Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible (Part 2) - Lesson 12

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 29 сер 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 5

  • @KildaltonBTS
    @KildaltonBTS  5 місяців тому

    ✝READ THIS BEFORE COMMENTING: The purpose of this UA-cam channel is to provide a theological education for those who want to learn. If you have a question, I will answer it. But the comment section of UA-cam is not conducive to long complicated debates nor is it the best use of our time. All trolls will be blocked. May you grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory both now and forever. Amen.✝

  • @ButConsiderThis
    @ButConsiderThis 5 місяців тому +3

    Why would an inerrant book from the very mind of God even have anything in it that could be considered a discrepancy?
    Wouldn’t God be perfect at communicating his will and desire? Certainly his will supersedes human minds and wills and could thus produce a truly perfect text despite it being written by people if he wanted to.
    So why didn’t he? Is he limited? Or did he just not want to and preferred the confusion and thousands of denominations and doctrines based on his supposed perfect word?
    None of that strikes you the least bit odd?

    • @KildaltonBTS
      @KildaltonBTS  5 місяців тому

      Did you watch the video? Have you watched the previous videos? As explained in previous lessons God has given us his inerrant word without discrepancies. The problem is with men not the Bible. Yet, as Peter states, the unlearned and unstable twist it to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:16-18). God was clear about what he said concerning eating the tree of the knowledge good and evil yet the serpent said they would not die. (Genesis 3:4). In a similar fashion, many in the history of the church have added Greek philosophy to the Bible, with which they then come up with unbiblical doctrines that distort the gospel and the sacraments. The church has always been plagued with heretics, false prophets, Gnostics, and false teachers. And today the seminaries are full of them.

    • @ButConsiderThis
      @ButConsiderThis 5 місяців тому +1

      @@KildaltonBTSI can point out to you dozens of flat out errors in the text. (So will a quick google search and a free easy to use Hebrew or Greek lexicon)
      And that’s not including errors in different translations.
      Let’s say though for the sake of another point it is inerrant and as you say men are interpreting it incorrectly.
      In what way can YOU have any confidence your interpretation is correct? Because as I’m sure you understand there are over 40k different denominations will wildly different interpretations of almost every verse in scripture.
      What makes your interpretation special? Why do you believe not just the book is inerrant but your specific interpretation is too? (Or at least why you think it is the superior interpretation and why)

    • @KildaltonBTS
      @KildaltonBTS  5 місяців тому

      @ButConsiderThis did you read the pinned comment at the top? Have you bothered to do the research to see if whatever discrepancy you think there is has resolved? If not, then you’re one of those I referred to at the beginning of this video. I agree there are less-than-perfect translations and I'll cover that in a future lesson. In regards to interpretation, I'll cover that in my next series on hermeneutics. But this applies not just to the Bible but to the U.S. Constitution. When you have a Supreme Court who has NO interest in the original intent and meaning of the authors but instead seek to twist it to further their political agenda it does not make the Constitution meaningless or indecipherable. The same goes for those in the early church who read the Bible through the lens neo-platonism or in the middle ages who read the Bible through the lens of Aristotle. We interpret ALL things (Including the content of these UA-cam comments) through the epistemological lens of our worldview. The question then is, "What worldview can provide a justifiable epistemology and account for the necessary preconditions of intelligibility?" I covered this in earlier lessons and will again in a future series on Worldview Apologetics.