swamplizard
Human
Greetings,
Could it be that Christianity has a duty to act according to its doctrine instead of opportunity?
best,
swampy
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is it possible for believers to believe the Bible has mistakes in it?
- Thread starter savagewind
- Start date
Greetings,
Could it be that Christianity has a duty to act according to its doctrine instead of opportunity?
best,
swampy
Yes. This is the reason why it is important to consider the truthfulness of one's thoughts and words. Thank you.
That I really can't see, personally. Doctrines are just that, after all. They are supposed to serve a purpose as opposed to being one.
Unless, perhaps, if one takes it for granted that the doctrine is god-given and therefore more sacred than whatever goals suggest changing it.
I hope someday we will no longer have people with such a belief.
So the pre-crucifixion Bible was without error but later corrupted. Is that your claim?
Before I go on, please know that I don't mean any disrespect, I only say what I think, and I'm not perfect so both possibilities to be right or wrong are present.
That is another valid point in my book. I however think that if it a misunderstanding took place in the earliest translations for example, then all that followed would accordingly be not what the Christ intended.
In my humble opinion, unless it was part of the original text that a duty or a burden will follow the end of the first era of the Christ telling people after him that they are suppose to improve it, then I would say no, I don't think so. I also believe that God followed Christianity by Islam, something He created, for that purpose.
I say that because I believe that God is absolute in everything that He does not need a human being to improve His own words He personally revealed. He would do it Himself.
Yes and no; I meant there is a high possibility it is, by saying "I can't say they same", and I elaborate now that I also don't say it for certain that the post crucifixion does for sure have mistakes.
Simply put, I cannot tell either as a fact.
That is another valid point in my book. I however think that if it a misunderstanding took place in the earliest translations for example, then all that followed would accordingly be not what the Christ intended.
In my humble opinion, unless it was part of the original text that a duty or a burden will follow the end of the first era of the Christ telling people after him that they are suppose to improve it, then I would say no, I don't think so. I also believe that God followed Christianity by Islam, something He created, for that purpose.
I say that because I believe that God is absolute in everything that He does not need a human being to improve His own words He personally revealed. He would do it Himself.
Yes and no; I meant there is a high possibility it is, by saying "I can't say they same", and I elaborate now that I also don't say it for certain that the post crucifixion does for sure have mistakes.
Simply put, I cannot tell either as a fact.
Last edited:
I appreciate that. For the record, I never take your posts as intending disrespect.
Why do you believe that there exists a high possibility that the pre-crucifixion Bible was without error but later corrupted. Who do you think corrupted it and why?
Koldo
Outstanding Member
I don't think so.
The can of worms is open once you see mistakes on it though.
If a certain part is a mistake, then it follows other parts could be as well.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
That is the most ridiculous post I have read in a quite while.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
What are you talking about?
Weren't the gospels written after Jesus' death?
EDIT: Not to mention the Pauline epistles.
Last edited:
Last edited:
I'm Catholic. I certainly think that the Old Testament is full of anti-Christian verses, and contains even devilish thoughts on God.
A vengeful prideful God never existed, not even before Christ.
I also think that Saint Paul misconceived Christ's teachings, and that's understandable given that Paul has never met Jesus
Saint Paul said that we all are sinners and we need God's grace.
That is the most devilish thing I've ever heard
We humans have infinite potentialities to do good things, and we can use our free will to avoid the grave sins. I am sure that even venial sins can be avoided.
A vengeful prideful God never existed, not even before Christ.
I also think that Saint Paul misconceived Christ's teachings, and that's understandable given that Paul has never met Jesus
Saint Paul said that we all are sinners and we need God's grace.
That is the most devilish thing I've ever heard
We humans have infinite potentialities to do good things, and we can use our free will to avoid the grave sins. I am sure that even venial sins can be avoided.
Last edited:
When I read this I heard him say the Hebrew scriptures (untranslated) are without error. The Greek scriptures are with error even in the original writing of them.
I'm sure you could. But it probably works itself out - if you know the Bible has mistakes, you're going in a little more skeptical and a little less faithful. Either your faithful side will win over and your mind will explain these mistakes to make them not seem like mistakes, or your skeptic side will win over and your mind will begin to question everything else in the Bible.
It's much like noticing flaws in the Roswell UFO story while believing it happened. It's possible, but most likely it'll pan out to either believing in the story completely or not believing the story at all.
It's much like noticing flaws in the Roswell UFO story while believing it happened. It's possible, but most likely it'll pan out to either believing in the story completely or not believing the story at all.
Thank you for your honesty man.
I believe the pre-crucifixion Bible was without errors (this is what I meant before actually) because Jesus was there and he would never had left this world without making sure of that. I have that much faith in him and more.
I can't say who did it for certain, or when that was, but what I believe for certain is that along the way until now things either changed, rather than saying corrupted, or mistranslated from the original source language. I believe the Quraan is a continuation/supersede to the Bible, and I see some things contradict heavily, mainly the identity of Jesus Christ. This is my reason and my belief only that I would like to share with you.
Written, at least, after his leaving this world as you say, not revealed. The Bible in my beliefs was completely revealed to Jesus through the Angel Gabriel. Not sure if it was started to be written before or after, but the version that existed in the time before his leaving this world, I believe was 100% authentic as he would never had allowed it to change while he was around.
All of the above are as per the Islamic point of view, my beliefs only. With utmost respect for other beliefs.
Maybe it was started to be written after the crucifixion as I suspected? The Bible I believe is originally a revelation memorized by Jesus not a physical book.
Last edited:
Skwim
Veteran Member
Interesting. But I'm curious as to where this information comes from. Care to share?
"Original Bible"! What is the original Bible?
By "pre-crufixion Bible" I assume you mean the Old Testament, so consider:
Solomon had 4,000 stalls and 12,000 horsemen - 2 Chron 9:25
Solomon had 40,000 stalls and 12,000 horsemen - 1 Kings 4:26
Jesse had eight children - 1 Sam 16:10-13
Jesse had seven children - 1 Chron 2:13-15
David takes 1700 horsemen - 2 Sam 8:4
David takes 7000 horsemen - 1 Chron 18:4
David destroys 700 chariots - 2 Sam 10:18
David destroys 7000 chariots - 1 Chron 19:18
The Temple pillars were 18 cubits - 1 Kings 7:15
The Temple pillars were 35 cubits - 2 Chron 3:15
The point being that both examples in each pair can't be right; they're contradictory. So, one must be wrong, and because it occurs in the Old Testament it means that in each case the pre-crufixion Bible is in error. Solomon had 40,000 stalls and 12,000 horsemen - 1 Kings 4:26
Jesse had eight children - 1 Sam 16:10-13
Jesse had seven children - 1 Chron 2:13-15
David takes 1700 horsemen - 2 Sam 8:4
David takes 7000 horsemen - 1 Chron 18:4
David destroys 700 chariots - 2 Sam 10:18
David destroys 7000 chariots - 1 Chron 19:18
The Temple pillars were 18 cubits - 1 Kings 7:15
The Temple pillars were 35 cubits - 2 Chron 3:15
Q: "Is it possible for believers to believe that the Bible has mistakes in it?"
My opinion: --> Not usually, because 'Believers' are limited to what they can believe. Contradictions create doubts. Using the example of Jesus parable of the seed and the various kinds of ground the seed that lands on rocky soil is the 'Believer'. They receive the gospel with joy but as soon as there is hardship they're gone. (Matthew 13:5) Believers therefore cannot accept errors in their Bibles (or other source texts).
My opinion: --> Not usually, because 'Believers' are limited to what they can believe. Contradictions create doubts. Using the example of Jesus parable of the seed and the various kinds of ground the seed that lands on rocky soil is the 'Believer'. They receive the gospel with joy but as soon as there is hardship they're gone. (Matthew 13:5) Believers therefore cannot accept errors in their Bibles (or other source texts).
Last edited:
outhouse
Atheistically
Then you may not understand the concept of god, nor how his definition evolved over thousands of years by different cultures.
OK so most of the OT and a major part of the NT are devilish.
Since you attest to know so much about the bible you judge it, any chance you want to try and write your own theology???
outhouse
Atheistically
Have you ever thought the errors and contradictions were placed there because the original authors and readers did not care about them?
That the scriptures were not supposed to be read as history or science?
It is all in context and interpretation, something that is not the same now as it was when it was written. Our lives and cultures are not the same, and thus the context is different.
It isn't so much a time-based cultural difference as the fact that we aren't necessarily the hard working, ecumenical, committed Sabbath keeping people they were writing to. I think the authors cared deeply about us far away in their futures and they wanted to talk to us not just through books but through commitment and committed people -- also aided by images, stories and parables. The books were not the primary method of transmission. The cultural gap isn't really so wide. There is no 'Bible code' but the material is meant to be read by a certain type of person. Its full of encouragement, conviction, urgings and pleadings. The material isn't intended to be an endless source of discussion but of action.
This is a very difficult thing for me as a Christian to say, and it has taken years and some debates with my Muslim friends as well as independent research, but I can no longer hold to my previous belief that the Bible is completely free of errors and mistakes. There are some things in the Bible that are not true, like the sun being created after the earth, or rabbits chewing their cud. There are also other things that in most likelihood did not happen, like an Egyptian Pharaoh drowning while pursuing a runaway army of Israelite slaves.
I am not sure where that leaves me. I believe the Bible is correct about Jesus, and in showing what God is like. However, the authors of the books I believe, though they were inspired by God, they definitely got some things wrong.