Javig: Greetings.
Thank you, Javig, for not being in a rush. Sometimes I work long hours and can’t get back to people as quickly as I should like. As to your questions: “[W]hy you personally don’t see the bible as many, including me, to be inspired and infallible word of GOD. If you can? answer me these questions.”
Well, first, the Bible nowhere states that it is the “infallible word of God.” Nowhere. Second, the Bible does state that Christ severely warned the Scribes as to their occupation when he said: “Woe to your scribes, etc.” That itself should give one pause for serious consideration. Yes? Third, the Bible itself warns us of those who tamper with its contents. It even goes so far as to list, in some places, the consequences for doing so. Yes? Fourth, the prophet Jeremiah warned us of the “false stylus” of the scribe. Yes? Fifth, Christ said that one of the reasons he came was to tell us the “truth” in contrast to what the scribes and Pharisees of that time were telling the people. Yes? My conclusion? All of the above tells me, that the Bible is not the “infallible word of God.” The fact that the Bible can be and has been tampered with is itself blatant evidence that it is not “infallible.” As to the Bible’s inspiration, the Bible states that “all scripture is inspired of God, NOT ‘all the Bible is inspired of God.” In the last chapter of Luke in two places it is recorded there that Jesus identified what “scripture” is. He is reported to have said there that “scriptures” are the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms. He didn’t identify any other writings to be “scripture,” thus I can conclude that the Bible contains “some scripture” but that not all of it is scripture. Also, in other places in the Bible, the Bible states most emphatically that Jesus Christ himself is the “Word of God.” And, no, the expression “written word of God” appears nowhere in the Bible. So, for me, the “scriptures,” which Jesus identified, are inspired, while the other books not identified by Christ are not inspired. They, like history books or epistles, contain valuable information—but not “inspired” information. Please note that the first five books of the Bible (called the Pentateuch) are alleged to have been written by Moses. A careful reading of them will show you they were not written by him. To the extent that they quote the things Moses said and did and received from God, to that extent one may consider them inspired because they quote the writings of Moses. Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy were written ABOUT Moses but not BY Moses. In all four of those books, Moses is written about in the Third Person. Do you understand what that means? These books were not written by him. And, all of it has been tampered with such the Christ needed to come to tells us the “truth” of things.
I trust that the above answers your questions regarding what I mean by “some scripture” and “not scripture,” and in answer to your question of “what is the meaning you are putting to the word ‘srciptures’?” I trust the above also answers: “What parts of the bible you don’t take as scripture? And inspired? And infallible?”
You ask: “Also, as good as the ‘scriptures’ are (and I grant you they are good, to a point’…tell me, to what point they are good?”
The point to which the “scriptures” are good is to that point in which they have not been tampered with. Do you not see that? The “scriptures are extremely valuable and “beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, that the man of God may be fit for every good work”; but only to the point in which they have not been tampered with. For example, and this is merely an example (one that I hope you get [no disrespect intended]), if a legal document is tampered with, will the courts rely on it. Come now? That tampered document will be thoroughly examined by numerous experts to determine its validity. They have to determine which part of the legal text has been tampered with, how, and why so, etc., etc., etc. And sometimes the legal document is rejected in parts or even in toto. The “scriptures” are more valuable than any legal document, and while we may trust much of the “scriptures,” caution needs to be employed when things have been tampered with. I’m sure you will agree and see my point.
You ask: “[W]hich bible translation you personally see as a truthfull rendering of the original manuscript?” I think that all Bible translations have truthfulness in them. I also think all Bible translations have error in them. One Bible translation may have more of one thing than the other, but they are all many many many times removed from the originals. There are not originals extant. Are there? All we have available to us are copies of copies. I would tend to think that depending on one’s upbringing and religious education by being born and raised in a religious organization that one might think one Bible translation is better than another. At one time I have had 37 different translations on my home bookshelves. For one reason or another, they were all good, they were all poor. You choose. I have no favorites.
I hope that I have answered your questions to your satisfaction as to what I believe.
Respectfully,
--Inkie
