How do Christians Know the Bible is Both Inspired by God and Inerrant?

[columbus]

Who are you to claim that Mormons and Catholics are "fake" Christians?

I wasn't too clear. I was describing a common form of equivocating amongst Christians. On the one hand, they will often describe Christianity as the world's largest religion. And also commonly describe large groups like Catholics as "not Christian", or only the group that they belong to as "true Christian".
It can go from dominant religion to smallish cult in a paragraph.
Tom

 

[McBell]

I wasn't too clear. I was describing a common form of equivocating amongst Christians. On the one hand, they will often describe Christianity as the world's largest religion. And also commonly describe large groups like Catholics as "not Christian", or only the group that they belong to as "true Christian".
It can go from dominant religion to smallish cult in a paragraph.
Tom

Ah,
Seems I misunderstood where you were coming from.
My apologies.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Your definition of perfect means that they're robots and obey God because that is how they were created. There is no definition of perfect like that. To win, there has to be a lose. They had free will to choose and that was God's test. Adam and Eve were perfect with free will. With free will, He knew that angels like Lucifer would happen in heaven so he had to create a separate place for them. What you can't have both ways is free will versus programming.

My definition of perfect is pretty what what perfect means. A perfect being by definition cannot make an error. A being that makes an error is by definition imperfect. If as you claim free will enabled Adam and Eve to act in an imperfect manner then clearly giving them free will made them imperfect. Since God created them with this imperfection it is ludicrous that God would then punish them for having been created as God created them. If free will is an imperfection then quit claiming that they were created perfectly.

 

[james bond]

My definition of perfect is pretty what what perfect means. A perfect being by definition cannot make an error. A being that makes an error is by definition imperfect. If as you claim free will enabled Adam and Eve to act in an imperfect manner then clearly giving them free will made them imperfect. Since God created them with this imperfection it is ludicrous that God would then punish them for having been created as God created them. If free will is an imperfection then quit claiming that they were created perfectly.

You're putting words in my mouth. I've never said free will is an imperfection. It can lead to imperfection. There is a difference there. A perfect being is still perfect until they make an error. Once they make an error, then they are not perfect anymore. There is a fine difference which you seem to equate with someone being perfect and having free will, and not making an error forever. In Adam and Eve's time, they were still perfect up to the TOK. That is the story of Adam and Eve is it not? The fall from grace and being banished for the Garden of Eden?

In the afterlife, those who are saved will be perfect for eternity. They will be perfect and not make an error by obeying God freely. Moksha. It's a difficult concept to grasp in this life because we have free will and so much imperfection. Yet, we still strive for perfection. In the afterlife, we will have perfection as you state. Does that follow what the Bible said?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

From "The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy"

[The "Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy" was produced at an international Summit Conference of evangelical leaders, held at the Hyatt Regency O'Hare in Chicago in the fall of 1978. This congress was sponsored by the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy. The Chicago Statement was signed by nearly 300 noted evangelical scholars, including . . . .]
source​

Article VI: Plenary Verbal Inspiration
We affirm that the whole of Scripture and all its parts, down to the very words of the original, were given by divine inspiration.

Article XII: Exhaustive Inerrancy
We affirm that Scripture in its entirety is inerrant, being free from all falsehood, fraud, or deceit.
source

​

So how do they know? Is it explicitly stated so in the Bible, if so, where?

I ask because there are quite a few things in the Bible that one would not think the Christian god would inspire, nor are seemingly without error.


.

No one knows this, they can only believe it to be so.
There is certainly no proof.
As they claim...." that the whole of Scripture and all its parts, down to the very words of the original, were given by divine inspiration." It is difficult to Understand which Bible and scripture they are talking about. As no two versions of the Bible contain the same number of books or use identical words.

 

[Skwim]

No one knows this, they can only believe it to be so.
There is certainly no proof.

And that's what I'm looking for, on what basis do they believe it.

As they claim...." that the whole of Scripture and all its parts, down to the very words of the original, were given by divine inspiration." It is difficult to Understand which Bible and scripture they are talking about. As no two versions of the Bible contain the same number of books or use identical words.

There are a lot of versions that have the same number of books and even the very same books.


.

 

[QuestioningMind]

You're putting words in my mouth. I've never said free will is an imperfection. It can lead to imperfection. There is a difference there. A perfect being is still perfect until they make an error. Once they make an error, then they are not perfect anymore. There is a fine difference which you seem to equate with someone being perfect and having free will, and not making an error forever. In Adam and Eve's time, they were still perfect up to the TOK. That is the story of Adam and Eve is it not? The fall from grace and being banished for the Garden of Eden?

In the afterlife, those who are saved will be perfect for eternity. They will be perfect and not make an error by obeying God freely. Moksha. It's a difficult concept to grasp in this life because we have free will and so much imperfection. Yet, we still strive for perfection. In the afterlife, we will have perfection as you state. Does that follow what the Bible said?

Wait a second now. By your convoluted definition of perfection I pitched a PERFECT game in baseball... that is up until the point at which the opposing team got a player on base. And of course if the opposing team gets a player on base then I never DID pitch a perfect game. Adam and Eve were perfect, right up until they weren't. Yeah, and the Titanic was UNSINKABLE... right up until it sank. But actually if the Titanic indeed WAS unsinkable, then it never would have sank. And if Adam and Eve indeed WERE perfect, then they never would have acted in an imperfect manner.

Let's be honest. What it appears that you mean to say is that Adam and Eve were created with the POTENTIAL to be perfect, but they were given this flaw called free will that made them gullible enough to be tricked into being imperfect by a talking snake. A talking snake, mind you, that God Himself created for the purpose of trying to trick them.

 

[james bond]

Wait a second now. By your convoluted definition of perfection I pitched a PERFECT game in baseball... that is up until the point at which the opposing team got a player on base. And of course if the opposing team gets a player on base then I never DID pitch a perfect game. Adam and Eve were perfect, right up until they weren't. Yeah, and the Titanic was UNSINKABLE... right up until it sank. But actually if the Titanic indeed WAS unsinkable, then it never would have sank. And if Adam and Eve indeed WERE perfect, then they never would have acted in an imperfect manner.

Let's be honest. What it appears that you mean to say is that Adam and Eve were created with the POTENTIAL to be perfect, but they were given this flaw called free will that made them gullible enough to be tricked into being imperfect by a talking snake. A talking snake, mind you, that God Himself created for the purpose of trying to trick them.

Tsk. I guess you do not see the difference in your example and Adam and Eve. In baseball, the other team caused the imperfection. With A&E, it was their own free will. You did not listen to what the Bible said and I said. You're not wrong. Your idea of perfection "forever" will come in the afterlife. As for the past, history cannot be changed. We cannot go back to the past and change it. That is science fiction. More evidence for God through creation science. Adam and Eve were perfect and could have remained that way and we would have been perfect, as well. I'm admitting you would be right in that scenario.

Moreover, I would think you're an atheist by what you just said in your second paragraph. Atheists are usually wrong. Had you read the Bible, there is no talking snake. We all know that. Satan just used the snake to disguise himself. He was the one talking to Eve. Anyway, so much for this Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth lesson.

 

[McBell]

Would some one please define "perfect" for the context of this thread.
Seems ya'll talking past each other.

 

[james bond]

Would some one please define "perfect" for the context of this thread.
Seems ya'll talking past each other.

I explained it this way. If you look at the first people who bought and read the Bible, then there were varied opinions like we have here. However, the book took off to become the best selling non-fiction book in the history of humans. What one smart person said was that they though it was based on God's love for us, so that is why it was perfect for them.

 

[McBell]

I explained it this way. If you look at the first people who bought and read the Bible, then there were varied opinions like we have here. However, the book took off to become the best selling non-fiction book in the history of humans. What one smart person said was that they though it was based on God's love for us, so that is why it was perfect for them.

I am not interested in your propaganda.
I asked for a definition of the word "perfect".
Care to try again?

 

[james bond]

I am not interested in your propaganda.
I asked for a definition of the word "perfect".
Care to try again?

Look in the mirror. That ain't it.

 

[McBell]

Look in the mirror. That ain't it.

Interesting spelling of the word "no"

 

[QuestioningMind]

Tsk. I guess you do not see the difference in your example and Adam and Eve. In baseball, the other team caused the imperfection. With A&E, it was their own free will. You did not listen to what the Bible said and I said. You're not wrong. Your idea of perfection "forever" will come in the afterlife. As for the past, history cannot be changed. We cannot go back to the past and change it. That is science fiction. More evidence for God through creation science. Adam and Eve were perfect and could have remained that way and we would have been perfect, as well. I'm admitting you would be right in that scenario.

Moreover, I would think you're an atheist by what you just said in your second paragraph. Atheists are usually wrong. Had you read the Bible, there is no talking snake. We all know that. Satan just used the snake to disguise himself. He was the one talking to Eve. Anyway, so much for this Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth lesson.

Now, now, you can't just decide to change the definition of perfection. Again, claiming that they were PERFECT up until the point where they acted in an imperfect way is like claiming the Titanic was UNSINKABLE, right up until the point that it sank. By sinking the Titanic proved that it was NOT unsinkable. By acting in an imperfect way A&E proved that they were NOT created perfectly.

"Atheists are usually wrong." Really? Then I guess that means that you are usually wrong as well, since I assume you don't believe in Vishnu or Zeus. The reality is that you are an atheist when it comes to every single religion, except for the one you happen to believe in. How did you even reach the conclusion that atheists are usually wrong? Am I 'wrong' not to believe in Odin? Am I 'wrong' not to believe in Scientology?

"...there is no talking snake. We all know that. Satan just used the snake to disguise himself." We all know that? Have you ever Googled Was the talking snake in Eden Satan? I just did and there seems to be a GREAT deal of debate on the subject... that is debate among CHRISTIANS. Below is a quote from just one such article.

"The snake in the Garden of Eden is a fierce and scary creature. But is he Satan? He has horned facial scales, so maybe he is.
The Bible is more ambiguous. In Genesis, the snake is introduced as “more cunning than any of the creatures of the field that the LORD God had made” (Genesis 3:1). He’s a creature, but a smart one. In the book of Revelation, Satan is called “the ancient serpent” (Revelation 12:9, 20:2), which refers to the snake in Genesis. So in the New Testament the snake is Satan. How did a smart “creature of the field” come to be identified with the Prince of Darkness? That’s an impressive leap in a reptile’s résumé. The answer tells us a lot about the importance of Genesis, and how people thought about it, in the early years of Judaism and Christianity."

So let's not pretend that 'we all know' the snake was Satan. It's clearly a matter up for debate. But let's assume the snake WAS Satan... how does that change the situation in any way? Instead of God creating A&E with the imperfection of being gullible enough to do what a talking snake told them, it just means that God created A&E with the imperfection of being gullible enough to do what Satan disguised as a talking snake told them. How does that change the reality that God created them with this imperfection or that God KNEW a snake or Satan would try and deceive them?

 

[james bond]

Now, now, you can't just decide to change the definition of perfection. Again, claiming that they were PERFECT up until the point where they acted in an imperfect way is like claiming the Titanic was UNSINKABLE, right up until the point that it sank. By sinking the Titanic proved that it was NOT unsinkable. By acting in an imperfect way A&E proved that they were NOT created perfectly.

"Atheists are usually wrong." Really? Then I guess that means that you are usually wrong as well, since I assume you don't believe in Vishnu or Zeus. The reality is that you are an atheist when it comes to every single religion, except for the one you happen to believe in. How did you even reach the conclusion that atheists are usually wrong? Am I 'wrong' not to believe in Odin? Am I 'wrong' not to believe in Scientology?

"...there is no talking snake. We all know that. Satan just used the snake to disguise himself." We all know that? Have you ever Googled Was the talking snake in Eden Satan? I just did and there seems to be a GREAT deal of debate on the subject... that is debate among CHRISTIANS. Below is a quote from just one such article.

"The snake in the Garden of Eden is a fierce and scary creature. But is he Satan? He has horned facial scales, so maybe he is.
The Bible is more ambiguous. In Genesis, the snake is introduced as “more cunning than any of the creatures of the field that the LORD God had made” (Genesis 3:1). He’s a creature, but a smart one. In the book of Revelation, Satan is called “the ancient serpent” (Revelation 12:9, 20:2), which refers to the snake in Genesis. So in the New Testament the snake is Satan. How did a smart “creature of the field” come to be identified with the Prince of Darkness? That’s an impressive leap in a reptile’s résumé. The answer tells us a lot about the importance of Genesis, and how people thought about it, in the early years of Judaism and Christianity."

So let's not pretend that 'we all know' the snake was Satan. It's clearly a matter up for debate. But let's assume the snake WAS Satan... how does that change the situation in any way? Instead of God creating A&E with the imperfection of being gullible enough to do what a talking snake told them, it just means that God created A&E with the imperfection of being gullible enough to do what Satan disguised as a talking snake told them. How does that change the reality that God created them with this imperfection or that God KNEW a snake or Satan would try and deceive them?

First, I already proved you wrong with your examples comparing baseball and A&E with free will. Again, you're claiming Adam & Eve were going to be perfect forever with free will. That is your definition and we already went over it and I agreed it will be so in the afterlife. Now, you're claiming the Titanic as unsinkable. What you're doing is committing a logical fallacy of comparing apples and oranges.

I stopped reading when you said, "The reality is that you are an atheist when it comes to every single religion, except for the one you happen to believe in." That makes no sense. You do not know the meaning of atheist.

 

[QuestioningMind]

First, I already proved you wrong with your examples comparing baseball and A&E with free will. Again, you're claiming Adam & Eve were going to be perfect forever with free will. That is your definition and we already went over it and I agreed it will be so in the afterlife. Now, you're claiming the Titanic as unsinkable. What you're doing is committing a logical fallacy of comparing apples and oranges.

I stopped reading when you said, "The reality is that you are an atheist when it comes to every single religion, except for the one you happen to believe in." That makes no sense. You do not know the meaning of atheist.

Naw, you didn't manage to prove anything. I never compared baseball and A&E with free will. I claimed that saying A&E were perfect up until the point where they acted imperfectly is like claiming I pitched a perfect game... up until the point when the opposing team got a player on base. It is like claiming the Titanic is unsinkable, right up until it sank. My definition of perfect is pretty much what perfect means. Your silly definition of perfect is it's perfect up until it proves itself not to be. That's just plain meaningless.

I DO happen to know the definition of atheist.. it is the lack of a belief in a god. So let me ask you, do you believe in the god Vishnu? Do you believe in the god Odin? If you answered NO then YOU are an atheist when it comes to both Vishnu and Odin. You have a lack of belief in them. Name any other god that you don't consider to be real and you are an ATHEIST when it comes to all of those gods as well. If fact, I suspect that the ONLY god you do NOT take an atheistic view of is the god of the Hebrew bible. If you can understand why I don't believe in Odin, just as you don't, then you should also understand why I don't believe in the Hebrew god. Just as no one has been able to present me with reliable evidence for the existence of Odin, no one has been able to present with sufficient evidence to believe in the existence of your Hebrew god either. It's really not that difficult a concept to understand.

 

[McBell]

It's really not that difficult a concept to understand.

You would be surprised how many people can not understand it

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

For those who sometimes read things too literally I should have clarified:

"How do Some Christians Know the Bible is Both Inspired by God and Inerrant?"​

.

Not to through a monkey wrench into this thread, but haven't you assumed that there IS a god?

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

However, the book took off to become the best selling non-fiction book in the history of humans.

I didn't realize we had sunk so low that we now define perfection as not something like "ideal forms", but "impressive book sales, most of which were coerced".

 

[james bond]

I didn't realize we had sunk so low that we now define perfection as not something like "ideal forms", but "impressive book sales, most of which were coerced".

Yes, after Adam and Eve's fall, we're all low lifes and do not understand perfection anymore. Far too often, we judge others by how much money they have as one of the criterias of success. I try not to judge others unless I have to, but one of my weaknesses or sins is using money to judge my own success.