The Bible never claims to be inerrant, and there are some obvious errors. Any (non cursory) study of the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) will make that clear.
Haven’t you noticed them?
By the ways, the passage in 2 Timothy 3:
Never claims inerrancy and
Is specifically about the writing Timothy had known from his youth, the Old
Testament in the Septuagint.
Do you need for me to point out one of the minor errors? God never promised us a perfect book, but He gave us a perfect Savior.
By the way, Genesis never claims to be the writings of Moses.
Dr. Collins wrote a really good essay on Christianity and evolution that is well worth reading:
He does a great job discussing his own testimony, his scientific career, evolution, and the intersection of theology and science. Even if you disagree with Dr. Collins, I think you will at least understand where he and many other Christians are coming from.
2 Likes
Klax
(The only thing that matters is faith expressed in love.)
39
The trick is to use science to interpret the Bible with no religious preconceptions whatsoever.
“…and seeking answers to whether or not belief in God is potentially rational,…”
But why did he begin to wonder if belief in God could be potentially rational?
As for your insults regarding me and my motives.
I am not reinventing God, I am expounding the God of the Bible according to the Bible!
While I have just decided to report you for insulting me and lying.
For it is your own wisdom that is lying and attempting to twist the truth of God’s word.
You cannot sanely throw out what the Bible says based upon theories that cannot even be tested much less proven.
We say common ancestors, instead of a common creator to make sense of how much common DNA is present. But a common Creator would inherently make common descent unnecessary.
While a Creator capable of forming things in a fully completed manner would make billions of years of evolution totally unnecessary.
While the reality of the situation is this, evolution is only a theory to explain how things might have come about, without any Creator and without any Common Designer.
As for butterfly equaling God breathed.
It is actually stupidity, not to see the truth of God’s word when this is very clearly stated, but to explain it away so that the Bible and false theories about origins can be interwoven into what will become the literal plan of satan. For Revelations clearly cites an alliance between a false church, which is referred to as the great whore and a goverment entity that is clearly defined as the beast.
Let us all come together, without Jesus, is not the plan of God, and when and if the world shows you a false Messiah, and you follow them, you will only do so to your own destruction.
As for evolution being proven, do you not know that current cosmological theory has so great a mismatch with current testing that it is absolutely absurd:
God breathed is not inerrant to you?
Why is this?
While Genesis is in the OT not the NT.
While the last passage in Revelations adds curses to those who add to God’s word and removes blessings from those who remove anything from God’s word.
This book is also written directly from revelations from Jesus and God and is placed last of all for a very good reason, because its warnings against altering God’s world applies from the beginning to the end of our Bible.
This only applies to this book, he did not want his book to be changed on purpose (obviously there will be mistakes in rewriting) And this does not apply to other books.
And I am not sure that for this reason this book is the last one in the Bible, you should probably read books about how the church was the canon of the Bible, there will probably be listed completely different reasons.
God breathed is not inerrant to you?
The compound word “godbreathed” is not defined by its two root words. That is not the way definitions work. A butterfly is not a fly made of butter. Understand does not mean to take an upright posture below something.
The word means inspired, and God can inspire a person to do something without making the person inerrant. Moses was inspired to lead the children of Israel out of Egypt, but Moses still made mistakes.
And I do hope you understand that 2 Timothy 3 is not about the New Testament. The passage clearly says it is about the holy scriptures that Timothy had known from his youth.
But as for you, continue in what you have learned and firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it, 15 and how from childhood you have known the sacred writings that are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 so that everyone who belongs to God may be proficient, equipped for every good work.
What sacred scriptures were available when Timothy was a child?
Where is inerrancy claimed in that passage?
Did God inspire Billy Graham to do all those crusades? Did God make him inerrant? Even Peter wasn’t inerrant!
While the last passage in Revelations adds curses to those who add to God’s word and removes blessings from those who remove anything from God’s word.
No, Revelation does not say that. It does not mention “God’s Word.” It does not mention the Bible. The curse is about people who add to or take away from the prophecies in the book of Revelation.
Why do make false claims about what Revelation says?
18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this book; 19 if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away that person’s share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
The questions are rhetorical, but you are welcome to answer.
No amount of thinking will cause me to think your thoughts which are not even coherent to me.
Your incomprehension concerning people such as Collins and myself is obvious. This is not to say that we are the same. I never considered myself an atheist. For me, not having been raised Christian, the question was never whether God exists but how to attach meaning to the word that would have some value. The question is why would you seek to prevent this thereby shutting the kingdom of God against men? The apparent answer is that people finding value in Christianity and a reason to believe in God doesn’t help you in a bid for power unless it is the same value and reasons as your own.
A more comprehensive comparison is found here in my study of his book. But expect you to see me as an enemy along with most of worldwide Christianity. That is what cults do. After rewriting the Bible with interpretations they make up as the only correct understanding of the Bible they then condemn everyone who dares to think differently.
It is not a question of motives but of the design inherent in a system of thought. If it is tailored for the use of religion as a tool of power and manipulation then the most likely origin of that way of thinking is people with such a purpose. When you truly put things in the hands of God then it no longer serves the interests of power and manipulation.
That is not what I see. I see you adding to the Bible so that you can pretend you speak for God and thus make yourself judge and savior. Jesus very clearly forbids us to do any such thing.
That is difficult to do when you have already insulted the people you report this to.
No doubt you would prefer the Bible to be all about obedience and leaving your brains at the door, but this is simply not true. The Bible is about wisdom, spoken of 349 times, constantly urging us over and over again to seek wisdom. Not simply to believe what Pharisees and religion users say, but to seek wisdom for ourselves from God Himself. And what does God say in all the sky and the Earth around us? You may not believe God created these things or simply call God a liar, but I do believe God is the creator of heavens and Earth and I do not believe He is lying to us.
It’s a one-way street then? Your moral superiority allows you to see into the hearts of others, as Jesus does? And then, when your statements are questioned, you can be offended that others are making judgments about your motives? There’s a word for this…
This is so disappointing to learn. I must immediately stop wiping butterflies on my toast.
I too believe the Bible is inerrant and that the Bible itself claims such about itself in a number of places. Psalm 19 and 2 Timothy 3 are such places. However, as The Chicago statement on biblical inerrancy would explain, it includes the concepts that
“We affirm that God in His work of inspiration utilized the distinctive personalities and literary styles of the writers whom He had chosen and prepared.” (Article 8). See my comment in Article 18)
“We deny that it is proper to evaluate Scripture according to standards of truth and error that are alien to its usage or purpose.” (Article 13) The Bible is about how God saves us, not a scientific document.
“the text of Scripture is to be interpreted by grammatico-historical exegesis, taking account of its literary forms and devices, and that Scripture is to interpret Scripture.” (Article 18). What is sometimes claimed to be an error is really a misunderstanding of the author’s original intention.
We need to reject the methods of reading the inerrant scriptures which treat it like magic rather than God’s word to people who have a brain which he gave us.
If there ever was a perfect manuscript it would had to have been the ones wrote by the original authors. As soon as the first one was copied, let alone the thousandth copy translated multiple times we simply lost that perfection. But I don’t believe it matters because we have more than enough to develop systematic theology and the parts that seem off can often be studied out using other translations and so on and doing word studies and seeing what early Jewish or christian fathers wrote on the matter to draw a accurate understanding.
On the face of it the claim of inerrancy is absurd. Not only are there abundant examples of errors but there is the inescapable fact of human involvement and differences in many copies and translations of the text (which copy or translation is it that is supposed to be “inerrant”?). And then there is the simple fact that the medium of human language in which it is written is fundamentally flawed already. But there is one sense upon which Christians must agree and that is except for improving the translations, this text is not something which we can improve upon, for if it is to represent any kind of communication from God then we cannot feel free to alter it as we see fit. Likely the errors are simply no more significant than the flaws in the paper or ink when viewed under a microscope, and perhaps in that it serves a divine purpose similar to the reason Jesus gave for speaking in parables. If we cannot see the forest for the trees, then maybe we are not ready for the message.
[quote=“Colin_McKay, post:50, topic:43969, full:true”] Psalm 19 [/quote] what verse?
[quote=“Colin_McKay, post:50, topic:43969, full:true”] 2 Timothy 3 [/quote] 1. this only applies to the Old Testament.
2. this is not a statement of infallibility at all, the divine inspiration in fact just says that the Old Testament is not fully invented by people.
