For those who do hold this, what is the justification for including the book of Esther (in which God is not mentioned at all in the Protestant version) and excluding the book of Judith? Each of the books is about a heroic woman who saved the Hebrews from being eliminated.
There were many different opinions in the early church as to which writings were to be read in the churches. 2 and 3 John, 2 Peter, Jude, and Revelation were rejected by some and were suspect by others. Paul’s fellow worker Clement’s letter to the Corinthians was read in the churches of the second century. Why was that rejected by those who formed the present accepted list of writings “outside of which there is no inspiration.” And were those who selected the present “canon of scripture” inspired to select he “correct” writings?
Here is an excellent website to investigate the development of “the canon of scripture”:
As a member of the Eastern Orthodox Church, I believe that the liturgy in all its fullness is the authoritative interpretation of the scriptures. If it’s in the liturgy, then I believe that it is the teaching of the twelve Apostles. If it’s not in the liturgy, then I believe that it is superfluous at best and heretical at worst.
This has interesting implications for the scripture since not all scripture is read in the liturgy. For example, the book of Revelation is never read in the liturgy. Since the liturgy represents to us the full Gospel, then the book of Revelation is superfluous to the Gospel. As such, I think it wise to pass over the book of Revelation in silence since the Church herself does so. (This does not preclude the scholarly study of the book of Revelation, of course.)
Thanks Jeff, it looks like I’ve opened a can of worms and it may be impossible for you to address all different perspectives. Personally, I think the question of whether the canon of scripture, or liturgy, is pre-eminent; is a separate question entirely, but I would like to clarify my questions even if you may not have time to deal with my issues.
My interest was the status “God’s Word” being attributed to the entire canon (the question of which books belong to the canon is secondary for me and of interest only when I have satisfied myself that the canon should have the status of “God’s Word”)
Err yes, “How do we know that the original autographs are infallible/without error?” BUT ALSO: seeing as the original autographs do not exist (to anyone’s knowledge) what relevance is there to determining the inerrancy of those autographs? I mean, where does that get us if there is possibility that the texts we possess may be errant? I will happily give example of why this is important to me.
Concerning point #2 in Jeff’s statement of faith, John 21:25 says this “And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written down one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.” To me, scriptures are the truths of life. People have written about these truths all throughout history, and they continue to be written about today.
Jeff, you mention in point #7 that we are redeemed through the death of Christ alone. I think the death of Christ would mean life without God. So I would say that we are redeemed (liberated) when God lives first and foremost in our hearts and minds.
To me the issue is not whether the “canon” is the limit of “inspired words”… Nor is it whether or not it is inerrant to the jot and tittle.
There can be books outside the canon, take “Judith” for example, which could have been canonized but were not for some reason- maybe the very redundancy Paidon uses as an example of the similarity of Judith and Esther. This would in no way disqualify the canon. The canon is a circle within which the words are sanctified by God’s choice for our foundation- if it is real. If not, then the words are not sanctified, and as such worthless for establishing authority on anything. Not worthless for inspiration or for understanding- but totally without authority concerning disagreements over doctrine and beliefs- which become truly meaningless(IMO) within a paradigm that does not recognize the legitamacy of the cannonized books.
The way I see it, folks take the tittles of inaccuracy and use them to try to invalidate broad themes about which the scriptures are very consistent. The inspiration of the scriptures can be thematically “inerrant” even if there are small instances of inaccuracy. I coined a proverb cncerning this, “God leaves the specks for people with logs in their eyes to stumble over”. An inaccuracy concerning some sequence of events does not necessarily tie into any inaccuracy concerning the broader themes and that is why we have the overlay of many writers, who, when carefully examined, agree.
If we cannot depend on the broad inspiration and thematic consistency of the scriptures of the canon there ought to be an emblem by our name(pro inerrant, anti inerrant), because you just arent having the same conversation if the person you are discussing with does not regard the scriptures as at least inerrantly inspired and the canon as a legitimate preservation of a depandable core of words from YHWH through the Holy Spirit. So why waste the time. The parameters are too different to allow meaningful conversation on a broad range of topics.
I also think that the generational record from mouth to mouth in the accumulation of the scriptures has been discounted, and altho there may be no record of it, it makes inescapable sense that the testimonies of the apostles- such as Peter’s record concerning Paul’s epistles accorded the value as scripture- and the testimony of men such a Timothy and others may have carried weight for a hundred years after the deaths of the apostles. We do not have a lot of evidence concerning how the canon developed or how the epistles and gospels were preserved over the first 250 to 300 years.
But that is the very statement that requires justification. How do you know that “the canon” was God’s choice? How do you know that those particular writings and no other are “God’s choice for our foundation.” The writings that were considered to be the right ones, varied in different times and at different locations. Also, as has been pointed out “Which canon?” If any one of the three, Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox, is the correct one, then the other two are not. So what basis can one affirm that a particular one of the three, is the correct one?
That is the position that doesn’t make sense to me. Please explain why you believe that to be the case. I have heard it said, “If the Bible is not inspired by God, or without error, or (fill in the blank), we might as well throw it away; it is useless.”
Histories are not useless, even though they are not inspired or flawless. They give us a basic understanding of what happened in the past.
The New Testament memoirs of Christ (now called “gospels”) give us a history of the life of Christ, including what He taught to His disciples, and principles that His disciples (including His modern disciples) should follow. How can the memoirs be useless?
Paul’s twelve letters to the churches are a record of what he actually wrote, and how he advised them to carry out “the law of Christ.” Wouldn’t this be true even if they were not inspired at all? (I think they were inspired, though not flawless).
The “Acts of the Apostles” is basically a true record of what happened in the primitive Assembly of Christ in the first century.
Thus it is my position that we can trust the historicity of these writings, that they are an authoritative account of what Jesus taught His disciples, and what the apostles taught the churches.
Well, both Luke’s Gospel and Acts were merely letters of witness to a third party, if I am not mistaken.
Our belief and faith in the canon should be conditional on the work of the Holy Spirit in ones life. Many will hear the Gospels and Epistles and think they are nothing more than historic blubbering’s, But Christians from that point (First century) on have been moved… And I mean incredibly moved, by the scriptures. And thus our debate and our love
Many here us these canonical passages to shape their lives and maybe the lives around them.
How many of us venomously quote scripture to drive home a point.
Regarding a particular teaching, I have done that with a non-canonical writing—the letter to the Corinthians by Clement, Paul’s fellow labourer. (Philippians 4:3). In mentioning his fellow workers, Paul refers only to Clement by name. The main thrust of Clement’s letter is that the Corinthians should not divide because some favour deposing the overseers that God has established in favour of some envious young upstarts who want to be overseers themselves, the result being a sedition in the assembly. Clement gives examples from the Hebrew writings to show the adverse results of resisting the spiritual leaders that God has set, and also the consequences of unrighteous envy in the days of the apostles resulting in Paul and Peter’s death. It helped me to realize the seriousness of opposing the overseers that God has placed in an assembly, unless they are clearly opposing God and doing wrong.
When I say- if it is real, I am establishing(in my own mind lol) 2 paradigms. The statement needs to be justified- yes, in every mind…for itself. We (generic- Christians) talk about the Holy Spirit a lot, but we disgree widely upon His abilities. Jesus says one of those abilities is to teach us what is true. To explain and integrate the context of the word of God as the truth in His priorities.
There is a point were I have to say I believe the canon was the work of the Holy Spirit. I don’t believe the canon excludes the possibility of other holy writings in existence. I just believe it is a complete source material. It lacks nothing in its full scope for establishing what is true, as a record of the Holy Spirit working through men to provide the truths of the gospel and the history of the Lampstand- the nation Israel. I dont think it is flawless- I think it is perfect, whole, sufficient and supernatural.
As oracles, quick and active, the limitations to understanding are in us, not in them.
As to why I believe it is pointless to debate doctrine with someone who does not except the authority of the canon of scripture- it is because their opinion and philosophy and perspective is their only authority in the final analysis. There is no need for them to integrate the scriptures in their truth…except when they feel like it. You cannot bring them to the common ground to be instructed- them by you ar you by them because there is no common authority with which to moderate the discussion, no arbiter, no compass with which to establish true north.
To me, it is a double standard, based in intellectual convenience.
The canon is a circle within which the words and thoughts are sanctified and trustworthy- a sufficient resource for the Holy Spirit to confirm in the words of the Messiah and the prophets and the apostles the things we believe because they ARE of God- if it is real, that is what it is.
I have done the research. I have studied the flaws and the specks that empower the naysayers. I have studied fairly comprehensively…but in the end I must say that when I was first saved, the Holy Spirit sowed in me- before I ever met another Christian for fellowship or went into a church to receive any corruption of my faith- a full assurance in the inspiration and authority of the written word as we have it. Not in the the jots and tittles, but in the themes and truths. Whatever flaws there are, there is no other writing available that exceeds the revelation held within it, and as it is(when properly translated and understood contextually)- it fulfills these requirements.
Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture comes from the prophet’s own interpretation. 21For no prophecy was ever brought about through human initiative, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. 2 Pet 1
You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15 and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. 2 Tim 3
Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’” Mt 4
As a living oracle the scriptures are like a multi level mozaic of endless depth, and the truths hidden between the lines are spiritually apprehended, and confirmed through fellowship among the spiritual. Jesus used “It is written” as sword and scepter, because He knew what it was and is in the spiritual realm.
I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling, 4 and my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, 5 so that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God.
6 Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature; a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age, who are passing away; 7 but we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages to our glory; 8 the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood; for if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory; 9 but just as it is written,
“Things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard,
And which have not entered the heart of man,
All that God has prepared for those who love Him.”
10 For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. 11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, 13** which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.
**
Everyone who is spiritual accepts the authority of the scripture. Those who stand around the outer perimeters examining it for “flawlessness” have missed the point and those who use it in the letter as a blunt instrument have never opened the seals upon it.
Such confidence we have through Christ toward God. 5 Not that we are adequate in ourselves to consider anything as coming from ourselves, but our adequacy is from God, 6 who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
7 But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, 8 how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory? 9 For if the ministry of condemnation has glory, much more does the ministry of righteousness abound in glory. 10 For indeed what had glory, in this case has no glory because of the glory that surpasses it. 11 For if that which fades away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory.
12 Therefore having such a hope, we use great boldness in our speech, 13 and are not like Moses, who used to put a veil over his face so that the sons of Israel would not look intently at the end of what was fading away. 14 But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ. 15 But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart; 16 but whenever a person turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. 18 But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.
The veil is taken away “in Christ”, “in the Spirit”. Seeing through the curtains is a function of the Holy Spirit teaching the deeper context and integrity and revelation hidden within the scriptures. These are all “my opinions”- not meant to offend anyone.
For this reason I too, having heard of the faith in the Lord Jesus which exists among you and your love for all the saints, 16 do not cease giving thanks for you, while making mention of you in my prayers; 17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of Him. 18 I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you will know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, 19 and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who believe. These are in accordance with the working of the strength of His might 20 which He brought about in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, 21 far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. 22 And He put all things in subjection under His feet, and gave Him as head over all things to the church, 23 which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all.
To me the core of scripture is to reveal who He is and who, and what, we are, as the people of God and members of one another, and how to receive the fulness of what He has called us to be and walk in it together- to reveal the kingdom of God on earth- not in words only, but in the full reality of the Spirit with power and glory. To become an acceptable offering upon which He will visit His Spirit as a testimony…
“And the word of the Lord grew and multiplied and great grace was upon them all…”
23Jesus replied, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make Our home with him. 24Whoever does not love Me does not keep My words. The word that you hear is not My own, but it is from the Father who sent Me.
25All this I have spoken to you while I am still with you. 26But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have told you.
John 14: 23-26
I carefully read your posts, Eaglesway and Dandelion. But I fail to see how the indwelling spirit of God has shown anyone that a particular list of writings is the unique canon, outside of which there is no inspiration. And neither one of you has yet answered my question, "Which canon?— Orthodox, Catholic, or Protestant?
Again, “Which scripture? Which Bible?” And why? Does the Spirit lead some to accept the Protestant Bible, others to accept the Catholic Bible, and still others to accept the Orthodox Bible?
As we have it? We have it in dozens of translations. Which translation is inspired and authoritative? The original manuscripts do not exist.
God sees our hearts and our motives. Humans see only the results of what we are motivated to do.
We cannot see what is in the hearts of those who either translated the Bible, or of those who read these translations.
In light of UR, I tend to want to hold onto the Catholic Bible, though I, myself, left the RC Church 13 years ago.
I say this, because the Catholic Bible has the Book of Macabees, which says to pray for the dead, which helps to confirm, for me, at least, that there is more to come, in the way of reconciliation, after we die. The Protestant Bibles carefully eliminated this, due to the abuse of indulgences, to a large degree. Indulgences were a means of the Catholic Church controlling its members and asking for huge amounts of money from poor peasants. I don’t know the Orthodox Bible, so I cannot speak on that. I don’t think that what is eliminated, however, destroys the Story of Salvation, that is told in all Bibles.
However, I don’t know if that is important, as, I believe that must be left to the Holy Spirit, as well.
In God’s time and in His purpose, I think we must trust that what needs to be revealed will be, despite our humanly ways of going astray and not following the good deeds we are supposed to be doing. Or perhaps, it is just due, not to our fallen, sinful selves, but merely to innocent error.
The point is, God knows, and He will do what is necessary. Ultimately, He is in charge.
The Holy Spirit,in other words, is capable of delivering what needs to be presented, as well as inspiring the writings. This is trusting in God, for me. And, as in all things, that sometimes has to just be enough for us.
As I believe it is extremely important to study the Bible, and use our intellect, which is God-given, I also believe we are still and all, extremely limited in discerning many things. Intellect cannot come close to understanding all things on a spiritual level, nor can we know all God’s ways, by using it, hard as we try.
1 Corinthians 2:11
For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.
It is only in the Old Testament, that the writings vary between the Protestant canon, the Catholic canon, and the Orthodox canon.
The Orthodox Old Testament contains 3rd Maccabees, whereas the RC contains only 1st and 2nd Maccabees.
The Orthodox contains Psalm 151, whereas the other two don’t.
Orthodox 2nd Ezra = RC 1st Esdras = Prot Ezra
Orthodox 1st Ezra is a later writing (about 150 BC) containing only 9 chapters. The other two do not contain it.
Orthodox Nehemiah = RC 2nd Esdras = Prot Nehemiah
Orthodox 2 Chronicles includes the Prayer of Manasseh
Orthodox contains “Lamentation of Jeremiah” and “Epistle of Jeremiah” whereas the other two don’t.
In the Orthodox, the History of Suzanna is at the beginning of Daniel, and Bel and the Serpent (or dragon) at the end.
This is but a partial list of the differences between the three Bibles. There are also a number of writings found in both the Orthodox and RC Old Testaments which are absent from the Protestant OT.
I obtained my information by comparing the Orthodox Study Bible with the RC Douay.
Here is a site I discovered afterward, that gives a more thorough comparison, and differs a bit from that which I provided above:
So if your children or grandchildren asked you what to search and study, as to what God wants you to know from all the different canons and writings and versions and all that might be outside what orthodoxy would consider relevant, what would you tell them?
My children and grandchildren would never ask that question, for I’ve never taught them that God has designed a canon or canons to provide us with what He want us to know.
I have taught my children that God has revealed Himself in His only-begotten Son, who became human, and who taught His followers how to live, as recorded in Matthew 5, 6, and 7, and taught a great crowd of His followers as well as a wider crowd how to live as recorded in Luke 6:17 to the end. Also, that the apostles (having been disciples of Christ) revealed the will of God through their letters to the churches and their general letters which are recorded, and that the four memoirs of Christ and the letters of the apostles are reliable accounts of what Jesus and His disciples taught—not because they are “the word of God” due to being part of a canon which man has declared infallible—but because they are historical documents. There is no valid reason to doubt their historicity.
Also that the validity of Christ’s teachings can be verified through practising them, and that the apostolic teaching concerning a personal relationship with Christ can be verified by experience.
Some words along these lines, from Dallas Willard in The Divine Conspiracy (I am thoroughly enjoying this book btw):
"…my assumptions about the Bible: on its human side, I assume that it was produced and preserved by competent human beings who were at least as intelligent and devout as we are today. I assume that they were quite capable of accurately interpreting their own experience and of objectively presenting what they heard and experienced in the language of their historical community, which today we can understand with due diligence.
On the divine side, I assume that God has been willing and competent to arrange for the Bible, including its record of Jesus, to emerge and be preserved in ways that will secure His purposes for it among human beings worldwide. …
…I assume that He would not and did not leave His message to humankind in a form that can only be understood by a handful of late twentieth-century professional scholars, who cannot even agree among themselves on the theories that they assume to determine what the message is."
(op. cit. Page xiv)
I think those are pretty sound assumptions.
And from Channing’s work:
“We answer again, that, if God be infinitely wise, he cannot sport with the understandings of his creatures. A wise teacher discovers his wisdom in adapting himself to the capacities of his pupils, not in perplexing them with what is unintelligible, not in distressing them with apparent contradictions, not in filling them with a skeptical distrust of their own powers. An infinitely wise teacher, who knows the precise extent of our minds, and the best method of enlightening them, will surpass all other instructors in bringing down truth to our apprehension, and in showing its loveliness and harmony. We ought, indeed, to expect occasional obscurity in such a book as the Bible, which was written for past and future ages, as well as for the present. But God’s wisdom is a pledge, that whatever is necessary for US, and necessary for salvation, is revealed too plainly to be mistaken, and too consistently to be questioned, by a sound and upright mind. It is not the mark of wisdom, to use an unintelligible phraseology, to communicate what is above our capacities, to confuse and unsettle the intellect by appearances of contradiction. We honor our Heavenly Teacher too much to ascribe to him such a revelation. A revelation is a gift of light. It cannot thicken our darkness, and multiply our perplexities.”
Again, this makes sense to me as well.
<Channing - the man is a treasure-house of wisdom and Christian insight>
Sorry for the delay in my answers to the recent discussion questions. Here are my thoughts…
How do we know the 66 book are God’s word ( and not more or less )?
We do not know and cannot know this absolutely or in an infallible way. It is possible that an inspired Scripture has been lost or an uninspired writing inserted. Yet is it probable? While no human list of Bible books can claim to be infallible I none the less trust that God is supervising the goal that His word will be available to truth seekers. Yet some questions do remain. For example Psalm 151… is it in or out? So as Christians seek answers to these questions it is essential to note that documents cannot be made to be Scripture by the declaration of any human authority, not even the church. Instead the effort of the church and faithful Christians is to find reason to recognize the inherent nature of particular documents as Scripture from God. Our saying that a document is Scripture does not make it so! Instead we have the hard work of study and research to find reason to recognize documents as Scripture through historical studies, textual criticism, internal consistency, etc. Furthermore, I agree with those who also conclude that inspired words ceased after the New Testament era based on 1 Corinthians 13:8 and Revelation 22:18-19. So the book of Mormon is not inspired, nor does it come close to sharing the same quality as the Christian Scriptures, nor liturgies and commentaries. As for the Deuterocanonical and Apocryphal books found in some canonical lists I am not persuaded that they are inspired for various reasons and so I reference the 66 books in the protestant list in my proposed statement of faith. And so my statement stands, “I believe that the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments are the unique, inerrant, inspired Word of God in the original autographs, and the final authority in all matters of faith and conduct, 2 Tim 3:16.” Is my statement infallible? Hardly, only God’s word is infallible. This is just my statement of belief .
How do we know the documents that God gave us are without error in the original?
The Christian Scriptures are documents of a special nature distinct from other human writings as explained in 2 Timothy 3:16. So we know that God has given us special written communication in that He ‘breathed’ his message through select people resulting in the Christian Scriptures. The Bible also says of itself that God’s Word is without flaw in Proverbs 30:5. However, it should be noted that no where does the Scripture extend the description of ‘God-breathed’ and ‘flawless’ to translations and copies of the original or any other human writing for that matter. And so God’s Word is inerrant in the original autograph, but not in the transcription or translation. Someone noted above that we no longer have the original autographs. Perhaps that is a good thing because the document would surely be worshiped and paraded around museums by the unbelieving. Yet how can we then know that the Bible we have in front of us can be trusted? Truth seekers need to understand that there is an inerrant document from God no longer available to us and that God himself, no doubt, has taken care to use faithful men and women to carry the message forward through their transcription and translation, yet not without error. For example, Ephesians 3:1 seems to be a false start of Ephesians 3:14 perhaps by a very early scribe since we have no earlier manuscript without the error. Yet for myself I am confident that the Ephesians 3:1 misstep is not in the original autograph. So why would God allow the original infallible autographs to be lost? Well we can be confident that the originals are perfect because God cannot do anything imperfectly. And if he breathed these documents they are perfect as he says in Proverbs 30:5. So the originals are infallible. Furthermore, even in ordaining the fall God’s perfection is not impugned or without purpose! My thought is that for the further display of grace and also so that He is worshiped and not the original autographs He has allowed the original autographs to be lost, leaving us with transcriptions and translations that are short of perfect. Yet the Holy Spirit is supervising this effort helping truth seekers to know the truth as explained in 1 John 2:27, even without the original autographs in our possession.
How can those who comprised the Protestant canon of scripture be right as opposed to Roman Catholic or
Eastern Orthodox?
There is no list of Bible books that can claim to be infallible, Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox. Canonization does not make a particular document to be Scripture! Some hold that church authority in canonizing a particular document is what then makes it God’s word. No so. Instead the authority, value, and title of Scripture for the original autographs ‘breathed’ by the Holy Spirit is instead inherent because the documents are from God himself. Canonization properly understood then is the effort of the church and faithful Christians to recognize which documents are in fact the inspired documents breathed from God. Yet the effort to recognize which documents are in fact Scripture is also not infallible, and as one might expect in our fallen world we have conflicting opinions. However, the infallible list of Scripture is known by God.
If we say the Scriptures are inerrant is there then an inerrant interpretation? Which group or tradition should we follow?
Yes, there is most certainly an inerrant interpretation of the Bible! This is an essential point, for many supposed truth seekers will dodge the truth and the hard work to seek the truth by complaining that there are so many different interpretations that one cannot really conclude anything certain about the Bible’s message. I meet with this lame excuse all the time. Yet believers know that the Bible was written to communicate a certain message of God’s love for mankind! Since the Scriptures are God-breathed, 2 Timothy 3:16, we know that God himself penned his inerrant message, Proverbs 30:5, through select people as his chosen instruments who He inspired by the Holy Spirit. So God himself can claim the inerrant interpretation of the Bible! He wrote to communicate meaning which He certainly knows infallibly! And most amazingly God then anoints us with an understanding of His Word through the Holy Spirit, 1 John 2:15. So Christians can boldly assert to know truth from God through the Bible. Yet even so no human individual or organization can claim to hold an infallible interpretation for we remain fallible and God remains infallible. So we are also reminded of the value of humility for if two people or two churches disagree on their interpretation, one or both of them is wrong, though God’s inspired Word is never wrong.
A well thought out exposition, to some difficult questions, Jeff. And I would also say, they would be “politically correct”, in most theological circles.
But Christians from that point (First century) on have been moved… And I mean incredibly moved, by the scriptures. And thus our debate 
and our love 
