Can you believe in the infallabilty of the bible?

[Jayhawker Soule]

There are issues that go beyond 'error,' issues dealing with interpretation and source selection. How many people were taken out of Egypt in the Exodus? How tall was Goliath?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

the reason why they matter is to point out how politics and the hunger for greed and power had a hand in the canonization of the NT

and it's also worth mentioning that next to the discovery of these books was a skeleton, hmmm the plot thickens...

:drool:

< typical >

 

[waitasec]

< typical >

for a debating forum...yes.



gotta problem with that?

 

[John Boanerges]

What was this in reply to and could you elaborate? I do not know what you are saying here exactly or why.

In response to the OPs question and title of the thread - "Can you believe in the infallibility of the Bible?"

There is nothing that has ever been proven to be false about the original text of the Bible, to which the KJV comes the closest of all versions. That is an amazing feat for a book of this nature, which is not simply a book of rules like those who haven't read it seem to think. It is a history book filled with very specific historical facts AND fulfilled prophecies. It is as complex of a book as one will find, written over thousands of years (Moses lived from 1391&#8211;1271 BCE) by dozens of authors (40 to be precise). To have them all dove-tail and agree is an amazing feat, don't you think?

On the other hand, there have been numerous changes in the NIV, with over 25% of them being gender-related. When you research the editors of the NIV, you see that they clearly have an agenda, a fact that is echoed by the numerous theologians you will read about when searching for "changes in the NIV" or "problems with the NIV". ( I don't have enough posts to post specific links...yet.)

 

[1robin]

There are issues that go beyond 'error,' issues dealing with interpretation and source selection. How many people were taken out of Egypt in the Exodus? How tall was Goliath?

How can Goliath's height or how many came out of Egypt (if they are inaccurate) have any meaningful effect on Christian doctrine and faith. Do you think a Christian who has been born again and been in the presence of God is going to think differently if a 3000 year old document records that 400,000 instead of 300,000 Jews left Egypt. It is a well excepted claim that not even the actual errors effects core doctrine.

 

[sojourner]

I have never heard anyone link trade routes with the books that were selected for the bible. The criteria that was used was the apostolic nature of the author and reliability. Are you claiming there are other texts that should have been in the bible? There is not much debate in Christian scolarship over this Divinci code type of issue.

It's not DaVinci Code type stuff -- it's simple availability and transmission. They didn't have publishing houses and the internet. Whatever happened to be written down was a single document. That document had to travel physically to other locations in order to become known. That sort of transmission happened more easily over sea routes than it did overland routes. by and large, the stuff that didn't make it into the canon was stuff that was not so well-known, and by and large, the stuff that was not well-known was stuff that would have traveled by overland routes. It's simple anthropological logic.

 

[1robin]

In response to the OPs question and title of the thread - "Can you believe in the infallibility of the Bible?"

There is nothing that has ever been proven to be false about the original text of the Bible, to which the KJV comes the closest of all versions. That is an amazing feat for a book of this nature, which is not simply a book of rules like those who haven't read it seem to think. It is a history book filled with very specific historical facts AND fulfilled prophecies. It is as complex of a book as one will find, written over thousands of years (Moses lived from 1391–1271 BCE) by dozens of authors (40 to be precise). To have them all dove-tail and agree is an amazing feat, don't you think?

On the other hand, there have been numerous changes in the NIV, with over 25% of them being gender-related. When you research the editors of the NIV, you see that they clearly have an agenda, a fact that is echoed by the numerous theologians you will read about when searching for "changes in the NIV" or "problems with the NIV". ( I don't have enough posts to post specific links...yet.)

Well I agree with your bible accuracy in general as you will see if you read my previous posts. I do not believe your NIV vs KJV statements are accurate. Are you a KJV only person? I have an NIV and it was worked on by over a hundred of the worlds best biblical scholars. Could you list the specific problems (just a few) with the NIV.

 

[sojourner]

What is it you are suggesting these texts mean? I do not see the relavance of a few spurious texts. History is full of them and the reason they are not in the bible is very simple and very sold.

I'm confident that, had the majority of Xtians known of Thomas back then, it would be in the canon.

If I could see why the texts matter it might be worth researching. Why are which ever ones you are specifically refering to any different from the dozens upon dozens of bogus texts that are well know? I do not find the teachings of heretical groups as valuable to anyone but a historian.

Not sure about the other books, but Thomas is extremely important, because it has links with Q, the source for much of Matt. and Lk. Plus, it parallels Mark in several important ways. It's probably (IMO) more "legitimate" than Revelation.

 

[sojourner]

Of the King James version (KJV)...yes. Of the NIV...NO!

Google "problems NIV". Ugh.

I don't like the NIV much, myself, but I trust it more for some things than the KJV, which was translated out of much newer manuscripts than those that produced the NIV.

 

[sojourner]

Well I agree with your bible accuracy in general as you will see if you read my previous posts. I do not believe your NIV vs KJV statements are accurate. Are you a KJV only person? I have an NIV and it was worked on by over a hundred of the worlds best biblical scholars. Could you list the specific problems (just a few) with the NIV.

It does have a conservative, evangelical slant. Most scholars I know see it as a viable translation with several agenda issues that one should be aware of. The NRSV is a much better translation.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

How can Goliath's height or how many came out of Egypt (if they are inaccurate) have any meaningful effect on Christian doctrine and faith.

I'm talking about one's ability to understand the intent of what's written in my Bible. If that has no effect on Christian faith, so be it.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Do you think a Christian who has been born again and been in the presence of God is going to think differently if ...

... or, for that matter, at all. I guess you're right.

 

[waitasec]

I'm talking about one's ability to understand the intent of what's written in my Bible. If that has no effect on Christian faith, so be it.

sadly this is true for most evangelical christians...where scholarship takes a back seat to believing for the sake of believing in order to escape some grumpy gods wrath...

The largest religion in the US is Christianity, practiced by the majority of the population (76% in 2008[4]). From those queried, roughly 51.3% of Americans are Protestants, 25% are Catholics, 1.7% are Mormons (the name commonly used to refer to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints), and 1.7% of various other Christian denominations.[17] Christianity was introduced during the period of European colonization.

Religion in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[sojourner]

There is nothing that has ever been proven to be false about the original text of the Bible,

To which "original text" do you refer? even the oldest codices are copies and do not contain the whole of what we call the bible. Are you unaware of the oral origin of most of the biblical content?

to which the KJV comes the closest of all versions.

The NRSV is currently the most accurate English translation available. it makes use of several ancient manuscripts to which the KJ translators did not have access.

It is a history book filled with very specific historical facts AND fulfilled prophecies.

...as well a filled with specific and glaring historic and scientific anomalies, as well as unfulfilled prophecies.

It is as complex of a book as one will find, written over thousands of years (Moses lived from 1391–1271 BCE) by dozens of authors (40 to be precise).

Surely you don't seriously believe that Moses wrote part of the bible??? The texts didn't come into existence until well after Moses' time.

 

[1robin]

sadly this is true for most evangelical christians...where scholarship takes a back seat to believing for the sake of believing in order to escape some grumpy gods wrath...

The largest religion in the US is Christianity, practiced by the majority of the population (76% in 2008[4]). From those queried, roughly 51.3% of Americans are Protestants, 25% are Catholics, 1.7% are Mormons (the name commonly used to refer to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints), and 1.7% of various other Christian denominations.[17] Christianity was introduced during the period of European colonization.

Religion in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I commented on Goliath's height and exactly how many Jews fled Egypt and the fact that it has no doctrinal application. You twist that context around and somehow out the other end comes Christians are idiots who have faith inspite of evidence. My faith is consistent with scholarship. What were those statistics supposed to prove. It's like saying 50% of the time it works everytime. (what movies is that from?)

 

[1robin]

It does have a conservative, evangelical slant. Most scholars I know see it as a viable translation with several agenda issues that one should be aware of. The NRSV is a much better translation.

I am sure that the NIV has minor problems just like they all do. I however feel that any major version is completely adequite. Especially modern ones that point out what is not known for sure and give foot notes. My issue was the assertion that the KJV is somehow light years ahead. I find the KJV only crowd illogical.

 

[waitasec]

I commented on Goliath's height and exactly how many Jews fled Egypt and the fact that it has no doctrinal application. You twist that context around and somehow out the other end comes Christians are idiots who have faith inspite of evidence. My faith is consistent with scholarship. What were those statistics supposed to prove. It's like saying 50% of the time it works everytime. (what movies is that from?)

selective scholarship pretty much means willful ignorance...if you are satisfied with that, so be it.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

sadly this is true for most evangelical christians...where scholarship takes a back seat to believing for the sake of believing in order to escape some grumpy gods wrath...

I know. It's a bit like disbelieving for the sake of disbelieving in order to ridicule the believer.

 

[sojourner]

I however feel that any major version is completely adequite.

Adequate for what task or tasks?

Especially modern ones that point out what is not known for sure and give foot notes.

It's not the translation that provides those things. It's the edition of the translation that provides them. Some NRSVs provide no footnotes at all. Those footnotes are a result of further scholastic work -- not the translated product, itself.

My issue was the assertion that the KJV is somehow light years ahead.

"Behind the curve" is more like it.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

selective scholarship pretty much means willful ignorance...if you are satisfied with that, so be it.

Very true.