Your View of the Bible

[Rvaughn]

[Dave Roberts]

[Rvaughn]

[KeithE]

A qualified yes to 1, 3, 4. Disagree entirely with 2.

1. I agree that the writers of scripture were inspired by God initially; some deviated to odd statements fairly soon (e.g. imprecatory Psalms), some universalized local customs (e.g. Paul about women), some just didn’t express that inspired message very clearly (e.g. Job, Revelation and many of the prophets at times) and many (probably most) gave a really good inspired message that we, in turn, need to be inspired by.

2. I'm with Dave, but I’ve only read translations. There are many contradictions (e.g. resurrections accounts details) , absurdities (e.g. MT 18:19 "If two [believers] agree about anything they ask, God will do it for them”) and morally questionable advice (e.g. EX 22:16-17 "An unbetrothed virgin is required to marry her seducer"). Many more (some answerable honestly, some not answerable).

3. Scripture certainly has authoritative value as a message from God for those able to discern the truth. But even those textual-based messages are not the sole authority - also important are nature itself, conscience, reason, and above all the Spirit which alone has the potential to lead to all truth.

4. I would say that the bible is sufficient for a rudimentary knowledge about God the Creator and Jesus the exemplar and it sufficiently has the ability (if someone reads the best parts) to lead one to accepting Christ. But as vaughn added the Holy Spirit helps greatly; it enlarges our understanding of life and instructions. Rvaughn's qualifier "this does not exclude the work of the Holy Spirit” is tantamount to saying there is more to it than the bible alone.

[Stephen Fox]

Has the Best view of the Bible.

Read her Apostles of Reason. Answers a lot of questions you haven't thought about yet.

And God Secretaries about the KJV.

Meanwhile for Thornton's accelerated reading list, here is a must read with a Georgia focus; UGA in fact

https://www.amazon.com/Mans-World-Portr ... %27s+world

[Haruo]

My first question might be, what Bible? I am convinced that the Bible itself never refers to the Bible itself, if by "the Bible" we mean one of the particular canons that 21st-century Christian groups accept as their Scriptural canon. For most of us Baptists, that means the 66-book canon, 39 running Genesis to Malachi and then 27 running Matthew to Revelation. For Catholics and various Orthodox churches a number of other books are viewed as canonical or deuterocanonical (which is still a variety of canonical). Nowhere in the Bible we have, when the text refers to "the Scriptures" or "the word of God" or anything along those lines, do I believe that the human authors had our present-day canons in view. When Paul writes that "All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching" I see no reason to think a particular canon is referred to. Indeed, I can easily see how the Qu'ran, the Vedas, or the writings of Baha'ullah could be part of that "all scripture". Heck, even, nay, certainly, The Big Book. To some degree, since all writings are produced (or were until recently) by living human beings, and since the life that animates us as living beings is itself the breath of God, it could be that "all scripture" should be taken literally, as "all writing".

Growing up in a Baptist (albeit a very liberal Baptist) household, one of the Bibles we had at home and made frequent reference to was the American Translation (i.e. "Goodspeed"), which had the Apocrypha in it. And for that matter the huge KJV on the Communion Table at Fremont Baptist also has the Apocrypha in it. So from grade school age on I was aware of the discrepancies among canons, though I didn't run into Psalm 151 or Jubilees or Enoch till much later. I remember my dad, a Baptist minister, teaching me that the Bible was not a book, but a library, and that various librarians had included slightly different collections of books in their libraries. And then, when I finally met God (in the form of a group of drunks, and very shortly thereafter in the guise of two nearly-full bottles of Almadén Mountain Chablis), the spiritual community I was engaged with at the time was the AurorA Fellowship, where the scriptures, such as they were, consisted of the Big Book, the 12x12, and maybe the Little Red Book or the ODAAT, depending on what meeting I was at.

That's a start. The library is about to close, so I'd better sign off now. More later, probably tomorrow.

[KeithE]

[Haruo]

[Tim Bonney]

[Rvaughn]

[Dave Roberts]

[Jim]

THE SCRIPTURES: The Holy Bible is a collection of sixty-six books inspired by God, written at different times by men both before and after the birth of Christ, free of error, and canonized in Christendom by the fourth century A.D. It provides the record of God's creation, His relationship to mankind (generic term for both genders), a history of events in antiquity, mankind's status, the life and work of Jesus Christ, God's plan for mankind's redemption, instructions for righteous living, prophecies, and the instituting of the church.

[Sandy]

[JE Pettibone]

Ed: Sandy I think you have that just backwards The New Testament can not be thoroughly understood with out sufficient knowledge of the Old.

Philip Yancy wrote a book that supports this more fully. His book is titled THE ONLY BIBLE JESUS EVER READ .

[Sandy]

[Haruo]

Well, it's a Judaism. Most serious religious Jews don't literally interpret and apply the Tanakh. Even the most seriously orthodox are concerned with reading and applying (more or less "literally") the commandents, which even though they number nearly 700 are a small portion indeed of the Tanakh. And the interpretation is as often as not more dependent on, or at least informed by, the Talmudic treatments (not to mention Rambam and/or the Besht...) than on a direct literal reading, and the old Rabbis were often very very far from what one would think "literal" would lead to.

[Stephen Fox]

To Molly Worthen in Apostles of Reason and Adam Nicholson in God's Secretaries. I believe in the Old and the New and the Now Testament of Harvard Lit Critic James Wood and others. I like what Rhodes scholar nominee Richard Kremer a Prince of my Generation of preachers said in his sermon on Inerrancy when Nelson Price was Hell Bent on taking the Baptist out of Shorter Higher Education. Google Kremer at save our Shorter. Trying to get it to the attention of Carson Newman fundy board of trustees presently.

[KeithE]

[JE Pettibone]

[KeithE]

[JE Pettibone]

Ed": Keith, do you know when and where this Rabbi did her Rabbinical studies? Trudy received an MA in Cognitive Language Studies from Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati. In 1998 and 99 she was the liaison between Jewish and Christian Graduate Students. Many of our friends during that period are Now Reformed Rabbis.

[Haruo]

So Reform has female rabbis now, eh? When I was learning such trivia, the Reconstructionists were the only ones. Not surprised (in fact, I was surprised back then that they didn't yet.)

[Sandy]

[Jon Estes]

BIBLE - Truth from start to finish

BIBLE - First to go to in all things for it will respond

Man - Second to go to - maybe. Never to spin Truth but to expound it, interpreting it from m itself.

More could be said. Been extremely busy. Maybe more later if time permits. Harvey and Irma has impacted my daily life and lots to do to help some affected. It's early here in UAE, so just getting the day started and had a moment to see what's happening.

[KeithE]