All scripture is the inerrant Word of God. It is inspired---God breathed. It is true from cover to cover.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." II Timothy 3:16

 

You can quote that all you want, but it still does not claim to used for history or science.

 

Where in the scripture does it say - "take all of these words literally and legalistically for they are actually the direct words of God"? It doesn't.

 

BTW LBBC I also believe the new testament guys can misinterpret or re-interpret. . .

 

You cannot ignore the fact that in the beatitudes that Matthew says that Jesus says "blessed are the poor in spirit" and Luke says "Blessed are the poor." Those are two VERY DIFFERENT things, written to two very different audiences meant to convery two very different things.

 

BTW LBBC I also believe the new testament guys can misinterpret or re-interpret. . .

 

You cannot ignore the fact that in the beatitudes that Matthew says that Jesus says "blessed are the poor in spirit" and Luke says "Blessed are the poor." Those are two VERY DIFFERENT things, written to two very different audiences meant to convery two very different things.

 

At this time then, it becomes Ace's religious view and only yours because you are getting to determine which Scriptures to follow and which not to follow.

 

To me, that is very dangerous and does lend itself to what we are so much accused of doing as Christians. Setting up a religion for us and making things to follow that we like.

At this time then, it becomes Ace's religious view and only yours because you are getting to determine which Scriptures to follow and which not to follow.

 

To me, that is very dangerous and does lend itself to what we are so much accused of doing as Christians. Setting up a religion for us and making things to follow that we like.

 

I know this conversation is straying off the main topic of the thread but I'll chime in. Christians have been interpreting scripture to fit their ideas for a long time. The whole idea of the Rapture and such was thought up during the 19th century by piecing together a bunch of different bible verses. Heck, no one is a Biblical literalist and actually puts it into practice. If I was I couldn't wear these comfortable cotton-poly pants.

I know this conversation is straying off the main topic of the thread but I'll chime in. Christians have been interpreting scripture to fit their ideas for a long time. The whole idea of the Rapture and such was thought up during the 19th century by piecing together a bunch of different bible verses. Heck, no one is a Biblical literalist and actually puts it into practice. If I was I couldn't wear these comfortable cotton-poly pants.

 

I sure try to be but fail alot of times miserably.

To to reply to your statement about your cotton pants, why can't you wear them?

In the Old Testament there is a law about not being allowed to wear two different types of cloth. I can't think of the verse off hand.

In the Old Testament there is a law about not being allowed to wear two different types of cloth. I can't think of the verse off hand.

 

Except that Jesus came to remove us having to follow the Law, or at least all of those other parts of the law beyond the commandments and other things he mentioned.

I believe you are OK on the pants. Look at Galatians chapter 3.

Except that Jesus came to remove us having to follow the Law, or at least all of those other parts of the law beyond the commandments and other things he mentioned.

 

He says not one mark of one letter of the law is to be abolished in Matthew. I never said that I pick and choose which verses to follow, what I do is use my life experience, my understanding of God - revealed in Jesus, and the reasoning that God gave me to attempt to understand what the Bible tells me.

 

I would need none of those things if I took it legally or literally. Heck fire, I would have already plucked out both of my eyes and cut off both of my hands because they have offended me. Both checks would be bruised b/c I keep turning them and I would never judge, lest I be judged by the same measure.

 

Because I do not take scripture literally does not mean that I don't take them seriously, or that I simply choose to ignore some of them. Your HELL is my Sheol or Gehanna - why do you get to be right in your interpretation and I have to be wrong. Is it not the Bible according to LBBC? or Mr. Wrong? or Hounds?

He says not one mark of one letter of the law is to be abolished in Matthew. I never said that I pick and choose which verses to follow, what I do is use my life experience, my understanding of God - revealed in Jesus, and the reasoning that God gave me to attempt to understand what the Bible tells me.

 

I would need none of those things if I took it legally or literally. Heck fire, I would have already plucked out both of my eyes and cut off both of my hands because they have offended me. Both checks would be bruised b/c I keep turning them and I would never judge, lest I be judged by the same measure.

 

Because I do not take scripture literally does not mean that I don't take them seriously, or that I simply choose to ignore some of them. Your HELL is my Sheol or Gehanna - why do you get to be right in your interpretation and I have to be wrong. Is it not the Bible according to LBBC? or Mr. Wrong? or Hounds?

 

It is the Bible according to LBBC if I ignore Scriptures and what they clearly say. Jesus indicate many, many times of an eternal punishment and if I don't teach that then yes it becomes the Bible of LBBC and I am open to debate.

 

But when the Bible indicates that those who don't know of him and don't accept him will have eternal punishment of burning in the lake of fire, I have two choices; 1) believe it; 2) believe in what I want it to be.

It is the Bible according to LBBC if I ignore Scriptures and what they clearly say. Jesus indicate many, many times of an eternal punishment and if I don't teach that then yes it becomes the Bible of LBBC and I am open to debate.

 

But when the Bible indicates that those who don't know of him and don't accept him will have eternal punishment of burning in the lake of fire, I have two choices; 1) believe it; 2) believe in what I want it to be.

 

But what about all of those other ones.

 

You don't believe Matthew 25:31-46 literally, b/c it says people will go to heaven for doing right by the poor and prisoners, it says nothing about what you believe. AND IF YOU TAKE IT LITERALLY, word for word, inerrant, then I can go to heaven by visiting people in jail and giving food to those who are hungry. Or else, you interpret it. Which is it?

Lets get back to the topic, please.

But what about all of those other ones.

 

You don't believe Matthew 25:31-46 literally, b/c it says people will go to heaven for doing right by the poor and prisoners, it says nothing about what you believe. AND IF YOU TAKE IT LITERALLY, word for word, inerrant, then I can go to heaven by visiting people in jail and giving food to those who are hungry. Or else, you interpret it. Which is it?

 

I look at all the Scriptures dealing with the subject and look at what they say.

 

Same way that I don't look at one Scripture about Jesus Christ and think that is the complete picture of Him. I look at ALL of the Scriptures concerning him and get a complete picture of Him.

 

Same as the story on 5 wise but blind men trying to describe an elephant but each only felt one part of the elephant's body. The one at the tusks did a good job describing the tusks but it was an incomplete picture of the elephant cause he only felt one part of the elephant.

If you want to find more information on the debate about Intelligent Design vs. Evolution, especially on teaching it in Biology classrooms in public schools go here

 

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/

 

Interviews and direct information from Phillip Johnson (father of Intelligent Design- and not a scientist)

 

Also from Ken Miller- probably the author of the Biology book used in most classrooms.

If you want to find more information on the debate about Intelligent Design vs. Evolution, especially on teaching it in Biology classrooms in public schools go here

 

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/

 

Interviews and direct information from Phillip Johnson (father of Intelligent Design- and not a scientist)

 

Also from Ken Miller- probably the author of the Biology book used in most classrooms.

 

I watched that when it came out. It was very well done. I've state before that Ken Miller has written a very good book called "Finding Darwin's God" that is very good. Miller is a Christian and also a very well-respected scientist.