Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [creat] Bible is 'incomplete'

Expand Messages
  • doug_54321
    I m starting a new group against Dave. Who wants to join? -doug ... a ... Princeton ... of ... the ... activity ... it ... in ... their
    Message 1 of 123 , Mar 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      I'm starting a new group against Dave. Who wants to join?

      -doug

      --- In creationism@yahoogroups.com, Dave Oldridge <doldridg@s...>
      wrote:
      > On 13 Feb 2004 at 19:08, Harold R. Holmyard III wrote:
      >
      > > Dear Dave,
      > >
      > > >Well, I have the advantage of you there. I'm able to read Koine
      a
      > > >bit.
      > >
      > > HH: I hope that you have heard of B. B. Warfield, a famous
      Princeton
      > > Theologian of the early twentieth century. He looked at this word
      > > closely in all its occurrences in a long, famous article, which is
      > > available at http://www.aomin.org/THEOPNEU.html . This is his
      > > conclusion:
      > >
      > > From all points of approach alike we appear to be conducted to the
      > > conclusion that it is primarily expressive of the origination of
      > > Scripture, not of its nature and much less of its effects. What is
      > > 'theopneustos' is "God-breathed," produced by the creative breath
      of
      > > the Almighty. And Scripture is called 'theopneustos' in order to
      > > designate it as "God-breathed," the product of Divine spiration,
      the
      > > creation of that Spirit who is in all spheres of the Divine
      activity
      > > the executive of the Godhead. The traditional translation of the
      > > word by the Latin inspiratus a Deo is no doubt also discredited,
      it
      > > we are to take it at the foot of the letter. It does not express a
      > > breathing into the Scriptures by God. But the ordinary conception
      > > attached to it, whether among the Fathers or the Dognaticians, is
      in
      > > general vindicated. What it affirms is that the Scriptures owe
      their
      > > origin to an activity of God the Holy Ghost and are in the highest
      > > and truest sense His creation.
      >
      > Sorry, but I will take the opinion of Jerome, a scholar who devoted
      > his life to translating the Bible and who was fluent in Koine at a
      > time when it was still the spoken language of the eastern
      > mediterranean over ANY 20th century academic you can scare up.
      >
      > That's SAINT Jerome for anyone who is actually a catholic believer.
    • Dave Oldridge
      ... Well, my take on it is that it was written by men who sought to know God. It is by no means the only things written by such men and it s by no means the
      Message 123 of 123 , Mar 7, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        On 7 Mar 2004 at 18:11, Todd wrote:

        > How about the bible as another man made "mythology" book.
        > Go figure.

        Well, my take on it is that it was written by men who sought to
        know God. It is by no means the only things written by such men
        and it's by no means the infallible oracle that the fundies claim
        it is, but it still the sacred scripture of the Church.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.