Excellent points !
"Jude" <Jude@aol.com> wrote in message
news:_Owtb.9609$rV.194@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
"Pastor Dave" <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message
news:t2jcrvsk9g5bmmshpdfiu5gp02ng2ts0q4@4ax.com...
On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 18:59:14 -0600, "Jude"
<Jude@aol.com> wrote:
Now why would you use Scripture, to try to support your
argument that we shouldn't use Scripture?
First of all, I never said we shouldn't use scripture. I said we
shouldn't
worship it. Secondly, I'm just showing that the scriptures themselves
say
the same thing, yet many Christians gloss over that and ignore the
message
of the Scriptures they worship.
They just can't hardly get what we're saying. We NOT saying they are
not
valuable.
If there is even one error, then they are not valuable
at all. You could not possibly know which passages to
trust.
All or nothing, huh?
The writers of the NT thought Jesus was returning within their generation.
They didn't think of creating strict ways in which to copy letters from
apostles and believers. According to one gospel, Jesus said that John
would
be the one left alive on his 2nd return. John, in fact, wrote
Revelations
at a very late date and was probably the only one left of the original 12.
The monks who were re-writing what we call the NT originals took many
liberties (add and taking away sentences), made gross mistakes likes
missing
a complete line or writing a line twice. I've asked you to go to a site
of
believers who have researched the Vaticanus and Sanaiticus. These two
documents are what ALL the translators go to (as well as bits and pieces
of
other manuscripts) to write a new translation. Of all the books in the
bible the two that all the canons had the most problem with WAS James
(some
also with Revelations.)
It doesn't have to be all or nothing. Why can't you trust the core of the
message no matter how it's given to you, whether it's oral or written. God
is our Creator. God loves us. We have salvation through faith in Jesus.
Obviously, being saved or "born again" will bring good changes in the
person's life. Trust in God. We don't have to have all the answers about
how God is going to deal with other's that don't believe in Jesus. In
fact,
we don't have to have all the answers about a lot of things. Upon hearing
this message and praying to God to reveal himself, the ones that are
counted
as His WILL be saved.
What is so difficult to see that people tried to write down what Jesus was
during his ministry but that they made mistakes? There weren't so many
mistakes made that the message of his ministry was made void. You've
heard
all your life that the bible was God's word even before being saved. You
join a church that says the same thing. It would be odd if you didn't at
first believe that it was inerrant. However, there ARE believers that
KNOW
that our earliest manuscripts are riddles with errors. Does that void
your
salvation experience? No.
To me the way in which the bible was brought about and is touted as
inerrant
as well as the stubborn way in which fundamentalists stick to their first
beliefs, no matter how painful it is to give them up, make people stumble.
The bible SHOULD NEVER have been put forth as inerrant. You can thank
ignorant, although probably well meaning, 2nd and 3rd century church
fathers
for beginning the inerrancy lie. Eventually, the bible was NOT encouraged
for believers to read because ministers starting see the problems. Luther
helped solve that and took the inerrancy lie to a greater level. I
believe
that Luther was right to rebel from the corruption of the Catholic church
at
the time though.
I could write what I wrote above 100s of different ways. Is any one of
the
ways wrong? You and I can argue til domesday about all the little
intricansies of what exactly how to believe. Obviously, James and Paul
approached the understanding of salvation differently. Didn't John say
that
if we were saved we no longer sinned. If we continued to sin, then we
were
liars? Paul continues to say he battled with his nature. Isn't it
alright
to say we're all works in progress instead of constantly arguing the
points
of James and Paul as well as thousands of other details?
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"As for me, I have not hastened from being a pastor
to follow thee: neither have I desired the woeful day;
thou knowest: that which came out of my lips was right
before thee." - Jeremiah 17:16
"There are only two possibilities as to how life
arose. One is spontaneous generation arising to
evolution; the other is a supernatural creative
act of God. There is no third possibility.
Spontaneous generation, that life arose from
non-living matter was scientifically disproved
120 years ago by Louis Pasteur and others. That
leaves us with the only possible conclusion that
life arose as a supernatural creative act of God.
I will not accept that philosophically because I
do not want to believe in God. Therefore, I choose
to believe in that which I know is scientifically
impossible; spontaneous generation arising to
evolution." - (Wald, George, "Innovation and
Biology," Scientific American, Vol. 199,
Sept. 1958, p. 100)
.
