Author Topic: Bible infallibility  (Read 10593 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RaphaCam

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,203
  • It is honourable to reveal the works of God
    • Em Espírito e em Verdade
  • Faith: Big-O Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Exarchate of Gotham City
Bible infallibility
« on: February 15, 2016, 11:00:00 PM »
Fr. Seraphim Rose says in God's Revelation to the Human Heart:

Quote
There are some who look at our Orthodox Church and say, (...) you don't believe in the Scriptures like a Protestant might and say tha they are the absolutely 'infallible' word. (...) If you haven't got the feeling that this is so, then you devise things like making the Bible infallible, making the Pope infallible.

So, isn't Bible infallibility an Orthodox thing? Or not a necessary doctrine for Orthodoxy? Should we just stop caring about answering possible contradictions such as Herod and Quirinius reigning at the same time,* or about the authorship of some books ascribing themselves to people that some doubt to have actually written them?

Maybe Fr. Seraphim wasn't trying to say something other than it seems?

*I know the word used to describe Quirinius's position isn't necessarily the one he assumed years after Herod's death, but it's still something that makes people scratch their heads over Bible infallibility.
"May the Lord our God remember in His kingdom all Holy Catholic Apostolic Church, which heralds the Word of Truth and fearlessly offers and distributes the Holy Oblation despite human deficiencies and persecutions moved by the powers of this world, in all time and unto the ages of ages."

May the Blessed Light shine Forth

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,592
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #1 on: February 15, 2016, 11:11:31 PM »
Fr. Seraphim Rose says in God's Revelation to the Human Heart:

Quote
There are some who look at our Orthodox Church and say, (...) you don't believe in the Scriptures like a Protestant might and say tha they are the absolutely 'infallible' word. (...) If you haven't got the feeling that this is so, then you devise things like making the Bible infallible, making the Pope infallible.

Orthodox don't teach "inerrancy" of the Bible.
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline wgw

  • All scorpions must DIE!!!
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,816
  • This icon is of St. Athansius.
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #2 on: February 16, 2016, 05:30:14 AM »
According to Fr. John Whiteford, scriptural inerrancy is an Orthodox position.
Axios and many years to you, Fr. Trenham!

Offline LizaSymonenko

  • Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,112
    • St.Mary the Protectress Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #3 on: February 16, 2016, 10:25:28 AM »

Don't miss the message in the Bible, while nitpicking it to pieces.

For these people who claim inerrancy in the Bible...will you defend the teachings of a real Adam and Eve...a real flood...plagues of locusts?

I believe Adam and Eve were the first humans and are our parents....I believe the great flood occurred and wiped out humanity, other than Noah and his family....I believe Jonah spent time inside a whale....I believe Christ walked on water and was resurrected on the third day after death.

However, often you will read on this forum, comments from people who think many of these "stories" were merely symbolic.  Adam, Eve and the snake are just a symbolic story.  The flood never really took place, etc.
Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,817
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #4 on: February 16, 2016, 11:05:42 AM »
A book can't be infallible because it is always subject to interpretation which is inherently fallible.
God bless!

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,592
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #5 on: February 16, 2016, 12:14:14 PM »
According to Fr. John Whiteford, scriptural inerrancy is an Orthodox position.
I've heard otherwise on OC.net. The writer noted that we would have trouble translating "inerrancy" in real ways.

Often, people who hold to Biblical Inerrancy will say that we cannot dispute whether the Torah stories are allegories, or say that man came from primates.

First, there is the issue of allegories: If in the Old Testament the Canaanites are called "bread" for Israel's troops, this doesn't mean that they are literally bread. So we have to admit that many places things are stated explicitly and yet remain allegories. And once we accept that principle, then theoretically anything could be considered an allegory, so long as it is not stated otherwise. If we accept "Biblical inerrancy", we will have to define "inerrancy" as allowing for things stated explicitly to be allegories. And once we accept that allegories fit into "inerrancy", then what do we do with Adam and Eve? If someone says that it's an allegory, he therefore has not violated the rule of "Biblical inerrancy".

So at some point, Biblical inerrancy would just mean that you cannot say "The Bible is wrong in every way." It means that "In some way the Bible must be right".

Secondly, again does it mean to say that every verse in the Bible is "inerrant" too? This also becomes tough to say, considering disputed passages and LXX v. Masoretic and even times when Jesus "corrected" OT teachings, or at least gave ones that appear at first glance to be much different.

...
Deacon Kuraev, a major theologian, teaches that Jonah's Book was an allegory. We don't have a record of Nineveh/Assyria's capitol worshiping Israel's God. Assyria conquered Israel. To think that Jonah survived three days in a fish's belly would be more fantastic than Jesus' raising of Lazarus on the fourth day when things were smelling bad.
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,592
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #6 on: February 16, 2016, 12:43:11 PM »
According to Fr. John Whiteford, scriptural inerrancy is an Orthodox position.
Fr. Whiteford said:

Quote
We believe that Scripture does not contain any error in anything that it intends to convey.
 I think St. Augustine put it about as well as anyone has:

"For I confess to your Charity that I have learned to yield this respect and honour only to the canonical books of Scripture: of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error...."
(Church fathers though in real life disputed how to take some Torah stories as literal or not)
http://fatherjohn.blogspot.com/2012/01/inerrancy-of-scripture.html

That's a major qualification. The scripture might say one thing on first reading, but it turns out that what it "intends to convey" could be different, such that the first reading was wrong.
And then this goes back to the same kind of debate as before, eg. how do you show what the author intended to convey?

Fr. Hopko, who took the opposite view from Fr. Whiteford noted:
Quote
As an example of such contradictions -- in fact the clearest example, according to Fr. Thomas -- he pointed out that the four Gospels all have different inscriptions on the Cross of Christ. Here are what the four Gospels actually record:

"THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS" (Matthew 27:37)

"THE KING OF THE JEWS" (Mark 15:26)

"THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS" (Luke 23:38)

"JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS" (John 19:19)
And he concludes his comments on this question with the statement "So much for historical accuracy."

Does this example prove that the Bible contradicts itself or is in error? No. For one thing, if someone gives an approximate quotation of something, and another person gives a more precise quotation, and these two quotations essentially agree, but the more precise quote provides more detail, have they contradicted each other? No... they have corroborated each other.
SAME SOURCE AS ABOVE
So it turns out, per Fr. Whiteford's logic, that each evangelist was only intending to convey an approximation of the real title, not to actually quote the title explicitly.

But then once we accept that principle, then theoretically anything in the Bible could become an author's intention to convey some approximation of truth. And that "approximation" is inerrant.

But considering writers' intent to be infallible also seems sticky.
If Moses' own intention when telling the Levites to kill anyone who disobeyed some rules like carrying wood on the sabbath was an infallible approximation of truth, then we are really forced to "spin" the Truth of this statement very hard. We have to say under Christianity that a rulebreaker deserves death in some metaphysical way because he is separated from God. But we are also forced to come in with Jesus' compassion and say that we have to do the opposite and forgive the rulebreaker, as Jesus did.

So I think we can't say that Moses' intended meaning - we must kill rulebreakers - is a close approximation of truth, but can only say that it contains at some level "a Truth", the metaphysical one I mentioned. Moses' intended teaching on this topic was compassionless, but Jesus taught compassion on the topic, therefore at best Moses' teaching has an aspect of a deeper truth about obedience and rlationship with God and Law.

This is like the issue of immutability of canons. On closer inspection it appears the most we can say is that canons have a deeper level with truth.

Getting back to Orthodoxy, in the Creed we say that God inspired the prophets. God inspired Moses too. And God's inspiration is true. If we do accept "infallibility", then it is in that sense. But we don't have as a faith fundamental that every verse in the Bible is correct in every way.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2016, 12:44:35 PM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline Asteriktos

  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,795
  • Faith: agnostic
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #7 on: February 16, 2016, 02:28:37 PM »
I have not read a book on the topic written by an Orthodox Christian, only snippets here and there. However, fwiw, anyone interested in the topic might want to check out: Debate About the Bible: Inerrancy Versus Infallibility by Stephen T. Davis. I certainly don't agree with all his points, but the text can be good for generating 'leads' that can be pursued using more (capital-O) Orthodox resources should you so desire.

Offline wgw

  • All scorpions must DIE!!!
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,816
  • This icon is of St. Athansius.
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #8 on: February 16, 2016, 02:40:30 PM »
St. Hilary of Poitiers wrote that Scripture is not in the reading, but the interpretation.  I don't mind regarding the Orthodox interpretation as infallible.
Axios and many years to you, Fr. Trenham!

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,592
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #9 on: February 16, 2016, 04:43:38 PM »
St. Hilary of Poitiers wrote that Scripture is not in the reading, but the interpretation.  I don't mind regarding the Orthodox interpretation as infallible.
In practice that is tough though.
Because sometimes Orthodox have different interpretations. Sometimes the main Orthodox view even changes.

To say Bible is infallible could be IMO misleading, because it can connote that each word and verses stated happened exactly as said, and then you are stuck with real life contradictions.

So the consensus must be in Orthodoxy that God inspired the Bible writers as Nicene Creed said, and God's inspiration is True. But beyond that in practice things about infallibility of the scripture are harder and are debated among Orthodox.

To say "inerrancy" I think has even tougher connotations.

I think often we say that Bible and Councils are infallible, but people even debate that.

« Last Edit: February 16, 2016, 04:44:31 PM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,817
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #10 on: February 16, 2016, 04:46:47 PM »
I think using terms like "trustworthy" or "efficacious" gives a better perspective on Scripture, the Creed or the Councils as opposed to infallible.
God bless!

Offline Luke

  • Formerly Gamliel
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,767
  • Ευλογημένη Σαρακοστή
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Metropolis of San Francisco
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #11 on: February 16, 2016, 04:53:40 PM »
The author is infallible.  The book is infallible.  The readers are fallible.

Offline Asteriktos

  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,795
  • Faith: agnostic
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #12 on: February 16, 2016, 05:08:31 PM »
Too bad no one added an infallible table of contents...

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,592
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #13 on: February 16, 2016, 05:42:49 PM »
Too bad no one added an infallible table of contents...
Good point: Slavs, Greeks, and Ethiopians differ on the books of the Bible. Ethiopians have 1 Enoch. It may be a deuterocanonical issue though.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2016, 05:43:29 PM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 15,089
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #14 on: February 16, 2016, 06:28:41 PM »
According to Fr. John Whiteford, scriptural inerrancy is an Orthodox position.
Fr. Whiteford said:

Quote
We believe that Scripture does not contain any error in anything that it intends to convey.
 I think St. Augustine put it about as well as anyone has:

"For I confess to your Charity that I have learned to yield this respect and honour only to the canonical books of Scripture: of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error...."
(Church fathers though in real life disputed how to take some Torah stories as literal or not)
http://fatherjohn.blogspot.com/2012/01/inerrancy-of-scripture.html

That's a major qualification. The scripture might say one thing on first reading, but it turns out that what it "intends to convey" could be different, such that the first reading was wrong.
And then this goes back to the same kind of debate as before, eg. how do you show what the author intended to convey?

Fr. Hopko, who took the opposite view from Fr. Whiteford noted:
Quote
As an example of such contradictions -- in fact the clearest example, according to Fr. Thomas -- he pointed out that the four Gospels all have different inscriptions on the Cross of Christ. Here are what the four Gospels actually record:

"THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS" (Matthew 27:37)

"THE KING OF THE JEWS" (Mark 15:26)

"THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS" (Luke 23:38)

"JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS" (John 19:19)
And he concludes his comments on this question with the statement "So much for historical accuracy."

Does this example prove that the Bible contradicts itself or is in error? No. For one thing, if someone gives an approximate quotation of something, and another person gives a more precise quotation, and these two quotations essentially agree, but the more precise quote provides more detail, have they contradicted each other? No... they have corroborated each other.
SAME SOURCE AS ABOVE
So it turns out, per Fr. Whiteford's logic, that each evangelist was only intending to convey an approximation of the real title, not to actually quote the title explicitly.

But then once we accept that principle, then theoretically anything in the Bible could become an author's intention to convey some approximation of truth. And that "approximation" is inerrant.

But considering writers' intent to be infallible also seems sticky.
If Moses' own intention when telling the Levites to kill anyone who disobeyed some rules like carrying wood on the sabbath was an infallible approximation of truth, then we are really forced to "spin" the Truth of this statement very hard. We have to say under Christianity that a rulebreaker deserves death in some metaphysical way because he is separated from God. But we are also forced to come in with Jesus' compassion and say that we have to do the opposite and forgive the rulebreaker, as Jesus did.

So I think we can't say that Moses' intended meaning - we must kill rulebreakers - is a close approximation of truth, but can only say that it contains at some level "a Truth", the metaphysical one I mentioned. Moses' intended teaching on this topic was compassionless, but Jesus taught compassion on the topic, therefore at best Moses' teaching has an aspect of a deeper truth about obedience and rlationship with God and Law.

This is like the issue of immutability of canons. On closer inspection it appears the most we can say is that canons have a deeper level with truth.

Getting back to Orthodoxy, in the Creed we say that God inspired the prophets. God inspired Moses too. And God's inspiration is true. If we do accept "infallibility", then it is in that sense. But we don't have as a faith fundamental that every verse in the Bible is correct in every way.

But the ultimate author of Scripture is God. Moses's human intent may have been compasionless, but God's intent was to ultimately point to Christ. Obviously, this carries problems regarding whether God inspired something deceptive. But the intent can still be unified.
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 15,089
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #15 on: February 16, 2016, 06:35:53 PM »
Too bad no one added an infallible table of contents...

What difference does it make, though?  Maybe 1st Enoch and the Book of Jubilees are inspired, maybe they aren't. Would Christian dogma be any different either way?

Focus on the books that all little-o orthodox churches have in common (and the ones that they reject in common, like the Gnostic Gospels), not the ones that they differ on.
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,592
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #16 on: February 16, 2016, 08:24:42 PM »
But the ultimate author of Scripture is God. Moses's human intent may have been compasionless, but God's intent was to ultimately point to Christ. Obviously, this carries problems regarding whether God inspired something deceptive. But the intent can still be unified.
Yes, and I could give that answer to explain infallibility of scripture should I wish to justify it.

Nonetheless, in Fr. Whiteford's article, he refers to the authors' intent being infallibility and then cites authors as being the direct scribes who composed the verses, eg. Moses. THis was what I was writing about.
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 15,089
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #17 on: February 17, 2016, 03:21:53 AM »
But the ultimate author of Scripture is God. Moses's human intent may have been compasionless, but God's intent was to ultimately point to Christ. Obviously, this carries problems regarding whether God inspired something deceptive. But the intent can still be unified.
Yes, and I could give that answer to explain infallibility of scripture should I wish to justify it.

Nonetheless, in Fr. Whiteford's article, he refers to the authors' intent being infallibility and then cites authors as being the direct scribes who composed the verses, eg. Moses. THis was what I was writing about.

I know.

I think he's kind of off on a non-sequitur. We have no idea what the Evangelists intended in giving different versions of the titulum (why would they do such a piecemeal job of it? Lack of paper? Fr. John suggests that each was focusing on a different language, but again this is all just guess work) nor what Moses intended when he instituted such Draconian laws.

At best we can make some kind of argument that they knew they were writing Scripture. And if we do that then we're getting away from the fallible intentions of men and back into God's intention anyway so the argument is pretty moot.
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,592
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #18 on: February 17, 2016, 03:32:36 PM »
But the ultimate author of Scripture is God. Moses's human intent may have been compasionless, but God's intent was to ultimately point to Christ. Obviously, this carries problems regarding whether God inspired something deceptive. But the intent can still be unified.
Yes, and I could give that answer to explain infallibility of scripture should I wish to justify it.

Nonetheless, in Fr. Whiteford's article, he refers to the authors' intent being infallibility and then cites authors as being the direct scribes who composed the verses, eg. Moses. THis was what I was writing about.

I know.

I think he's kind of off on a non-sequitur. We have no idea what the Evangelists intended in giving different versions of the titulum (why would they do such a piecemeal job of it? Lack of paper? Fr. John suggests that each was focusing on a different language, but again this is all just guess work) nor what Moses intended when he instituted such Draconian laws.

At best we can make some kind of argument that they knew they were writing Scripture. And if we do that then we're getting away from the fallible intentions of men and back into God's intention anyway so the argument is pretty moot.
I think the argument is not really moot.
I think when Moses wrote scripture about killing people for disobeying the Sabbath, he did not have an intent of mercy and intended for this rule to actually be followed in real life. But Jesus has an attitude where we forgive this stuff, and personally I doubt whether Jesus would have even wanted the rule on killing to be followed in 100 BC before His incarnation. I mean, he would want people to respect Sabbath, but killing over it?

Likewise, if you asked the author of Jonah: "Are you really writing this about the Messiah?" I would be very interested to know!
Jonah did not in real life get into a whale and convert Nineveh, so maybe the writer was talking about a later, miraculous figure. And maybe the author was not talking about getting into a material whale and converting just one city, but really meant escaping from death and converting the pagan world - the Messiah. Maybe the author did intend this really to be a Messianic book!

However, on face value, Jonah does not sound Messianic, it just sounds like a story of a prophet like Noah and the Ark or Elijah and the chariot, which also are Types.

So I think it's not a moot point, because I think it's best to say that God's Truth inside of the passages is infallible, but what that Truth is might not be the same as the human, specific book authors' own intents were.

This is not even to get into the extra-vengeful genocidal story of Esther, which freaks me out a little bit and might have no explicit references to God.
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Raylight

  • Guest
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #19 on: February 17, 2016, 03:55:54 PM »
The Bible is infallible. And yes, there are good reasons to believe that what is written in Genesis truly happened. I know that plenty on oc.net don't like the idea of Bible infallibility, maybe (and I say maybe) because of the allergy they have to anything that sounds Protestant. Maybe the fact that many of them are converts from Protestant denominations, they decided to throw the baby with the bath water.  In the end, whether you believe in the Bible infallibility or not, doesn't determine if you're Christian or not. Being Christian is most of all about Jesus Christ, the word incarnate.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 15,089
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #20 on: February 17, 2016, 04:02:52 PM »
That's my point, though. God's intent can be different from the human author's intent. We see this in Genesis 50 with other actions.

Quote
As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good,

Not that I mean that any of the human authors of Scripture actually had evil intent. I'm just saying that God's intent behind the same actions can be different. So it's better to just focus on God's intent since the human's intent is at best just a curiosity.


As for whether the story of Jonah is "literally" true, I think this is only a problem if one insists on a flat "exactly as it happened" view of history. The past, by definition, does not exist for us (obviously it exists for God, but we have no idea how). All that we have is the stories that we tell ourselves about it- some of these stories are sacred stories and some of these stories are secular stories.

Sacred history and secular history are different kinds of narratives with different rules, so we shouldn't be surprised that they contradict one another on something like this. The story of Jonah is literally true in the context of sacred history and for the believer that's all that really matters.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2016, 04:03:51 PM by Volnutt »
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #21 on: February 17, 2016, 05:14:52 PM »
The Bible is infallible. And yes, there are good reasons to believe that what is written in Genesis truly happened. I know that plenty on oc.net don't like the idea of Bible infallibility, maybe (and I say maybe) because of the allergy they have to anything that sounds Protestant. Maybe the fact that many of them are converts from Protestant denominations, they decided to throw the baby with the bath water.  In the end, whether you believe in the Bible infallibility or not, doesn't determine if you're Christian or not. Being Christian is most of all about Jesus Christ, the word incarnate.
It depends on what you define concerning the doctrine of Biblical Infallibility. If you mean the teaching that the moral and dogmatic teachings of Scripture are completely without error, then I would say yes. If you mean the more broad definition of every single word being correct and inerrant in every single context (biblical inerrancy), then no. It is clearly not. The Bible was not created to be a science book, or a history book. It has that in there, but it is made for one purpose. To show Christ. Period "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name.". Not to be a text on astronomy, earth science, history, or any other scholarly discipline. The Bible is not the Word of God. It contains words of God, but the Word of God is the Word made flesh, not the Word made text.

There are so many cases of direct contradiction that you cant explain away. In my personal belief, the semi-religion of "Bibleism" is a massive contributor to the spread of Atheism in our culture today.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,817
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #22 on: February 17, 2016, 05:24:15 PM »
The Bible is infallible. And yes, there are good reasons to believe that what is written in Genesis truly happened. I know that plenty on oc.net don't like the idea of Bible infallibility, maybe (and I say maybe) because of the allergy they have to anything that sounds Protestant. Maybe the fact that many of them are converts from Protestant denominations, they decided to throw the baby with the bath water.  In the end, whether you believe in the Bible infallibility or not, doesn't determine if you're Christian or not. Being Christian is most of all about Jesus Christ, the word incarnate.
It depends on what you define concerning the doctrine of Biblical Infallibility. If you mean the teaching that the moral and dogmatic teachings of Scripture are completely without error, then I would say yes. If you mean the more broad definition of every single word being correct and inerrant in every single context (biblical inerrancy), then no. It is clearly not. The Bible was not created to be a science book, or a history book. It has that in there, but it is made for one purpose. To show Christ. Period "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name.". Not to be a text on astronomy, earth science, history, or any other scholarly discipline. The Bible is not the Word of God. It contains words of God, but the Word of God is the Word made flesh, not the Word made text.

There are so many cases of direct contradiction that you cant explain away. In my personal belief, the semi-religion of "Bibleism" is a massive contributor to the spread of Atheism in our culture today.

PP
+100

Pretty much every former evangelical/newly minted atheist I come across points unimportant contradictions in the Bible as if it is proof that the whole thing must be thrown out because of a few errors. In their defense, it is because many of them probably when growing up were drilled that the Bible is "inerrant" and is the exact words of God.
God bless!

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,592
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #23 on: February 17, 2016, 05:25:18 PM »
There are so many cases of direct contradiction that you cant explain away. In my personal belief, the semi-religion of "Bibleism" is a massive contributor to the spread of Atheism in our culture today.

PP
Yes. If Christianity teaches that the Bible's science is factual to the common readings, and if in Acts Jesus is sitting up on the clouds, and if Jesus remains in a physical body meeting scientific ideas of physical human bodies, and if the astronauts and satellites went to the clouds and didn't see Jesus up there, then Christianity is disproven by reality.

This is why the vulgar version of Biblical Infallibility makes the Bible fail.

It creates a Monthy Python and the Holy Grail vision of the Bible.



Meanwhile, reality looks more like Life of Bryan to them.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2016, 05:28:43 PM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #24 on: February 17, 2016, 05:27:23 PM »
The Bible is infallible. And yes, there are good reasons to believe that what is written in Genesis truly happened. I know that plenty on oc.net don't like the idea of Bible infallibility, maybe (and I say maybe) because of the allergy they have to anything that sounds Protestant. Maybe the fact that many of them are converts from Protestant denominations, they decided to throw the baby with the bath water.  In the end, whether you believe in the Bible infallibility or not, doesn't determine if you're Christian or not. Being Christian is most of all about Jesus Christ, the word incarnate.
It depends on what you define concerning the doctrine of Biblical Infallibility. If you mean the teaching that the moral and dogmatic teachings of Scripture are completely without error, then I would say yes. If you mean the more broad definition of every single word being correct and inerrant in every single context (biblical inerrancy), then no. It is clearly not. The Bible was not created to be a science book, or a history book. It has that in there, but it is made for one purpose. To show Christ. Period "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name.". Not to be a text on astronomy, earth science, history, or any other scholarly discipline. The Bible is not the Word of God. It contains words of God, but the Word of God is the Word made flesh, not the Word made text.

There are so many cases of direct contradiction that you cant explain away. In my personal belief, the semi-religion of "Bibleism" is a massive contributor to the spread of Atheism in our culture today.

PP
+100

Pretty much every former evangelical/newly minted atheist I come across points unimportant contradictions in the Bible as if it is proof that the whole thing must be thrown out because of a few errors. In their defense, it is because many of them probably when growing up were drilled that the Bible is "inerrant" and is the exact words of God.
It almost did that for me. Like, really close. Then I realized that The Church predated Luther  :laugh:

Quote
Yes. If Christianity teaches that the Bible's science is factual to the common readings, and if in Acts Jesus is sitting up on the clouds, and if Jesus remains in a physical body meeting scientific ideas of physical human bodies, and if the astronauts and satellites went to the clouds and didn't see Jesus up there, then Christianity is disproven by reality.

This is why the vulgar version of Biblical Infallibility makes the Bible fail.
One of many issues that are up-front-and-center everytime I talk to someone about this who is an Atheist (or thinks themselves to be).

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,592
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #25 on: February 17, 2016, 05:38:22 PM »
It almost did that for me. Like, really close. Then I realized that The Church predated Luther  :laugh:
I think Luther was not so bad. It's true that he downplayed Tradition, but look what happened:

Luther got into a big debate with the Reformed. Jesus said This is my body and handed the apostles a piece of bread. Luther took Jesus at His word and said Jesus' body can be in bread if it goes through a wall in John 20.

Calvin replied basically: No, Jesus' body is up in heaven, and to say he is in bread is "absurd" and violates the "ordinary laws of nature" (Calvin's terms about this).

Luther's and his colleague Westphal's reply to Calvin and Zwingli were that the latter two were using "Reason" to trump Christian belief.

Ultimately, Luther was correct about this. Calvin's system relies very much on a hard materialistic and rationalistic worldview, which is why he demands conscious faith to occur post-Baptism and why he in effect negates free will.
See Jim Nelson's writing on this:
https://justanotherjim.wordpress.com/2010/12/29/john-calvin-student-radical-and-humanist/
Jim is an ex-Presbyterian pastor and ex-Evangelical who is now Orthodox.

So even if you downgrade Church tradition, you could still theoretically come away with a Lutheran attitude that is not necessarily materialistic. However, the Calvinist view is based much more on a materialist or naturalist approach.

It's a major issue, because most Protestants, if not Christians in general, in the US come out of the Calvinist movement in their heritage. Even Methodists do with their Arminianism. (Although it's debatable whether Arminianism is really a version of Calvinism).
« Last Edit: February 17, 2016, 05:40:39 PM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #26 on: February 17, 2016, 05:51:21 PM »
It almost did that for me. Like, really close. Then I realized that The Church predated Luther  :laugh:
I think Luther was not so bad. It's true that he downplayed Tradition, but look what happened:

Luther got into a big debate with the Reformed. Jesus said This is my body and handed the apostles a piece of bread. Luther took Jesus at His word and said Jesus' body can be in bread if it goes through a wall in John 20.

Calvin replied basically: No, Jesus' body is up in heaven, and to say he is in bread is "absurd" and violates the "ordinary laws of nature" (Calvin's terms about this).

Luther's and his colleague Westphal's reply to Calvin and Zwingli were that the latter two were using "Reason" to trump Christian belief.

Ultimately, Luther was correct about this. Calvin's system relies very much on a hard materialistic and rationalistic worldview, which is why he demands conscious faith to occur post-Baptism and why he in effect negates free will.
See Jim Nelson's writing on this:
https://justanotherjim.wordpress.com/2010/12/29/john-calvin-student-radical-and-humanist/
Jim is an ex-Presbyterian pastor and ex-Evangelical who is now Orthodox.

So even if you downgrade Church tradition, you could still theoretically come away with a Lutheran attitude that is not necessarily materialistic. However, the Calvinist view is based much more on a materialist or naturalist approach.

It's a major issue, because most Protestants, if not Christians in general, in the US come out of the Calvinist movement in their heritage. Even Methodists do with their Arminianism. (Although it's debatable whether Arminianism is really a version of Calvinism).
You're totally all right, on all points. I stated Luther for 2 reasons.

1. Most Evangelicals' knowledge of Church history starts at Luther. Hell, at Liberty University, they claim his as a Church Father. No, Im not making it up. There is a lurker here on OC.NET that can back me up on this.
2. I was schooled in a Traditionalist Lutheran school....so yeah, Luther all the time.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Raylight

  • Guest
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #27 on: February 17, 2016, 05:57:10 PM »
The Bible is infallible. And yes, there are good reasons to believe that what is written in Genesis truly happened. I know that plenty on oc.net don't like the idea of Bible infallibility, maybe (and I say maybe) because of the allergy they have to anything that sounds Protestant. Maybe the fact that many of them are converts from Protestant denominations, they decided to throw the baby with the bath water.  In the end, whether you believe in the Bible infallibility or not, doesn't determine if you're Christian or not. Being Christian is most of all about Jesus Christ, the word incarnate.
It depends on what you define concerning the doctrine of Biblical Infallibility. If you mean the teaching that the moral and dogmatic teachings of Scripture are completely without error, then I would say yes. If you mean the more broad definition of every single word being correct and inerrant in every single context (biblical inerrancy), then no. It is clearly not. The Bible was not created to be a science book, or a history book. It has that in there, but it is made for one purpose. To show Christ. Period "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name.". Not to be a text on astronomy, earth science, history, or any other scholarly discipline. The Bible is not the Word of God. It contains words of God, but the Word of God is the Word made flesh, not the Word made text.

There are so many cases of direct contradiction that you cant explain away. In my personal belief, the semi-religion of "Bibleism" is a massive contributor to the spread of Atheism in our culture today.

PP

You have the right to disagree and I have the right to not agree with you either. I believe the Bible is infallible morally, theologically, historically, and scientifically.

As for the spread of Atheism. It is not related to that. If we will go by your false and too simple claim, then can you tell me why Atheism is quite strong in France, Spain, Netherlands, Britain, Belguim, Sweden, Norway, and Finland? Those countries didn't have the idea of Bible infallibility, but Atheism there is flourishing. Why about 3 to 5 percent of Eastern Orthodox in America DO NOT believe in God. That 27% of Eastern Orthodox think the Bible is just a book written by men without any divine revelation. It is not like your Church is doing that good, as far as statistics show, almost 50% of Eastern Orthodox have left the Church and stopped identifying as Orthodox. Meanwhile, Evangelical Churches that you and others look down at, at least they have the courage and the honesty to stick to what they believe, and again, as statistics show, they are among the least to lose members, and the most to have young people in their pews.

Raylight

  • Guest
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #28 on: February 17, 2016, 05:59:24 PM »
The Bible is infallible. And yes, there are good reasons to believe that what is written in Genesis truly happened. I know that plenty on oc.net don't like the idea of Bible infallibility, maybe (and I say maybe) because of the allergy they have to anything that sounds Protestant. Maybe the fact that many of them are converts from Protestant denominations, they decided to throw the baby with the bath water.  In the end, whether you believe in the Bible infallibility or not, doesn't determine if you're Christian or not. Being Christian is most of all about Jesus Christ, the word incarnate.
It depends on what you define concerning the doctrine of Biblical Infallibility. If you mean the teaching that the moral and dogmatic teachings of Scripture are completely without error, then I would say yes. If you mean the more broad definition of every single word being correct and inerrant in every single context (biblical inerrancy), then no. It is clearly not. The Bible was not created to be a science book, or a history book. It has that in there, but it is made for one purpose. To show Christ. Period "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name.". Not to be a text on astronomy, earth science, history, or any other scholarly discipline. The Bible is not the Word of God. It contains words of God, but the Word of God is the Word made flesh, not the Word made text.

There are so many cases of direct contradiction that you cant explain away. In my personal belief, the semi-religion of "Bibleism" is a massive contributor to the spread of Atheism in our culture today.

PP
+100

Pretty much every former evangelical/newly minted atheist I come across points unimportant contradictions in the Bible as if it is proof that the whole thing must be thrown out because of a few errors. In their defense, it is because many of them probably when growing up were drilled that the Bible is "inerrant" and is the exact words of God.

Please explain to me why your Church lost almost 50% of its members in America?

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,817
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #29 on: February 17, 2016, 05:59:42 PM »

You have the right to disagree and I have the right to not agree with you either. I believe the Bible is infallible morally, theologically, historically, and scientifically.

Woah! You're like a gay Bob Jones!  :D
God bless!

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,817
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #30 on: February 17, 2016, 06:02:05 PM »
The Bible is infallible. And yes, there are good reasons to believe that what is written in Genesis truly happened. I know that plenty on oc.net don't like the idea of Bible infallibility, maybe (and I say maybe) because of the allergy they have to anything that sounds Protestant. Maybe the fact that many of them are converts from Protestant denominations, they decided to throw the baby with the bath water.  In the end, whether you believe in the Bible infallibility or not, doesn't determine if you're Christian or not. Being Christian is most of all about Jesus Christ, the word incarnate.
It depends on what you define concerning the doctrine of Biblical Infallibility. If you mean the teaching that the moral and dogmatic teachings of Scripture are completely without error, then I would say yes. If you mean the more broad definition of every single word being correct and inerrant in every single context (biblical inerrancy), then no. It is clearly not. The Bible was not created to be a science book, or a history book. It has that in there, but it is made for one purpose. To show Christ. Period "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name.". Not to be a text on astronomy, earth science, history, or any other scholarly discipline. The Bible is not the Word of God. It contains words of God, but the Word of God is the Word made flesh, not the Word made text.

There are so many cases of direct contradiction that you cant explain away. In my personal belief, the semi-religion of "Bibleism" is a massive contributor to the spread of Atheism in our culture today.

PP
+100

Pretty much every former evangelical/newly minted atheist I come across points unimportant contradictions in the Bible as if it is proof that the whole thing must be thrown out because of a few errors. In their defense, it is because many of them probably when growing up were drilled that the Bible is "inerrant" and is the exact words of God.

Please explain to me why your Church lost almost 50% of its members in America?
I don't know if that number is true, but if it is, I would argue that it is because Orthodox Christianity is hard to follow and easy to quit. When you live in the lap of (comparative to the rest of the world) luxury and there are so many distractions like Kim Kardashian and Kanye West to waste time reading about, spending your time in prayer, fasting and repentance is not easy to do.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2016, 06:02:28 PM by TheTrisagion »
God bless!

Raylight

  • Guest
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #31 on: February 17, 2016, 06:03:33 PM »
There are so many cases of direct contradiction that you cant explain away. In my personal belief, the semi-religion of "Bibleism" is a massive contributor to the spread of Atheism in our culture today.

PP
Yes. If Christianity teaches that the Bible's science is factual to the common readings, and if in Acts Jesus is sitting up on the clouds, and if Jesus remains in a physical body meeting scientific ideas of physical human bodies, and if the astronauts and satellites went to the clouds and didn't see Jesus up there, then Christianity is disproven by reality.

This is why the vulgar version of Biblical Infallibility makes the Bible fail.

It creates a Monthy Python and the Holy Grail vision of the Bible.



Meanwhile, reality looks more like Life of Bryan to them.

You see, this is when you sound exactly like an Atheist who doesn't really know what Christians believe.

When I say I believe the Bible is infallible. It is because I take the Bible literally not superficially. Meaning; that what is written as history and recording event, is ought to be understood as historicaL, What is written as poetry, is ought to be understood as such, What is written as prophecy, is ought to be understood as prophecy.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #32 on: February 17, 2016, 06:05:34 PM »
The Bible is infallible. And yes, there are good reasons to believe that what is written in Genesis truly happened. I know that plenty on oc.net don't like the idea of Bible infallibility, maybe (and I say maybe) because of the allergy they have to anything that sounds Protestant. Maybe the fact that many of them are converts from Protestant denominations, they decided to throw the baby with the bath water.  In the end, whether you believe in the Bible infallibility or not, doesn't determine if you're Christian or not. Being Christian is most of all about Jesus Christ, the word incarnate.
It depends on what you define concerning the doctrine of Biblical Infallibility. If you mean the teaching that the moral and dogmatic teachings of Scripture are completely without error, then I would say yes. If you mean the more broad definition of every single word being correct and inerrant in every single context (biblical inerrancy), then no. It is clearly not. The Bible was not created to be a science book, or a history book. It has that in there, but it is made for one purpose. To show Christ. Period "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name.". Not to be a text on astronomy, earth science, history, or any other scholarly discipline. The Bible is not the Word of God. It contains words of God, but the Word of God is the Word made flesh, not the Word made text.

There are so many cases of direct contradiction that you cant explain away. In my personal belief, the semi-religion of "Bibleism" is a massive contributor to the spread of Atheism in our culture today.

PP
+100

Pretty much every former evangelical/newly minted atheist I come across points unimportant contradictions in the Bible as if it is proof that the whole thing must be thrown out because of a few errors. In their defense, it is because many of them probably when growing up were drilled that the Bible is "inerrant" and is the exact words of God.

Please explain to me why your Church lost almost 50% of its members in America?
Firstly, I wasn't aware this was a popularity contest, secondly the truth isn't what most people want. They want a buffet version of Christianity. Thirdly, where do you get that Orthodoxy has lost 50% of its members? There have been 3 separate studies saying that orthodoxy is one of the few groups seeing high conversions. Fourth, why change the subject?

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Raylight

  • Guest
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #33 on: February 17, 2016, 06:09:42 PM »
The Bible is infallible. And yes, there are good reasons to believe that what is written in Genesis truly happened. I know that plenty on oc.net don't like the idea of Bible infallibility, maybe (and I say maybe) because of the allergy they have to anything that sounds Protestant. Maybe the fact that many of them are converts from Protestant denominations, they decided to throw the baby with the bath water.  In the end, whether you believe in the Bible infallibility or not, doesn't determine if you're Christian or not. Being Christian is most of all about Jesus Christ, the word incarnate.
It depends on what you define concerning the doctrine of Biblical Infallibility. If you mean the teaching that the moral and dogmatic teachings of Scripture are completely without error, then I would say yes. If you mean the more broad definition of every single word being correct and inerrant in every single context (biblical inerrancy), then no. It is clearly not. The Bible was not created to be a science book, or a history book. It has that in there, but it is made for one purpose. To show Christ. Period "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name.". Not to be a text on astronomy, earth science, history, or any other scholarly discipline. The Bible is not the Word of God. It contains words of God, but the Word of God is the Word made flesh, not the Word made text.

There are so many cases of direct contradiction that you cant explain away. In my personal belief, the semi-religion of "Bibleism" is a massive contributor to the spread of Atheism in our culture today.

PP
+100

Pretty much every former evangelical/newly minted atheist I come across points unimportant contradictions in the Bible as if it is proof that the whole thing must be thrown out because of a few errors. In their defense, it is because many of them probably when growing up were drilled that the Bible is "inerrant" and is the exact words of God.

Please explain to me why your Church lost almost 50% of its members in America?
I don't know if that number is true, but if it is, I would argue that it is because Orthodox Christianity is hard to follow and easy to quit. When you live in the lap of (comparative to the rest of the world) luxury and there are so many distractions like Kim Kardashian and Kanye West to waste time reading about, spending your time in prayer, fasting and repentance is not easy to do.


Here are numbers then, as you can see, almost half of those who left Orthodoxy went to the Unaffiliated. I don't see the wishy-washy approach to the Scriptures keeping members in the pews.

NOTE: As you may see, 19% of Unaffiliated left and became Evangelical Christians. Which again, shoots the false claim that Evangelical Christianity with its approach to the Scriptures is the reason for the spread of Atheism in the head.

« Last Edit: February 17, 2016, 06:17:04 PM by Raylight »

Raylight

  • Guest
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #34 on: February 17, 2016, 06:11:37 PM »
The Bible is infallible. And yes, there are good reasons to believe that what is written in Genesis truly happened. I know that plenty on oc.net don't like the idea of Bible infallibility, maybe (and I say maybe) because of the allergy they have to anything that sounds Protestant. Maybe the fact that many of them are converts from Protestant denominations, they decided to throw the baby with the bath water.  In the end, whether you believe in the Bible infallibility or not, doesn't determine if you're Christian or not. Being Christian is most of all about Jesus Christ, the word incarnate.
It depends on what you define concerning the doctrine of Biblical Infallibility. If you mean the teaching that the moral and dogmatic teachings of Scripture are completely without error, then I would say yes. If you mean the more broad definition of every single word being correct and inerrant in every single context (biblical inerrancy), then no. It is clearly not. The Bible was not created to be a science book, or a history book. It has that in there, but it is made for one purpose. To show Christ. Period "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name.". Not to be a text on astronomy, earth science, history, or any other scholarly discipline. The Bible is not the Word of God. It contains words of God, but the Word of God is the Word made flesh, not the Word made text.

There are so many cases of direct contradiction that you cant explain away. In my personal belief, the semi-religion of "Bibleism" is a massive contributor to the spread of Atheism in our culture today.

PP
+100

Pretty much every former evangelical/newly minted atheist I come across points unimportant contradictions in the Bible as if it is proof that the whole thing must be thrown out because of a few errors. In their defense, it is because many of them probably when growing up were drilled that the Bible is "inerrant" and is the exact words of God.

Please explain to me why your Church lost almost 50% of its members in America?
Firstly, I wasn't aware this was a popularity contest, secondly the truth isn't what most people want. They want a buffet version of Christianity. Thirdly, where do you get that Orthodoxy has lost 50% of its members? There have been 3 separate studies saying that orthodoxy is one of the few groups seeing high conversions. Fourth, why change the subject?

PP

You're the one who started changing the subject by your false and unjustified claim that Bible infallibility is the cause of Atheism. All what I did is showing you that your Church is losing half of its members even though Bible infallibility is quite small among Eastern Orthodox. Which meant to show you that the cause of Atheism is something else.

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,592
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #35 on: February 17, 2016, 06:18:04 PM »
The Bible is infallible. And yes, there are good reasons to believe that what is written in Genesis truly happened. I know that plenty on oc.net don't like the idea of Bible infallibility, maybe (and I say maybe) because of the allergy they have to anything that sounds Protestant. Maybe the fact that many of them are converts from Protestant denominations, they decided to throw the baby with the bath water.  In the end, whether you believe in the Bible infallibility or not, doesn't determine if you're Christian or not. Being Christian is most of all about Jesus Christ, the word incarnate.
It depends on what you define concerning the doctrine of Biblical Infallibility. If you mean the teaching that the moral and dogmatic teachings of Scripture are completely without error, then I would say yes. If you mean the more broad definition of every single word being correct and inerrant in every single context (biblical inerrancy), then no. It is clearly not. The Bible was not created to be a science book, or a history book. It has that in there, but it is made for one purpose. To show Christ. Period "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name.". Not to be a text on astronomy, earth science, history, or any other scholarly discipline. The Bible is not the Word of God. It contains words of God, but the Word of God is the Word made flesh, not the Word made text.

There are so many cases of direct contradiction that you cant explain away. In my personal belief, the semi-religion of "Bibleism" is a massive contributor to the spread of Atheism in our culture today.

PP
+100

Pretty much every former evangelical/newly minted atheist I come across points unimportant contradictions in the Bible as if it is proof that the whole thing must be thrown out because of a few errors. In their defense, it is because many of them probably when growing up were drilled that the Bible is "inerrant" and is the exact words of God.

Please explain to me why your Church lost almost 50% of its members in America?
Firstly, I wasn't aware this was a popularity contest, secondly the truth isn't what most people want. They want a buffet version of Christianity. Thirdly, where do you get that Orthodoxy has lost 50% of its members? There have been 3 separate studies saying that orthodoxy is one of the few groups seeing high conversions. Fourth, why change the subject?

PP

You're the one who started changing the subject by your false and unjustified claim that Bible infallibility is the cause of Atheism. All what I did is showing you that your Church is losing half of its members even though Bible infallibility is quite small among Eastern Orthodox. Which meant to show you that the cause of Atheism is something else.
America has always been what, 96% NonOrthodox? It's no surprise that they assimilate after a few generations to a certain degree. It's just natural.
NonOrthodox who move to Orthodox countries assimilate too. It's just reality.
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #36 on: February 17, 2016, 06:20:49 PM »
The Bible is infallible. And yes, there are good reasons to believe that what is written in Genesis truly happened. I know that plenty on oc.net don't like the idea of Bible infallibility, maybe (and I say maybe) because of the allergy they have to anything that sounds Protestant. Maybe the fact that many of them are converts from Protestant denominations, they decided to throw the baby with the bath water.  In the end, whether you believe in the Bible infallibility or not, doesn't determine if you're Christian or not. Being Christian is most of all about Jesus Christ, the word incarnate.
It depends on what you define concerning the doctrine of Biblical Infallibility. If you mean the teaching that the moral and dogmatic teachings of Scripture are completely without error, then I would say yes. If you mean the more broad definition of every single word being correct and inerrant in every single context (biblical inerrancy), then no. It is clearly not. The Bible was not created to be a science book, or a history book. It has that in there, but it is made for one purpose. To show Christ. Period "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name.". Not to be a text on astronomy, earth science, history, or any other scholarly discipline. The Bible is not the Word of God. It contains words of God, but the Word of God is the Word made flesh, not the Word made text.

There are so many cases of direct contradiction that you cant explain away. In my personal belief, the semi-religion of "Bibleism" is a massive contributor to the spread of Atheism in our culture today.

PP
+100

Pretty much every former evangelical/newly minted atheist I come across points unimportant contradictions in the Bible as if it is proof that the whole thing must be thrown out because of a few errors. In their defense, it is because many of them probably when growing up were drilled that the Bible is "inerrant" and is the exact words of God.

Please explain to me why your Church lost almost 50% of its members in America?
I don't know if that number is true, but if it is, I would argue that it is because Orthodox Christianity is hard to follow and easy to quit. When you live in the lap of (comparative to the rest of the world) luxury and there are so many distractions like Kim Kardashian and Kanye West to waste time reading about, spending your time in prayer, fasting and repentance is not easy to do.


Here are then numbers, as you can see, almost half of those who left Orthodoxy went the Unaffiliated. I don't see the wishy-washy approach to the Scriptures keeping members in the pews.


This study only has those listed who were raised in said religion.

Quote
I don't see the wishy-washy approach to the Scriptures keeping members in the pews
Looks like there were no Christians for the majority of history then....at least till the modern view of innerancy was invented.

I also wouldn't throw stones, as Evangelical protestant and Mainline Protestant had signifigant and about the same loss, respectively. Also, because of where the study was held, the losses for protestantism are FAR more severe as orthodoxy, even by the most liberal estimate, has roughly 5% of the evangelical and mainline populations. Having 1 fall away from 10 is nowhere near as strong a blow as having 1 million fall away from 10 million. Furthermore, if your study held any weight in the argument (which it does not) then Islamojudahinduism is the way to go. But nah, totally because of biblical inerrancy denial ::)

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #37 on: February 17, 2016, 06:22:58 PM »
Quote
You're the one who started changing the subject by your false and unjustified claim that Bible infallibility is the cause of Atheism. All what I did is showing you that your Church is losing half of its members even though Bible infallibility is quite small among Eastern Orthodox. Which meant to show you that the cause of Atheism is something else.
I didnt make a claim. I said it was my personal belief, nothing more.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Raylight

  • Guest
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #38 on: February 17, 2016, 06:26:07 PM »
The Bible is infallible. And yes, there are good reasons to believe that what is written in Genesis truly happened. I know that plenty on oc.net don't like the idea of Bible infallibility, maybe (and I say maybe) because of the allergy they have to anything that sounds Protestant. Maybe the fact that many of them are converts from Protestant denominations, they decided to throw the baby with the bath water.  In the end, whether you believe in the Bible infallibility or not, doesn't determine if you're Christian or not. Being Christian is most of all about Jesus Christ, the word incarnate.
It depends on what you define concerning the doctrine of Biblical Infallibility. If you mean the teaching that the moral and dogmatic teachings of Scripture are completely without error, then I would say yes. If you mean the more broad definition of every single word being correct and inerrant in every single context (biblical inerrancy), then no. It is clearly not. The Bible was not created to be a science book, or a history book. It has that in there, but it is made for one purpose. To show Christ. Period "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name.". Not to be a text on astronomy, earth science, history, or any other scholarly discipline. The Bible is not the Word of God. It contains words of God, but the Word of God is the Word made flesh, not the Word made text.

There are so many cases of direct contradiction that you cant explain away. In my personal belief, the semi-religion of "Bibleism" is a massive contributor to the spread of Atheism in our culture today.

PP
+100

Pretty much every former evangelical/newly minted atheist I come across points unimportant contradictions in the Bible as if it is proof that the whole thing must be thrown out because of a few errors. In their defense, it is because many of them probably when growing up were drilled that the Bible is "inerrant" and is the exact words of God.

Please explain to me why your Church lost almost 50% of its members in America?
I don't know if that number is true, but if it is, I would argue that it is because Orthodox Christianity is hard to follow and easy to quit. When you live in the lap of (comparative to the rest of the world) luxury and there are so many distractions like Kim Kardashian and Kanye West to waste time reading about, spending your time in prayer, fasting and repentance is not easy to do.


Here are then numbers, as you can see, almost half of those who left Orthodoxy went the Unaffiliated. I don't see the wishy-washy approach to the Scriptures keeping members in the pews.


This study only has those listed who were raised in said religion.

Quote
I don't see the wishy-washy approach to the Scriptures keeping members in the pews
Looks like there were no Christians for the majority of history then....at least till the modern view of innerancy was invented.

I also wouldn't throw stones, as Evangelical protestant and Mainline Protestant had signifigant and about the same loss, respectively. Also, because of where the study was held, the losses for protestantism are FAR more severe as orthodoxy, even by the most liberal estimate, has roughly 5% of the evangelical and mainline populations. Having 1 fall away from 10 is nowhere near as strong a blow as having 1 million fall away from 10 million. Furthermore, if your study held any weight in the argument (which it does not) then Islamojudahinduism is the way to go. But nah, totally because of biblical inerrancy denial ::)

PP


What percentage Evangelical Christians did lose? 35%. How about Eastern Orthodox? 47%. And the Mainline Protestant? 55%.

I have more statistics that will show that even the current Eastern Orthodox have less faith than Evangelical Christians. Even when it comes to God. But I would rather not go there because,  in the end, that is a matter between the person and God. My point remains, however, that once you start throwing doubts at the Scripture so you can please some Atheists here and there, you better be prepared to what is coming.

As for the Muslim approach. You can't compare two totally different religions on such issue. Islam is quite different than Christianity. Please keep your focus on the Christian denominations.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2016, 06:29:08 PM by Raylight »

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #39 on: February 17, 2016, 06:29:30 PM »
Quote
What percentage Evangelical Christians did lose? 35%. How about Eastern Orthodox? 47%. And the Mainline Protestant? 55%.
So, if Mainline Protestants lost even more than Orthodox, then obviously it cant be biblical inerrancy, now can it? Even the Orthodox have admitted VAST numbers of falling away over issues like not accepting homosexual "marriage" and abortion.

Also, Evangelicals outnumber Orthodox by what, 20 to 1?

You're comparing apples and diesel engines.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Raylight

  • Guest
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #40 on: February 17, 2016, 06:30:11 PM »
Quote
You're the one who started changing the subject by your false and unjustified claim that Bible infallibility is the cause of Atheism. All what I did is showing you that your Church is losing half of its members even though Bible infallibility is quite small among Eastern Orthodox. Which meant to show you that the cause of Atheism is something else.
I didnt make a claim. I said it was my personal belief, nothing more.

PP

Then I apologise for the misunderstanding. :)

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • A highly skilled and trained Freudian feminist slut
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,976
  • Hey, did you ever wanna hold a terryfold?
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Mercenary Freudianism
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Feminist Coptic
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #41 on: February 17, 2016, 06:30:16 PM »
LOL, didn't we go through this once before with Raylight? 
OCnet is KGB.
I hail Mor Ephrem as our Secretary General.

Quote
Oh you Greeks, you are all dumb!

An Athonite

Raylight

  • Guest
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #42 on: February 17, 2016, 06:32:58 PM »
Quote
What percentage Evangelical Christians did lose? 35%. How about Eastern Orthodox? 47%. And the Mainline Protestant? 55%.
So, if Mainline Protestants lost even more than Orthodox, then obviously it cant be biblical inerrancy, now can it? Even the Orthodox have admitted VAST numbers of falling away over issues like not accepting homosexual "marriage" and abortion.

Also, Evangelicals outnumber Orthodox by what, 20 to 1?

You're comparing apples and diesel engines.

PP

Your point remains invalid. It is very well known that Mainline Protestants are among the first to support the approach that the Scriptures are not infallible. Have you forgot that Episcopalians, United Church of Christ, ELCIA, United Methodist, and Presbyterians are what we call Mainline Protestantism?
« Last Edit: February 17, 2016, 06:34:53 PM by Raylight »

Raylight

  • Guest
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #43 on: February 17, 2016, 06:34:22 PM »
LOL, didn't we go through this once before with Raylight?

Yes you did :) How is xOrthodox4Christx btw?
« Last Edit: February 17, 2016, 06:36:49 PM by Raylight »

Raylight

  • Guest
Re: Bible infallibility
« Reply #44 on: February 17, 2016, 06:35:23 PM »
The Bible is infallible. And yes, there are good reasons to believe that what is written in Genesis truly happened. I know that plenty on oc.net don't like the idea of Bible infallibility, maybe (and I say maybe) because of the allergy they have to anything that sounds Protestant. Maybe the fact that many of them are converts from Protestant denominations, they decided to throw the baby with the bath water.  In the end, whether you believe in the Bible infallibility or not, doesn't determine if you're Christian or not. Being Christian is most of all about Jesus Christ, the word incarnate.
It depends on what you define concerning the doctrine of Biblical Infallibility. If you mean the teaching that the moral and dogmatic teachings of Scripture are completely without error, then I would say yes. If you mean the more broad definition of every single word being correct and inerrant in every single context (biblical inerrancy), then no. It is clearly not. The Bible was not created to be a science book, or a history book. It has that in there, but it is made for one purpose. To show Christ. Period "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name.". Not to be a text on astronomy, earth science, history, or any other scholarly discipline. The Bible is not the Word of God. It contains words of God, but the Word of God is the Word made flesh, not the Word made text.

There are so many cases of direct contradiction that you cant explain away. In my personal belief, the semi-religion of "Bibleism" is a massive contributor to the spread of Atheism in our culture today.

PP
+100

Pretty much every former evangelical/newly minted atheist I come across points unimportant contradictions in the Bible as if it is proof that the whole thing must be thrown out because of a few errors. In their defense, it is because many of them probably when growing up were drilled that the Bible is "inerrant" and is the exact words of God.

Please explain to me why your Church lost almost 50% of its members in America?
Firstly, I wasn't aware this was a popularity contest, secondly the truth isn't what most people want. They want a buffet version of Christianity. Thirdly, where do you get that Orthodoxy has lost 50% of its members? There have been 3 separate studies saying that orthodoxy is one of the few groups seeing high conversions. Fourth, why change the subject?

PP

You're the one who started changing the subject by your false and unjustified claim that Bible infallibility is the cause of Atheism. All what I did is showing you that your Church is losing half of its members even though Bible infallibility is quite small among Eastern Orthodox. Which meant to show you that the cause of Atheism is something else.
America has always been what, 96% NonOrthodox? It's no surprise that they assimilate after a few generations to a certain degree. It's just natural.
NonOrthodox who move to Orthodox countries assimilate too. It's just reality.


It could be that. Even though I doubt it.