Inerrancy

Is there any "close connection and communication" between Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture? The RCC tries very hard for everyone to believe that there is. The RCC team of spin doctors put it this way, "For both of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, "in a certain way" merge into a unity of Truth, and tend toward the same end.. . " What 'certain way'? They never say - but it sounds like a real weak way of admitting that the RCC has no power in itself, and therefore they need all Roman Catholics and anyone else who is just playing spiritual tic-tac-toe, to join with them in their lifelong dream of conquering all nations as they reach out to the world for Roman Catholicism, being of one accord with the Vatican City pope as their leader.
 
Last edited:
bluedog1us said:
Matthew 24:35 NASB95 — “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.

Mark 13:31 NASB95 — “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.

Luke 21:33 NASB95 — “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.

Matthew 5:18 KJV — For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.


Jesus was pretty emphatic about that!
Click to expand...
What does that Scripture have to do with the inerrancy of translations? Do you believe the translators were given the gift of infallibility regarding the words they chose for the translations?
 
Kirby said:
Yes, in it's original writing.
Click to expand...
The originals no longer exist; so, is the current word of God inerrant?

Kirby said:
There is no translation which is considered inerrant as far as I know.
Click to expand...

OK, you stated original writing is inerrant; the translations are errant.
Kirby said:
God’s Word is not errant.
Click to expand...

The originals no longer exist; where can we get a copy of God's word which is not errant?
 
Kirby said:
What does that Scripture have to do with the inerrancy of translations? Do you believe the translators were given the gift of infallibility regarding the words they chose for the translations?
Click to expand...
God created EVERYTHIG visible and invisible. By the Word of His mouth. But He is somehow not able to keep His Holy Word intact? You really believe in a very weak and limited God. But then you worship an apostate church and traditions of men that place their man-made traditions on an equal footing with God's word so I am not surprised of your lack of faith in God's ability.
 
Kirby said:
Do you believe all translations are inerrant?

Yes, I do believe God protects His Word.
Click to expand...
I believe we can trust God has protected His word and no I don't the RC version have the words changed to fit their false doctrines for a start. I have read many translations and they are vary slightly but the meaning is correct.
 
PeanutGallery said:
The originals no longer exist; so, is the current word of God inerrant?



OK, you stated original writing is inerrant; the translations are errant.


The originals no longer exist; where can we get a copy of God's word which is not errant?
Click to expand...
But we know from the dead sea scrolls that the scribes were extremely careful when copying scripture. Mistakes were rare and might be a misspelling. This is just the RCs once again throwing doubt on God's word and promoting the need for the bad tree which definitely translation are made to suit their false beliefs.
 
bluedog1us said:
God created EVERYTHIG visible and invisible. By the Word of His mouth. But He is somehow not able to keep His Holy Word intact? You really believe in a very weak and limited God. But then you worship an apostate church and traditions of men that place their man-made traditions on an equal footing with God's word so I am not surprised of your lack of faith in God's ability.
Click to expand...
I don’t lack faith in God’s ability, I lack faith in self-professed Christians who claim to know which translations of Scripture are the inerrant Word of God.
 
RayneBeau said:
Does the Roman Catholic Church believe and teach that the Word of God is inerrant?
Click to expand...
Seriously?

We not only believe the BIble is inerrant, we believe it is Theopneustos. (God breathed/breathed out by God/Inspired/God
Inspired.)

The Church is infallible, only the Bible is Theopneustos. That what makes it unique.
 
Kirby said:
I don’t lack faith in God’s ability, I lack faith in self-professed Christians who claim to know which translations of Scripture are the inerrant Word of God.
Click to expand...
But you follow those who lack faith and profess to know what translation is the errant word of God, you follow evil men, RC leaders.
 
bluedog1us said:
God created EVERYTHIG visible and invisible. By the Word of His mouth. But He is somehow not able to keep His Holy Word intact? You really believe in a very weak and limited God. But then you worship an apostate church and traditions of men that place their man-made traditions on an equal footing with God's word so I am not surprised of your lack of faith in God's ability.
Click to expand...
SMH. Which translation of Scripture do you believe is inerrant? All? None? Some? And by extension were the translators of those translations infallible in the words they chose?

I do believe God has preserved his Word in this day and age. There are many translations which are perfectly fine for conveying what God wants us to know. They just don't carry the tag of 'inerrancy'.
 
Kirby said:
SMH. Which translation of Scripture do you believe is inerrant? All? None? Some? And by extension were the translators of those translations infallible in the words they chose?

I do believe God has preserved his Word in this day and age. There are many translations which are perfectly fine for conveying what God wants us to know. They just don't carry the tag of 'inerrancy'.
Click to expand...

So when Scripture says.......

Deuteronomy 6:13
Fear the LORD your God, serve Him only,

Isaiah 42:8
“I am the Lord; that is my name! I will not yield my glory to another

Luke 4:8
Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.’”

Revelation 22:8-9
I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I had heard and seen them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who had been showing them to me. 9 But he said to me, “Don’t do that! I am a fellow servant with you and with your fellow prophets and with all who keep the words of this scroll. Worship God!”

But according to you, the above is all wrong. Because it doesn't have the official rcc stamp of approval. The above according to the rcc wasn't translated correctly. This is the exact same crock that mormon's and sda's spit out. Rc's claim to worship God, but fight against Scripture tooth and nail in posts. We non-rc's have been directed in every direction but to Christ. The above quote is an example of what I said.
 
Kirby said:
SMH. Which translation of Scripture do you believe is inerrant? All? None? Some? And by extension were the translators of those translations infallible in the words they chose?

I do believe God has preserved his Word in this day and age. There are many translations which are perfectly fine for conveying what God wants us to know. They just don't carry the tag of 'inerrancy'.
Click to expand...
Inerrancy means that the bible is totally true in its teaching. Not very popular with the rcc, and for good reason. But history has proved that to be true with comparisons of today's translations and the manuscripts available. Many biblical scholars affirm this. Some don't. Personally I do believe it to be true. Jesus would not have made the statements he did if He thought that Scripture could not be kept as the Holy Spirit had it written. I can send you a web site that presents both sides if you want. I doubt they will let me paste in on here but will send it to you in a message if you accept them.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top