***I freely admit that the idea of scripture being an afterthought of God is fully consistent with the treatment scripture is routinely given by Apostolics around here. :) I think I am pretty close to a decent understanding of what Apostolics really think of scripture, and how it fits within your paradigm of earthly authority.***
You may wish to further your understanding of how the Church viewed Scripture as it matured over the centuries, from wandering preachers largely teaching orally, to carrying various scraps of parchment around, to finally arranging it all in a book and deciding on its contents.
We have only one incident of Jesus actually writing anything mentioned in the Bible, and He wrote in the dust. Is that not of significance? The Bible does not have anyone writing anything that came to be in it during the life of Jesus. Is that not of significance?
***Ah, that is exactly why I like “God-breathed” better, because God IS perfect, and He gave us His word perfectly as He intended. ***
Scripture is not there for us to “like”. It is there for us to be instructed.
***I think the Apostolic view must be that the scriptures are fundamentally flawed because they contradict so many holdings of the Church, dogma and doctrine.***
The Apostolic view is that Scripture contains all the truths that God wanted us to know through the Bible. Scriptures do not contradict the Church of Jesus, since the Church of Jesus decided on the content of the Bible, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
***The only way for the men of the Church to be right is to bring down God and say that His word is flawed.***
While your translation of a translation of a translation may be flawed, the Bible contains God’s truth that He wishes us to know through the Bible. Jesus left us His Church - we do not know of anything written down during His lifetime that has made it into the Bible. Jesus left us His Church, commissioned at Pentecost by the Holy Spirit. No words, no parchments, no books.
(Naturally, I think that God handled the content of the Bible.) Now, on the one hand we have the perfectly good idea that men, or even bodies of men, will and do grow in faith. They are sanctified. On the other hand, we have "always and everywhere believed". How do you reconcile these?
We have only one incident of Jesus actually writing anything mentioned in the Bible, and He wrote in the dust. Is that not of significance? The Bible does not have anyone writing anything that came to be in it during the life of Jesus. Is that not of significance?
That depends on whether we say the Bible is a work of men, or a work of God through men. If we say the latter, then all of your above, ......... well .......... goes away. :)
The Apostolic view is that Scripture contains all the truths that God wanted us to know through the Bible. Scriptures do not contradict the Church of Jesus, since the Church of Jesus decided on the content of the Bible, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
OOOPS! Good start, bad finish. :) Yes or no, does man determine what God's revelation to man is?
Jesus left us His Church, commissioned at Pentecost by the Holy Spirit. No words, no parchments, no books.
I don't understand. The written word should not threaten you. I think much of your (collective) faith is based on the written words of the Fathers. Those words appear to be OK with you, but you appear to have a problem with the authority of the words that God actually authenticated.