Is it necessary for the Bible to be inerrant?

[otseng]

Is it necessary for the Bible to be inerrant and still be authoritative? Can the Bible be authoritative while still have errors in it?

Also up for discussion is what is meant by the Bible and inerrancy.

As is the case for all debates in TD&D, it is assumed the Bible is authoritative and is not up for debate.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 8 by otseng]

Some background information may be of interest

SOUTHERN BAPTISTS/LUTHERENS

Interpretations of Bible Divide Protestant Denominations

We clearly could not agree on the inerrancy question,� said Wanda W. Button of Concord, Iowa, the head of the committee that composed the paper. It affirmed that the Bible, “rightly interpreted, is a fully trustworthy guide for our lives� while not agreeing on whether “trustworthy� meant inerrant.

https://www.nytimes.com/1979/09/16/arch ... ggest.html

THE BAPTIST SCHISM - New Yor Times, June 9, 1985


source: https://www.nytimes.com/1985/06/09/maga ... chism.html

[Elijah John]

[Replying to Elijah John]

How can be imperfect something inspired by the spirit of God?

Inspired, not dictated. Because fallible human beings are part of the equation. Also, when Paul wrote to Timothy that "all Scripture is inspired.." was he referring to his own writings? OR to the Hebrew Bible. (the "Old" Testament). Remember historical context before you answer please.

Or are you claiming the Bible was dictated by God? Muslims make that claim about the Qu'ran, but I don't think even Fundamentalist Christians make that same claim about the Bible.

OK, let's go then, with perfect and infallible. Consider Exodus 21.20-21. The slave beating verse. Moses, at least tacitly approves of the institution of slavery here. Not only that, he gives permission to beat one's slave half-to-death as long as they don't die immediately. Moses justifies that because he said that the slave is the slaveowner's "property". Two questions. 1) Do you think these atrocious verses are directly from God? 2) Do you think God considers any human being made in His image to be "property" of another human being?

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by otseng]

Yes, it has to be. Otherwise it is essentially the equivalent of just a collection of human ideas untrustworthy, when it comes to the big questions that lay beyond the realms of human experience.


JW

Then you defend Exodus 21.20-21? How? Do you think human beings should be considered property of another? Do you think God does? If so, do you think it's OK to beat one's slave half-to-death as long as they don't die right away? Do you think God ever approved of the institution of slavery?

If not, how'd that passage ever get into a perfect Bible? Do you elders preach this passage from the pulpit, extolling it's virtue? Do they advocate snake handling too?

[2timothy316]

Yes, the Bible can be imperfect, just as our leaders can be, and still be authoritative. Authoritative in that it is the main source of Spiritual inspiration for Christians and Jews.

Especially now that we are not under jurisdiction of a theocracy, we cannot go anymore by the "letter of the (Biblical) law." But we can still look to the Good Book for Wisdom, and Spiritual guidance and inspiration. In that sense, it is still authoritative.

So can God be just as imperfect as a human leader?

[Elijah John]

Yes, the Bible can be imperfect, just as our leaders can be, and still be authoritative. Authoritative in that it is the main source of Spiritual inspiration for Christians and Jews.

Especially now that we are not under jurisdiction of a theocracy, we cannot go anymore by the "letter of the (Biblical) law." But we can still look to the Good Book for Wisdom, and Spiritual guidance and inspiration. In that sense, it is still authoritative.

So can God be just as imperfect as a human leader?

Are you equating the Bible with God? Is the Bible "God"? I think there's a word for that. "Bibliolatry"

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 1 by otseng]

Yes, it has to be. Otherwise it is essentially the equivalent of just a collection of human ideas untrustworthy, when it comes to the big questions that lay beyond the realms of human experience.


JW

Then you defend Exodus 21.20-21? How? Do you think human beings should be considered property of another? Do you think God does? If so, do you think it's OK to beat one's slave half-to-death as long as they don't die right away? Do you think God ever approved of the institution of slavery?

He did allow it and still allows it today. Why does that make the Bible imperfect? Because there are imperfect people doing bad things? Why are you blaming a book for an institution that humans created? Are you aware that the Mosaic law was not made to abolish slavery? Do you know what the Mosaic law was there for?

If not, how'd that passage ever get into a perfect Bible? Do you elders preach this passage from the pulpit, extolling it's virtue? Do they advocate snake handling too?

Our elders just point to it as a fact of life during the time of the Israel. Just because the Bible is frank on God's allowing of slavery doesn't make the Bible imperfect and I don't understand why it should.

[WeSee]

[Replying to post 12 by Elijah John]

Do you think God considers any human being made in His image to be "property" of another human being?

In the following God is depicted as expressly doing just that. It expressly depicts God as condoning slavery:
Leviticus 25
44“ ‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life...

It is passages such as these that gave supporters of slavery in the antebellum period to believe that God was on their side.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to Elijah John]

How can be imperfect something inspired by the spirit of God?

Inspired, not dictated. Because fallible human beings are part of the equation. Also, when Paul wrote to Timothy that "all Scripture is inspired.." was he referring to his own writings? OR to the Hebrew Bible. (the "Old" Testament). Remember historical context before you answer please.

"For you know this first, that no prophecy of Scripture springs from any private interpretation. For prophecy was at no time brought by man’s will, but men spoke from God as they were moved by holy spirit." - 2 Peter 1:20, 21

Paul is not enough? Then about about Peter? Or will this be rejected as well?

"Paul also wrote you according to the wisdom given him, speaking about these things as he does in all his letters. However, some things in them are hard to understand, and these things the ignorant and unstable are twisting, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction." 2 Peter 3:15, 16

How about Peter acknowledging Paul's writings are included with 'the rest of the scriptures'?

Are these scriptures going to be accepted as "being accurate or true; reliable" as the definition of authoritative means or not?

[WeSee]

[Replying to post 16 by 2timothy316]

He did allow it and still allows it today. Why does that make the Bible imperfect? Because there are imperfect people doing bad things? Why are you blaming a book for an institution that humans created?

Leviticus 25 depicts God as expressly condoning chattel slavery instead of prohibiting it as He did with murder for instance which is also "imperfect people doing bad things". Your argument is specious at best.

[otseng]

[Replying to Tcg]

Yes, most of the groups that I found add the qualification that inerrancy only applies to the autographs (original). Probably if pressed, the Southern Baptists and Lutheran Church Missouri Synod would limit it to the autographs, but they are not explicit in this.

Following applies inerrancy only to the autographs:

Chicago statement on Biblical inerrancy
"We affirm that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture,"
http://www.alliancenet.org/the-chicago- ... -inerrancy

Evangelical Theological Society
"The Bible alone, and the Bible in its entirety, is the Word of God written and is therefore inerrant in the autographs."
https://www.etsjets.org/about

Ligonier
"Importantly, when we speak of biblical inerrancy, we are speaking of the original text of Scripture, not its manuscript copies."
https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotion ... inerrancy/

Moody Bible
"Moody Bible Institute believes strongly in the factual, verbal, historical inerrancy of the Bible. That is, the Bible, in its original documents, is free from error in what it says about geography, history and science as well as in what it says about God."
https://www.moodybible.org/beliefs/posi ... nts/bible/

Assembly of God
"Inerrancy is a near synonym to infallibility and has been used more recently to further attest that Scripture as recorded in the original manuscripts, the autographs, is without error."
https://ag.org/Beliefs/Position-Papers/ ... -Scripture

Jehovah’s Witness
"Absolute inerrancy is therefore to be attributed to the written Word of God. This is true of the original writings, none of which are known to exist today. The copies of those original writings and the translations made in many languages cannot lay claim to absolute accuracy."
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/120 ... p=par#h=23

Answers in Genesis
"When we talk about inerrancy, we refer to the original writings of Scripture."
https://answersingenesis.org/is-the-bib ... scripture/

CARM
"Inspiration and inerrancy applies to the original writings, not to the copies. In other words, it is the original writings that are without error. The copies, sadly, have copyist errors in them."
https://carm.org/inerrancy-and-inspiration-bible

1921 Christian Fundamentals Association creed
"We believe in the plenary and verbal inspiration of the Bible as the Word of God; that it is authentic in its matter, authoritative in its counsels, inerrant in the original writings, and the only infallible rule of faith and practice."
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/unreasona ... mentalism/

Theopedia
"Inerrancy is the view that when all the facts become known, they will demonstrate that the Bible in its original autographs and correctly interpreted is entirely true and never false in all it affirms, whether that relates to doctrines or ethics or to the social, physical, or life sciences."
https://www.theopedia.com/inerrancy

CS Lewis Institute
"The inerrancy of Scripture means that Scripture, in the original manuscripts and when interpreted according to the intended sense, speaks truly in all that it affirms."
http://www.cslewisinstitute.org/The_Ine ... ullArticle

New World Encyclopedia
"Biblical inerrancy is the doctrinal position that in its original form, the Bible is totally without error, and free from all contradiction; referring to the complete accuracy of Scripture, including the historical and scientific parts."
https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/en ... _Inerrancy

Evangelical Dictionary of Theology
"When all the facts become known, they will demonstrate that the Bible in its original autographs and correctly interpreted is entirely true and never false in all it affirms, whether relative to doctrine or ethics or the social, physical or life sciences."
https://bible.org/article/inspiration-inerrancy