Abortionist shot at Lutheran Church

[Eric Swensson]

John, you said yesterday that we did not need to do anything to be saved because we were covered with the blood of Jesus. Why do you believe that about the blood of Jesus if it is not becasue the Bible says, so, is that one of the places where Scripture is inspired? How do you discern which places are inspired? The ones you agree with?

[Charles_Austin]

I just took a quick look at some region 3 - Lutheran heartland - synods. In all three, transfers from "other Lutheran congregations" (probably mostly LC-MS) were considerably more than transfers "to other Lutheran congregatins."

[jrubyaz]

Darrell,

There is another option. One can view the scriptures as infallible but not inerrant, and as God breathed as well.

Inerrancy and infalliblity are not the same thing.

Of course, I am not sure Petty is buying either.

Jeff Ruby   

Killing is not murder when it is commanded by God. That is why a massacre in 1250 BC is proper, but not one in 2009 AD.

I never thought I'd see the Nixon defense--"if the president does it, it's legal"--applied to God.

Might God know a little bit more than we do?  Oh, I forgot, it is up to us to clean up the errors and mistakes in the Bible according to our superior understanding and sensibilities.  Might I suggest Job 38-41?

Dan

I'm still focusing on that, "Killing is not murder when it is commanded by God."  You apparently agree with this.  If that's the case, then Scott Roeder did not commit murder.

Are you saying that God commanded Scott Roeder to commit murder?  Where do you find that?  I am not aware that Scott claimed that, but even if he did, that does not prove that God did in fact command Scott to murder.  Scott could be delusional or mistaken.  Or are you saying that Joshua et al was dislusional or mistaken?  

Dan

No, I'm saying that the early Hebrews interpreted their history as being directed by God.

Based on your statements, can we assume you would deny that the writers of Scripture were inspired by the Holy Spirit?  I mean if they were inspired, as Scripture claims, then by definition there cannot be error, because God cannot lie or err.
However, if there is no verbal inspiration to the writers, I guess that leaves the barn door to error wide open, does it not?

It will come as absolutely no surprise to you that I do not view the scriptures as "inerrant," a view of scripture that is demonstrably false.  If you're into that, then as we used to say on the farm, "Mister, you're driving your ducks to a mighty poor pond."

So by saying that the Scriptures are not inerrant, you must deny that they are "God breathed" and inspired by the Holy Spirit, no?  God cannot lie, and God cannot err, so there is no middle ground.  Either they are inspired, which would make them inerrant, or they aren't, which leaves you with a collection of books.  Which is it?

I asked you this question earlier and you have still not answered it.

[peter_speckhard]

This thread is now about everything except the shooting of Dr. Tiller. Therefore I'm going to lock it down and start another thread about the killing.