01-11-2015, 08:30 AM
|
#252
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 8,064
|
Re: LSM's Etymological Errors - Nigel Tomes
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeek
For me, Tomes didn't so much "bury" the Bible. He did state that Lee's method of etymological interpretation is invalid and made correct interpretation the province of linguistic experts, thus taking it out of the hands of amateurs like us. So, to me, it's more like Tomes placed the Bible out of my reach.
|
My point exactly.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by zeek
Really? According to what "calibration"? Or is it safe to say that the calibration is no more than your own subjective evaluation? Not that I have a problem with that. Just that if that is what it is i would like to be able to understand it as such.
|
Oh you know exactly what I meant/mean. You're just being cantankerous for the fun of it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by zeek
Oh let's do talk about it. Witness Lee usually used 2 Timothy 3:16 not to show that the Bible was infallible but rather spiritual as he does here:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lee
For example, I would like to point out again that 2 Timothy 3:16 says, “All Scripture is God-breathed.” The Scriptures are the breath of God, or the breathing out of God, God's breathing out of Himself. The Bible, therefore, is God's breath, and God's breath is the Spirit of God, for God is Spirit (John 4:24). The Greek word for Spirit is pneuma, which is also the word for breath. Thus, we may say that the Holy Spirit is the holy breath (cf. 20:22). God is Spirit, and the Spirit is the holy breath. To say that all Scripture is God-breathed is to say that the Bible is the breath, the breathing out, of the very God who is Spirit. God has breathed Himself out, and this breathing out of God is the Bible. This is what 2 Timothy 3:16 is saying when it tells us that the Scriptures are God-breathed.
|
|
What constituted "all scripture" back when Timothy was written?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by zeek
Now, ironically, this interpretation is etymological and therefore, undercut by Tomes' thesis. Would Tomes' linguistic experts also undercut the standard inerrantist appropriation of the verse? I don't know. I am hopelessly lost on the matter according to Tomes' analysis. Far safer for me to stop reading the Bible and start reading the linguists so that hopefully someday I can begin to understand it correctly through them.
|
That's the way I felt after reading this work by Tomes.
__________________
Cults: My brain will always be there for you. Thinking. So you don't have to.
There's a serpent in every paradise.
|
|
|