Early views regarding "inerrantcy"

[angellous_evangellous]

I suppose that we've all seen folks wave around a Bible and passionately declare that it is perfect.

In my reading I have found ancient writers both "for" and "against" perfection in translation of Jewish and Christian writings.

I will try and post them here.

Today I found this tastey morsel from the Letter of Aristas. The Letter of Aristas was written about 130BCE and records the legendary translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek, the Septuigant, or LXX.

Here is what the author says about the text used to translate:

"It happens that [the books of the Law of the Jews] are written in the Hebrew tongue, and they have committed to writing somewhat carelessly and not adequately, according to the testimony of our experts..."

"Inasmuch as the translation has been well and piously made and is in every respect accurate, it is right that it should remain in its present form and no revision of any sort take place."

It is interesting that perfection can be wrought from imperfection. This means that the translators had to interpret, using some of the same methods that are used today by scholars, which text best represents continuity of the work.

 

[michel]

This, to be frank, is the great problem I have with the Bible. I am quite prepared to believe that the greatest of care (and honesty) has gone into translating ancient texts (and I know some who would even argue that point), but man is not "perfect" - there is also the point of books have been left out of the Bible.....

Which is why (to be honest), I would rather rely on "What would Jesus Christ have said/done in such and such a circumstance?", and use my own honest "gut feeling" - knowing -as I do- about what Christ taught and preached.

 

[A4B4]

Hmm.. Quite interesting.

I have to say, I'm with you Michel. Of course, I still read the Bible because, even if much of it has been changed, I believe it originally was good and accurate, so I naturally assume that there is still good within it. I read it carefully and pay acute attention, and I do not hesitate to question, but I address those doubts by coming here and/or doing research.

Regarding following your "gut" instinct, I am inclined to agree also. There's an article which discusses how Jesus internalized many laws, which I consider somewhat relevant, from which I quote:

Old (written upon tablets)-------------------New (written upon the heart)
No Murder (Ex. 20:13; Deut 5:17)-------------No Anger / resentment (Matt 5:21-4)
No Adultery (Ex. 20:14; Deut 5:18)-----------No Lust (Matt 5:22-32)
No False Witness (Ex. 20:16; Deut 5:20)-----Simple Honesty (Matt 5:33-7)
Eye for Eye Justice (Ex. 21:24)----------------Forgiveness (Matt 5:38-42)
Love friends; hate enemies (Lev 19:18)------Love all people (Matt 5:43-48)
Outer Righteousness----------------------------Inner Righteousness (Matt 6:1-4)
Formulaic prayer--------------------------------Secret Prayer (Matt 6:5-6)
Ostentatious Religiosity------------------------Secret Fasting (Matt 6:16-18)
Outwardness-------------------------------------Inwardness (Matt 7:12)

(http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Articles/Torah_Observance/torah_observance.html)

Although the above quote is slightly off topic, it brings something concrete such as the Jewish laws much closer to our inner "gut" conscience, as you mentioned. One might even say Jesus was preparing us to follow our conscience. (Of course, one might also argue that it was the Tree of Conscience, of Knowledge of Good and Evil that put humankind in the bind we're now in--that humankind believing we can decide what's good and bad ourselves is our weakness and our sin. Frankly, I can think of no good counterargument to this.)

But it is with the same care that I also read the Qur'an--where, even if it were not inspired, would at the very least provide an insight into early Christianity, at least as much as the non-Canonical texts (which I also read), but in all probability more.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Old (written upon tablets)-------------------New (written upon the heart)
No Murder (Ex. 20:13; Deut 5:17)-------------No Anger / resentment (Matt 5:21-4)
No Adultery (Ex. 20:14; Deut 5:18)-----------No Lust (Matt 5:22-32)
No False Witness (Ex. 20:16; Deut 5:20)-----Simple Honesty (Matt 5:33-7)
Eye for Eye Justice (Ex. 21:24)----------------Forgiveness (Matt 5:38-42)
Love friends; hate enemies (Lev 19:18)------Love all people (Matt 5:43-48)
Outer Righteousness----------------------------Inner Righteousness (Matt 6:1-4)
Formulaic prayer--------------------------------Secret Prayer (Matt 6:5-6)
Ostentatious Religiosity------------------------Secret Fasting (Matt 6:16-18)
Outwardness-------------------------------------Inwardness (Matt 7:12)

I would be careful with this kind of supersessionism. Christ came - at least in Christian orthodoxy - to fulfill the law and the prophets, not to supercede it. There is nothing that makes Christianity superior to Judaism, and making it seem inferior in any way is completely devestating to the Christian message.

For example, the list completely neglects how Jesus is an interpreter and teacher of the Hebrew law and prophets, and makes him out to be (*somehow*) taking the Hebrew bible to a completely new level, which is something that clearly he did not do.

 

[A4B4]

angellous_evangellous, thank you for your warning. I hope that I was not misunderstood to be establishing Christianity's superiority over Judaism--I believe that Judaism and Christianity (and Islam) are good in so many ways. To me, much of Judaism makes great sense; I often find myself in the middle between Judaism and Christianity.

However, by following the internal laws, you will naturally follow the Jewish laws. I have heard many Christians say that Jesus came to show us how to live a life pleasing to God. With that, he is not replacing those laws, but telling us a good way to abide them--tutoring us, if you will, on how to succeed. That is not to say you must obey his advice--it is not a new law, but a method of fulfilling the law--and one could still follow those same laws even without his advice, as Jews have done for millennia.

In fact, I disagree to some extent concerning the message on the site I linked to. It is admittedly biased, as shown in their choice of the word ostentatious, and as I look back over the list, many of the "old laws" seem radically interpreted--for that I apologize. I will be more careful and show greater discretion when choosing quotes in the future. My intent was only to highlight the idea michel briefly touched upon.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Please,

the scriptures never make a claim to being perfect. Ask those who loudly proclaim the inerrancy of the scriptures to show you where. Remind them not to add or subtract from the scriptures when they can't.

[uqote=ae] Christ came - at least in Christian orthodoxy - to fulfill the law and the prophets, not to supercede it.[/quote] I will disagree with you here. First, Jesus fulfilled the law, and so it no longer applies. In that sense he has superseded it completely.

Hebrews 8:6 But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises. NIV

Hebrews 8:13 By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear. NIV

What is missing when MOST people read the scriptures is the reliance on the Spirit to help them understand them.

 

[Katzpur]

It is interesting that perfection can be wrought from imperfection. This means that the translators had to interpret, using some of the same methods that are used today by scholars, which text best represents continuity of the work.

Of course the Latter-day Saints would totally agree with this. Our eighth Article of Faith explains that "we believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly." This doesn't mean that we reject the Bible as being so full of errors that it's not worth the paper it's printed on. I'm glad to see that there are other Christians who aren't operating under the mistaken assumption that the words of the ancient prophets and apostles have been flawlessly preserved.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I would be careful with this kind of supersessionism. Christ came - at least in Christian orthodoxy - to fulfill the law and the prophets, not to supercede it. There is nothing that makes Christianity superior to Judaism, and making it seem inferior in any way is completely devestating to the Christian message.

For example, the list completely neglects how Jesus is an interpreter and teacher of the Hebrew law and prophets, and makes him out to be (*somehow*) taking the Hebrew bible to a completely new level, which is something that clearly he did not do.

I will disagree with you here. First, Jesus fulfilled the law, and so it no longer applies. In that sense he has superseded it completely.

Hebrews 8:6 But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises. NIV

Hebrews 8:13 By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear. NIV

What is missing when MOST people read the scriptures is the reliance on the Spirit to help them understand them.

Pete,

If Christianity supercedes Judaism in any way, it cannot be continuous with it and is completely disconnected rather than a fulfillment. Therefore, we need to affirm Judaism wholeheartedly in order to maintain any kind of historical, theological, or intellectual honesty.

For example, Jesus fulfills the law and the prophets - which are inseperable. Jesus is the Messiah because the law and the prophets testify to him. If the law and the prophets are superceded, then they no longer bear testimony to anything and Jesus is the Messiah of obsolete and useless religious teachings.

I grant that there is a very strong anti-Semetic streak in Christianity, and it has always been self-defeating.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Pete,

If Christianity supercedes Judaism in any way, it cannot be continuous with it and is completely disconnected rather than a fulfillment. Therefore, we need to affirm Judaism wholeheartedly in order to maintain any kind of historical, theological, or intellectual honesty.

Why? If I mortgage my house and pay off the mortgage, I have fulfilled it and so am FREE from it. I don't keep sending in payments because of some misguided loyalty. Jesus did not "replace" Judaism as he is the messiah: the chosen one.

I grant that there is a very strong anti-Semetic streak in Christianity, and it has always been self-defeating.

I find this argument to be vapid and without any serious support. After all, the scriptures were written BY JEWS and about Jews. There is no racism preached from the scriptures, but many see CHANGE as a threat and that threat is easily couched as racism.

 

[sojourner]

Please,

the scriptures never make a claim to being perfect. Ask those who loudly proclaim the inerrancy of the scriptures to show you where. Remind them not to add or subtract from the scriptures when they can't.

[uqote=ae] Christ came - at least in Christian orthodoxy - to fulfill the law and the prophets, not to supercede it.

I will disagree with you here. First, Jesus fulfilled the law, and so it no longer applies. In that sense he has superseded it completely.

Hebrews 8:6 But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises. NIV

Hebrews 8:13 By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear. NIV

What is missing when MOST people read the scriptures is the reliance on the Spirit to help them understand them.[/quote]
What's missing when many read the scriptures is the ability to engage in exegesis and to refrain from eisegesis.

When one establishes a covenant, two parties are needed. We know that God is always faithful to God's end of the covenant. We also know that God's people are not always faithful to their end of the covenant. When one party is unfaithful, the whole covenant goes sour, much like one marriage partner being unfaithful to the other partner -- the whole marriage covenant goes sour.

The reason why Hebrews states that the old covenant is obsolete is not because of something inherently wrong with God's covenant, it's obsolete because of what humanity has done to it.

The superiority of the new covenant to the old, as stated in Hebrews, has to do , I feel, with clarification, and not content. The old covenant was simple: "If you will be my people, I'll give you land and progeny." The new covenant is, likewise, simple,but more generalized than the old, and relies on grace, rather than upon our specific actions.

The gift of land and progeny (physical signs of prosperity, or abundant life) are given in exchange for our being God's people, achieved by our following a specific set of laws. In the new covenant, those laws are fulfilled by Christ on our behalf, because we cannot fulfill them. In exchange for our acceptance of that grace, we have been given abundant life.

It is specifically because Christ fulfills the Law, that we are saved ... not because Christ supplants the Law.

To extend your mortgage metaphor, what happens when you cannot pay your debt (the dynamic present in our ability to keep the Law)? You declare bankruptcy and your debts are forgiven. Humanity has been declared bankrupt, and we needed Christ to forgive our debt ... which he has done. The reason why the new covenant is "superior" to the old, is because it contains an element of "debt recovery" not included in the old.

 

[A4B4]

In my humble opinion:
Jesus lived the perfect life. He fulfilled the law where we could not. However, to fulfill the law to our greatest extent is to be "Christ-like"--to be Christian. Therefore, it would serve us well to live by the law, even if it no longer applies.

Of course, there are other ways we may be "Christ-like" as well.