The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Partial Inerrancy - working definition

Well, if that is not a familiar face. I am losing my trust in the idea of Sola Scriptura. After years of reading both sides of the story, I am more inclined to believe that we look to Christ and not to the Scriptures to whom they point. Dr. Waite and his Dean Burgon mission have left me being dishonest and dogmatic and pounded by those standing in an open field with a few happy fragments.

To quote Dr. M. Mckain,


and further he states;


He adds:



He then quotes John 5:39 and says,


and still unpacking his ideas;


and finally;


My conclusion: Though ideas like 'Sola Scriptura' came as a result of the Reformation....can we still hold to them with such unwavering, dogmatic intensity ??? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/Banghead.gif" alt="" />

In earnest,

I have to somewhat agree- as I said in another post- the Bible itself has changed greatly though translations. I, personally, feel the origional Bible hands down was 100% inerrent- but through translations it is questionable. Some people claim anyone who translates the Bible is inspired by Him to preserve it's infallibility- but I do not agree- especially with modern politically correct versions that call God "He/she"

While no one can deny that the Scriptures should be the primary guide to our faith- we must remember it's not the only thing that guides us and that things can be lost in translation but the core of God's will is still in The Holy Book.

There are indeed many nefarious "translations" of Scripture, which most of us here prefer to line our trash cans with. However, there are some very reliable translations which can for all intents and purposes be said to be incredibly accurate. Now... what both you and Straw, although his reasons being far different I am sure, have failed to take into account, or at least mention, is that research has shown incontrovertibly that the manuscripts that are in our possession today are more than accurate copies of the originals. Thus, those of us who read the original languages can testify that there are some English translations, albeit but a few, are trustworthy and do contain the very words of God as those originally given to holy men of God moved by the Holy Spirit.

Secondly, reject any part of these accurate translations, or even more so, the extent Hebrew and Greek manuscripts and you have no warrant nor foundation to make any statement concerning God, Christ, salvation, etc. On what basis can anyone say confidently that "this" or "that" portion of Scripture is reliable and the remainder is spurious? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/scratch1.gif" alt="" />

In His grace,

Straw,

1) Sola Scriptura isn't a doctrine to which one can stand with unwavering confidence because it came out of the Reformation. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/nope.gif" alt="" /> The doctrine was in existence long before the Reformation ever came along. ALL the prophets in the O.T. held to the doctrine as did ALL of God's elect. Likewise, it was a truth held by ALL the N.T. prophets/disciples. "Thus saith the LORD" was no fanciful cliché, but a total reliance upon what had been given and recorded was the very word of God. I have previously given you a link to myriad articles which describe and defend this ancient doctrine. One can only hope you took the time to read even a few of them, if not all of them.

2) As I mentioned to "Young Catholic", IF the extent manuscripts we have in our possession are not reliable (i.e., they are fraught with errors), then there is NOTHING in the Bible which one can look to and say, "This is what God has spoken.", or "This is the will of God". Thus, the person of Christ is questionable as is His atoning work. In fact, there is no warrant to speak about sin, faith or salvation nor to make determinations as to what is right or wrong; good or evil. Those denominations and groups which have forsaken the divine inspiration and authority of the Bible deny the necessity of salvation, the deity of Christ, the need of repentance and faith, ad nauseam. And, who can find fault with their reasoning if the Bible is nothing more than a literary work? It's either all or nothing my lost friend.

3) A couple of friends of mine have written a 3-volume work which can be said to be the last word on the doctrine of "Sola Scriptura". They have provided an incredible repository of biblical and historical arguments, which categorically show that "Sola Scriptura" is a doctrine of the Scripture itself. Although the main audience (antagonist) of the work was the Roman State Church, it applies equally well to anyone. You can read my book review of that set here: Sola Scriptura, by David T. King and William Webster.

4) Lastly, what is the alternative you would offer? Hmmmmm <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/scratchchin.gif" alt="" /> . . . let me guess! A still small voice that whispers in your ear from God Himself, right? And what verity does that have over a physical record of God's will for mankind in the Bible? How can one really know if that is God speaking or one's own musings or the voice of the serpent? Since the Bible teaches that such "voices" are nefarious and are to be rejected cart blanc, then there is no "proof" you or anyone else can offer. I can just as quickly and easily respond to anyone who claims that "God told me . . ." that the Spirit spoke to me and specifically said that what you said is false and not of God. Then what? Are you going to charge God with failing to successfully communicate with mankind? Or, will you suggest that it is God's will that generations of men are to remain ignorant and confused as to His person and will? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/igiveup.gif" alt="" />

In His grace,

Dear Pilgrim,


Firstly, before I attempt to find my way between the narrow page you have prepared for me; let me state for the record that I am not rejecting the Scriptures.

Secondly, I have read and studied considerably on this topic and considerably more than your thin archive on Sola Scriptura.

Thirdly, I have defended the position of Sola Scriptura for as long as I have been a Christian (30 years) It was taught to me as a young believer and I accepted it to be true, never questioning it.

Fourthly, I read nearly everything by William Webster and he certainly does a good job, but I found his arguments thin in the face of Rome.

Fifthly, I have studied nearly everything in the Trinity Foundation and spent eight solid months exploring Textual Criticizm, reading scores and scores of authors. (It is what I do)

I don't mind you asking me questions and I don't mind you answering them. The only danger there is that you muddy the water and then I have to really spend a lot of time trying to correct your preconceptions.

My answer is simple. The Body of Christ has the Spirit of Christ and this is the gracious gift of the Father to lead us and guide us into ALL truth. Rome may have her apocrypha and Church Fathers, but Protestantism has scores of writers, creeds, confessions and the like..it is no different to that of Rome ?

Your devilish snaps at me are unfriendly and if you do not hear the Lord speaking to you, it is not a reason to write your thoughts in the way you have been. It is unkind and unchristian. I will not further elaborate on how this is possible, but let's just say He does and 'my experience' is not that unique.

His,

Straw, straw, straw... <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/argue.gif" alt="" />

You don't need to make personal attacks on Pilgrim just because you believe his view is more narrow than yours. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/nono.gif" alt="" />



I agree your experience is not unique. Your replies demonstrate that even though you have read a lot of material (including Pilgrim's replies) yet it doesn't seem that you have benefited very much from it. It's sad because as much as you seem to rely on direct communication from the Holy Spirit you have a great deal of difficulty with His writings. May I remind you that the Bible was not only inspired by the Holy Spirit but He also shaped the very lives of the men who wrote it down as well as those who read it. What is written is not just inspirational but in fact God breathed.

I stand amazed when I read many of your replies here on the highway. Your experience has become your guiding light and unfortunately not Sola Scriptura.


Wes

It has been well said, "A man with an argument is no match for a man with an experience." TRUTH is objective, propositional, eternal and dependable. The Lord Christ said, "Sanctify them in the truth; Thy word is truth" (Jh 17:17), to which He was referring to the WRITTEN Word and not some alleged "voice". Could it be that you are one of those whom Paul warned Timothy about who are "Ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."? (2Tim 3:7)

Isaiah 8:19-20 (KJV) And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, [it is] because [there is] no light in them."

Poor king David.... what a deluded soul was he. So much a "Scripturalist" in his love for the WRITTEN WORD OF GOD, that he dedicated an entire Psalm to extol its excellence and to which his whole being was dependent for truth, light and consolation. (Psa. 119)

The Anvil of God's Word

Last eve I passed beside a blacksmith's door
And heard the anvil ring the vesper chime:
Then looking in, I saw upon the floor
Old hammers, worn with beating years of time.

"How many anvils have you had," said I,
"To wear and batter all these hammers so?"
"Just one," said he, and then, with twinkling eye,
"The anvil wears the hammers out, you know."

And so, thought I, the anvil of God's Word,
For ages skeptic blows have beat upon;
Yet though the noise of falling blows was heard,
The anvil is unharmed . . . the hammers gone.

—Author unknown

In His grace,

Pilgrim,

Kathy2 aka Kathy who has had technical problems posting, but not trouble reading/lurking, and biting my tongue concerning wishing to post on a variety of threads.

Does it fit in your scriptural understanding to say that God does speak to individuals, when things are called to mind, i.e., to see goodness, sins brought to mind, or apologize or various things that the Spirit may lead one to deal with? And this may be a stretch to you, but doesn't God speak to us via his creation, ie. beauty (not pantheism)... and in others?

Straw,

Very interesting that position would be based on a passage from Scripture (Jh. 5:39). Did it occur to you, in all your reading on the subject, that after all if Scripture can't finally be trusted as the inerrant, infallible, authoritative, word of God, the position that we are to look to Christ rather than the Scriptures is a theological fantasy? For if the Scriptures are not reliable, then neither is that to which they supposedly point!

Hi Kathy,

The Scripture itself teaches us that it is the Holy Spirit who applies the written word - through providential events, through creation, and by His indwelling work (1st John 2:20-29, John 6:45 and 16:13-14, 1st Corinthians 2:10-12, Isaiah 59:21). The Spirit shows us Christ (John 16:14) and "convicts" the heart and regenerates the soul (John 3:5-6). Without the work of the Spirit, the written word is foolishness to the unbelieving (1st Corinthians 2:14). Certainly in the light of these Scriptures it's plain that the Lord still "speaks" today. But a more accurate term is that He applies the work and word of God to the heart and renews the mind by means of the word of God (Romans 8:6-17, 12:2, Hebrews 1:1-2) which shows us Christ (John 5:39).

Hi Kathy2,

The Bible is a book FULL TO THE BRIM with a God who speaks to people. The problem begins when you get folks who gather these sayings together in one book and say, "No more, we have heard enough." Or we have systematized it, and are convinced that this is it. Print, bind and seal. The problem is when a translator or group of translators attempt to extract the meaning and a little human colouring is brought into it. The Old Testament was copied in a more regimented way, though it was not without it's difficulties. I love the part where in NT textual criticism, they might decide that a particular passage should be deleted or moved somewhere else....this in the name of cleaning up the Scritures. It is said that this cleaning up now means we have it almost 99.99998 % accurate. (excuse my little giggle..hehehe) The original autographs are not with us but the Spirit of Christ who inspired them is, and pity that the fear of allowing Him to move as He was allowed to move in the NT Church. A read through Acts reveals the Holy Spirit in intimate dialogue with the disciples (obviously not every household conversation is recorded) and this book of Acts continues into this very moment. To shut up the book or seal it in the name of King James, or Revised Standard, or New American Standard, or Message Bible is to do a great harm to the flow of the Holy Spirit and small wonder that the Body of Christ is so divided over this issue. It is time let go of the cruddy old books and open up to the meaning that the Holy Spirit wants to give us for NOW for this GENERATION... The 1600's are back then, we are living in the year 2007 and God has something to say to us, but we would prefer to pull out the journals of yesteryear and believe it is all SO AMAZING... To say no to Rome's solo verbo Dei is hypocritical if one retains the writings of Protestant Fathers. Are we afraid that God the Holy Spirit might say something that requires repentance (change) or are we just recycling the old masters out of fear of letting go into the flow of the Holy Spirit. Stiff necked and hard heartedness are all a result of quenching the flow of the Holy Spirit. To attempt to print, bind and seal God into 66 books and then remove all the apparent contractions by years of filtering is dishonest. What this is all about is taking His spoken word and recording it and then worshipping it. The only one we are suppose to worship is God in Spirit and in Truth. The Bible only idea just is a vexation to the Spirit and so is the Spirit only (hyper Mystical vs hyper Scripturulist) what is needed is a little thinking here. To do this is to always fight not only with one another but with our own minds. We are not only intellectual, we are also spiritual and as such we long to have a personal relationship with the God of the Bible, that is the goal after all, that is why the Word became Flesh, the danger here is making the Flesh word again and missing the point altogether.

What you are speaking of is what is known in THEOLOGICAL terms as the GENERAL revelation. Scripturalist minimize this in order to facilitate their narrow minded approach. The creation ANNOUNCES GOD and we the crown of His creation, ANNOUNCE GOD. The Scripturalists will accuse those who enjoy this revelation to much as been Mystics etc...silly, God created all this first and for good reason it is HIS HANDIWORK, and we are FEARFULLY AND WONDERFULLY made. A person would have to either be blind or indoctrinated, brainwashed not to see....'in every leaf that trembles, and in every grain of sand' - There is no way to the Father through these things, but they are BOLD and GLORIOUS and we are encouraged to offer praise to Him out of the wonder of these things.

The Scripturalists over express the SPECIAL revelation, and even neuter it. They will happily prescribe the Westminster Confession, and any number of Systematic Theology there own too in an attempt to make as did Rome ONE INTERPRETATION as correct theirs. The truth is that there is MEANING and God the Holy Spirit never intended this dry letter stuff, it kills who He is, it takes away the Lord Jesus Christ's Spirit out of our hearts and makes it a document. In the end all that is done then is to memorize the document over and over in the hope that it will change one. Oh shame, oh shame, shame, shame ... to lose this priceless gift of God's Spirit in us, leading, guidig, comforting and YES, YES, YES...speaking to us. We have built a wall of books around us and now we wonder why we reject the idea that GOD is able to speak personally to people.

Are you listening ? Lord, what do you want to say to me ?

<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/chatter.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/BigThumbUp.gif" alt="" />

There is only one who is inerrant and infallible and you know exactly who that is. He as spoken to us through His Son, and out of fear of losing the words we have immortalized the biblio and made it what it was never meant to be. The Scriptures are there to lead us to the Lord, however what do you see in Christendom for centuries and centuries a MIXED messaage. Not one Christian can agree with another for they are all hiding behind their theological position. We are only to have One that unifies us, one that leads us, guides us, comforts us and what was that faithful saying ... ??? .... This He did so that He could have His Spirit living in us. Such a treasure in earthern vessels, but what we have done is to bind a book, put a cover on it and bow down at it. No wonder Rome will not let go her idols, when we have one too.

Pilgrim,

It is a pity that you are so dogmatically focussed on this one aspect of Christianity. I used the first text as my main argument and you need to remember that this truth comes from the heart and mind, and soul and substance of the Almighty. The same who John on the Island of Patmos said, spoke and it was like the sound of many waters. To an unbeliever the Bible is just a book with words, even to some Christians but when the Spirit of God breathes upon our hearts and minds we are able to recieve meaning from more than just the Bible, or else we have to get ready with the cigarette lighter fluid and begin to burn the Institutes and Bondage of the Will and Jonathan Edwards' writings...you know I think I heard Luther say..do it, do it, burn it all. The idea that God is unable to reach a person who has never read the Bible is a myth that was spread to keep everything with in the realm of mind. We are not in the flesh but in the Spirit if we have the Spirit of Christ, for he who has not the Spirit of Christ is none of His.

Ever learning...?? now if that doesn't make the point even stronger. Coming to the knowledge of the truth can only be accomplished when God opens the heart and mind as he did with Lydia, when Paul was talking to her. Interaction instead of cold freeze Sola Scriptura is what Paul was not afraid of.

This passage in Isaiah does not strengthen your position at all ??? It is full to the brim with meaning that when you get it you are going to wish you never put it up. Firstly, apart from the hidden emphasis that hearing God is the same as associating with a familiar spirit etc. Interesting to note that they would have needed to have light within them. Quake!

Now we are going to the most flamboyant character in the Bible the man who danced for how many hours in the presense of the Lord. I guess he was doing so while reading the scrolls, or he was writing down every word as he worshipped. The songs of King David and King Solomon and Moses and Habbakuk are included in Scripture and we are called to sing unto the Lord a NEW SONG, for it is He who gives us songs in the night...no my friend you are digging your own hole with this. What you are doing is what so many do, to make your meaning, or interpretation the only correct one. Exegesis has this claim, but it falls prey to Bibical Criticizm which often leaves huge gaping holes.

Why not have His Spirit in you, leading you and guiding you into ALL truth, not just a few sacred texts that you gaurd, but the new song, right now! God speaking in the here and now, not yesterdays newspaper, but todays! For today is the day of salvation.

Why did you not let the Holy Spirit give you something of your own to share instead of a song by and unknown author. Dry bones, Dry bones, receive the Spirit of God, dry bones rise up and walk.

<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bigglasses.gif" alt="" /> Pumpkin time I have a long drive tonight.

No surprise the Book He wrote by His Spirit should also be inerrant and infallible.


Heb. 1:2, "in these last days [God] has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world." How did you know that except you have read His Scripture?


What it was never meant to be? "But He answered and said, 'It is written, "Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God"'" (Mt. 4:4). And again, "All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:16-17).


"You do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God" (Mt. 22:29). Let the word of God judge between you and me, and the true idolater shall be evident to all.

You can ask a man, "Do you love Jesus?" But Who is Jesus to him? Is he a Jesus of his own imagination?

<span style="background-color:#FFFF00">The Bible</span> teaches us that eternal life is knowing God and His Son Jesus Christ. Jesus says, And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

So the question is does man know the true God? Not the god of the imagination of men, but the God who is described in <span style="background-color:#FFFF00">the Bible</span>?

<span style="background-color:#FFFF00">As it is written</span>, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet are swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery are in their ways: And the way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before their eyes.
Romans 3:10-18

This is the<span style="background-color:#FFFF00"> judgment and emphasis of Scripture</span> upon the natural man.

In Peace, William

.