Biblical Infallibility

[McBell]

Which proves my point to the evangelicals that come to this thread that the inconsistencies in the Bible invalidate it!!!!! Thank you!!!!

Actually the only ting it proves is that you are willing to lie.
How you think your willingness to lie invalidates the Bible is a stretch I would really love to see you prove.

 

[Riverwolf]

Which proves my point to the evangelicals that come to this thread that the inconsistencies in the Bible invalidate it!!!!! Thank you!!!!

How so?

There's no reason to believe that evangelicals lie when they do their thing, and I, for one, do not believe they are lying.

 

[ChristineES]

While I believe that the Bible and other religious texts are God inspired, there is no doubt that men actually wrote the things down. Also, they have been translated over time. I don't know if this caused a great discrepancy or a small one, it would be vulnerable to discrepancy. I believe, however, that the main message is not diminished in any religious text.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

Beliefs are really outdated. Come on, guys...

 

[J Bryson]

As a historical document, the Bible makes little sense to me. However, both the Old and New Testaments start off with interesting underlying moral truths, though both descend into odd dogmatism and hallucinatory prophesying.

 

[jtartar]

Please come forth if you believe in Biblical infallibility. I beg you! People are getting off topic here and you could make many people's days better by making a comment or two about why,and how you believe the Bible is inerrant.

ThuggishSplicer,
There is a difference between infallible and inerrant. The Holy Scriptures are translated by many Bible Societies. Some of these, because of there beliefs, have slanted the scriptures a little away from God's original message. By comparing Bibles the message from God is made clear. God's word is infallible, but man's translations may not be.

Inerrant is a term that means that the scriptures were completely accurate when written by the inspired writers, and was understood perfectly by the ones it was first written to. As time went on, several reasons occurred to cause errors to creep into God's word. Cultural expressions of ancient people may be difficult to understand today. The way names were pronounced, and because many people had different names in olden times, has caused errors in spelling some Biblical names. There seems to be some slight errors in some numbers. This is because the Hebrew language lacked words for large numbers.

There were also. what is called random errors, and systemic errors.
It is not possible for a human being to copy the entire Bible without making a mistake. This is a random error, and this error could be copied over and over again. When an error is copied over and over again it is called a systemic error.
There were families of copies of the Bible that were spread over much of the earth. Each of the had the same error. When the families of copies were compared, the errors were easily noted and changed.
God Himself has promised that He would keep His message to all men free from errors that would keep His message from being clear to all who care enough to do research, Ps 12:6,7, Isa 40:8, 1Pet 1:25, John 17:17.
Today almost all the new translations are better than older translations, because many old manuscripts have been found that makes comparisons easy to weed out any errors. You can find the truth in almost all Bibles if you get a Bible with references, and follow them.

 

[JustWondering]

ThuggishSplicer,
There is a difference between infallible and inerrant. The Holy Scriptures are translated by many Bible Societies. Some of these, because of there beliefs, have slanted the scriptures a little away from God's original message. By comparing Bibles the message from God is made clear. God's word is infallible, but man's translations may not be.

Lol. God reinvented Man's language (Babel Tower). So, if God wanted to get a message across how could it possibly be misinterpretted?

 

[ThuggishSplicer]

Actually the only ting it proves is that you are willing to lie.
How you think your willingness to lie invalidates the Bible is a stretch I would really love to see you prove.

If the Bible starts to lie in many areas, then you can invalidate it.If a guy starts to lie time after time to you, you have the right to ignore what he says BECAUSE YOUR TRUST IN HIM GOES DOW TO ZERO!!! Same with the Bible!
What is your problem with me??
It doesn't mean I am willing t lie. It means I am willing to share truth with all sentient beings and am really not a *******,but like to use analogies.

 

[ThuggishSplicer]

ThuggishSplicer,
There is a difference between infallible and inerrant. The Holy Scriptures are translated by many Bible Societies. Some of these, because of there beliefs, have slanted the scriptures a little away from God's original message. By comparing Bibles the message from God is made clear. God's word is infallible, but man's translations may not be.

Inerrant is a term that means that the scriptures were completely accurate when written by the inspired writers, and was understood perfectly by the ones it was first written to. As time went on, several reasons occurred to cause errors to creep into God's word. Cultural expressions of ancient people may be difficult to understand today. The way names were pronounced, and because many people had different names in olden times, has caused errors in spelling some Biblical names. There seems to be some slight errors in some numbers. This is because the Hebrew language lacked words for large numbers.

There were also. what is called random errors, and systemic errors.
It is not possible for a human being to copy the entire Bible without making a mistake. This is a random error, and this error could be copied over and over again. When an error is copied over and over again it is called a systemic error.
There were families of copies of the Bible that were spread over much of the earth. Each of the had the same error. When the families of copies were compared, the errors were easily noted and changed.
God Himself has promised that He would keep His message to all men free from errors that would keep His message from being clear to all who care enough to do research, Ps 12:6,7, Isa 40:8, 1Pet 1:25, John 17:17.
Today almost all the new translations are better than older translations, because many old manuscripts have been found that makes comparisons easy to weed out any errors. You can find the truth in almost all Bibles if you get a Bible with references, and follow them.

Uhhh...

...the Bible right now is fallible...:sarcastic

 

[McBell]

If the Bible starts to lie in many areas, then you can invalidate it.If a guy starts to lie time after time to you, you have the right to ignore what he says BECAUSE YOUR TRUST IN HIM GOES DOW TO ZERO!!! Same with the Bible!
What is your problem with me??
It doesn't mean I am willing t lie. It means I am willing to share truth with all sentient beings and am really not a *******,but like to use analogies.

Yet you admitted that the first what, three pages are you lieing.
Though you try to weasel word word with "ruse".

So now you have the problem of being taken seriously.
How can you be taken seriously when you have spent the better part of this thread so far lieing?

 

[ThuggishSplicer]

Yet you admitted that the first what, three pages are you lieing.
Though you try to weasel word word with "ruse".

So now you have the problem of being taken seriously.
How can you be taken seriously when you have spent the better part of this thread so far lieing?

All right. I AM SORRY. You can take me seriously now that I say I don't believe in Biblical infallibility. I beg your forgiveness! Truly! I'm sooo tired of arguing over me lieing that all I want to do is say sorry sorry sorry... I am being very serious. SORRY! I just want to talk about the Bible now! Please ,you can stop baggering me now.

 

[linwood]

As a historical document, the Bible makes little sense to me. However, both the Old and New Testaments start off with interesting underlying moral truths, though both descend into odd dogmatism and hallucinatory prophesying.

True but I don`t think an actual historian who is concerned only with "history" and not theological concepts cares that the story itself is convoluted.

The facts that are in the Bible are a gold mine when they are able to be compared to other historical texts to test the veracity of the known history of any certain time period.

Times, places, environmental happenings, political happenings, all these things are useful if their probable truth can be verified.

Even the facts that are wrong have their usefulness I`d imagine.

2000 years from now even Steven Kings novels would at the very least give an idea of the environment and geographical area within which they were written .

Add to that the possibility of his novels being but a few of the texts that survived two millenia their value rises due to nothing more than their rarity.

The oldest texts of the Tanakh are some of the earliest writings civilized humans created.
That in itself has value.