Does the Bible Tell Us to Take Everything in the Bible as LIterally Inerrant?

By -
"Do not despise the words of prophets, but test everything..." -- Thessalonians 5:20-21

I'd say that is a "no."

Comments

  1. Anonymous5:13 PM

    Just curious, what version of the Bible are you reading from. I only ask because I only have a King James version, and the text is quite a bit different.

    ReplyDelete
  2. gcallah9:03 PM

    Joseph, just Google the phrase and you can find it. (I'm heading out and can't look at the moment.)

    ReplyDelete
  3. PH2:13 PM

    I'm not sure it makes a difference, but the Greek reads προφητείας μὴ ἐξουθενεῖτε. That is literally "prophecies [do] not despise," the word "prophecies" being the object rather than the subject of the verb.

    Paul appears to be saying that the Thessalonians should test those who come before them claiming to have the gift of prophecy.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Bob Murphy10:12 AM

    I tried looking at various translations, and they didn't really help me decide the matter. But, I think Gene it's possible that you are totally misinterpreting what Paul is saying.

    I think (though I'm not sure) he is saying, "Don't dismiss prophecies. Go ahead and actually check if they are fulfilled, because they will be if you just open your eyes."

    For a similar thing, look at God talking about tithing in Malachi 3:10:

    10(A) Bring the full tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. And thereby(B) put me to the test, says the LORD of hosts, if I will not open(C) the windows of heaven for you and pour down for you a blessing until there is no more need.

    I can't find the exact translation that made me think of that passage, but I'm pretty sure I've read it where the Lord says "test me in this."

    Well clearly God isn't saying, "Don't assume you should literally believe my promises, because maybe I'll disappoint you."

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose...
Read more

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more