Bible Inerrancy - Comprehensive Resource Bible Inerrancy
Posted 08 March 2006 - 10:34 PM
Warfield does not quote a single scripture to support his claims in the first paragraph about the apostles toting around scriptures. It is true that keeping records was a Jewish tradition. And since the first Christians were Jews it makes perfect sense that they would retain records. The only problem is that around 130 a.d. Rome totally leveled Israel. Not a tree was left standing. Not a scroll was left unburned. It is very likely that the dead sea scrolls were hidden in a desparate attempt by the Essenes to save what records their sect had, but very little was saved of the Jewish orthodox faith. What Rome didn't get in the second century, Islam got later on. By the 4th century Rome was falling and Eusebius, bishop of Caesaria, worked feverishly to collect and translate any ancient hebrew records as well as Christian letters and chronicles. Unfortunately the barbarian tribes of Europe sacked Rome repeatedly. Churches, libraries and universities were destroyed by the Celts, Germans and gallic tribes. Much was lost in ignorance and the ravages of war. There was no Bible of any sort before the church put one together.
Warfield is making things up. Even if these texts he claims the apostles carried around are not mentioned in the scriptures by some kind of accident or misunderstanding, it would have been mentioned by some historian like Josephus.
Posted 23 March 2006 - 07:22 PM
Jesus and the Apostles had a high view of Old Testament Scripture as can be seen these verses:
“Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. “For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.” - Matt. 5:17-19
"...the scripture cannot be broken; John 10:35
Now I think we can agree that arguments from silence are not legitimate in historical investigations. The historian David Hacket Fischer states that in historical investigations appeals to silence are not legitimate (see: http://www.theologyw...ead.php?t=36762 ).
With that in mind, just because the Bible doesn't say the Apostles carried the Old Testament upon occasion doesn't mean they didn't. Now the question of whether or not they constantly or near constantly carried the Old Testament (and any New Testament) books is an open question. I do think the New Testament often alludes to or quotes from the Old Testament because I believe the Apostles had a very high very of Old Testament Scripture.
Now Warfield wrote:
No more authority dwelt in the prophets of the old covenant than in themselves, the apostles, who had been "made sufficient as ministers of a new covenant "; for (as one of themselves argued) "if that which passeth away was with glory, much more that which remaineth is in glory." Accordingly not only was the gospel they delivered, in their own estimation, itself a divine revelation, but it was also preached "in the Holy Ghost" (I Pet. i. 12) ; not merely the matter of it, but the very words in which it was clothed were "of the Holy Spirit" (I Cor. ii. 13).
I am hoping that Warfield does not mean that we are under the law as Galatians says we are not (of course, we cannot steal, murder, etc.). I am guessing that Warfield doesn't believe this as he mentions a new covenant.
Posted 10 November 2009 - 06:45 PM
This post has been edited by Hostile2Faith: 10 November 2009 - 06:53 PM