- This topic has 400 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 6 months, 3 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
My dad knows both Hebrew and Greek! He always goes back to the source when writing a sermon. Freedom is right that there isn’t always an English equivalent, but translations usually try to find the best word/s as a replacement. Luckily that doesn’t affect the meaning of the original text, and if you can find a source of knowledge on the texts (such as my dad), they can usually make something a whole lot more clear, but the translation never contradicts the original text outright.
Take that passage about “the wind blows where it pleases” as an example. (I can’t remember its location, haha 🥲) Using the word wind is still a technically right translation of it, because Jesus basically pulled a pun on his disciples. But the real meaning of the word also includes “spirit.” Using “wind” obviously wasn’t the best choice but it doesn’t totally ruin the meaning of the text.
So the best choice of action is to find all translations of a particular text and use other, clearer texts to fill in the context. 🙂
#ProtectAdolinKholin
⬆️⬆️⬆️
@theducktator Yes, precisely!
@trailblazer Good! I always encourage researching, especially when it comes to the Bible. There are sooo many false teachers out there, so it’s always good to do your own research, read lots of Bible, and pray a lot ❤️My dad knows both Hebrew and Greek! He always goes back to the source when writing a sermon.
Oh, are you a pastor’s kid too? My dad knows some Hebrew and Greek, but I don’t think he’s fluent.
So the best choice of action is to find all translations of a particular text and use other, clearer texts to fill in the context. 🙂
I use an ESV study bible, and it usually gives multiple translations in the notes.
Tempus adest gratiae
Hoc quod optabamus,
Carmina laetitiae
Devote reddamus!Agreed!
"Real love is for your good, not for your comfort." -Justin Whitmel Earley
On the subject of extra scripture… I don’t want to depend on just other people for an understanding on this, but I know a lot of Hebrew and Greek reading pastors and a couple professors.
As my dad explained it, they have studied these other books, and they simply don’t look like Biblical works. It’s kind of like being an artist and studying Mona Lisa in comparison with Girl With Pearl Earring. They don’t have the same voice or style of depth. For example, the Bible likes to use chiasms, metaphors traditional to the tabernacle storyline, and an insane amount of parallelism. I imagine these other books don’t follow these stylistic elements.
I hope this is at least a little helpful 😄
#ProtectAdolinKholin
Yes, I most certainly am! PASTOR KIDS ROCK
Jkjk, the rest of y’all are great 😆
And I agree, the extra translations in footnotes are super helpful.
#ProtectAdolinKholin
You’re both mistaking what I’m saying though. I’m not questioning if scripture is inspired by God either, I’m just open to the idea that scripture is written by imperfect hands, and therefore even when inspired by an infallible God, can be mistaken in some ways. Why do we have many gospels of Christ’s life instead of 1? Why do they contradict each other on some points, like quoting Christ differently, or things like are the apostles supposed to carry staffs, or not? I’m ok with these discrepancies. The apostles were imperfect men, but I can still believe they were inspired by God and follow all the wisdom they give.
You’re absolutely right though. That’s one of the biggest things for me, is if scripture is God breathed, then why don’t we have 1 perfect translation? We don’t even have the original written words of the apostles. How do we know what is translated right? Did Christ say that we should never be angry, or did He say that we should never be angry without reason? This verse has been debated for centuries without answer. I’m ok that I don’t know what Christ said here, because He’s said so many other things that collectively give an idea of His teachings on things like anger. Every word doesn’t need to be perfect to still collectively be the word of God.
We can’t just say that the Bible is full of flaws and yet still believe it to be complete truth.
If the Bible isn’t so perfect that it is entirely true, then there is no reason to believe any of it.
If one thing could be a mistake, then all of it could be a mistake.
If one thing is wrong, then all of it could be wrong.
…Why not though? If an ancient prophet gave an opinion about something, and that’s recorded, does that invalidate the entirety of scripture? We know that prophets and apostles were imperfect men, take Peter, who straight up denied Christ 3 times! I just don’t see why it’s so all or nothing. If there are faults, they are the faults of men, therefore, let us not condemn the things of God.
I’m curious, Arcane…what makes you think that the Bible isn’t infallible? Is there any specific part of the Bible that makes you think it’s not infallible?
Well, this is just kind of something I’ve been studying about my own faith as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ. I actually quoted The Book of Mormon’s title page in my last sentence above. This is the word of God, by it acknowledges that there could be faults from men, but let us not condemn God’s word for it. To me, looking at the Bible this makes sense. There are many things that sometimes don’t add up, like the examples I’ve mentioned to Trailblazer above (also, I’m skeptical of the entirety of the Songs of Solomon, but we don’t need to go there). If scripture is infallible, how do we know, and what books are infallible, why not the Apocrypha? Does scripture teach that it’s infallible, if so, what reason is there to trust it? If we rely on external witnesses to show that it can be trusted, then aren’t we saying that that other witness is more fundamental than scripture?
This is the paradox of epistemology, something I’ve been studying lately. How do you really know that it’s infallible? If you can come to know that it is infallible, then it can only be as much as you know that your mother is a conscious being, which you can’t know with 100 certainty, meaning that it isn’t infallible. This is ok though, you have every reason to believe that your mother is a conscious being, and you can have every reason to trust what scripture says, you just can’t know beyond 99.99999…% certainty.
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
I’m a Youth Pastor’s kid😂
…Why not though? If an ancient prophet gave an opinion about something, and that’s recorded, does that invalidate the entirety of scripture? We know that prophets and apostles were imperfect men, take Peter, who straight up denied Christ 3 times! I just don’t see why it’s so all or nothing. If there are faults, they are the faults of men, therefore, let us not condemn the things of God.
But if their hands wrote mistakes/faults, then how can we know it’s true? If it’s possible that there are many, many mistakes in the Bible simply because it was written by man, then why not deny every bit of Scripture? I mean, if we can’t be sure that the men who wrote the Bible wrote everything as God desired it to be, then why do we still believe?
The supposed “contradictions” and “mistakes” in the Bible is one of the things that Atheist have against Christianity.
Well, this is just kind of something I’ve been studying about my own faith as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ. I actually quoted The Book of Mormon’s title page in my last sentence above.
I see. I assumed such.
This is the word of God, by it acknowledges that there could be faults from men, but let us not condemn God’s word for it. To me, looking at the Bible this makes sense. There are many things that sometimes don’t add up, like the examples I’ve mentioned to Trailblazer above (also, I’m skeptical of the entirety of the Songs of Solomon, but we don’t need to go there). If scripture is infallible, how do we know, and what books are infallible, why not the Apocrypha?
But if it has mistakes, then how can we know it’s even God’s word?
Scripture is infallible because it was written by men with the HOLY SPIRIT inside them. If there are mistakes in the Bible, then that means God made a mistake, given that God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are three in one. (and I know not all Christians believe that, but I am not discussing that today. I don’t have that kind of energy rn).
Does scripture teach that it’s infallible, if so, what reason is there to trust it? If we rely on external witnesses to show that it can be trusted, then aren’t we saying that that other witness is more fundamental than scripture?
Scripture itself is Christ. (John 1:1-18) So if scripture is fallible, then so is Jesus Christ. We know that scripture can be trusted because it was written through the power of the holy spirit. God CHOSE to work through mankind.
He could have easily just breathed scripture into existence, but he didn’t. God made the choice to use mankind, but if scripture is fallible because mankind is fallible, then did God make a mistake by choosing to use mankind to write scriptures?
This is the paradox of epistemology, something I’ve been studying lately. How do you really know that it’s infallible? If you can come to know that it is infallible, then it can only be as much as you know that your mother is a conscious being, which you can’t know with 100 certainty, meaning that it isn’t infallible. This is ok though, you have every reason to believe that your mother is a conscious being, and you can have every reason to trust what scripture says, you just can’t know beyond 99.99999…% certainty.
I wouldn’t compare scripture to your mother.
God is God.
Humanity is Humanity.
It’s really that simple.
‘What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar…’
Romans 3:3-4
We can’t know if it is or not, besides through the faith of the Spirit. But what is the most logical option?
If you take Biblical philosophy and try to find a verse that directly contradicts it, you aren’t going to find anything more than vaguer verses that have open-ended statements, or use a less conventional way of explaining something. Conversely, if you remove deny the meaning of a given passage, doing so will automatically deny so much more. It’s like takin away a premise of a logical argument.
So why is there so much open endedness, and contradiction though? Even if you could explain away every contradiction, like the one about the staffs, isn’t the mere fact that we need to in the first place a bit odd for something that is meant to be perfect and God breathed in every word? Could you show me that the Bible also explains its infallibility? (Meaning the 66 books of the Bible)
First of all, if Scripture is the word of God, it is necessarily perfect. Second, there’s no reason not to believe God can directly communicate his words through the hands of man without mistakes. For example, Moses wrote the ten commandments on two tablets, to bring to Israel. I don’t think the commandments somehow changed as Moses wrote them down – he was just God’s tool of communication.
And yet we have s many different versions of the 10 commandments through changing translation. If God can use Moses perfectly, why doesn’t He use His translators perfectly to make the 10 commandments the same for everyone faithful to Him?
I don’t find it silly, because my mother isn’t my key to salvation. To trust my mother has more benefit than harm, because she is only one earthly source of wisdom and any problems may be sanded down if I use other sources.
Salvation is more than life and death. If our main source of knowledge about God is fallible, how can we know he is infallible? At best, we don’t know. Meanwhile, if the Bible is infallible, God is necessarily infallible.
You’re quite right, salvation is more than life and death. But when it comes to life and death, like I said to Freedom, how do you know that your mother is a conscious being? I’d say that’s pretty important, and just as if not more important than life and death. You don’t infallibly know, just like you can’t infallibly know that scripture is infallible as you’ve already admitted. This then being the case, how is infallibility even meaningful? The reality is, I don’t know if God is infallible, but I have faith that He is, I know it with every fiber of my being, I have every reason to believe it, and yet I can’t epistemologically know that it is 100% true, because I myself am flawed, and I’m at peace with that.
I agree that the fallibility idea can make sense. I just don’t think it is the most consistent or hopeful thing to believe.
I also hope I don’t sound too pushy or offensive 😅 This is just what I have found to be best – not just because I was raised this way, but because I genuinely don’t want to believe something so founded in being unfounded.
Fair enough, I completely understand. You want something that you can put all your trust in, without any fear that it may be false. As I see it though, you can still have that. God is infallible, and we can put all our faith in Him, put faith in the words of His prophets, even though they are imperfect men. You already admitted that you can’t know infallibly that scripture is infallible, so I don’t see why this is different, you simply have faith that it is, I simply have faith that if there is error, I need not worry, because I have faith that God has it all figured out.
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
I have thoughts 😝 But I need to take a shower first, so like, don’t drive y’all’s trains into walls while I’m gone
#ProtectAdolinKholin
I’m technically a PK, too, but my dad’s role is missions pastor, so he’s not usually doing the preaching.
And thanks for adding your thoughts!
"Real love is for your good, not for your comfort." -Justin Whitmel Earley
I had to google a definition of infallible for this, so hopefully I understand what you are talking about. I think that all of the stories and ideas in the Bible are true, but that there is room for error in things like spelling, and errors in translation. For example, Nebuchadnezzar is spelled two different ways in the Old Testament. I think Nebuchadrezzar is the other one, but I’m not certain.
Yep, and that’s ultimately all I’m saying. I think that since there are small issues like that, there can just as much be bigger ones, but that can be ok. We can still trust and love God with all our hearts, might, mind, and strength.
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
The whole lot of y’all are pastor kids, that’s awesome! Do your Dads study ancient Hebrew, modern, or both?
But if their hands wrote mistakes/faults, then how can we know it’s true? If it’s possible that there are many, many mistakes in the Bible simply because it was written by man, then why not deny every bit of Scripture? I mean, if we can’t be sure that the men who wrote the Bible wrote everything as God desired it to be, then why do we still believe?
The supposed “contradictions” and “mistakes” in the Bible is one of the things that Atheist have against Christianity.
Again, you’re making the same fallacy. I shouldn’t reject a math textbook and fear math as a construct to be wrong just because there was an incorrect solution in the answer key for a problem. I can still trust when studying the textbook as a whole, and applying the knowledge it gives and seeing if it works or not in my own experience, I can find many different witnesses in and outside of the textbook to show that it is globally true.
But if it has mistakes, then how can we know it’s even God’s word?
Scripture is infallible because it was written by men with the HOLY SPIRIT inside them. If there are mistakes in the Bible, then that means God made a mistake, given that God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are three in one. (and I know not all Christians believe that, but I am not discussing that today. I don’t have that kind of energy rn).
Agreed, no need to get into the Trinity, lol! Though that does bring up something interesting, why is there disagreement if the Bible is infallible? Why does a man filled with the Holy Spirit need to be perfect? Do they stop sinning completely? Once again, didn’t Peter deny the Christ 3 times? Is there no room for error, if not, is there no room for an atonement then?
Scripture itself is Christ. (John 1:1-18) So if scripture is fallible, then so is Jesus Christ. We know that scripture can be trusted because it was written through the power of the holy spirit. God CHOSE to work through mankind.
Eh, Christ is “The Word” yes, but is that specifically in reference to the 66 books?
He could have easily just breathed scripture into existence, but he didn’t. God made the choice to use mankind, but if scripture is fallible because mankind is fallible, then did God make a mistake by choosing to use mankind to write scriptures?
Not at all. But mankind is fallible unavoidably, and because of that, even if God did breath every word into existence all at once, then we would still be imperfect recipients, it wouldn’t matter. God still chose to use prophets to speak for Him the same reason He seeks to save us all. He loves us, and wants us to be with Him. We are imperfect, but He for so loved the world that He sent His only begotten Son. He sends His imperfect prophets to lead us, and we have every reason to trust them, perhaps to the point that every word they utter is God breathed as you suggest, but we can’t epistemologically know, we can only have faith.
I wouldn’t compare scripture to your mother.
God is God.
Humanity is Humanity.
It’s really that simple.
You completely missed my point though. Question then, do you believe that you can epistemologically know that every word in the Bible is God breathed? You know it just as much as you know that you experience exists. Not the things you experience, but experience itself, essentially selfhood, you think therefore you are. Do you know the Bible is infallible with just or more certainty than your own existence? Whaley already admitted this is faith based.
‘What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar…’
Romans 3:3-4
Based.
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
I have thoughts 😝 But I need to take a shower first, so like, don’t drive y’all’s trains into walls while I’m gone
See you then!
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
So why is there so much open endedness, and contradiction though? Even if you could explain away every contradiction, like the one about the staffs, isn’t the mere fact that we need to in the first place a bit odd for something that is meant to be perfect and God breathed in every word? Could you show me that the Bible also explains its infallibility? (Meaning the 66 books of the Bible)
Ey, I can say something in a round-about way, and it can still be completely logical. But that’s beside the point. I can’t see how any of those “contradictions,” as you put it, discard the infallibility of those passages’ meanings. If the different disciples wrote Jesus’ words with slightly different grammar, that is a matter of medium, and it doesn’t change the meaning of his words.
Also, what do you mean “meaning the 66 books of the Bible)? You blew right past me there.
And yet we have s many different versions of the 10 commandments through changing translation. If God can use Moses perfectly, why doesn’t He use His translators perfectly to make the 10 commandments the same for everyone faithful to Him?
Again, what blatant changes to the ten commandments do you mean? There are lots of different translations, sure, but the meaning of the commandments isn’t debated to my knowledge. Again, it’s a matter of medium. I can recite the first commandment in the ESV, the KJV, or Spanish, and it still means “no other gods but me.”
You’re quite right, salvation is more than life and death. But when it comes to life and death, like I said to Freedom, how do you know that your mother is a conscious being? I’d say that’s pretty important, and just as if not more important than life and death. You don’t infallibly know, just like you can’t infallibly know that scripture is infallible as you’ve already admitted. This then being the case, how is infallibility even meaningful?
Bruh. You literally pullin radical skepticism on meh. O.O
That is a belief system you may take and I will not debate against it, because that is too much for both of us rn. But regardless of whether or not we can definitely know God’s word is infallible, if it is infallible, he is, and if not, we have a whole bigger problem to deal with. And if you deny that then that’s being skeptical of logic itself, and that’s an even bigger fish that I am not catching tonight, nO siR, nOt me.
The reality is, I don’t know if God is infallible, but I have faith that He is, I know it with every fiber of my being, I have every reason to believe it, and yet I can’t epistemologically know that it is 100% true, because I myself am flawed, and I’m at peace with that.
Acknowledged and noted.
Fair enough, I completely understand. You want something that you can put all your trust in, without any fear that it may be false. As I see it though, you can still have that. God is infallible, and we can put all our faith in Him, put faith in the words of His prophets, even though they are imperfect men. You already admitted that you can’t know infallibly that scripture is infallible, so I don’t see why this is different, you simply have faith that it is, I simply have faith that if there is error, I need not worry, because I have faith that God has it all figured out
Common ground also noted.
I guess where I’m confused is where you actually stand. I was under the impression you believed God’s word is fallible. Can you give me a clear statement of what you believe?
#ProtectAdolinKholin
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.