Bruce, do you see what I’m getting at?

Sure. I see it. But………..that is your problem. You are the one arguing for perfection. We don’t have the originals and we wouldn’t know we had them for sure if we did.

Your view of inerrancy requires perfection. So, you have two choices………either produce the goods OR admit your inerrancy view is a faith proposition that can not be proved. (of which I have no problem) Saying the Bible says it is is circular and not a logical argument.

Jonathan then asks “What church are you referring to? I’m not following where you are coming from?”

The historic Church. The ecumenical Church. My point is you/we are very selective in what “authority” we accept. Why do we accept their authority on the canon yet reject it baptism and the Eucharist?

The deeper point is that we as Protestants (all non-catholics) have become an authority unto ourselves. Wesley’s three-legged stool has two of the legs cut off and it is no wonder the stool falls over.

Your inerrancy view is a product of the modern age, particularly the battles between fundamentalism and modernism in the 1920’s. It is not the historic view of the Church.

The Scripture was given to and a product of the Church. It is the Church that gives the Scripture authority. The Church decided what was and was not Scripture. God did not chuck a KJV/NIV/ESV over the portals of heaven and say “this is my word” Instead copies of copies of copies were made, resulting in 3 times as many variants as there are verses in the NT. Yet, on the authority of the historic Church, and lived out by faith, we say this is God’s Word.

I have refrained from quoting outside sources. I want to give one now. I would commend to you “Christian Theologies of Scripture. A Comparative Introduction” I think you might find a bit of enlightenment by reading this book

Let me sum up my belief. I believe the Bible to be true. I believe it to be true by faith. I am a follower of Jesus., A Jesus whom I do not know apart from faith.

From start to finish it is all about Jesus.

Bruce

…but I hope I can always be clothed with humility and walking in grace.

That is why I have so much respect for you and realy listen to what you have to say.

I don’t mind you calling me Gene…

Things I abhor in the blogasphere:

* Politics
* Moral hubris
* Doctrinal epiphanies
* Ad hominen attacks
* No sense of humor
* Human idolatry
* Attacking the lost
* Name calling
* Posting living believers sins
* Raw hate
* Anytime Chris L. thinks he knows something! (see #3)

I think my doctrine is very similar to yours (from what I have read so far on Judah’s Lion). Perhaps I am placing much more emphasis on the interaction with the Word because I am so tired of people(sometimes me) bashing each other over the head with the Bible wanting to validate from it their own stance but not bearing the fruit. I realise the importance of sound doctrine but lately I have the desire to rather listen than to tell people how it should be. I also have loosened my grip on my theology/doctrine and strangely found my grip on faith getting tighter (if that makes sense… ). I have found that having a sound doctrine does not change my heart. (Who sang that song about the journey from the head to the heart?) But daily interaction with the Bible, praying and asking God to make what He says in the Bible a reality in me has this huge impact on me. So I have this desire to talk and reason less and live more, not that I succeed in that so well. Sigh! Petra sang a song: “Sometimes God’s people should be seen and not heard.” That’s not who I am but that’s who I want to be.

Sometimes I get so irritated with people claiming that their way is the only right way while I know that I have been where they are now. Guess I have to be more patient with people. God is doing His work in each of us in His own time.

Peter actually defers to Paul as the apostle to the Gentile church.

Concerning the last setence of this quote…Some would say the formation of their hearts by the Word of God is the foundation for their doctrine…such is Calvinism!
In fact, if you boil it down, your views can be labeled as your own doctrine, which in a great sense, you lay hold of it and committ eternity to it…Do you see where I am going with this?

“I think we often fall prey to our desire to be right and that causes strife.”

I couldn’t care less about being right in myself, but my whole calling in the name of Jesus is the verse, “If I be lifted up, I will draw all men unto myself.” My goal is to present the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ by way of the Word of God. My whole mindset is the lifting up of Jesus name. I am not perfect, my father can vouch for that, but I know my God is and it is he whom I long to honor(even though I do a poor job sometimes).

“14As obedient children, do not conform to the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance. NIV”

This is definitely talking about being conformed to the world after coming to Christ!

There are some “churches” who observe them as salvation necessities, but , through scripture, we label these salvation ritual observances as un-orthodox!

This type of interpretation is subjective. These “churches you refer to would probably take Acts 2:37-38 and interpret that baptism is redemptive:

When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”
Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Act 2:37-38 NIV

What you classify as orthodox is un-orthodox to the next Christian. We should be humble enough to learn from each other without using the Bible to prove to each other we are more right than they.

At a learning community that I am part of, eChurch, we discussed intelligence and learning and the following was very insightful:

3 prerequisites for growth:
- I don’t know
- I had it wrong
- I changed my mind

K. Albrecht – Once you let go of your need to be certain of about everything you liberate yourself…

Complex thought patterns:
- Simplex thought pattern – Only one answer allowed. No questions allowed. Closed worldview. Single sided answers
- Duplex thought pattern – Worldview of opposites. (Right/Wrong; Good/Bad… )
- Multiplex thought pattern – high tolerance for complexity and opposites. More than one answers possible. Respect for other’s views. Sees oneself as a work in progress. Sees own thought processes apart from ego.
- Omniplex thought pattern – flourishes in complexity and contrast. Chaos is no threat. New ideas are new terrain to be explored. Respect all knowledge. Openness. Questions rather than answers.

Let’s look at the OP again. Phil is saying that the Bible should be used to bring change of the inner man of ourselves and not to prove that my doctrine is better than yours/you are a bad person/God will let His wrath loose over you…

Should we form doctrine out of the Bible? Yes. Should we fight about whose is the more orthodox? I don’t think so. History proves that fighting about doctrine brings destruction and in the end apostasy. But forming doctrine should be secondary to the formation of our hearts by the Word of God.

I think we often fall prey to our desire to be right and that causes strife.

1 Peter 1:13Therefore, prepare your minds for action; be self-controlled; set your hope fully on the grace to be given you when Jesus Christ is revealed. 14As obedient children, do not conform to the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance. NIV

I might have this all wrong

You asked this earlier, “Why accept consensus on the Scriptures and reject it on issues like communion and baptism? ”

What church are you referring to? I’m not following where you are coming from?
I mean, if you went to the gathering place I show up to on Sundays for the gathering of believers, they pastor and elders would check the Eph 2:8,9 scripture box. We don’t reject those practices as observances, but we do reject the practice of them if they are used for atonement value…used as something that is a necessity for salvation!

There are some “churches” who observe them as salvation necessities, but , through scripture, we label these salvation ritual observances as un-orthodox!

“Unless we have the actual parchment that the writer wrote on we do not have the originals. No one has seen the originals in probably 1800-1900 years.”

This is my thought….I could have the originals, yet how would you know they are the originals, because the y have the date on them? People would still doubt…Then they would say, “I will believe when I see the author standing right next to it!” Then they would say, “I still don’t believe…I need to see Jesus standing with the author and the originals.” Then they would say, “I still don’t believe…Jesus, do a miracle and I will believe!” AND SO ON!

Bruce, do you see what I’m getting at?

Joe, I was definitely kidding…I will answer your questions in a bit…Let me eat first..

Bruce, I’ll discuss with you too…

That’s of course I don’t have to tend to my wife! She’s pregnant and hungry! LOL