Saturday, April 18, 2009

Father Matthew on "Biblical Inerrancy"

I subscribe to Father Matthew's YouTube posts but was behind on watching the latest ... thanks to Episcopal Cafe for the "Lead" ... and BRAVO, Father Matthew!!!


uffda51 said...

Pardon me, waiter, I'd like to change my breakfast order.

DavidJustinLynch said...

Very well done! What many people don't realize is that the Christian Church did not even agree on what books should be in the Bible until about the middle of the Fourth century and then the issue was reopened in the Sixteenth Century when the protestants jettisoned the deuterocanonical books (we Anglicans consigned them the Apocrypha). I've always advocated adding a New Testament Apocrypha as I think there is valuable material in the Infancy Gospels, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Judas, the Acts of Paul & Thecla, the Epislte of Barnabas, the two Epistles of Clement, the Didache, the Protovangelium of James, and the Act of Pilate aka Gospel of Nicodemus that would be valuable to read. To be added to the Hebrew Bible Apocrypha should be Enoch, as it is mentioned in the Epistle of Jude. The Christian Church should convene a truly Ecumenical Council to consider the issue of reopening the Scripture Canon.

LGMarshall said...

It's heartbreaking how far TEC will go to discourage people from believing God's Word. When it is that very thing, Faith in His Word (the Bible),that brings people to Salvation Life Everlasting. No more, no less.

It begs the question... 'Why would you continue to half heartedly 'play act' when it comes to the Bible?

The Bible is completely self sufficient and has total self-referral...'All Scripture is God-breathed and useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness...(2tim3:16)

I'll say, in the spirit of fun like the video, that anyone who pursues quasi-Christian endeavors, who continually dabs at the edges, and pokes the Word of God with such a 'long stick of disdain', -- well maybe their brain is a little bit weak too?

It's totally a natural thing for seekers to look to the Bible for Answers, Explanations, Encouragement, Hope & Guidance. And they will NEVER be disappointed.

As for improving the intellect which TEC places at a premium ...'the Word of God is living and active. Sharper than any 2-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marorow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.' ...God says..'Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the Renewing of your Mind...'

What kind of Pastor would insult Believers -- and equate their brains with being drugged-out and fried because they believe the Bible is the Word of God?

If he leads even one sheep astray and away from God, he will have to give an accounting. (Oh- sorry, didn't mean to bring in the Word of God to make my argument. Scratch that -- & all of the above Scripture. Please Forgive me. Oh --scratch that idea too.)


Watch the video again, LG.

No one says the Bible isn't the Word of God ... it's debunking the only-about-200-year-old idea that the Bible is the WORDS of God.

(See also: "We take the Bible too seriously to take it literally.")

IT said...

LGM proves the problem with the conservative side. With them it is "either-or". With the liberal side, it is "both-and".

Black and white,or shades of grey.

Biblical inerrancy: 6 days of creation 6000 years ago, slavery is condoned, and infectious disease is due to demons.


In any case, regardless of whether people want to use that as a foundation for religion, it is no foundation for the state.

uffda51 said...

“The Bible is completely self sufficient and has total self-referral.”

This kind of bibliolatry has driven countless numbers of people away from the church.

People who are aware of Galileo, Darwin, the Enlightenment, the Holocaust, Hiroshima, the Civil War, Neil Armstrong, the Hubble Telescope and the centuries of historical-critical scholarship on the Bible know that the above statement, while for centuries thought to be true, is not. When new knowledge trumps doctrine, doctrine loses.

Do we hunger for doctrine, and the rebuke of those who point out the limits of doctrine, or do we hunger to experience the sacred, the numinous and transcendent?


Point: "The Bible is completely self sufficient and has total self-referral."

Counterpoint: "There are many Christians who believe that about the Bible. Anglicans have NEVER been among them. So if you want that kind of church, go join one -- and leave ours alone."