^ FoundationsOfTheLikePreciousFaith

Moved By

kjv@2Peter:1:20 @ Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

kjv@2Peter:1:21 @ For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

It may beyond the scope of this present writing to attempt to definitively tackle the skeptics' adamant conclusions on the subject of possible Bible authorship/inspiration and inerrancy. We must however approach our need for these doctrines to be true as it is most essential to the proper operation/justification of "like precious" faith.

Contextual Anchors:

1. Scripture

Quoted resource: strongs 'G1124'

G1124 @ γραφή graphē graf-ay' From G1125; a document that is holy Writ (or its contents or a statement in it): - scripture.

(See: Topical study BibleFacts dict:torrey Scripture )

2. Pherō̄ fer'-o - Moved

Quoted resource: strongs 'G5342'

G5342 @ φέρω pherō̄ fer'-o A primary verb (for which other and apparently not cognate ones are used in certain tenses only; namely οἴω oiō̄̄ and ἐνέγκω enegkō̄ to bear or carry (in a very wide application literally and figuratively: - be bear bring (forth) carry come + let her drive be driven endure go on lay lead move reach rushing uphold.

(See: Topical study dict:all Inspiration )

3. Holy Ghost

(See: Topical study dict:torrey Holy Spirit and slidy:TorreyNamesOfHolySpirit )

Practical Aspects:

A multitude of men and women wiser than I have written extensively on these crucial theological doctrines, some of them I'd do better simply referring you to. But so that we are all on equal grounds understanding this difficult conceptual vocabulary I will be using, let me quote Matthew George Easton:

Quoted resource: easton 'Inspiration'

Inspiration @ that extraordinary or supernatural divine influence vouchsafed to those who wrote the Holy Scriptures, rendering their writings infallible. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God" (R.V., "Every scripture inspired of God"), nkjv@2Timothy:3:16. This is true of all the "sacred writings," not in the sense of their being works of genius or of supernatural insight, but as "theopneustic," i.e., "breathed into by God" in such a sense that the writers were supernaturally guided to express exactly what God intended them to express as a revelation of his mind and will. The testimony of the sacred writers themselves abundantly demonstrates this truth; and if they are infallible as teachers of doctrine, then the doctrine of plenary inspiration must be accepted. There are no errors in the Bible as it came from God, none have been proved to exist. Difficulties and phenomena we cannot explain are not errors. All these books of the Old and New Testaments are inspired. We do not say that they contain, but that they are, the Word of God. The gift of inspiration rendered the writers the organs of God, for the infallible communication of his mind and will, in the very manner and words in which it was originally given. As to the nature of inspiration we have no information. This only we know, it rendered the writers infallible. They were all equally inspired, and are all equally infallible. The inspiration of the sacred writers did not change their characters. They retained all their individual peculiarities as thinkers or writers. (See BIBLE; WORD OF GOD

Logically , we "like precious" believers absolutely need this definition of divine inspiration to be true for our discussion of the "like precious" faith to hold water; and the critic is fully aware of this. The critic needs not strain to replace all the substantive change afforded by this inspiration with his own invention, he merely needs to shoot down ours. "To the unclean of heart all things are defiled" a wise man once wrote, such seems to be the case of with modern criticism.

Until it can be definitively proven that either God did not write this or that God does not even exist both sides are left playing a game of logic, one side buttressed by the evidences of the many lives the inspiration seems to transform, the other by the lack of God and godliness this present uninspired corruption seems to suggest. Which would you rather?

The point of the debate I would be more defenseless to is the issue of fallible private/corporate interpretation of what otherwise I believe to be divinely inspired holy writ. Peter is obviously not saying that prophecy and scripture are not subject on our part to private interpretation; they are laden with our efforts privately and corporately to better understand them. What he and the other bible authors are claiming is that the actual communications themselves are "God breathed" not "man thought of".

I am not so sure that this fallible handling of the infallible writ is altogether a bad thing as it forces us to try interpretations, to prove/test interpretations, to in fact make us all the more dependent upon direct relationships with our Lord and Savior. The problem is that man is going to take what ever he is given and find an immediate way of corrupting it one way or another. If he is to abandon his relationship in the quest for these intellectual ramblings he is likely to do nothing but spin his wheels.

God could have given us more or less detail than HE did. Perhaps that would have helped resolve some of this, but likely not. Whether opting for more or less, both are viable options for a righteous God to take, absence however is not (not if HE is going to judge). What we believe as "like precious" Christian believers is that God is very much righteous and HE has very much not been absent and that HE has favored a slightly minimal option which first and foremost draws from us the simple presumption of HIS righteousness (which is due in any loving relationship and longterm commitment) and from that a deeper quest in sincerity into HIS righteous in-errancy and truth.

Let us say for now that God has breathed to us the essentials to find our way into His further influence in the Holy Writ. His influence confirmed by Writ and Spirit can show us all the more. So much better is this than the critics' vacuous alternative!

^ FoundationsOfTheLikePreciousFaith

Comment Board:MovedBy

Further Resources:
media: pdf/WhenCriticsAsk.pdf

Child Threads:

[Edit MovedBy] [Create Thread to MovedBy] [Discuss MovedBy] [MovedBy Presentation]