[geocentrism] Re: Only originals inerrant?
- From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 15:29:17 +1000
In between in Brackets [ gary] Phil
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Shelton
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 2:26 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Only originals inerrant?
[Philip wrote:]
"...as I agree with Neville, only the original is the inerrant word of
God,..."
You know, this is very problematic. How can we say that the original
manuscripts, scribed by men, are infallible while translations by other
godly men are automatically fallible?
[ very problematic for those who hold to "BIBLE ONLY" for if you say the Holy
Spirit guides all the the translaters and interpreters, how do you explain all
the contradictions.Who has the authority or skill to discern the spirit
infallibly? ]
Take, Jesus. He was known to say "It is written..." a few times. Doesn't
this lend a little credibility to translations? After all, some of the
canonized books were over 1500 years old when He was on our globe.
Languages and dialects would have dramatically changed in that amount of
time. Therefore, wasn't Jesus using, and referring to, some kind of
"translation"? Yet, wasn't He able to ascribe truth, and more, even
authority, to the words that were commonly known in His day on the earth?
[ Yes Gary, and you raised the correct question. Jesus had the Authority to
interpret, not any other man there so had it. Not as you say "even authority",
as it was the least important , but absolute authority. The question arises
which you should think about. To whom did He pass on this authority when He
left the Earth. Certainly not any Tom Dick and Harry, claiming the authority
and the Spirit. Nor can He have meant it for each individuals conscience. For
remember this,
30 And Philip running thither, heard him reading the prophet Isaias. And he
said:
Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest?
31 Who said: And how can I, unless some man shew me? And he desired
Philip that he would come up and sit with him. (now Philip did have the
authority to do just that. ]
That would mighty peculiar if all translations suffer from credibility.
Jesus said, "It is written...", and I think there's some truth to be found
in those three words.
[The big problem is that it could never be written for every man. Certainly
not till 1500 year later when the press eventuated. Yet could this invention be
called a tool of God, when one looks at the 99% of printed material in Sodom
today? Add to that the confusion caused by the abundance of contradictory
Bibles. ]
Philip
snip.
Other related posts:
