It is a gift of grace.

 

[TheOldColonel]

The human race is messy.

 

[curious_cath]

The human race is messy.

That is why we need a God who is not…?

 

[ericc]

I did not say these invalidate the old law. I said that they override it. Everything has a new meaning with Christ.

Means the same. The old law is no longer in effect. Replaced, superseded, whatever. But it is not as I have shown. The old law is still there with enhanced expanded provisions. Jesus expect more. Yes, an even stricter interpretation for those old laws such as the 1st and second example.

Or perhaps you have another meaning of “override”? I am old school. I go with usual common usage.