[QUOTE=Polycarp]
If you’ve ever seen arguments among Christians of various belief structures about the meaning of “The Word of God,” you’ll appreciate the problem that I, and I would guess everyone here who cares about the question, have with your position.The Bible is a collection of writings by human beings. Period. Regardless of the provenance of the content, that much is true: men (and possibly a few women) sat down, put stylus to parchment, and produced what we have..
[/QUOTE]
There are many Christians who compromise the Word by denying its inspiration in whole or in part, I’m not one of them. Contrary to them and your statement, I instead believe that the Bible is a collection of writings by human beings who were directly inspired by the Holy Spirit. Period. They were God’s instruments. But every person who examines the testimony of the scriptures must make their own decision (and bear the responsibility) for either accepting and obeying them, or standing in opposition to them.
[QUOTE=Polycarp]
On the presumptions that (a) there is a God, (b) He is active in human affairs, and (c) He communicates to and through selected individuals, some parts of Scripture may be His precise words. .
[/QUOTE]
Hebrews1:1 states, “In many separate revelations - each of which set forth a portion of the Truth - and in different ways God spoke of old to our forefathers in and by the prophets. But in the last of these days He has spoken to us in the person of a Son, Whom He appointed Heir and lawful Owner of all things…” and Psalm138:2 states, " for You have exalted above all else Your name and Your word, and You have magnified Your word above all Your name.". According to the scriptures therefore, there is a God who takes an interest in His creation, He communicates precisely as He intends, and places that communication as the highest priority. Once again, it’s your choice whether to listen to and heed His words or not.
[QUOTE=Polycarp]
If Isaiah writes, “Thus saith the Lord…” it’s clear that he at least believed himself to be writing down the exact words of God.But was he right? Or is this a trope for “God impressed on me that He wants me to get this message across, strongly”? We are absolutely certain that some elements of Torah are later rulings back-written to come across as having been handed down by God to Moses the Lawgiver. .
[/QUOTE]
We are absolutely certain of no such thing. To make the assumption, for example, that writings like the final details of the death of Moses were back-written is pure conjecture - Moses himself most likely simply commanded those details to be added after his death or added them while he was alive by the gift of prophecy. These so-called “higher criticisms” are contrary to the repeated declarations that Moses wrote the Torah (Ex24:4, Ex34:28, Num33:2, Deut31:9, Deut31:22) and also directly contradicts Christ’s own personal testimony that Moses wrote them ie, John7:19 “Did not Moses give you the Law?” and John5:46-47 “For if you believed in an relied on Moses, you would believe in and rely on Me, for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe and trust his writings, how then will you believe and trust My teachings - how shall you cleave to and rely on My words?” It comes down to who you decide to trust - the clear testimony of the plain written acounts and the endorsement of Christ, or some self-proclaimed scholars writing centuries later based on nothing but the spurious hypotheses emanating from their own minds.
[QUOTE=Polycarp]
It is a matter of human tradition, not God’s own word, that every word of Scripture was dictated or otherwise verbatim inspired by Him. And it seems to be the opinion of those who are insistent on certitude, who cannot muster the trust to have faith in Him and need something clearcut on paper to assure themselves. .
[/QUOTE]
Without the written Word we would have no way to test the multitudes of false spirits who do not proceed from God, and it is the first line of defense against false doctrine (see Acts17:11). Indeed every false doctrine can be shown to violate the scriptures, including your opinion that it is only human tradition that holds them as inspired. I’ve already mentioned just two of the scriptures which declare your opinion to be wrong ie, 2Pet1:20-21 and 2Tim3:1. You have decided to not believe those scriptures for an assortment of reasons, just like you set aside the rest of the Bible’s teachings and instructions.
[QUOTE=Polycarp]
Paul discussing marriage at one point (I Corinthians 7:10ff) draws a distinction between what he claims to have direct from the Lord and what he says as his own counsel. This is clearly the make-or-break point, as I Cor 7:12-16 can hardly be the only place in the Bible not verbatim inspired by God. .
[/QUOTE]
Hardly a make-or-break point as Paul goes on to say in 1Cor7:40, " And also I think I have the Spirit of God". Further, Paul acknowledges in 1Cor13:9, “For our knowledge is fragmentary and our prophecy is fragmentary…” A small disclaimer was certainly in order as Paul dealt with many social matters in the Corinthian church which could not be backed up directly from Christ’s teachings, and he was leaving the door open for the Holy Spirit to clarify some issues or provide additional information from someone else. This attitude is also borne out in other instructions given by Paul (see1Cor14:29-30); some might hear the Holy Spirit more clearly or completely on some matters. To extrapolate a reason to undermine all the scriptures based on this instance is quite typical of those who refuse the teachings and authority of the Bible - they grasp at the tiniest straw to justify their unbelief and disobedience.
[QUOTE=Polycarp]
And clearly the working through from doubt to faith so sublimely portrayed in Psalm 22 (which our Lord quoted on the Cross) is not God but a man grappling with doubt who speaks..
[/QUOTE]
His identification with the struggle of Psalm 22 confirms that Christ’s own trials were real tests of faith against the weaknesses of the human nature that He had taken on. Hebrews4:15 states, “For we do not have a High Priest Who is unable to understand and sympathize and have a fellow feeling with our weaknesses and infirmities and liability to the assaults of temptation, but One Who has been tempted in every respect as we are, yet without sinning.” Further, if your comment was intended to deny His divinity, I should remind you that He was crucified for claiming to be God.
[QUOTE=Polycarp]
I would strongly encourage you to take a good look at the original Greek of II Timothy 3:14-17 (or if you do not read Greek, a good literal translation). The famous “All Scripture is inspired by God…” passage is (a) not what was written in the first place, (b) definitely not a reference to the Bible as we have it, since its antecedent is what Timothy was taught as a Jewish boy by his mother and grandmother, and (c) completely an extended modifier to verse 15. The two instances of “is” in that sentence are supplied by King James’s men, and are not present in the original.
[/QUOTE]
The fact that “is” might have been added for clarification in the translation takes nothing away from the substance or intent of the passage. To claim that this “addition” to God’s Word, which may have been added for clarification into the target language, somehow forms a basis to reject the Word as being corrupted and therefore untrustworthy, is blatent nonsense.
The reference in Timothy is indeed pointing to the Old Testament scriptures but must extend to the New Testament scriptures as they are a testimony of the fulfillment of the old covenant promises in Christ. Also see Ephesians2:20 ie, “You are built upon the foundation of the apostles (NT) and prophets(OT)…” Besides, there are other scriptures which parallel the 2Tim3:16 passage regarding the inspiration of scripture while also including the New Testament writings (see 2Pet1:20-21 and 2Pet3:16).
