This doesn’t apply, since the man-made doctrine of inerrancy is not a secret of God. It is a false doctrine that is not found anywhere in the Bible.
Scripture. What is considered Scripture?
- Thread starter Jacob
- Start date
glorydaz
Well-known member
It would be an omission if we were talking about court reporters. BUT, we are talking about what the Holy Spirit directed each man to record. :sigh:
glorydaz
Well-known member
It is not a short question to answer. It's just too complicated for someone like you, considering a genealogy can follow either the natural of the legal line....and there is a good reason for that. Like I said....too deep for someone like you, who is only interested in pointing our supposed errors.
glorydaz
Well-known member
It does apply. You just don't believe God reveals His secrets to his servants the prophets. Prophets are those who speak the word of God.... as did the writers of the Gospels.
You think the Holy Spirit led them to make an error?
Is that what you think happened when Matthew said Joseph descended from Solomon while Luke said Joseph descended from Solomon’s brother Nathan?
To attribute the error to the Holy Spirit Of God is a serious charge. Are you sure you want to do that?
glorydaz
Well-known member
Don't even suggest you know what I think, pig.
The Holy Spirit led them to record EXACTLY what He wanted them to record, and ONLY that which He wanted each of them to record. :duh:
No, as I said, there is a natural line and a legal line....you're just not up to figuring that out.
The error is yours. The Holy Spirit had each man record exactly what He wanted them to record.
Save your fear mongering for someone who has something to fear.
Pig?
I am not the one who implied God is the author of error.
A “natural line and a legal line”: you are simply denying what the Bible says for the sake of your man-made tradition. That does show your dedication to false doctrine. It is more important to you than what the Bible actually says!
Lon, do you also deny what the text actually says and support this “natural/legal” pretending?
I am not the one who implied God is the author of error.
A “natural line and a legal line”: you are simply denying what the Bible says for the sake of your man-made tradition. That does show your dedication to false doctrine. It is more important to you than what the Bible actually says!
Lon, do you also deny what the text actually says and support this “natural/legal” pretending?
glorydaz
Well-known member
You're a pig because you force your way up to the trough and expect to get fed.
And you're a liar when you say I "implied" any such thing about God.
Now, Lying Pig, do you think you can slander God and the Bible, and think you can get off scott free? Not around here you can't. :down:
Lon
Well-known member
Look, you really MUST see your own shortcomings on this and your errancy theory. I'll explain this once more: Nobody is guilty and presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty. In this country we insist on it because we don't believe in witch hunts and insist on proving a thing before declaring guilty and throwing away the key. In light of all this, ALL you know is that there is a difference. That's ALL you know. You CANNOT say 'error' without having been there. Guess what? You WEREN'T there! :noway: Quit being the one who storms the castle with little to nothing but a witch hunt 'because you don't like it.' Not good enough. You'll storm and wind up in jail alone. Later, it will come out if these disciples were wrong or not. NOT before that trial where ONLY Jesus and the disciples will be in court. You won't be privy to that verdict first-hand. You are not even a lawyer!
Here is a thought. Simply 'read' your Bible. Leave innocence or guilt in God's hands, where it belongs. You are NO judge, nor jury. You don't GET to declare it. Until then, INNOCENT (inerrant) until PROVEN guilty, which you CANNOT do. This case would be thrown out of an actual court and you'd look foolish because of the lack of evidence and ability. Think more, speak less. You have no horse in such a race anyway, so look even more foolish for trying. Don't do it. God doesn't see that as being a faithful steward. How could He possibly?
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
The guy has stumbled upon the Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties and decided that he will just go through them all and declare how everyone got it all wrong.
Nothing to see here, folks. Go back to your homes.
AMR
Lon
Well-known member
On your witch-hunt for error against the scriptures, you made a horrible accusation against GloryDaz and thus 'Pig for that!'
You aren't careful with your words and surely they offend people. This one was especially hurtful.
See, you trample by inference another's garden and then think that's okay. You don't think people cherish what they believe about God's Word?
Well, no, because you don't hold them up as something coming from God by which we cannot live without Matthew 4:4 Luke 4:4
Did you read Psalm 19? Do you see how David cherished the scriptures? Do you further see how that would be the same with Christians today? Before you say anything 1) You CANNOT know if there is an error. You CANNOT know the scriptures aren't inerrant. You aren't that guy. You'd have to have walked with Jesus to be able to substantiate that claim and you can't. You have no idea if a discrepancy is purposeful and for a reason. I truly and intelligently believe that is the case. Because of that, you can't really affront that wall. I'm too intelligent for this kind of amateur hour. Others? You might be the one putting milestones around peoples neck.
GloryDaz is not namecalling out of infirmity of her theology, but against mudslinging. God says not to allow pigs to trample pearls. God wasn't talking about real pigs, He was talking about people who would trample beautiful things of God. Matthew 7:6 I don't WANT to be seen as the pig trampling another's pearls. You? :think:
As I said before, you are no lawyer and this is worse than Don Quixote attacking a windmill. It is a guy with a home-made sword trying to attack a military base, by analogy. You do NOT have the wherewithal, either in ability or data, to prove guilt. I believe in innocence until guilty is proven. You CANNOT prove your allegations. They are just gossip and you are guilty of that gossip. You 'suspect' something you couldn't possible prove. In this case, as I told you, I 1) Give benefit of doubt: Innocent (inerrant) AND 2) Practice patience for that which is none of my business (I wasn't there, and neither were you, we aren't even witnesses). I treat the Bible the way it is intended: To read it, live by and be informed of what God expects of me. You then, when you could be extolling the virtues of God, are instead wasting it on something you are completely unable to deliver on. The ONLY thing you are doing is giving examples of difference. Difference does not mean 'error.'
A scene in New York where a purse snatcher takes a purse. In court, the kid on the street says the man was right behind Santa Claus. The man on the balcony said the man was right behind a train. The fella across the street says he saw nothing at all.
Question: Are two of them mistaken? No, that's just sloppy police work and that guy needs a senior investigator to take him under his wing.
"Santa Claus" was the Salvation Army bell-ringer. The Train was behind the robber, behind the Santa Claus, in front of the child.
I came at this as an investigator. You came at scriptures as an accuser. Check yourself.
Never looked at it.The guy has stumbled upon the Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties and decided that he will just go through them all and declare how everyone got it all wrong.
Nothing to see here, folks. Go back to your homes.
AMR
I noticed these on my own, mostly in preparation for leading a small group on the synoptic gospels. We used this book:
https://www.amazon.com/Gospel-Parallels-Comparison-Synoptic-Standard/dp/0840774842
You are wrong again.
I will you the same thing that I asked Lon and he hasn’t answered:
AMR, do you also deny what the text actually says and support this “natural/legal” pretending?
glorydaz
Well-known member
You're a babe, at best, and too immature to be teaching anything.
You look to a book when you have THE BOOK. :nono:
glorydaz
Well-known member
Oh, of course, blame Glory. Sonnet, Evil's lap dog blames Glory. :rotfl:
Never heard of the royal lineage with the authority (legal claim) to sit on David's Throne? Never heard of the natural lineage...physical descent from David which had to be established through Mary since Joseph was not His biological father?
Go back to school preacher man.
Lon
Well-known member
There you go, tit for tat then. You dragged her through the muck first.
I 'thought' I had. Ask it another way if you aren't getting the answer you are looking for.
I understand you think you have designed an elaborate ruse to pretend the Bible says things that it does not say.
But Matthew says Joseph is a direct descendant of Solomon and Luke says Joseph is a direct descendant of Solomon’s brother Nathan.
So you declare the Bible lies. And you declare the lie was intentional and was directed by the Holy Spirit. That sounds like blasphemy. I am glad that I did not make that claim.
Then you tried to defend your words by pretending a passage about spoken prophecies by prophets of old is really about written words of the New Testament. That is another blatant disregard of what the Bible actually says.
glorydaz
Well-known member
I suppose you don't know that Matthew traced the paternal line of descent through Solomon, and Luke traced the maternal line through Solomon’s brother, Nathan.
Did you know Heli is Mary's father....not Joseph's?
Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
As I told you, the legal and natural lines of decent were necessary to fulfil all prophecy. I also told you, this is not a "simple question" as you insisted.
There is more, but you aren't able to bear it.