Is the bible inerrant?

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

@adamjedgar

If you cannot reconcile that christ in resurrecting dead people who died from sickness as proof that life is the opposite of death and that death is a consequence of sin

Job contradicts you. (And Christ?)

So, maybe, you are trying to make a rule out of a specific circumstance. Whether those healed by Christ were inflicted due to sin, is neither here or there. It was the proof that the audiance of the day needed. They believed it (despite Job).Christ forgives sins but that is impossible to demonstrate unless there was some sort of physical (visible) change.

Chrsit did not claim all were sinners. You have even quoted one of the proofs!

@adamjedgar

It is not the healthy who need a doctor but the sick”

That implies that there were those who did not need Him!

The Garden is ntot about physical death! Adam didn’t drop dead!

“Leave the dead to bury their dead”?

You know the quote. Now understand it!

Richard

[St.Roymond]

@Terry_Sampson

IMO, the firmest believers in an inerrant bible are the folks who affirm that The Song of Songs, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes. Jude, and Revelation are inerrant.

That however is not helpful: I knew a NT scholar who regarded Revelation as inerrant but held it has nothing to do with the future because it was talking about events at the time it was written.

@jpm

The Holy post Skye-Pod recently compared it to the feeling you get looking at the menu of the Cheesecake Factory as compared to going to your local burger place and being able to just chose from a few combos.

There was a place in a small town in Colorado called “The Burger Factory” where there were no standard burgers, just a list of ingredients (including such things as avocado and black olives).

@jpm

To have an inerrant Bible means you don’t really have to choose,

Or to think. It tends to turn theology into a multiple choice quiz rather than an essay test.

@Burrawang

the Scripture cannot be nullified

Dos not mean it is inerrant in the sense of factual details being correct, only that it is authoritative. It was a phrase used by rabbis including the Pharisees and Sadducees, so Jesus tossed it at them to amplify His point.

@Mervin_Bitikofer

in your quoted passage Jesus says: “Has it not been written in your law…”

Good catch! Given the way many inerrantists argue, one might venture to say that this proves that the Law of Moses was not Jesus’ law . . . .

@Mervin_Bitikofer

It’s fascinating to me that he didn’t say “my law” or “God’s law” there … but your law.

Compare John 15:25–

But the word that is written in their Law must be fulfilled

@adamjedgar

I dont make claims without biblical evidence.

I’m laughing so hard it hurts! Your entire foundation as a YEC has no biblical evidence!
Or have you found some passage that says the scriptures intend to be historically and scientifically accurate?

@adamjedgar

If Lazurus died physically on earth twice? Well thats clearly problematic isnt it.

Why? Lazarus was hardly the only one brought back to life, and nowhere does it say that those brought back weren’t still mortal.

@jpm

Maybe there is an argument that using the word resurrected is not accurate, and they are best described as revived. We tend to associate resurrected as being to a new life, whereas they were revived to the old one.

Good point.

[St.Roymond]

@Mervin_Bitikofer

It’s usually taken for granted (argument from silence) that Lazarus lives a ‘normal’ life after that and dies like anyone else. But you are correct that it’s just an assumption. But also think about this … had Lazarus gone on living in a resurrected state, obviously now impervious to death, can you imagine any universe in which Christ-followers would have remained silent about that?!!! So while it may only be an argument from silence, the silence is deafening!
. . . .
I just don’t find the notion of him living out his life after that (and dying again to await the final resurrection his sister spoke of) as being all that problematic to me.

@adamjedgar

Lazurus was quite obviously raised in his old earthly body that was still wrapped up in linen.

Yes. “First death” isn’t a matter like of a bus schedule but of categories, death of mortal flesh vs. death of the entire person.

[St.Roymond]

@RichardG

@adamjedgar

It is not the healthy who need a doctor but the sick”

That implies that there were those who did not need Him!

Only if you throw out what the prophets said. It only implies that there were people who thought they didn’t need Him.

[Terry_Sampson]

@St.Roymond

That however is not helpful:

You remind me of my oldest brother: Nothing is helpful unless a thing helps him personally.

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

@St.Roymond

@RichardG

That implies that there were those who did not need Him!

Only if you throw out what the prophets said. It only implies that there were people who thought they didn’t need Him.

Except that these are the words of Jesus, Are you calling Him a liar?

The prophets spoke of the people of Israel. You are claiming it applies to all, why?
The flood was the known world, why not the prophecies?
If the Decalogue does not apply to gentiles, why should the condemnation of the prophets? (Romans 14: 1-5)

You are obsessed with the notion of fallen humanity. It is just not true.

Richard

[Burrawang]

@Mervin_Bitikofer

I think Jesus was a bit “playful” with scriptures (in ways that you would almost certainly not approve … the religious leaders of his time certainly didn’t.)

Dear Mervin,
thank you for your reply., though, what a strange false thing to say about Jesus our Loving, Righteous and Just Creator, Lord and Saviour.
Contrary to your claim, I haven’t need to perform mental gymnastics, however the reality is I most certainly do not approve of your belief that Jesus viewed the scriptures “playfully” whatever that means.
I can only assume you are claiming that Jesus was in error, and if that is the case, I can only quote Jesus rebuking Peter in Matthew 16:23: "23 But He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God’s purposes, but men’s.”

The rest of your reply follows in the same vein also in grave error.
I have no difficulty understanding the scriptures and I do not see any contradictions.

If you choose to search for and then believe you have found contradictions that suit your overall belief, (your worldview) that is a matter between you and God, but PLEASE don’t foist such falsities on others, as the weak in faith may be deceived by such false beliefs and not put their faith in Jesus our Lord and Saviour; there may be eternal consequences to every single letter we type.

God bless,
jon

[jpm (Phil McCurdy)]

The authors of the scripture certainly used humor, irony, and even sarcasm in their writing at times, and Jesus was not humorless as well. That does not imply error, but was used to point out the way the Pharisees and others erroneously interpreted the Bible.

[Burrawang]

@St.Roymond

@Burrawang

the Scripture cannot be nullified

Dos not mean it is inerrant in the sense of factual details being correct, only that it is authoritative. It was a phrase used by rabbis including the Pharisees and Sadducees, so Jesus tossed it at them to amplify His point.

Well, we will have to agree to disagree.

“nullified” means, ‘to render null and void’; ‘to render invalid’; ‘to invalidate’; ‘to revoke’; it does not mean authoritative.
The scriptures are authoritative, that is a given as they were written by men ‘inspired’ by God.
God does not make mistakes and as stated previously, ‘our loving God, Who made time, Who made every single sub atomic particle in the universe, Who wrote the genetic codes of all life on Earth, Who is holding all of creation in existence right now, is way more than capable of ensuring His Word to repentant humanity is profoundly understandable as He intended…’

Other translations use similar language,
New International Version
and scripture cannot be set aside

King James Version
and the scripture cannot be broken

English Standard Version
and the scripture cannot be broken

Complete Jewish Bible
and the Tanakh cannot be broken

Orthodox Jewish Bible
and the Kitvei Hakodesh cannot be broken

Jesus is The Word, the Logos, therefore, apply simple logic to the text:
The Scripture cannot be broken, that is, it cannot be rendered null and void, that is, it stands immutable forever, thus, it is unchangeable, constant and true, the Scripture is inerrant.

THE BIBLE IS INERRANT

God bless,
jon

[Mervin_Bitikofer]

@Burrawang

I can only assume you are claiming that Jesus was in error,

It is precisely because I don’t believe Jesus was in error that I cannot follow your example in how you treat God’s word. I have too much respect for it to do that. I look to Christ and His Spirit instead, and encourage you to join those of us aspiring toward the same.

By “playful”, I mean Jesus was willing to enter into the culture’s (and indeed even the Pharisees’) system of thought, even as messed up as it so often was, to meet them where they were at and draw them closer to truth - toward himself. Sometimes that meant confronting some hard realities head-on (“Get behind me, Satan!”), and other times just asking them questions to provoke them to some self-reflection about all the stuff they thought they were so good at understanding.

Blessings to you.
-Merv

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

@Burrawang

I do not see any contradictions.

Then quite frankly you are blind.

There are contradictions in content and understanding

@Burrawang

PLEASE don’t foist such falsities on others, as the weak in faith may be deceived by such false belief

That is just a trifle pompous and arrogant… If anyone is deceiving it is you and those who think like you, but frankly you are only deceiving yourselves.

The truth is sitting in front of you. How can the Bible be inerrant if there are more than a dozen different versions of the text?

And even if the original text was perfect it has gone through several translations let alone the redactions by scribes before we got our hands on it. Then there is the understanding. Scripture is not obvious, You only have to look at the different discussions on this forum to see that there is not a single identifiable understanding.

Each one claims to have the right understanding, So either scripture has multiple understandings or at least one view is adrift. Vanity would dictate who insists they must be right.

@Burrawang

as the weak in faith may be deceived

And that is the real crunch. What happens to your faith if I prove you and the Bible are in error?

Richard

[Burrawang]

Dear Mervin,

I am relieved for you that you don’t believe that Jesus was in error.

It appears that it needs to be said, (though I would have hoped it to be unnecessary), that I hold God’s Word with the highest respect, and I look to Jesus and the Holy Spirit for guidance in life and sharing the Gospel.

Your choice of the word, “playful” to mean,

@Mervin_Bitikofer

“Jesus was willing to enter into the culture’s (and indeed even the Pharisees’) system of thought, even as messed up as it so often was, to meet them where they were at and draw them closer to truth…”

is curious if not somewhat irregular…

But all that aside, the fact remains that the Scriptures can be trusted as accurate, as inerrant.
On that point we will just have to agree to disagree.

If you truly believe with your heart that the Bible has errors, then that is your free choice, and if I truly believe with my heart that the Bible is inerrant, what is that to you or anyone else for that matter.
For both of us, it is enough that Jesus loves us enough that He died on our behalf, though we are both unworthy, His love for us all is what is important.

The Bible is inerrant!

God bless,
jon

[Burrawang]

Dear Richard,
thank you for your thoughts.

If I am blind, then pity me, though I do not think that I am.

When I read the Bible, (as I would hope many on this site would experience the same), I comprehend profound truths that I know within myself are valid and come from God.

I have an old friend who is an atheist. He and I have discussed, debated the validity of the Bible on many occasions throughout more than the last fifty years. It is no small thing that the very arguments my atheist friend raises are similar arguments to some raised on this website.

My atheist friend, Peter, would argue that the Bible is Middle Eastern mythology and was written by a primitive superstitious tribe for their own purposes and that it is full of errors and contains contradictions, and he claims the text has been changed, and the book we have now as the Bible is the end result final set of books selected because they suited the political ends of those in positions of power throughout the ages.

When my daughters were young; my wife, my daughters and myself would drive to Church each week, we would read a text from the Bible during the 1 hour drive and more often than not, when we arrived, the sermon would be about the randomly selected text from the Old and New Testaments that we read on the way there.
This we realised was through the Holy Spirit, because it happened far to often to be a coincidence.

I sincerely believe that God is able to convey what He wants us to understand from the text. I have always believed that God’s Word to us, the Bible is inerrant.
I have read the mass of half truths and blatant lies on some sceptic and humanist websites and am dismayed that some of those arguments I find here on this website.

Of course there are variations in translations, but as far as I am concerned, that doesn’t make the Bible in error. I have found the King James Version and the NASB to be very good translations.

God bless,
jon

[adamjedgar (adam james edgar)]

@RichardG

Job contradicts you.

can we just go back here…please explain how a single book in the Bible, the book of Job, contradicts New Testament scriptures and indeed Christ?

The fact is, the bible does not contradict itself…in your consistently going back to Job, its quite clear you are missing something there. So if you would just post the references in Job again, i will be able to see where you have gone wrong.

[adamjedgar (adam james edgar)]

@St.Roymond

Only if you throw out what the prophets said. It only implies that there were people who thought they didn’t need Him.

St Roymond, you are changing the focus of the illustration in this passage of scripture. this passage was an illustration given by Christ regarding the pharasees who believed that they should not associate with sinners…indeed remember the pharasees prayer Christ used in one of his stories.

Luke 18:
The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector

9To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else, Jesus told this parable: 10“Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’

then there’s this…

What does Matthew 9:12 mean? | BibleRef.com

What does Matthew 9:12 mean?

Jesus has called Matthew to follow Him as one of His core twelve disciples (Matthew 9:9). Matthew was a tax collector, one of the most despised people in Israel. Tax collectors were Jewish men who took money from other Israelites and gave most of it to the occupying Romans. The remainder they could keep, as allowed by Roman order, as payment for their services. Most Jewish people saw tax collectors as greedy traitors. It would have been scandalous, in that culture, for a righteous man like Jesus to invite a tax collector to become His disciple.

Worse, Matthew then hosted a dinner party at his home with his friends (Matthew 9:10). These, of course, were other tax collectors and “sinners.” As used in these passages, “sinners” are those people unwelcome in religious society because they did not follow the rules of the Pharisees or, in some cases, the law itself. That’s not to say they were innocent of sin—their actions were certainly immoral—but these people were overtly identified by their sins in that culture.

The Pharisees make baffled accusations, asking Jesus’ disciples why He eats with these people, something they would never do (Matthew 9:11). Now Jesus answers them in a way that both explains His actions and exposes the Pharisees.

Healthy people don’t need a doctor, Jesus says. Sick people do. Jesus was not declaring the Pharisees to be healthy, but pointing out that they saw themselves that way. Jesus told them He was there to help people who knew they were sick. Spiritually speaking, they understood they needed help. They were open to the truth: that they needed saving.

Two important applications emerge from this statement. First, the purpose of good works and evangelism is to reach the lost (Matthew 5:11–16). Christians are not called on to barricade themselves away from anyone they see as a “sinner.” Of course, it’s important to guard friendships and associations (Psalm 1:1; 1 Corinthians 15:33). However, believers cannot live out the love of Christ while avoiding all possible contact with lost people (1 Corinthians 5:9–10). Self-labelled Christians, or churches, who turn their noses up at sinners are like doctors, or hospitals, who refuse to associate with sick people.

Second, Jesus was not condoning the wrong choices of the people He spent time with. Showing love and kindness does not require—and does not imply—endorsing everything the other person does or believes. Christ was introducing them to Himself as the only way to be forgiven and redeemed. He was showing them the true face of God, full of love and compassion for them.

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

@Burrawang

I sincerely believe that God is able to convey what He wants us to understand from the text.

No argument, but it doesn’t have to be inerrant to do so.

@Burrawang

not, when we arrived, the sermon would be about the randomly selected text from the Old and New Testaments that we read on the way there.

I am sorry, but I do not approve of random dipping into the Bible. There are untold dangers in doing so. furthermore the meaning you derive from an odd verse may not corelate with the original intent. The standard text of 2 Tim 3:10 fall into that catagory. Paul is signing off to a fellow Jew who knew , and had studied Hebrew Scripture. But, if you read Romans 14: 1-5 Paul allows Gentiles, not familiar with Hebrew Scripture to ignore the Sabbath. We have access to Hebrew Scripture, now, but that does not mean the original text was aimed at us.
Don’t get me wrong, as others have, I am not ignoring the Old Testament, but tis relevance is primarily to the background and legitimacy of Jesus. he minutia that some people try and impose was for the people of the day rather than modern Christianity… Having said that, the meaning of Job, for instance, seems to be overlooked by the over enthusiastic Bible basher trying to convict all and sundry of Sin… It is not about “picking and choosing”, more about relevance and intent and to a greater or lesser extent human knowledge .

Inerrancy is more vague tan it is promoted. It is not about errors or even contradictions but abut the changes in understanding as humanity grows and God reveals Himself.
All the food and cleanliness laws become obsolete if yo understand hygene, buddy planting and how to cook properly.

IOW you can hold onto a version of inerrancy without insisting on the minnutia.

Richard

[adamjedgar (adam james edgar)]

@St.Roymond

I’m laughing so hard it hurts! Your entire foundation as a YEC has no biblical evidence!

2 Peter 1:
19We also have the word of the prophets as confirmed beyond doubt. And you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture comes from one’s own interpretation. 21For no such prophecy was ever brought forth by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Answer me this St Roymond…

Do you believe Moses a prophet?

To save us having to digest a stupid answer, I will answer the question using a well known reference…wikipedia

Moses [note 1] was a Hebrew prophet, teacher and leader,[2] according to Abrahamic tradition. He is considered the most important prophet in Judaism[3][4] and Samaritanism, and one of the most important prophets in Christianity, Islam, the Baháʼí Faith, and other Abrahamic religions. According to both the Bible and the Quran,[5] Moses was the leader of the Israelites and lawgiver to whom the prophetic authorship of the Torah (the first five books of the Bible) is attributed.

Christ (Gods own words during his ministry on earth)

Matthew 24
38For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark. 39And they were oblivious, until the flood came and swept them all away.

Then we have the apostle Peter (the first bishop of the Christian church) writing the following after Christs ministry here on earth…
2 Peter 2

For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them deep into hell,a placing them in chains of darkness to be held for judgment; 5if He did not spare the ancient world when He brought the flood on its ungodly people, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, among the eight; 6if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction,b reducing them to ashes as an example of what is coming on the ungodly;c 7and if He rescued Lot, a righteous man distressed by the depraved conduct of the lawless 8(for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard)— 9if all this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials and to hold the unrighteous for punishment on the day of judgment.

10Such punishment is specially reserved for those who indulge the corrupt desires of the flesh and despise authority.

then there’s this…

Exodus 20
11For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth and the sea and all that is in them, but on the seventh day He rested.

[Burrawang]

Hi Richard,
whether you approve or disapprove, matters not one iota, however, what does matter is that the Holy Spirit was with us on our many, many long journeys to Church each week, and on most occasions, guiding us to read the relevant text in readiness for the sermon.
I am to this day, grateful to my Lord Jesus for guiding my family in this way, my daughters and their respective families are strong in the Lord. He answers prayer, He is faithful and true.

The Old Testament is relevant in many ways, not the least of which are the answers to the BIG questions most people have, that are answered in Genesis, that also provides the basis for why we need to be saved. The information provided at the opening chapters of Genesis explains how we became separated physically from God, what the fall of Adam means for mankind, and thus precisely WHY we need Jesus atoning death on the cross and His resurrection from the dead on the third day.

Without the Old Testament, the gospel makes little sense as to WHY we need to be saved.
Yes much of the Old Testament is about the coming Messiah, Jesus the Christ who came to Earth incarnate to SAVE the world from eternal separation from Him.
That said, I love the New Testament with all my heart.

What I have observed and continue to observe during my time on this present Earth, is the constant attack on anything and everything that has been instituted or set up by God.
Predictably, and most often, I see the diametric opposite raised up into prominence to replace what God has ordained for us.
For example, whether it be the accuracy of the Bible, the sacred union of marriage between a man and a woman, or proper natural relations between people, or two biological genders of male and female, they’re all under constant bullying and fierce spiritual and physical attack at all levels of ‘modern’ society.
I’m not at all surprised as these things are inevitable and will come to pass in this world that’s more and more run by people controlled by the principalities and powers of darkness. (See Ephesians 6:12).
When that day is, I do not know, but make no mistake, these things are coming to pass as prophesied long ago.

"37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."

In concert with the abovementioned attacks, there are the attacks against the Church, against the body of Christians throughout the world.
Once again it is the forces of darkness that have deceived many Churches to compromise themselves for unholy motives such as vanity and pride, being seen to be ‘intelligent’ to conform with the widely held beliefs of what they perceive as science, (though in truth it is anything but rigorous science).

For example, the madness and folly of Theistic evolution that is a house of cards already collapsed. Deep time flies against a rapidly growing body of REAL empirical evidence, and evolution is a wholly falsified theory that’s mathematically impossible let alone probable, yet it will still be many a year before many of those inculcated with the Theistic evolution deception discover the truth.

I agree with you regarding unnecessary minutiae that some people get bogged down in is pointless, as God Himself can and does wish to open our minds as He sees fit, to understand profound messages and concepts that He wants us to know and live by in holiness and truth.

It’s not the letter of the text, but the spirit of the text that matters, and that in Love and gentleness toward our brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ our Lord.

God bless,
jon

[Bill_II]

@Burrawang

For example, the madness and folly of Theistic evolution that is a house of cards already collapsed.

Nope evolution is alive, well, and growing stronger all the time.

@Burrawang

Deep time flies against a rapidly growing body of REAL empirical evidence,

There is zero, as in 0.00, REAL empirical evidence. Only the falsehoods promoted by some.

@Burrawang

evolution is a wholly falsified theory that’s mathematically impossible let alone probable,

Nope, only in the mind of a YEC/anti-evolutionist apologist.

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

@Burrawang

what does matter is that the Holy Spirit was with us on our many, many long journeys to Church each week

That He can is unquestionable, that He does?

As a preacher I can confirm that on one unique occasion He preached for me, but it was more a test of trust than something that repeated. Putting God to the test springs to mind. I have found that God expects me to put some effort in but holds my had in the process. I guess it depends on the way you look at thngs and maybe your fiath is different to mine.

As a preponant of Theistic Evolution , as opposed to the scientific ToE we will have to disagree. I am sorry but YEC just doesn’t do it for me. I can’t, in all honesty, dismiss the mountain of evidence as being left to deceive. God created the heavens and the Earth, but how is not for Scripture to dictate (IMHO)
I suspect we will disagree on the nature and persistence of sin also… Jesus would have died for 1 person, so perhaps we can let a few through without HIm.

@Burrawang

What I have observed and continue to observe during my time on this present Earth, is the constant attack on anything and everything that has been instituted or set up by God

You are sounding like “Reds under the beds” theology… Perhaps we can give God a bit more credit than to limit Himself to the favoured few?

There is more good in the world than many Christians appreciate and it does not do us any favours to dismiss it as “against Scripture”

At the risk of your wrath. Scripture is neither God dictated or vetted. It is human responses to God’s revelations with all the baggage that entails

One thing I abhor is the notion of the Bible being “God in written form” as opposed to Jesus a God in human form

You are obviously entitled to your beliefs and views as long as you reciprocate without judgement or criticism. Discussion is fine. Lecturing or Preaching isn’t. Say your pieces with whatever proofs you have but do not expect me to just Comply.

Richard