Only Jesus was infallible. Period.
Jesus alone.
Everything else we see darkly, because of our sin.
I finally reached the summation for the previous threads and what I was leading up to all along. Now I can move back to politics. I will still be a part of a hopefully lively discussion and hope further that we can all agree to disagree agreeably.
In the end, Constantine and Theodosius wanted to run a state and dissension stood in the way of that.
the fallable are incapable of proving infallabilty but some of us wont allow that to interrupt our attempts to wrest sovereignty....power..and glory from the one to whom all sovereignty....power..and glory belongs!!
Jesus. His Word; however, is infallible. If, guided by the Holy Spirit, someone quotes His Word, they would be speaking God’s infallible Word. Miss-quoting would mean the speaker was not in the Spirit and be obvious to a hearer who is in the Spirit.
Is any book infallible?
Matthew 28:18 (NIV) Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Sure...
Christ said He’d send the Holy Spirit to guide individuals in a thousand different directions, because truth is relative and individually revealed.....
Yes under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Jesus.
I'm not seeing the part where they claimed infallibility.
The text indicates that (1) they were wrong (2) they didn't like being lectured and therefore (3) they wanted to throw the man out for lecturing them.
But many people have repeated these steps without claiming "infallibility or something close to it."
For example, Luther had pretty much the same attitude toward the Jews of his time that the Phrisees had toward the Jew whom Jesus cured. From Luther:
(1) "If I were to avenge myself on the devil himself I should be unable to wish him such evil and misfortune as God's wrath inflicts on the Jews, compelling them to lie and to blaspheme so monstrously, in violation of their own conscience."
That's obviously wrong.
(2) "I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb."
He didn't like their lectures.
(3)"If this does not help we must drive them out like mad dogs, so that we do not become partakers of their abominable blasphemy and all their other vices and thus merit God's wrath and be damned with them."
He wanted them driven out.
So Luther delivered untrue statements with certainty and authority. Does that mean he claimed "infallibility or something close to it" too?
A number of Religions claim to be the TRUTH, Islam, Mormons, Catholic, Christian domination's, all believing their version are the best from Jehovah Witnesses, Catholic, Church of Christ, and many others. Israel and the Jews may have the truest faith. We simply know mankind has been involved and even with the best intentions do add and subtract form the HOLY SCRIPTURES.. God forgive us we know not what we do, in Jesus name amen.
At the very least, the human authors of Scripture were infallible when writing Scripture, because they were inspired, and inspiration (saying exactly what God wishes to be said) includes infallibility (not saying what God does not wish to be said).
...the Apostle Peter was wrong occasionally, and corrected by the Apostle Paul...(seems like Saul was corrected one time...also...
on the road to Damascus... ( ; )
so...
...unless you are sitting in the Chair to the Right of Jehovah God...
...
I suggest you refer to the Holy Scripture.
And may you be Blessed.
xxxandifyousaytheHolySpirittoldyouso...please stand a little farther away from me. ( ; )
...even though I was promised the “gift of the Holy Spirit” at my baptism.
“Once delivered to all.”
“No private interpretation.”
“from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them.”
[[Does any Church or Council possess infallibility or did Jesus alone possess this?]]
Well if a church or leader was really infallible, then I could pick and choose who I want to be my savior
Assuming what you write is correct, it destroys the Bible [as we know it] from being the one and only to ever contain all truth. This opens up tradition as guidance. Somehow it validates that Jesus wrote only once and that was in sand. Jesus relied on teaching through individuals, not books, to teach. He didn’t rely on individual interpretation. Sounds like the Catholic Church got it right with apostolic succession.
1. On what authority do you know that the Bible you use is inspired at all? Even if the Bible somewhere claimed that authority for itself (which it doesn't) it wouldn't matter, because any book could say that (and false books like the Book of Mormon and the Koran do). A burning in the breast feeling also is not valid.
2. How do you even know what books are inspired and belong in the Bible you use? The table of contents is not inspired and some human being with requisite authority had to decide that, for example, the Gospel of John is in, and the Gospel of Barnabas is out.
3. What use would it be for God to throw us an infallible book if he were not going to provide an infallible interpretor? Otherwise every man, citing the gift of the Holy Spirit, would interpret the Bible for himself. This is exactly what has happened since Martin Luther resulting in the tens of thousand conflicting and contradicting denominations we have today. If this were God's plan, then the Holy Spirit is one of confusion, not truth.
I myself believe with all my heart that the 73 books found in my Bible are the inerrant, inspired word of God. But I have good, solid, biblical reasons for doing so. Other, people-- I'm afraid not so much. This is not because they are stupid (almost everybody is smarter than me), but because they have never fully thought through the implications of their assumptions on this topic, either because no one has pointed it out to them, or they have avoided the subject.
It is always better to put light on an idea rather than just heat. Here are some more considerations for those who are not afraid to peruse them: