Are all scriptures "God breathed"Are scripture or

[polonius]

Is all scripture "God breathed" (II Timothy), or not? Divisions in Christianity are based upon the answer to this question.

http://www.lcdiocese.org/why-catholic/8 ... alism.html

“ (W)e can trace the roots of today’s Fundamentalism to the beginning of the twentieth century. During the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries, there arose deep divisions among some of the Churches concerning the findings of biology, psychology and the other sciences when explaining the Scriptures. These Christians were called "Liberals" or "Modernists." "Conservatives," on the other hand, saw no need to rethink their understanding of basic doctrines.

One small group of Conservatives became intensely opposed to what they called Modernism. Between 1909 and 1915, they published a series of pamphlets entitled The Fundaments: A Testimony to the Truth. The term, "Fundamentalist," began to be used in reference to those conservatives who agreed with the teachings outlined in The Fundamentals pamphlets.�

http://www.abarim-publications.com/Bibl ... wmk1e4vyUk

“To declare that the Bible is the one and only Word of God, folks most often cite 2 TIMOTHY 3:16. There Paul seems to inform Timothy that the Bible is God-breathed, in stark contrast to other writings, which are the mere fumblings of man. What very few of these folks seem to notice is that just eight verses prior, Paul refers to the legend of Jannes and Jambres, which is wildly extra-Biblical (2 TIMOTHY 3:16).�

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 1 by polonius.advice]

Are all scriptures "God breathed"?

Yes I believe so. The NWT puts it as "all scripture is inspired of God" we (JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES) take that to mean that all scripture contains the thoughts and instructions of God.

JW

RELATED POSTS

Who is the author of the bible?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 132#885132

How can we be sure the bible is true?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 653#868653

[steveb1]

Is all scripture "God breathed" (II Timothy), or not? Divisions in Christianity are based upon the answer to this question.

http://www.lcdiocese.org/why-catholic/8 ... alism.html

“ (W)e can trace the roots of today’s Fundamentalism to the beginning of the twentieth century. During the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries, there arose deep divisions among some of the Churches concerning the findings of biology, psychology and the other sciences when explaining the Scriptures. These Christians were called "Liberals" or "Modernists." "Conservatives," on the other hand, saw no need to rethink their understanding of basic doctrines.

One small group of Conservatives became intensely opposed to what they called Modernism. Between 1909 and 1915, they published a series of pamphlets entitled The Fundaments: A Testimony to the Truth. The term, "Fundamentalist," began to be used in reference to those conservatives who agreed with the teachings outlined in The Fundamentals pamphlets.�

http://www.abarim-publications.com/Bibl ... wmk1e4vyUk

“To declare that the Bible is the one and only Word of God, folks most often cite 2 TIMOTHY 3:16. There Paul seems to inform Timothy that the Bible is God-breathed, in stark contrast to other writings, which are the mere fumblings of man. What very few of these folks seem to notice is that just eight verses prior, Paul refers to the legend of Jannes and Jambres, which is wildly extra-Biblical (2 TIMOTHY 3:16).�

My take on it is that no scripture of any religion is God-breathed.

Having said that, I do think that inasmuch as scripture claims to and actually does record human experiences about God, then that section of scripture can be considered inspired, with a small "i".

As records of mystical encounters with God, the Spirit, and the Holy, some scriptures do seem to point to a Sacred Transcendent in which/in Whom the authors felt that they lived and moved and had their being.

[William]

The other aspect of the idea that 'all scripture is inspired by GOD' is that if such is only inclusive of what is contained in the Bible, and excludes other sources of inspired writ, then this can only lead to the deceptive belief that 'The Bible is The Word of GOD' and anything not included in the bible - bearing in mind that which 'decided' what would be included and what wouldn't - could be ignored as 'that which is NOT divinely inspired'.

Which of course leads to such rules allowing for the argument that one can have 'a place to freely engage in debates on Christian theology with the basic assumption that the Bible can be used as a primary reference without the need to defend its authority.' - it's 'authority' being the assumption that it is in truth, 'the word of GOD'...the actual TRUTH itself.

In the world, this 'place' amounts to Christendom as a whole which all of its sects umbrella under the assumption of 'truth' that the Bible is the Word of GOD and cannot be challenged otherwise...or can be challenged but such challenge can be ignored without consequence. Deception, however, always has consequence, whether it is ignored or not, but especially if it is.

[polonius]

[quote="JehovahsWitness"]
[Replying to post 1 by polonius.advice]

Are all scriptures "God breathed"?

Yes I believe so. The NWT puts it as "all scripture is inspired of God" we (JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES) take that to mean that all scripture contains the thoughts and instructions of God.

JW

RESPONSE: The immediate problem that this claim raises is that the Bible contains some errors and contradictions.

Are you then claiming that God makes errors and contradictions?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 5 by polonius.advice]

There are some minor copyist errors in the bible, mostly resolvable. I have yet to see an apparent "contradiction" in the bible that cannot be resolved.

Are you then claiming that God makes errors and contradictions?

No. See above.




JW



Bible Contradictions,are there any?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 941#336941

[dio9]

[Replying to post 1 by polonius.advice]

Is Paul implying his letter is scripture? I don't think so, yet many may think it is god breathed. . This verse is rather more Paul's intellectual theological logical thought process .

All the many Gospels were written years after Paul's letters. In Paul's days there was no Christian scripture other than Paul's and maybe some other unknown letters in circulation.

Paradoxically the scripture he is referring to is the Law and the Prophets and the Wisdom writings not the Gospels .

So inspired writings are worthy but Jesus and his passion are not something God breathed to the Gospel writers Jesus was not God breathed, Jesus happened. Likewise David and the kings happened Moses happened , Abraham happened Cain happened Adam happened. We learn from these characters success and failures under God.

[steveb1]

[Replying to post 1 by polonius.advice]

Is Paul implying his letter is scripture? I don't think so, yet many may think it is god breathed. . This verse is rather more Paul's intellectual theological logical thought process .

All the many Gospels were written years after Paul's letters. In Paul's days there was no Christian scripture other than Paul's and maybe some other unknown letters in circulation.

Paradoxically the scripture he is referring to is the Law and the Prophets and the Wisdom writings not the Gospels .

So inspired writings are worthy but Jesus and his passion are not something God breathed to the Gospel writers Jesus was not God breathed, Jesus happened. Likewise David and the kings happened Moses happened , Abraham happened Cain happened Adam happened. We learn from these characters success and failures under God.

Very good points. Paul never claims to be writing scripture. The closest he comes to that is when he says things like, "the Lord has told me this/The Lord has told me to say this" - things like that. If Paul thought that his letters were a new scripture - a literal new testament - he would have been sure to tell the world. Had he done so, his persecutions would have been much more intense and deadly, because such a claim would offend both Jews and Christians because both parties believed - as you pointed out - that there was only one scripture, namely, the Jewish Bible. Had Paul advertised that he was supplementing Jewish scripture with a new scripture designed just for Christians, both Jews and Christians would probably stone him.

[polonius]

[quote="JehovahsWitness"]
[Replying to post 5 by polonius.advice]

There are some minor copyist errors in the bible, mostly resolvable. I have yet to see an apparent "contradiction" in the bible that cannot be resolved.


RESPONSE: How about the archaeological conclusion that the Hebrews were never in Egypt, the Exodus story is fictional, and the first seven books of the Bible were written between 800 and 700 BC, as a founding legend?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodu ... the_Exodus

A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness.[40] Archaeologists generally agree that the Israelites had Canaanite origins:[41] the culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains are in the Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite.[42] Almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether even this is an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.[42]

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 5 by polonius.advice]

There are some minor copyist errors in the bible, mostly resolvable. I have yet to see an apparent "contradiction" in the bible that cannot be resolved.


RESPONSE: How about the archaeological conclusion that the Hebrews were never in Egypt, the Exodus story is fictional, and the first seven books of the Bible were written between 800 and 700 BC, as a founding legend?

Archeology is not in a position to make such a absolute "conclusion" especially in the negative. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, even if the bible was written yesterday.


JW