Why God's Word The Bible IS Infallible!

reply to post by jmdewey60


PS Believe I found it. Epistles, I thought it to be OT first.

reply to post by bogomil


I'm just trying to get him to realize there are two different stories told within the first two chapters of his infallible book... thus it makes little sense that the Torah was written by one author, i.e. Moses, as he believes... Then we'll move on to the general concensus on how the Torah was compiled...

If I'm really lucky we'll get back around to the father of the lie argument...

I find baby steps are necessary in a situation such as this one...

reply to post by wearewatchingyouman


Note: to those who think that this discussion is some type of Bible study or preaching on my part, then I would suggest don’t read this post as it will attempt to explain the confusion raised by the poster and show that the Bible never make mistakes.

OK?

Last time you said to “check Gen. 1:11 and 1:26 vs 2:5-7...” but actually you were specifically referring to Gen 1:24-27 and Gen 2:19.

Now I see what you mean, zeroing on the verses in question there seems to be a contradiction between the verses.

That is:

24 And God went on to say: “Let the earth put forth living souls according to their kinds, domestic animal and moving animal and wild beast of the earth according to its kind.” And it came to be so. 25 And God proceeded to make the wild beast of the earth according to its kind and the domestic animal according to its kind and every moving animal of the ground according to its kind. And God got to see that [it was] good.

26 And God went on to say: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness, and let them have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and the domestic animals and all the earth and every moving animal that is moving upon the earth.” 27 And God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.

And:

Gen 2: 19 - Now Jehovah God was forming from the ground every wild beast of the field and every flying creature of the heavens, and he began bringing them to the man to see what he would call each one; and whatever the man would call it, each living soul, that was its name.

So by themselves without including the surrounding verses and context, two possible creation realities are presented to us, that is:

1) Every (wild beast and flying) animals were created before Adam was created.
2) Every (wild beast and flying) animals were created after Adam was created.

Question is: which one is correct?

As I read the creation account – one thing is for sure. Gen 1:1 – 2:2 gives us detailed account of the creation sequence of events, namely:

1) Planets, sun moon stars already existed (created) billions and billions of years.
2) Watery earth was formless.
3) Preparation for earth to be inhabited.

Day 1: Light (of some sort) came to be on a formless watery earth.
Day 2: Separation between waters above and waters below, expanse (sky) appeared.
Day 3: Dry land, vegetation, organism appeared and water basins formed (seas).
Day 4: Lights from the luminaries became discernible from earth. Days and seasons.
Day 5: Animals of every sort appeared; fish, flying creatures, sea monsters – dinosaurs.
Day 6: More animals -wild and domestic and finally man was created.
Day 7: Creation stopped. (Chapter 2:1-3)

On the other hand Genesis 2:4-25 gives us a more detailed account of man’s initial existence on earth as verse 4 start the account this way:

“This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time of their being created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven.” – Gen 2:4

So from this verse of Gen 2, it becomes clear that the writer is narrating for us what went on when man was created on earth under the heavens. Specific details were provided as to where man was put after being created, the woman, the tree of life, of good and evil, etc. We also notice that there was no mention of any specific creative “day”. In fact the accounts on Gen 2:4-25 do not contradict that both man and (wild beast and flying) animals were created in the 6th creative “day”.

But the key in understanding 2:19 is in the statement “was forming from the ground every wild beast of the field and every flying creature of the heavens”. This simply means that every (wild beast and flying) animals were formed from the ground and that Adam was given the task of naming them. That’s all; any other way of reading it will present a problem.

For comparison of Gen 2:19, other translations puts it this way:

KJV
And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof.
© Info

NKJV
Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name.
© Info

NLT
So the LORD God formed from the ground all the wild animals and all the birds of the sky. He brought them to the man* to see what he would call them, and the man chose a name for each one.
Footnote:
* Or Adam, and so throughout the chapter.
© Info

NIV
Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name.
© Info

ESV
Now out of the ground the LORD God had formed* every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.
Footnote:
* Or And out of the ground the Lord God formed
© Info

NASB
Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the *sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name.
© Info

RSV
So out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.
© Info

ASV
And out of the ground Jehovah God formed every beast of the field, and every bird of the heavens; and brought them unto the man to see what he would call them: and whatsoever the man called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
© Info

YLT
And Jehovah God formeth from the ground every beast of the field, and every fowl of the heavens, and bringeth in unto the man, to see what he doth call it; and whatever the man calleth a living creature, that [is] its name.
© Info

DBY
And out of the ground Jehovah Elohim had formed every animal of the field and all fowl of the heavens, and brought [them] to Man, to see what he would call them; and whatever Man called each living soul, that was its name.
© Info

WEB
And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air, and brought [them] to Adam to see what he would call them; and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] its name.
© Info

HNV
Out of the ground the LORD God formed every animal of the field, and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. Whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.

So there u go.

But so as not be dogmatic about it, if you insist that these creatures were created after Adam was created, it’s possible since there was no mention of the “domestic animals” with the rest of the “moving animals” (being given to Adam to be named). I have no problem with it, that is if they are the rest of the (wild beasts and flying) creatures for they were still created within the 6th creative day. Problem for you thought like I said is you’ll be stuck with the your contradiction because it’s clear in Gen 1 that animals were indeed created before man on the 6th creative “day”. So it’s ur choice.

So the explanation is either:

a) every (wild beast and flying) animals were formed from the ground (on the 6th creative) before man and that Adam was given the task of naming them.

Or your version:

b) every (wild beast and flying) animals were created after Adam was created.

Later…dude...

reply to post by edmc^2


no... I used the later accounts after you refused to see the contradictions in earlier parts of the creation stories...

but regardless...

But so as not be dogmatic about it, if you insist that these creatures were created after Adam was created, it’s possible since there was no mention of the “domestic animals” with the rest of the “moving animals” (being given to Adam to be named).

ummm. maybe you should check verse 20

20 So the man was calling the names of all the domestic animals and of the flying creatures of the heavens and of every wild beast of the field, but for man there was found no helper as a complement of him.

reply to post by jmdewey60


I am happy to see someone knows a piece of the story not mentioned.
We might disagree who we think Job was in Contest with here, but we both will agree this is an important part of this story.
Very interesting you bring this up, as you are correct.

Originally posted by wearewatchingyouman
reply to post by edmc^2

 

no... I used the later accounts after you refused to see the contradictions in earlier parts of the creation stories...

but regardless...

But so as not be dogmatic about it, if you insist that these creatures were created after Adam was created, it’s possible since there was no mention of the “domestic animals” with the rest of the “moving animals” (being given to Adam to be named).

ummm. maybe you should check verse 20

20 So the man was calling the names of all the domestic animals and of the flying creatures of the heavens and of every wild beast of the field, but for man there was found no helper as a complement of him.

edit on 22-7-2011 by wearewatchingyouman because: clarity

back...

glad that you caught that one - now you know (and hopefully understand) what happens when the context or the surrounding texts are not considered.

So - should I include v20 with the rest? What about the context - should we consider it to?

Like I said:

"So by themselves without including the surrounding verses and context, two possible creation realities are presented to us, that is:

1) Every (wild beast and flying) animals were created before Adam was created.
2) Every (wild beast and flying) animals were created after Adam was created. "

Only by considering the rest of the texts and the context and sometimes the entire chapter will we get the complete picture.

Thus, to repeat the correct explanation of the verses in Q is - that every (wild beast and flying) animals were formed from the ground and that Adam was given the task of naming them. That’s all; any other way of reading it will present a problem.

you pass the test - i think

Originally posted by Nosred

Originally posted by edmc^2
Interesting - so do you believe that God will accept Muslims if they don't accept Jesus as the Savior?

“Jesus said to him: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6)

What's ur take?

They do believe in Jesus as their savior, they think he was a prophet that died for their sins and will come again to judge them just like you do. I don't believe any of this stuff but I'm asking why you don't believe it since it fits your qualifications for being "infallible". You seem to be avoiding my question.

Why aren't you a Muslim if this is what you believe? The Koran was inspired by the same god as the first two testaments.

edit on 21-7-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)

I'm curious about this - can you cite proof or Surah that says Muslims accept Jesus as their Savior?

As for the Koran (Qur'an) being Inspired by the same God as the Bible, do you have proof of it?

As for the reason for why I'm not a Muslim - in addition to what I already said, I'm fully convinced that the Christianity founded by Jesus based on God's infallible written word is the way to salvation. No other path given to man in order to approach Jehovah God except through Jesus - these are the main reasons why I'm not a Muslim.

“Jesus said to him: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6)

Can you find this in the Qur'an?

btw - are u a practicing Muslim?

reply to post by edmc^2


You wrote:

[""So by themselves without including the surrounding verses and context, two possible creation realities are presented to us, that is:

1) Every (wild beast and flying) animals were created before Adam was created.
2) Every (wild beast and flying) animals were created after Adam was created. "]

And that's how they are read using standard logic.

While using CHRISTIAN logic, with all its merry semantic dances, you ofcourse arrive at the expected pro-christian conclusion:

Quote: ["Only by considering the rest of the texts and the context and sometimes the entire chapter will we get the complete picture."]

I can also 'prove' the most absurd things, by using twisted logic.

reply to post by bogomil

And that's how they are read using standard logic. While using CHRISTIAN logic, with all its merry semantic dances, you ofcourse arrive at the expected pro-christian conclusion:

Huh? common sense is common sense - doesn't matter what ever you belief is. But when common sense based on fact is not used it becomes twisted logic.


Just like life - common sense and logic says that life can only come from life - this is an undeniable irrefutable fact that stood the test of time. Yet inspite of the evidence, unbelievers and atheist alike say this is nonsense and insist that life came from nonlife - and they call this scientific.

So what say you bogomil - which one is the undeniable irrefutable fact?

a) God's infallible written word which states that "life can only come from life"?

Or:

b) nonlife is the source of life?

Which one is false - a mistake?

What does your Standard logic say?

btw - my as you say "CHRISTIAN logic, with all its merry semantic dances" pick - (a).

Is my as you say "CHRISTIAN logic, with all its merry semantic dances" correct?



......

(quote]I can also 'prove' the most absurd things, by using twisted logic.


Of course you can do that and there's no doubt about it but the question is - is "using twisted logic" leads to the truth?

That I doubt.

In fact Satan, according to the infallible written word of God the Bible used cunning logic, by twisting the truths he accomplished diabolical things:

He -

1) Made God appear to be the liar.
2) Convinced Eve then Adam that they will not die if they violate God's commands.
3) Made himself to be an angel of light.
4) Convinced man that there is no God and man has no need for God.
5) Made God's word the Bible useless - man made, fallible.
6) Made people blame God for all the badness.
7) Got man worship the creation (evolution) rather than the creator.
8) Made man believe that God roast people in a fiery place.
9) Accused God that his creation (man) is selfish and weak (remember Job).
10) Man's rule is all that is needed - God's kingdom some to be laugh at.
11) Made Jesus to be just a person - not the son of God - on the flip side made people believe that he is both God the Almighty and the son of God - a mystery.

his accomplishments is long but the bottom line is - sure you can use twisted logic but will it lead to the truth?

Evidence and experience say NO!

So what is it that you can twist from the word of God and prove that it's false?

Originally posted by edmc^2


...common sense is common sense...

I hope you can see the humour in this statement coming from one who is apparently religious.

There is no common sense in religion.

online-bible-code.ezekielvictor.com...

Ken is a word that occurs in els codes throughout the entirity of the bible. Ken means perception or to perceive.

Also worth mentioning is a website www.bible.cc... and the search words "brass kingdom" using that websites parrellel online bible one can see the relation of the iron rod and the forever and evers. Certainty, the bible is....

Hi OP,

Thank you so much for this post. I do understand that God's Word is infallible,
Keep planting those seeds: Growth will spring forth!

and may He bless you !

Originally posted by SeekerLou
Hi OP,

Thank you so much for this post. I do understand that God's Word is infallible,
Keep planting those seeds: Growth will spring forth!

and may He bless you !

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and I'm glad that you have the same POV with regards to the Infallible Word of God. To those who put their trust on God and his infallible written word and his son Jesus - will NEVER be disappointed!

In fact there's an assurance from the apostle Paul:

"Paul, a slave of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ according to the faith of God’s chosen ones and the accurate knowledge of the truth which accords with godly devotion upon the basis of a hope of the everlasting life which God, who cannot lie, promised before times long lasting,” (Titus 1:1-2)"

Paul said that "God, who cannot lie!" will fulfill his promises - thus whatever God said - whatever word that comes out of his mouth is not only HOLY, TRUE but INFALLIBLE!

God's word is the ONLY light that we can fully trust on this bedarkened world that will go darker and darker until God's words are completely fulfilled.


And those who trust on ANY man on the other hand will be disappointed.

In the end - the promise to those with humble hearts:

““When the Son of man arrives in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit down on his glorious throne. And all the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another, just as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. And he will put the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on his left. “Then the king will say to those on his right, ‘Come, YOU who have been blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for YOU from the founding of the world.” (Matthew 25:31-34)



stay safe.

reply to post by edmc^2


Keep on preaching it, Bro! I say Amen and Amen!
His Word will not return unto him void .


Thanks for the stirring in my spirit ... feels kinda like revival in here !

Originally posted by SeekerLou
reply to post by edmc^2

 

Keep on preaching it, Bro! I say Amen and Amen!
His Word will not return unto him void .


Thanks for the stirring in my spirit

... feels kinda like revival in here !

Well hopefully it's not just a revival SeekerLou but a motivation to show the power of the Word of God.

Witness the power of the two very simple verses below:

“A calm heart is the life of the fleshly organism.”—PROVERBS 14:30.

“A heart that is joyful does good as a curer.”—PROVERBS 17:22.

Notice what the "Journal of the American College of Cardiology states concerning a calm heart versus one given to anger:

“Current findings suggest a harmful association between anger and hostility and CHD [coronary heart disease].”

Then it noted that a:

“Successful prevention and treatment of CHD might involve. . . not only conventional physical and
pharmacological therapies, but also psychological management focusing on anger and hostility.”

In other words, a calm heart fosters good health, just as the Infallible Word of God the Bible says.

One doctor said:

“Happier people also have greater protection against things like heart disease and stroke.”

What do you think SeekerLou? Very practical advice?

ty,

reply to post by edmc^2


You wrote:

["Huh? common sense is common sense - doesn't matter what ever you belief is. But when common sense based on fact is not used it becomes twisted logic."]

I referred to standard logic. What has 'common sense' to do with that, and why do you introduce it? More wordgames?

Quote: ["Just like life - common sense and logic says that life can only come from life - this is an undeniable irrefutable fact that stood the test of time. Yet inspite of the evidence, unbelievers and atheist alike say this is nonsense and insist that life came from nonlife - and they call this scientific."]

The FACT is, that no-one (including you and your holy manual) has a conclusive answer. And again, what is this upside-down reasoning meant to 'prove'? Talky-talky again.

Quote: ["So what say you bogomil - which one is the undeniable irrefutable fact?

a) God's infallible written word which states that "life can only come from life"?

Or:

b) nonlife is the source of life?

Which one is false - a mistake?

What does your Standard logic say?"]

What 'infallible' words? That's what you want to demonstrate; and in standard logic this isn't done by circle-argumenting: "Assumed 'infallibility' proves infallibility".

Quote: [" Is my as you say "CHRISTIAN logic, with all its merry semantic dances" correct?"]

No, it's not correct. You're just piling more assumptions on top of the old ones, by filling out knowledge-gaps with guesses. This has NOTHING to do with standard logic, which starts from the observable and processable, not from a predetermined answer.

Quote: ["In fact Satan, according to the infallible written word of God the Bible used cunning logic, by twisting the truths he accomplished diabolical things:

He -...."]

If there are any 'liars' around, it's those, who twist standard logic and use circle-argumentation, bad semantics and allegoric 'proofs'.

Quote (on satan): [" 1) Made God appear to be the liar."]

The character, described as Jahveh, is a falsification as seen from several perspectives (e.g. standard logic).

Quote: [" 2) Convinced Eve then Adam that they will not die if they violate God's commands."]

According to the premises of your mythology.

Quote: ["3) Made himself to be an angel of light."]

That was Lucifer, the arch-liberal freedom-fighter.

Quote: ["4) Convinced man that there is no God and man has no need for God."]

Which undoubtly is significant inside your circle-argumentation, but irrelevant outside it.

Quote: ["5) Made God's word the Bible useless - man made, fallible."]

Thanks 'god' for that.

Quote: ["6) Made people blame God for all the badness."]

Or rather a cosmos not especially benevolent to biological life.

Quote: ["7) Got man worship the creation (evolution) rather than the creator."]

You're using your own mindset as everybody's measure-tape. There are more sane approaches to life than 'worshipping'; examplified in e.g. some eastern semi-religions and utilitarian philosophy.

Quote: ["8) Made man believe that God roast people in a fiery place."]

That one you'll have to sort out amongst all the 'true christian' competitors.

Quote: ["9) Accused God that his creation (man) is selfish and weak (remember Job)"]

Mankind (and biological life) is submitted to principles of predation. Contemporary ideologies try to do something about this.

Quote: [" 10) Man's rule is all that is needed - God's kingdom some to be laugh at."]

Considering what theocracies have demonstrated, 'god's kingdom' is to be avoided like a plague.

Quote: ["11) Made Jesus to be just a person - not the son of God - on the flip side made people believe that he is both God the Almighty and the son of God - a mystery."]

Don't get carried away. You're not preaching in a church now. For me these theological points are like debating what kind of green cheese the moon is made of.

Quote: ["his accomplishments is long but the bottom line is - sure you can use twisted logic but will it lead to the truth?

Evidence and experience say NO!"]

So stop using twisted logic.

Quote: ["So what is it that you can twist from the word of God and prove that it's false?"]

Have you confused everybody enough now with this circumstantial preaching? I for one, haven't lost the direction, we're STILL at square one, with gen. 1 and 2 being contradicting each other. But if you like, give it another smoke-screen sermon.

reply to post by bogomil

I referred to standard logic. What has 'common sense' to do with that, and why do you introduce it? More wordgames?

It simply means that whenever "standard logic" (whatever standard that iz) if not based on facts then like I said it become twisted logic.

Common sense comes hand in hand with logic:

For example God is Infallible so logically his words are infallible.

Common sense tells me that since God's words are infallible then anyone who puts their full trust on it will not be disappointed. That is the secret to a happy life. Of course since noone is perfect - we need to keep adjusting our thinking and our ways so as to conform to God's will. Makes logical sense?

The FACT is, that no-one (including you and your holy manual) has a conclusive answer. And again, what is this upside-down reasoning meant to 'prove'? Talky-talky again.

Of course if you're reffering to imperfect man then NOONE has a conclusive answer - thus this is one of the reasons why the Bible the word of God exist - to guide those who want's to listen to God. Since you're not one who is willing to listen thus you don't see the benefit of it - it's just as you say "talky-talky".

No, it's not correct. You're just piling more assumptions on top of the old ones, by filling out knowledge-gaps with guesses. This has NOTHING to do with standard logic, which starts from the observable and processable, not from a predetermined answer.

What guesses? Is there one that I said that's not based on God's infallible word?

....

Satan --
Quote: ["5) Made God's word the Bible useless - man made, fallible."]

Thanks 'god' for that.

Of course - as expected, his followers will thank him.

“If, now, the good news we declare is in fact veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, 4 among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through.” (2 Corinthians 4:3-4)

Have you confused everybody enough now with this circumstantial preaching? I for one, haven't lost the direction, we're STILL at square one, with gen. 1 and 2 being contradicting each other. But if you like, give it another smoke-screen sermon.

Only those without faith on God's word are confused.

As for the Creation account in Genesis 1 and 2 - there's no contradiction to those with understanding and to those who has God's guidance - his holy spirit - the spirit of understanding.

No need to repeat it since you're not able to understand it.

Originally posted by wearewatchingyouman
I'm just trying to get him to realize there are two different stories told within the first two chapters of his infallible book...

Don't be silly, any person with common sense can see that Gen 1 is the story of Creation while Gen 2 is commentary of the events. Some people need to retake their comprehension class .

Originally posted by RealTruthSeeker

Originally posted by wearewatchingyouman
I'm just trying to get him to realize there are two different stories told within the first two chapters of his infallible book...

Don't be silly, any person with common sense can see that Gen 1 is the story of Creation while Gen 2 is commentary of the events. Some people need to retake their comprehension class

.

No, it's indoctrination and they are two different stories and the person you are addressing (wearewatchingyouman) is no dummy and probably knows more about the Bible than you do.

reply to post by edmc^2


Your relatively long post, basically says, that "god is infallible, because he's infallible".

Apart from this being meaningless, it's also in sharp contrast with the thread-title, where you included a "WHY"( ...... god's words etc). I'm still waiting for you to come around to that "why".

And as in my latest post: When will you answer directly and rationally (i.e. without a sermon and without circle-arguments) to the problems around gen. 1 and 2?

You can't be putting up smoke-screens forever.