prisonchaplain Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 I submit that you cannot trust scripture at all when comparing scripture with G-d. I submit that we should worship (trust) G-d and him only.The Traveler Dare I suggest that this is a false dichotamy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prisonchaplain Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Well hmm. We dont doubt Gods word at all. :) If you follow this string, there seems to be a greater hesitancy to embrace scripture as God's infallible word. The focus on transmission errors, copyists' additions/omissions, and translation variances seem to lead to more doubt than we evangelicals have. The result is a greater reliance on living prophets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
estradling75 Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 If you follow this string, there seems to be a greater hesitancy to embrace scripture as God's infallible word. The focus on transmission errors, copyists' additions/omissions, and translation variances seem to lead to more doubt than we evangelicals have. The result is a greater reliance on living prophets.When I read the Bible I read stories about how god calls Prophets (and after Christ Apostles which are just prophets that are also witnesses to Christ' resurrection) These prophets are the ones that God entrusts his word too. These prophets are who God uses to reach out to reclaim his people. To correct them of the errors that have crept in to the traditions and the written word, wither they be from misunderstanding or deliberate errors.Its not that we have a 'greater reliance' on living prophets. It's that we believe in the Biblical gold standard of how God works. He calls prophets. They give the Word of God as God gives it to them. People find it wise to write it down. This is how we got the Bible in the first place. This is also how we got the Book of Mormon and other books LDS consider scripture.Given how much other Christians claim to believe the bible where are do they say God's prophets and Apostles are today? Us LDS can give you the names of whom we believe they are. And we feel they are just as important to us in our day as Noah was in his, Moses was in his, and Peter, Paul, John, Matthew etc were in theirs.In the end we feel our greater reliance on prophets is precisely what the Bible instructs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volgadon Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Do you believe the Bible is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works? If yes then why bring it up, if not then the Bible is not the word of God.I believe that scripture is profitable (or in other words, useful) for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. None of this requires infallibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volgadon Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 I seriously doubt that Paul, Peter, James, John, Luke etc. thought for even one minute that the scriptures they had in their time had copying or translating errors even though the Pentateuch was "inspired" 1500 years before them, copied numerous times,(they didn't have the original either) and even translated into Greek. (Septuagint)I find it very hard to credit your statement when the raison d'etre for the group known as scribes was to correct copyist errors as well as errors in interpretation.The Septuagint was even quoted in the New Testament therefore you have a God-breathed translation.The Septuagint was quoted by the Greek writers because it was the most commonly available translation into Greek. It is full of places which obviously are translation errors, such as Isaiah 40:3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annewandering Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 If you follow this string, there seems to be a greater hesitancy to embrace scripture as God's infallible word. The focus on transmission errors, copyists' additions/omissions, and translation variances seem to lead to more doubt than we evangelicals have. The result is a greater reliance on living prophets.Another good reason to have living prophets. :) I embrace scripture fully. There are some obvious errors so for me I would have to reject the whole thing if its either all, including the errors, or nothing. Fortunately its not necessary to do that and if we have questions we can pray about them and get answers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prisonchaplain Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 I believe that scripture is profitable (or in other words, useful) for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. None of this requires infallibility. It does if you do not have the kind of prophets LDS do, or the kind of teaching authority the Catholic Church bestows upon its hierarchy and tradition. So...here's a summary...see if it's accurate:1. Protestants: The Bible is the final authority. It is infallible in its original manuscripts, and today's translations are reliable.2. Catholics: The Bible and Church Tradition and Dogma are of equal authority. Any "prophetic" message would be interpretative, rather than offering a new teaching.3. LDS: The living prophets offer God's latest word. Scripture is reliable and useful, but it is the prophets that can clarify, along with personal testimony through spiritual witness.Any corrections, changes in nuances, or reactions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annewandering Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 I really never had thought about how the protestants use the Bible as the last word on doctrine. That makes a lot of sense. There is a lot to lose if you make the Bible fallible in any way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prisonchaplain Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 If LDS folk come to understand us a little better, it heartens me as much as when I come to understand some of your beliefs and practices more accurately :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gopecon Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 I agree with PC's point at the beginning of this discussion - we as LDS will not win too many friends and converts by disparaging the Bible. We believe the Bible to be the word of God. I think that PC hit on a key difference. We have other sources of God's word - the BofM, D&C, and living prophets. Since we have other sources we can look at the Bible as inspired while not being shaken admitting that there could be some small errors from man that have crept into it (or maybe some chapters that were not inspired at all - like some Psalms after David's fall, or maybe the Song of Solomon). When the Bible is the only source, it starts to look like the Bible itself becomes an object of worship, which is uncomfortable for many of us. To top it off, in discussions many Christians have ideas they have heard about in church that are not biblical, that they assume are somewhere in there. (The Book of Additions perhaps). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveler Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Well now you have. I do not doubt the bible at all like the LDS ( Your own words). I find no gospel differences between the different versions either. I use the NAS (Alexandrian) and also the KJV ( Byzantine ). I also like the NLT. The Christians that I surround myself with also would say the same thing. To us, the bible contains the Incorruptible word of God. It is the foundation for our belief. When you start to doubt the word of god you open yourself to deception from Satan. I respect your belief and understand your logic for doubting God's word, I just believe you are deceived. When push comes to shove I will always side with God and His word. God Bless Do you believe that trees will produce fruit without the light of the sun? or do you believe if the sun no longer gave light that trees would continue to produce fruit?The Traveler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prisonchaplain Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Do you believe that trees will produce fruit without the light of the sun? or do you believe if the sun no longer gave light that trees would continue to produce fruit?The Traveler If this is in reference to Revelation, then yes, I believe that the light of God's presence will likely produce far more glorious trees and fruit, then the sun does. The sun is God's provision by creative force--the light of God's eternal kingdom will be more direct...something unfathomably superior, in my estimation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveler Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Dare I suggest that this is a false dichotamy? You may suggest such a notion but I would also point out some concepts for consideration.First - Satan has both a desire and proclivity to use scriptures in tempting man to rebel against G-d. Second - We are counseled by the ancient prophets from whence the scriptures have come that we should trust not the written scriptures of pen and ink or even etched in stone by the finger of G-d but rather the scriptures that are etched without ink and paper on the essence of our souls. Third - The world’s leading experts in scripture in ancient time - Without who we would not even have the Bible; both rejected the Christ and sought his life based on their trust and understanding of the scriptures. The point is that throughout history those that thought they could rely (trust) in scriptures only have ended up fully or in part in opposition to the servants sent by the master of the vineyard. The Traveler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prisonchaplain Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Traveler, do you really believe the Word of God is dangerous??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soninme Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Quote:Do you believe the Bible is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works? If yes then why bring it up, if not then the Bible is not the word of God. From VolgadonI believe that scripture is profitable (or in other words, useful) for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. None of this requires infallibility. "that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works?"I believe requires that scripture be sufficient, trustworthy and authoritative or else how can one be sure.Originally Posted by Soninme I'm not buying the idea that the God who spoke and the universe leaped into existence .From mnn727Thats part of your problem right there. Ex Nihlo creation is not a Biblical idea. Col. 1:16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth,. To me all means all. "visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. Even before primordial matter. While these and other verses may not convince you that God creates out of nothing, I likewise don't see in the Bible the teaching that matter is eternal. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volgadon Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 "that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works?"I believe requires that scripture be sufficient, trustworthy and authoritative or else how can one be sure.None of which requires scripture to be perfect and infallible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soninme Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 I believe one can be saved without a word of scripture. Also if one is following fallible teachings (scripture) then one is therefore following error and cannot "be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." Shall we sin that grace may abound? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annewandering Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 I believe one can be saved without a word of scripture. Also if one is following fallible teachings (scripture) then one is therefore following error and cannot "be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." Shall we sin that grace may abound?Exactly who are you recommending that we follow then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volgadon Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 I believe one can be saved without a word of scripture.How refreshing in a protestant.Also if one is following fallible teachings (scripture) then one is therefore following error and cannot "be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." If all have sinned and fallen short, then none can be perfect, right? Since the scriptures are sufficient, who needs grace? Shall we sin that grace may abound?Whatever floats your boat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maygraceabound Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 I believe one can be saved without a word of scripture. Also if one is following fallible teachings (scripture) then one is therefore following error and cannot "be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." Shall we sin that grace may abound?Soninme is right. You an be save without a word of scripture. Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness. Abraham had no scripture. You are saved by Grace through faith by believing in Jesus. Scripture does not save you. Also, one more point .....may grace abound so we can continue in sin? May it never be!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Some important words left out here, don't you think. Changes the whole meaning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annewandering Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 We dont actually know Abraham had no scripture. In fact I would guess he did since Genesis is before his time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maygraceabound Posted November 2, 2011 Report Share Posted November 2, 2011 We dont actually know Abraham had no scripture. In fact I would guess he did since Genesis is before his time.The general thought is that Moses wrote Genesis. However, the point is this, you are not saved by scripture knowledge. You are saved by grace through the faith you have in Jesus. You can be saved having never seen a bible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annewandering Posted November 2, 2011 Report Share Posted November 2, 2011 The general thought is that Moses wrote Genesis. However, the point is this, you are not saved by scripture knowledge. You are saved by grace through the faith you have in Jesus. You can be saved having never seen a bible.Of course is true that we are saved not by what we read. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow Posted November 2, 2011 Report Share Posted November 2, 2011 We dont actually know Abraham had no scripture. In fact I would guess he did since Genesis is before his time.We don't actually know that Abraham had no game of Monopoly but it doesn't do us much good to speculate on something completely unreasonable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerome1232 Posted November 2, 2011 Report Share Posted November 2, 2011 We don't actually know that Abraham had no game of Monopoly but it doesn't do us much good to speculate on something completely unreasonable.I think it's reasonable to assume he (Abraham) did have scripture. Seeing as God instructed many of his prophets to write things down, why would he take a different stance on more ancient prophets. There were records found among the dead sea scrolls that claim to be written by prophets before Abraham.I'm just saying "unreasonable" seems to be way to strong a word for this scenario. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.