If the Bible is not inerrant but some writers were mistaken, how do you know that you are not mistaken?
Or perhaps the scribes who later wrote things down that they were told, were mistaken, and added to that understanding, or exaggerated numbers, etc...
And I can only go as I am led by the Spirit. I do not expect anyone to take my word for anything, because I am a human, and I can make mistakes. I would not take yours for it; I would not take anyone else's word for anything. I would always wait until something was shown or confirmed to my in spirit. If not, then at the least i would test the message... against love, Christ, and His teachings. If not in conflict, but i still have not heard anything as to it, or received understanding/insight... then I would shelve it until such a time as i do. (he who is not against you, is for you)
All the writers claim legitimacy and that they are inspired by God. I don't see how one can pick and choose. When you add the Gnostic and infancy gospels to the mix, it is even more confused. For others to believe that you have a personal revelation, you need legitimacy. Yet you do not set forth any legitimacy.
No, all writers do not claim to be inspired. Luke never did. Luke stated that he specifically 'investigated' all matters to make an account for someone. Paul made a point of differentiating when something was from God and when something was from him, but he thought he was right.
The only legitimacy I see that makes any difference is Christ. Test against Him; test against love. The one common thing that all the gospels and witnesses to Christ teach is to look to Christ, and that love is the 'greatest commandment'.
I believe in both grace and works. Grace should lead to works.
Faith should lead to works. Grace, I think, inspires love and so also leads to works, because love leads to works.
What concrete deeds has your experience done to improve human life? I respect groups such as Catholic Charities and Doctors without Borders reflecting Christ much more than I do. Jesus said our love for one another would be the litmus test. You aren't St. Theresa (learning more about here, I now see no saint. quite the opposite).
Well, i make no claim to be a saint, Band. Far from. As far as my faith and works, well, i think that is my business. I don't think I will put myself out there to be judged. I respect those such groups as well, and see the love that Christ spoke of in them as well.
I don't claim to show the love too much in my own life. A Catholic relief agency came to help me once. It was literally as though Jesus of Nazareth knocked on my door and came in to my home to soothe me. The Quakers are very impressive at showing the love that Christ mentioned.
Nothing in my faith would ever seek to take away anything of such love as that.
Love for one another makes sense. Intelligence or education can only go so far. I have experienced that love as a recipient. It is very real. As skeptical as I can be, it moves me greatly. I don't see what Jesus accomplishes with these private, exclusive experiences. I've cried from the experience of Christ's love reflected in certain groups.
One does not take away from the other. And just because you don't see what Christ accomplishes does not mean that He accomplishes nothing. I know the opposite is true. But again, one does not take away from the other. One could be said to simply add to the other, so that love is shown in many ways, to the people who need different things.
I focus on concrete, measurable results. The Joel Osteen and the woman (I can't recall her name" repulse me.
But this is you. You are not eveyone. And I know nothing about the above person.
Peace,
tammy