Some would say disbelieve the Quran at your peril.
Yup; I would be one of them. Although I don't follow the Quran--strictly speaking, and this just confuses things here, I would say that you could not effectively make it and the Bible disagree.
Ha, an excellent case-in-point; wherever you see "Easter" (Ishtar) in a Bible, presented as Gospel, trust that you are being lied to by those that even the Bible will warn you wish to add or subtract, yes?
To reply to Randy, also, here. It is merely recognizing man's free will, IMO, that God puts it down on paper, assures that there are many original copies, and warns you that Kenites are involved with translation, better check those originals? I believe.
I tend to think of "inspired" as God moved a man to write somethign God dealt with him to write. I don't take "Inspired" to mean God took control fo the man and made him write precise things like he was taking dictation from the Almighty.
Another interesting discussion I liek to think about is whether the canon is all the scripture we were really meant to have. After all, it was the majority who defined orthodox and heretical and decided what was apocryphal. Yes some of the apocryphal stuff is nonsense and completely contradicts the overall body of scripture, but others fit well. Some, such as Enoch, are quoted by our own Bible. Paul seems to have felt Enoch's writings were authoritative, yet it is left out of canon. It has some hard to believe stuff in it, but only becase we are conditions to refuse to believe that angels corrupted themselves by mating with women and teaching them "charms" or spells.
True. The canon was determined essentially by "majority rules". BTW, it's not really the canon, as even today there are several canons in use by Christian denominations. Enoch is included in the Ethiopian canon, e.g.
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
Yup; I would be one of them. Although I don't follow the Quran--strictly speaking, and this just confuses things here, I would say that you could not effectively make it and the Bible disagree.
Oh, I don't know, I'd think anyone could make them either agree or disagree, depending on their preference.
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
And surely THE "Word of God" is much much bigger then what we see in the printed Word. And "In the Beginning" what language did God speak and how could any human dialect possibly convey it?
Perhaps in absolute terms the "Word" and His "Will" are one and the same and what we know of as the Bible is something altogether separate?
I quote this, agreeing largely with subsequent points made by Nitehawk and Aquila, and you as well, I think, here. While they should not disagree with a proper interpretation of the Bible, other manifestations of the Word exist for verification of it; indeed, the Bible even alludes to its becoming a relic, while at the same time "these words shall never entirely pass away."
Is the Bible infallible? Probably not. It has passed through hundreds of hands down thru the centuries. It has been translated and revised many, many times. So, its highly probable that the words have changed. The accounts of certain events may have been altered. It may not be as scientifically or historically accurate as we might hope, but, really, thats okay...It is neither a Scrience or Historical book.
The Message of the Bible, however, IMO, IS accurate and infallible. The Bible is the "vehicle" that is used to bring us the Message God wants us to hear. The Word of God is that message. Jesus said Why do ye not understand my speech? [even] because ye cannot hear my word. Jhn 8:43 We can't understand the Bible because we can't hear Its Message (Word).
Is the Jonah story factual or is it an anology to convey a deeper meaning? I don't know.... but I do know there IS a deeper meaning than a man being swallowed by a whale. Or fish.
So, I'll go on record as saying the Bible, as we have it today, is not infallible. But the Word of God contained therein is absolute Truth.
To illustrate, in Acts 9 we have the account of Pauls conversion. We read in verse 7: And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man. They heard a voice, but saw no one with Saul (Paul). However, Acts 22:9 says: "...they heard NOT the Voice....". Contradiction? No, just a difference in the way the story was retold. The MESSAGE of the story, however, remains true and accurate.
__________________
"Rest in the Lord, and wait patiently for Him...." -Psa. 37:7
Waiting for the Lord is easy... Waiting patiently? Not so much.
He believes angels took physical form and took human women, breaking God's ordinance of separation between man and angel. He might believe Enoch is authorative.
Linear Mode
