What "scripture is inspired of God?"

by Mad Sweeney 67 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  PSacramento

  "The authors of these epistles used Paul's name, but they gave their own answers, which were in some cases at least, rather different to those given by Paul himself earlier on. It has to be said that they wittingly gave other answers than the purported author did before, because the new circumstances required new answers. To them (these authors) it was of vital importance to win the theological struggles of the time and for this reason they made these epistles seem to originate from Paul. To lend credibility to the authenticity of their epistles, certain details were inserted that should support this claim. In this way, they could achieve their purpose, i e that their epistles would get authority in the churches."

  That is a very real possiblity, yes.
• 

  PSacramento

  ALL "scripture" really IS inspired, dear ones. The problem is that the word/term "inspired" does not mean TODAY what it meant which such writings were penned. Today, the word means that one is "moved" or "compelled" to do something. Whether it be write, help, go, whatever. However, when the scriptures were written, the word/term meant that the writer... was IN SPIRIT: the writer was transformed INTO THE SPIRIT... when given what to write and told to write. Which is how John was able to receive the Revelation (Revelation 4:2).

  See, this is where we disagree Shelby :)

  I thinkt hat TODAY we put a different definition of inspired than they did in those days.

  That is why in many of the passages, they point out that they were in Spirit as opposed to it being assumed.

  On top of that, the spirit that was poured onto the writer was still "interpreted" through the writer and not always as well as it could have been.

  John's excessive imagery is a fine example of that.

  There were MANY writings and books in the OT and not all where viewed as "inspired word of God" and those that were became "canon".

  Enouch for exampel was NOT viewed as such, though it shoudl have been.

  This means that the people of THOSE times already made a distinction between "inspired by God" and "inspired Word of God".

  God was their inspiration, yes, but not all scripture was "god breathed".

  Unless of course we do believe that God finds shrimp an abomination and that he was "fine" with Lots's daughters "raping" their Father.
• 

  AGuest

  upon what basis can we believe that it is "inspired of God?"

  We cannot, dear MS (the greatest of love and peace to you!), with the exception of the Revelation. We can KNOW that the Revelation was inspired because it SAYS it was: it tells HOW John received it (from Christ, through an angel (Michael) while he was in spirit) and that he was told BY Christ to write it. Now, some of the others (excluding Luke's gospel and account of the Apostles acts) may have been the result of information the writer received from the Holy Spirit... which recalled to the writer's mind things that had taken place... but none SAY that. And we KNOW Paul wasn't led by the Holy Spirit (contrary to what he states) at the time of writing... because his writings conflict with what Christ taught and, at times, each other. Paul simply wrote what he BELIEVED... which CHANGED... as he was further led by the Holy Spirit. But, due to the "Pharisee" in him, he OFTEN wrote things founded IN that teaching. Which often caused a lot of problems... either congregationally or between him and others, including the Apostles.

  See, this is where we disagree Shelby :)

  Greetings, my dear PSacto... and the greatest of love and peace to you! I think perhaps you misunderstand my comment (I hope you did). I did not state that all "that's in the Bible" is inspired, because it is not. However, all SCRIPTURE... which is, according to our Lord, "Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms"... is indeed inspired. Now, are ALL of the books attributed to certain "prophets" the Prophets? Uh-uh, no, they are not. And are all of the Psalms included in the Bible considered "Pslams" as our Lord considered them? Again, uh-uh.

  I think that TODAY we put a different definition of inspired than they did in those days.

  We DO. But when asking if all "scripture" is inspired... don't we have to go by what they did IN those days... the says during which scripture was either written... or consulted by the Apostles? I mean, since the Apostles are the FOUNDATION of the "temple"... shouldn't it be about what THEY considered to be "scripture"... and "inspired"? And Paul was NOT one of those apostles who make up the "foundation."

  That is why in many of the passages, they point out that they were in Spirit as opposed to it being assumed.

  Or... they point it out because it was true... and didn't point it out because it was not and so the writing is not "scripture"?

  On top of that, the spirit that was poured onto the writer was still "interpreted" through the writer and not always as well as it could have been.

  Ummmm... here, I have to disagree with you, dear one. Intepretation... belongs to God. And so, the Holy Spirit would NOT have given the writer a "revelation" that the writer had to interpret. Such ones were to write... just as they saw and heard. Often, they DIDN'T understand. But that was not their task, to understand. Theirs was simply to write... what they saw and heard.

  John's excessive imagery is a fine example of that.

  Exactly! As was Ezekiel's, Isaiah's, etc.

  There were MANY writings and books in the OT and not all where viewed as "inspired word of God" and those that were became "canon".

  Absolutely! I totally agree! That they became/are canon, however, does NOT make them "scripture." Indeed, that's why our Lord SAID, "Woe, to you, scribes!" Because there were scriptures that were altered, edited, tampered with... scripture that was left out... and writings that weren't scripture that were included. Long before the current Bible canon (e.g., the Septuagint).

  Enouch for exampel was NOT viewed as such, though it shoudl have been.

  Yep!

  This means that the people of THOSE times already made a distinction between "inspired by God" and "inspired Word of God".

  I'm not sure what you mean, here...

  God was their inspiration, yes, but not all scripture was "god breathed".

  And these two definitions... both of which are WRONG... are the problem. "Scripture" is neither that were God was the inspiration NOR that which is God-breathed. The scribes, unled by Holy Spirit that THEY were... didn't understand what "inspired" meant. It means that the writer is IN SPIRIT when the "revelation" is received. I implore you: read Isaiah. Ezekiel. Jeremiah. John's revelation. The Psalms. And "Moses" is going to be hard because it ain't all there (the Pentateuch is NOT "Moses").

  Unless of course we do believe that God finds shrimp an abomination and that he was "fine" with Lots's daughters "raping" their Father.

  I am not sure what your position is, here. Bottom feeders were an "abomination" in that Israel could have been poisoned by eating it. Didn't have to be all of Israel... just some. Shellfish is a risky diet source for many people, even today. And I can't see where He would have been "fine" with what Lot's daughters did, but it happened. They were not Israel, however. Lot was Israel's cousin, not brother.

  Again, I think you and I are crossing definitions of scripture, dear one. I do NOT believe that everything in the Bible is "scripture." Not at ALL. I know that the Bible CONTAINS scripture... and that ALL scripture, including that which is NOT in the Bible... is inspired: men wrote, while they were IN spirit... and borne along BY the Holy Spirit. Other than that, it's just a writing (which is where many get confused because the word "scripture" does mean "writing" - however, it pertains to CERTAIN writings: those that were penned when the writer was in spirit).

  I hope this helps! Now, off to a business meeting... and peace to you all!

  Your servant and a slave of Christ,

  SA
• 

  PSacramento

  Hi Shelby,

  Yeah, I think we are discussing two different things in scripture and bible.

  But I wanted to address this part:

  Ummmm... here, I have to disagree with you, dear one. Intepretation... belongs to God. And so, the Holy Spirit would NOT have given the writer a "revelation" that the writer had to interpret. Such ones were to write... just as they saw and heard. Often, they DIDN'T understand. But that was not their task, to understand. Theirs was simply to write... what they saw and heard.

  Lets look at Revelation for a moment, John wrote down many things, not all in order and those that came after did the best they could putting it all together, but the thing I want to address is the symbolisim and imagery in Revelation.

  John saw many things that the HS showed him and he did his best to interpret them and that is what he did, as you said he didn't always understand, just like other before him, but he did the best way he could and that is what I meant about "limitations of interpretation" by those "in the spirit".

  No matter what, God's message is still being tranmisted by Man to Man and re-tranmitted by Man and as such, it isn't always perfect, though the core is always there.

  The best with multiple heads and horns, the anti-christ with the mortal wound, the locusts with the heads of people, all those things were left up to MAN to interpret and, as the say ing goes, many things get lost in the translation.
• 

  Chalam

  Some answers here

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon

  Blessings in Christ,

  Stephen
• 

  AGuest

  all those things were left up to MAN to interpret and, as the say ing goes, many things get lost in the translation.

  I understand what you're saying, dear PSacto (as always, the greatest of love and peace to you, dear one!)... but I am not sure I agree. No, I don't agree. I USED to think that it was left up to man. And then I learned from our Lord that that is the REASON for ALL of the confusion: man... trying to interpret what is not his TO interpret. It is a "revelation" because it was... and must BE... revealed. By the One who gave it. That is why Luke wrote... and the disciples were recorded to have said:

  "And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.

  They asked each other, "Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?"

  He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms." Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures."

  Through I Lord I learned that I could read... and read... and read... all I wanted to. But I would NOT understand... unless HE explained... HE opened... the scriptures to me. So that I could understand... NOT what I thought... or wanted to... but what was/is TRUE. Because HE is the truth... and thus what comes from HIM is the truth. On the other hand, if I lean upon my OWN understanding... or that of "certain men"... then I am BOUND to get it wrong and/or be misled.

  Please know that I am not trying to be contentious or argumentative with you dear one. I am only sharing the truth about this matter as I received it FROM the Truth, our Lord. I hope it helps and, as always, I bid you peace!

  YOUR servant, sister, and fellow slave of Christ,

  SA
• 

  cameo-d

  agonus: Oh yes, let's talk about E(u)noch! Nummy nummy nummy...

  Do you think Eunoch was a Eunok?
• 

  PSacramento

  Through I Lord I learned that I could read... and read... and read... all I wanted to. But I would NOT understand... unless HE explained... HE opened... the scriptures to me. So that I could understand... NOT what I thought... or wanted to... but what was/is TRUE. Because HE is the truth... and thus what comes from HIM is the truth. On the other hand, if I lean upon my OWN understanding... or that of "certain men"... then I am BOUND to get it wrong and/or be misled.

  Please know that I am not trying to be contentious or argumentative with you dear one. I am only sharing the truth about this matter as I received it FROM the Truth, our Lord. I hope it helps and, as always, I bid you peace!

  I never find you contentious sweetness :)

  I understand what you are saying and I agree, 100%. Without Our Lord guiding Us and helping Us to understand his Divine word, we won't be able to understand it.

  But that wasn't what I was saying, but it does flow into what point I was trying to make in regards to Revelation and other prophetic works hat are full of symbolisim and imagery.

  It is still left to MAN to interpret and when MAN tries ( alone without Our Lord to Guid him), much gets lost in the translation.
• 

  designs

  So- PS and AG what exactly has your Lord helped you to understand that the unbelieving dolt or serious student and critic misses.
• 

  PSacramento

  So- PS and AG what exactly has your Lord helped you to understand that the unbelieving dolt or serious student and critic misses.

  Well, speaking only for myself of course, My Lord has helped to understand that His truth is universal and absolute and that it can be found in almost every expression of faith that is based on love, He has guided me to not only read the bible but the history of the bible, the history of how it came to be, how it was transmitted and restored, how it was corrupted and He has guided me to find Him in the writings of others outside the bible, even in the writings of Hid sharpest critics, He has shown me that I don't know asmuch as I thought I did and that there is no harm in being worng, in learning from many sources and from understanding why some say what they say.

  In short, My Lord has helped me to love to learn about Him and Our Father.

  Dude, I love to learn, I love to read the different views about Christianity, about the different views WITHING it and the thoughts and expressions of its ancient writers AND modern writers.

  The history yes, but also how people apply it in their everyday lives, which is far more important in my view.

  My Lord has also helped me to be critical of what I learn, to "test everything" and to not take anyone's word as His.

  I will give you an example:

  I will read a passage and that passage may seem difficult and I ask My Lord for guidence and the first thing I "hear" is that " I am Love, a powerful, undying love, would Love do that? say that?" and base don THAT view, I try to understand what I am reading, why it says this and there are times that yes, I still don't get it and ask for more help and there are other times when I will research it and research it and, perhaps, find the answer there.

  Then there are other times when I won't like the answers I find.