This point is without debate, IMO. Nowhere in scripture is there the sense of ex-cathedra in regard to the spoken word -- or even the logical need for same.
Consider the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15). How is the decision made? It is most likely that every author of N.T. scripture was sitting in the meeting. !! Right? So why the collabrative effort? Because of the correctness of G's observation, obviously!! (please note the use of scripture and the anticipated use of bias in response.)
What of the borther in I Cor 8:1ff? His experience (which is mis-informed) differes from that of Paul's theology, yet, Paul does not insist on his teaching.
In Romans 14, the entire passage concerns itself with two brothers who are in serious error , yet Paul does not insist on agreement -- in fact, it is clear that such a demand would have been rejected.
Peter is in error when it comes to the Gentile inclusion with regard to the assembly of the saints.
Jesus, at His ascension (!) is faced with doctrinal error in regards to the very nature of the Kingdom of God ("will you now establish the Kingdom to Israel?"). He has had to deal with this type of ignorance all the while and, here it is after the resurrection!! It is almost as if He shook his head, looked up to the heavens and said to His Father, "Get Me out of here !!" And so the reason for why the ascension took place WHEN it did.
jd
-------------- Original message --------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
hint1:'the door to understanding' & human 'in/fallibility' have no role in NT thought, are not categories of NT revelation------On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 06:50:59 -0500 "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jesus being the Messiah has nothing to do with the NT gospel? Are
> you serious? Lance, John, Bill... do you guys agree with Gary on this?
>
> David Miller.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
> Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 11:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The door to understanding
>
> myth (the fallibility in part is that it has nothin' to do w ith the
> NT gospel; is that it is basic to false doctrine)
>
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 22:20:13 -0500 "David Miller"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> writes:
> >some of my understanding is infallible[:] I understand that Jesus
> is the Messiah.
>
