Quote:
Originally Posted by UnTraditional
It was poenned by men as they were moved upon by the Spirit. Your hatred for the inspiration of the Word makes me question some things.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh
Pel is known for quibbling but not for hating the Word or its inspiration.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*
|
Thanks ladies.
The "quibble" is that men really did write the Bible (and ladies too - the Song of Miriam and the Song of Deborah were obviously written by the females named, perhaps other passages as well).
When we say "men wrote (spake) as they were moved by the Holy Ghost" we are looking at a process of inspiration whereby the writer is involved in the process as well. Throughout the history of the Church it has been said that the writers were not an "amanuensis" - that is, a secretarial scribe writing down word-for-word what has being dictated.
God did not "dictate" the Bible to an amanuensis; instead, we see the Holy Spirit moving upon human beings and inspiring them to write. This is why we see the writers of the Bible confessing their own limitations - even as they are writing Holy Writ. Consider the example of the apostle Paul:
1 Corinthians 1:16.
Now, we can easily see how a human being such as Paul might forget some of the names of those he had baptized in Corinth, but would the Holy Ghost forget their names as well? (
Psalm 37:28;
John 10:28-29). Why couldn't Paul just "ask the Holy Ghost" if he had left any names out?
There are many other examples as well:
2 Chronicles 4:2, tells us that the "compass" (circumference) of the "molten sea" (the brasen sea) in Solomon's Temple was "30 cubits" around. It also adds that this huge vessel was "ten cubits" from "rim to rim" (the radius).
What's wrong with that equation?
Does the fact that the Chronicler is obviously unfamiliar with the value of
pi invalidate the Book? No. The Chronicler was inspired by the Holy Spirit to record the details of the Temple and not in matters pertaining to mathematics. The use of "rounding" was permitted since there are no supernatural associations with the measurements of Solomon's Temple and its furnishings.
Consider the difference between the way Mark and Luke refer to a quote of David from
Psalm 110:1:
Mark 12:36 - For
David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Luke 20:42-43 - And
David himself saith in the book of Psalms, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, Till I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Now, since the Gospel of Mark was written first, and since Luke obviously used Mark's Gospel as source material (
Luke 1:1-4) - did Luke "err" by dropping out the "by the Holy Ghost" phase? And, just why did Luke leave that out? Did the Holy Ghost Himself inspire Luke to leave it out? Was it "lost" over the centuries by copyists?
Or, did Luke consider David's words important, but just not "as inspired" as Mark considered them? No matter what conclusion you might reach, for me it seems quite plain that Luke felt he was communicating
the exact same idea when he said "David himself said..." as Mark had communicated when he said, "David himself said by the Holy Ghost..."
That's how the inspired writers of the NT handled this; so UnTraditional, just what was it about my own post that makes you think I "hate the inspired Word of God?" And, do you also think Luke, the author of the Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles "hates the inspired Word of God?"
My soul followeth hard after thee....Love one another with a pure heart fervently. 
Linear Mode
