One of the best examples of gettting it right and then completely blowing it is Peter. One moment he walks on water, and the next he sinks. He’s commended by Christ for listening to the Holy Spirit in Matt16:17, and six verses later is rebuked for having listened to Satan. He performed healings (Acts3:6) and ressurections (Acts9:40), then was sharply rebuked by Paul for hypocrisy (Gal2:11). Shows that the only perfect human is Christ, and that salvation is not only an event (being born again(Jn3:5)) but it’s also a process (Phil3:12).
You believe it is the Holy Spirit’s presence,you do not know, or can you prove it is. That is your right to believe as you may, but others have the right to disagree. As I stated earlier,The only written, passed on, or taught knowledge, comes strickly from humans, so one chooses what human to believe.
Jesus almost aways said," My father and yours", Not; you will be sons of God or God will adopt you it was made very plain(in my beliefs) that he considered all humans to be Children of God as he was. Luke learned second hand, as he did not know Jesus personally so he was saying what he believed not necassarily what was fact.
Monavis
The Bible writers disagree with your opinion that the source of their writings and teachings is man, here are a few places:
-John14:26, Jesus told the apostles, “… the Holy Spirit, Whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things”.
-Paul states in Galatians1:11-12, "For I want you to know, brethren, that the gospel which was proclaimed and was made known by me is not man’s gospel - a human invention, according to or patterned after any human standard. For indeed I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it; it came to me through a direct revelation…
-1John2:27 states, "But as for you, the anointing which you received from Him, abides in you; so then you have no need that any one should instruct you. But just as His anointing teaches you concerning everything, and is true, and is no falsehood, so you must abide…
2Pet1:21 states, “For no prophecy ever originated because some man willed it - it never came by human impule - but as men spoke from God who were borne along by the Holy Spirit”
-John8:43-44 disagrees with your opinion about how Jesus viewed man’s sonship, as He spoke to the Pharisees, “Why do you misunderstand what I say? It is because you are unable to hear what I am saying - you cannot bear to listen to My message, your ears are shut to My teachings. You are of your father the devil and it is your will to practice the lusts and gratify the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a falsehood, he speaks what is natural to him; for he is a liar himself and the father of lies and all that is false.” Any verses in which Jesus referred to others as having the same Father as He, were spoken to His disciples ie, those who had received Him and were entering into the process of adoption.
-Concerning that adoption there are these verses:
-John1:11-12 states, “He came to that which belonged to Him and they who were His own did not receive Him and did not welcome Him. But to as many as did receive and welcome Him, He gave the authority to become the children of God, that is to those who believe in His name; who owe their birth nether to bloods, nor to the will of the flesh, nor to the will of man, but to God. They are born of God.”
-Galatians4:4–5 states, “But when the proper time had fully come, God sent His Son…that we might be adopted and have sonship conferred upon us.”
-Ephesians1:5 states, “For He foreordained us to be adopted as His own children through Jesus Christ…”
-Romans8:15 states, “For you have now received not a spirit of slavery to put you once more in bondage to fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption…”
Well, I learn something new every day; I thought that The writers of the Gospels etc. were humans. So, John, Paul, Mark, Luke, Peter,and Matthew were not humans so then of course their words are God’s.
You are believing in what some men wrote many years ago and claimed God said it, or inspired it, You are believing in the Bible not God!
Monavis
We’ve now come full circle in the discussion which centers around the fact that God uses human agency to speak to others. My original point was:
John, Paul, Mark, etc testify that they heard directly from God and therefore the words they spoke or wrote were not their own but inspired by the Holy Spirit. It’s up to the individuals who hear them to decide whether their testimony is true or not, and also to bear the responsibility of obeying the message or not - the messengers have done their job.
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. On the presumptions that (a) there is a God, (b) He is active in human affairs, and © He communicates to and through selected individuals, some parts of Scripture may be His precise words. 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 – just as the “Laws of Hywel Dda” (the king celebrated in Wales as the lawgiver) include later rulings clarifying things left ambiguous in Hywel’s original lawcode (and of this we can be certain because older manuscripts leave ambiguous points that later ones have “Hywel’s” clarifications on). There seems to be very little doubt that Job is a dialogue poem written around the ancient frame story of Job the upright man who lost everything.
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.
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. 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.
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 © 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.
Well put Polycarp.
It boils down to ‘One’ can believe God inspired or dictated what to say. Historians can find no evidence of Moses except in the Old Testament.They have found that the Israelites were fighting in other lands while they were supposed to be slaves in Egypt and Archeologists have found writings(Just in the past few years that the people who built the pyramids were well paid and left behind writings stating that some had come from far away lands to work.) But the argument has little meaning to one who does not believe. You or I could say God told us that he had no word,it would be just as creditable. If one believes the Bible is the word of God that satisfies that person, but there is no proof that any of the Bible was inspired it is a matter of believing what some human or humans believed.Just as there is no proof that Mohammad was told to write the Koran.
Monavis
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
I’m not sure how 2 Tim 3:1 relates to the subject at hand. “1But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days.” Are you sure you got that right?
2 peter on the other hand is a great example of interpreting a passage to fit a preconceived belief. Is there an indication that the author is speaking of anything other than prophecy? What indicates that the meaning was to be extended beyond prophecy to include all scripture? Even then you have to deal with the fact that the NT didn’t exist and at best the author was referring to the prophecies of the OT and not the NT. You are extending the meaning of the verse in order to support a preconceived belief.
The same is true of Acts 17:11. There was a lot of discussion and disagreement in the time of the Apostles among the Jews about Jesus being the Christ of the OT spoken of by the prophets. In Acts that’s obviously the discussion at hand.
It is really an unreasonable stretch of the passage to indicate it proves God verify everything through the scriptures. Another example of interpreting the passage through the filter of a preconceived belief and mans tradition.
Your first sentence here is telling. I think that’s why so many people cling to the belief that the scripture must be the inerrant word of God. “How else would we be sure what the HS is telling us?” The strong desire for some external verification. The truth is we are not always sure and that is plainly evident by the wide disagreement among those who accept the Bible as God’s word. We have been given a way to measure. Jesus called it the fruits of the spirit. I continue to wonder why that guidance doesn’t seem to be enough for so many who claim faith in Jesus. It’s really that simple. As we accept the guidance of the HS and surrender to it’s call we will better exhibit the fruits of the spirit. Without these in our lives then all our lip service to Jesus is meaningless. If we truly have faith in Jesus promise of the Holy Spirit and seek the fruits of the spirit in ourselves and others then there’s no need for any external authority.
I meant 2Tim3:16 but the passage from 2Tim3:1 can still be used to illustrate the point under discussion. First, the major themes of the Bible are diffused throughout the scriptures, it’s not a textbook. For instance, you can’t turn to the chapter on baptism or the chapter on salvation when looking for doctrinal information. Similarly, the themes of the innerancy and authority of the scriptures are encountered throughout, not just in 2Tim3:16 and 2Pet1:20-21, although they happen to deal with the subject directly. For example, the thought beginning in my typo at 2Tim3:1 ends in verse 5 with, “For although they hold a form of piety, they deny and reject and are strangers to the power of it.” If one knows that 1Cor1:24 states that Christ is the power of God and John1:1 informs us that Jesus Christ is the Word of God, it is seen that the 2Tim passage is saying "they deny and reject and are strangers to the Word of God ". Which precisely identifies your condition as you have rejected the written Word of God and decided instead to follow a spirit of your own choosing. There are literally dozens if not hundreds of scriptures throughout the Old and New testament, many I’ve already listed, that indicate the absolute necessity of receiving the written Word of God as being the Truth and obeying it as authoritative (more examples: Jn10:35, Lk8:21, Mt24:35, James1:21, Mt7:24, Jer23:29, Pr30:5, etc, etc, etc, etc) but you have rejected all of them. You’ve decided instead to follow a spirit which replaces the Word with some “inner voice” that you define as being the “real” Word and which allows you to reject any Scriptures you don’t like and\or to add worldly philosophies to them. We’ve already been completely through this issue and the fact is, that it’s not the Holy Spirit that’s the source of your doctrine; He will never speak contrary to what He’s already inspired to be written in the Bible. There’s simply nothing further to discuss about this, and my only suggestion is that you should sit down and write your own bible with the verses and philosophies that you and the spirit you hear happen to like.
Your last suggestion to write one’s own Bible was just what the early writers probably did. How can you fault someone who thinks and interpets different than you? I am sure the monks who copied the Bible for the early church included a lot of their own beliefs.That is why there is so much contradiction.
I thnk the Bible was to be a guide, and was not infallible.
Monavis
You’re right. We’ve discussed it enough. Even though we don’t agree thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts. Peace
It’s not possible to change the Bible undetected any more than you could change your last post without leaving a trail. This nonsense about Bible copiests having changed it whenever they happened to feel like it, is absurd. From the moment the first copy of the original writings is made and distributed, phonies or changed versions would be there to witness against it, not to mention the living author. After many copies of a book are produced as the years go by, making changes without detection is completely impossible. But it’s the typical argument made by evolutionists, just as they assume changes of life forms somewhere in the nebulous past, they do the same with the Bible writings even despite actual evidence (such as the dead sea scrolls) to the contrary. When Cosmo writes his bible, it will be for his use and anyone else he convinces that it is a better version, but the only possibility to replace our existing Bibles would be to collect and destroy them all - that has actually been tried in the past, but someone always manages to hide some authentic versions.
It’s Cosmos btw with that second s
Sorry my stubborn friend. What you state here is in complete denial of the evidence we have. This is not the so called shadowy science of evolution. This is well documented and supported science of textual criticism of the Bible by biblical scholars. My suggestion is you read Misquoting Jesus by Bart Ehrman. One of those biblical scholars. In it he spells out the details of the evidence. To paraphrase him , there are about 5000 documents and pieces of documents relating to the bible under study by scholars. There are more differences in these documents than there are words in the Bible. He admits that the largest portion of these differences are minor spelling and copy errors, but others that he goes on to list in detail, clearly show that changes were made purposefully to support a preconceived doctrine. Portions were added and others left out. Add to that the men who selected which books would be included in the Bible and which ones would be left out had their own agenda to enforce consistent belief among the newly state sanctioned “official” Christianity.
IMO that shows it is crucial to rely on the guidance of the HS rather than the imperfect traditions of man.
Can you indicate any reputable Biblical scholar that supports your claims since you use the term actual evidence?
One more time, my goal is not to discredit the Bible or dismiss it. It is simply in pursuit of truth as Jesus taught that I attempt to place the Bible in it’s proper perspective. IMO those who deny or refuse to look at ample clear evidence in order to maintain a traditional belief do a great disservice to themselves and the truth they claim to worship.
I’ve been thinking about this, and how it relates to your argument with cosmosdan. I think you may be building your position upon a circular (and therefore fallacious) line of thinking.
As far as I can tell (and may he correct me if I’m wrong), cosmosdan’s position is that conference with the Holy Spirit has confirmed the opinions that he’s drawn from the factual evidence he’s observed: that the Bible is fingerprinted all over by men, starting with the men who wrote it (inspired or not), through the men who compiled it, to the men who translated it, to the men who transcribed it. Exaclty how much this reduces the credibilty of the bible as a source of direction is a little unclear, but at least a little reduction in credibility occurs.
Your position seems to be that any spirit that supports any reduction in credibility of the Bible cannot be the real Holy Spirit. You cite your own Holy Spirit, which confirms the accuracy and importance of the Bible, as the basis for discounting cosmosdan’s spirit. Am I correct so far?
As your position depends rather entirely on your Holy Spirit being the actual correct one-and-only Holy Spirit, I asked you how you confirmed that, and got the response quoted above: You can tell an accurate spirit because it agrees with the Bible.
The problem with this is that in order to compare the guidance of any given spirit to the bible, you have to compare it with your own interpretation of the bible. You have no other interpretation to use. Using this interpretation as a test for the reliability of a given Holy Spirit will leave you with only Holy Spirits that tell you what you already think. In the event that your initial interpretation was not correct in particulars large or small, then any spirit that came out and told you the flat truth about one of your human errors would be dismissed as a demon.
Essentially, you are limiting yourself to spiritual yes-men. And your test allows any yes-man; it does not actually restrict itself to the true Holy Spirit.
Now, to be entirely fair, cosmosdan Holy Spirit is agreeing with him as well (at least on the matter at hand). To me this just says that either one or both of you is chatting with your subconsious, or that one or both of you is conferring with some agreeable spirit; it says nothing about whether one of your spirits is more honest than the other, and it certainly doesn’t say that your spirit is the actual correct one-and-only Holy Spirit, or that you have any basis at all for calling his a demon.
Though, if I had to bet, I would say that any spirit that requires you to reject known true facts about science and history…isn’t Him.
I find this informative and interesting. What might we infer as other possible meaning s from the verses if we leave out the two “is” Most translations include those although Young’s literal says
15and because from a babe the Holy Writings thou hast known, which are able to make thee wise – to salvation, through faith that [is] in Christ Jesus;
16every Writing [is] God-breathed, and profitable for teaching, for conviction, for setting aright, for instruction that [is] in righteousness,
17that the man of God may be fitted – for every good work having been completed.
showing the {is} as implied?
To me the key point is that the NT did not exist. The author was likely not referring to his own letter which many now regard as scripture to use to justify their beliefs about the nature of inspiration and scripture.
Even if we accept that it is inspired why should we to conclude that the nature of inspiration leads to something inerrant. This verse certainly doesn’t indicate such. It basically says the scriptures can be very useful as guidelines. It doesn’t grant them or instruct anyone to give them ultimate authority.
Heh, I knew that I recognized this discussion from somewhere!
It’s pretty much the same darn thing as any group of rabid Thelemites will come to at some point; defining who does and doesn’t have ‘authentic communication’ with their Holy Guardian Angel, and who does and doesn’t know their True Will.
There’s a reason I’m not in any O.’.T.’.O.’. faction. 
I think you are fairly accurate here.
Any meaning from the Bible or anything else comes from within ourselves via introspection. When it comes to seeking the truth about the questions asked by religion we should consider the objective evidence that is available to us. Objective evidence isn’t always conclusive but if you claim to worship the truth then why ignore it completely? Since meaning comes from within there is no need for any external authority. Agreed upon guidelines and traditions? Sure as long as we recognize the difference between tradition and truth.
an interesting take on my circular arguement post above.
To clarify my position. The spiritual journey is about surrendering our illusions to the truth. The essence of the Holy Spirit is truth and love. Because we are individuals we each have a unique journeys. I argue my position here but I am aware I have much more to learn and my beliefs are evolving. The test is what Jesus described as the fruits of the spirit. It’s not in a book. It’s in your heart and reflected in your actions, or it isn’t.
We were discussing specific beliefs that I have strong feelings about. I didn’t intend it to sound like “I’m listening to the Holy Spirit and you’re not” I was trying to express that seeking the truth means honestly and sincerely considering the evidence available to us and then through introspection deciding what it means to us personally. We go forward based on that until new evidence and experience calls for a reevaluation or refinement.
I suppose it sounded like I am chatting with the voice in my head but inner voice is a metaphor and it’s much subtler than that.
The truth will set you free, but you have to really want to be free. That is sometimes a scary proposition.
[Nitpick] Only the most historically illiterate person associates the enslavement of the Hebrews with the building of pyramids. Exodus only refers to building cities intended to store grain and even Cecil B. DeMille got that one right. [ /Nitpick ]
While I do not know your exact point, here, I suspect that it is some claim that the Qumran Scrolls had perfectly validated the text of the Tanakh/Old Testament, “proving” that no errors have gotten into the texts.
It is true that when the Great Isaiah Scroll was found at Qumran, it was an extraordinarily close match to the Masoretic texts preserved in the forms of the Codex Leningradensis and the Aleppo Codex. However, there are, indeed, many small differences among those texts–along with a couple of more significant differences including the addition or subtraction of entire verses. Then, when we move beyond the texts for Isaiah, we find rather more differences than it appears you are willing to admit–including changes in words, the loss of whole verses, etc.
The Dead Sea Scrolls & the Text of the Old Testament
Now, I am not arguing that the books, as a whole, have been corrupted, but a claim that “no changes” could get in without us knowing it is clearly in error. There were already differences between the Septuagint and the Masoretic texts and there are also differences between the Qumran scrolls and the Masoretic text–differences that indicate that, on some occasions, the Septuagint is superior to the Masoretic texts. These discrepancies were unknown for at least a thousand years and were only discovered with the accidental finding of the Qumran scrolls.
I have always maintained that the human factor should be regarded when considering the Scriptures - from copiest errors to translation difficulties to willful misinterpretations, but any significant changes\errors can’t be done in secret and they are well documented. In my own experience, a Wycliff translator I know worked on a translation for a tribe somewhere in Mexico where the indians thought that “take up your cross and follow Me.” meant that they should wear a crucifix. The translators therefore, changed the passage to read “to follow Me, you must be willing to die.” Translators make decisions like that all the time for the sake of convenience, and it’s why differences can creep into the text (btw, my opinion was that they should leave the text alone and rely on teaching, not translation, to clarify the passage).
And look at these various historical translations of John1:11
(Wiclif - 1380) “he cam in to his owne thingis: & hise resceyueden hym not”
(Tyndale - 1584) “He cam amonge his (awne) and his awne receaved him not.”
(Cranmer -1539) “He cam amonge hys awne, and hys awne receaued him not.”
(Geneva - 1557) “He came among his owne, and his owne receaued him not.”
(Rheims - 1582) “He cam into his ovvne, and his ovvne receiued him not.”
(Authorised -1611) “He came vnto his owne, and his owne receiued him not.”
Despite all the flaws of the message system related to mankind - language barriers, copying mistakes, etc, the Bible’s message regarding man’s sinful condition, and God’s only solution for it, is quite clear and authoritative. Those who point to the relatively minor frailties of transmission are simply making excuses for their unwillingness to obey the message.
And yes, I do agree that the Holy Spirit is intimately involved in applying the Word to man’s heart and He is the interpreter and teacher of the Scriptures - without His ministry no one could receive salvation or truly understand the Scriptures. But contrary to what you believe, He is not Himself the Word and He does not endorse that which contradicts what He has already inspired to be written. You’ve decided that you have a spirit which is leading you to a “higher truth” that falls outside the parameters of the Bible in many instances. My advice is to take some paper, write “Thus says the Lord:” at the top and begin making your “corrections” as that spirit inspires you. Why simply grouse about the errors you perceive? Take some authoritative steps to correct them.