Is it necessary for the Bible to be inerrant?

Post by **otseng** » Tue Oct 29, 2019 3:54 pm

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.

Avoice · Post by **Avoice** » Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:14 am

As I have said, Christians can not prove their religion is true if they are forced to apply truth to it.
Christian doctrine must be upheld by the Hebrew Scriptures. If it isn't then it is false. Christianity fails under the light. But it has survived by manipulating the HS and changing the messages they contain. Every PROOFTEXT they claim is non existent, mistranslated, or massaged in some way to point to Jesus.

Now I read here that the innerancies can be accounted for by saying, and I'm paraphrasing - that God got daydreaming and wasn't paying too much attention to what words he was sending down the arms of the gospel writers. But if what they wrote makes Christianity out to be a lie then it is GOD that makes mistakes. Oh no...the gospel writers aren't lying. Oh no .. God wasn't thinking right. It is God who lied. Yeah...YOU ARE SAYING THAT GOD IS THE LIAR. You can try to sugar coat it and say he didn't do it on purpose. You are accusing God of writing lies. Is their no end to what Christians will do. Their truth is based on twisting God's truth into lies. They can never stand on the truth of the Hebrew scriptures. They have outdone themselves today. Backed into a corner they have nothing left so they do the unthinkable:. Accuse God of lying. Yes, Christians are infected with an original sin alright. They say they inherited the inability to do good. No. What they have in common with Adam and Eve is blaming others for their transgressions. Then attempting to hide behind a fig leaf
to hide their dulisobedience. Hiding behind Jesus tightens the rope around their necks. Adam and Eve admitted they knew the law the minute they put on the fig leaves in order to avoid God's wrath. Hiding behind Jesus tells God that you DO KNOW his laws still stand. If they didn't why do they want Jesus. It would be better if they tied a millstone around their necks and threw themself over a bridge. Admitting one knows the law and intentionally refuses it is a fool to think Jesus' sacrifice will save them. GO.....GO READ THE LAWS ON SACRIFICES... You Christians learned of sacrifices from the Hebrew Scriptures...go read it real good.

SACRIFICES ARE ONLY GOOD FOR UNINTENTIONAL SINS. Your sins are intentional. And you have proved they are intentional by clinging bto Jesus. NOW HURRY....go figure out a way to manipulate the truth on the laws of sacrifice. If you try standing on the truth you will fall. Now go...turn the truth of God into a lie so you in may worship the creature not the Creator

I am still waiting, WAITING NEARLY TWO MONTHS NOW, for JehovahsWitness to defend her position. JW claims that I am wrong. That the supposed fulfilled prophecies that I noted we're fulfilled. I elaborated on why they weren't. That the writer of Mathew lies. JW refuses to respond with a defense. A person who refuses to debate their position should NOT be allowed here. Is this a debate forum or is it not? JW refused to debate another person. JW said they weren't obligated to answer every question. JW is right. We don't have to say anything. But once a person enters a debate they should be required to debate the topic.

With all due respect to this forum and it's founders, it is failing at it's task at being a face to debate in which they moderate. Allowing people to make a claim then run should not be allowed. It is disrespectful to those who are here to debate. Allowing a person to run from a debate and continue posting on your site abandoning debate after debate is not acceptable. It's not acceptable for atheists not acceptable for theists. This is a place of debate. If the actions of JW is acceptable then I will start doing the same. Maybe we all should

brianbbs67 · Post by **brianbbs67** » Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:39 am

Avoice wrote: As I have said, Christians can not prove their religion is true if they are forced to apply truth to it.
Christian doctrine must be upheld by the Hebrew Scriptures. If it isn't then it is false. Christianity fails under the light. But it has survived by manipulating the HS and changing the messages they contain. Every PROOFTEXT they claim is non existent, mistranslated, or massaged in some way to point to Jesus.

Now I read here that the innerancies can be accounted for by saying, and I'm paraphrasing - that God got daydreaming and wasn't paying too much attention to what words he was sending down the arms of the gospel writers. But if what they wrote makes Christianity out to be a lie then it is GOD that makes mistakes. Oh no...the gospel writers aren't lying. Oh no .. God wasn't thinking right. It is God who lied. Yeah...YOU ARE SAYING THAT GOD IS THE LIAR. You can try to sugar coat it and say he didn't do it on purpose. You are accusing God of writing lies. Is their no end to what Christians will do. Their truth is based on twisting God's truth into lies. They can never stand on the truth of the Hebrew scriptures. They have outdone themselves today. Backed into a corner they have nothing left so they do the unthinkable:. Accuse God of lying. Yes, Christians are infected with an original sin alright. They say they inherited the inability to do good. No. What they have in common with Adam and Eve is blaming others for their transgressions. Then attempting to hide behind a fig leaf
to hide their dulisobedience. Hiding behind Jesus tightens the rope around their necks. Adam and Eve admitted they knew the law the minute they put on the fig leaves in order to avoid God's wrath. Hiding behind Jesus tells God that you DO KNOW his laws still stand. If they didn't why do they want Jesus. It would be better if they tied a millstone around their necks and threw themself over a bridge. Admitting one knows the law and intentionally refuses it is a fool to think Jesus' sacrifice will save them. GO.....GO READ THE LAWS ON SACRIFICES... You Christians learned of sacrifices from the Hebrew Scriptures...go read it real good.

SACRIFICES ARE ONLY GOOD FOR UNINTENTIONAL SINS. Your sins are intentional. And you have proved they are intentional by clinging bto Jesus. NOW HURRY....go figure out a way to manipulate the truth on the laws of sacrifice. If you try standing on the truth you will fall. Now go...turn the truth of God into a lie so you in may worship the creature not the Creator

I am still waiting, WAITING NEARLY TWO MONTHS NOW, for JehovahsWitness to defend her position. JW claims that I am wrong. That the supposed fulfilled prophecies that I noted we're fulfilled. I elaborated on why they weren't. That the writer of Mathew lies. JW refuses to respond with a defense. A person who refuses to debate their position should NOT be allowed here. Is this a debate forum or is it not? JW refused to debate another person. JW said they weren't obligated to answer every question. JW is right. We don't have to say anything. But once a person enters a debate they should be required to debate the topic.

With all due respect to this forum and it's founders, it is failing at it's task at being a face to debate in which they moderate. Allowing people to make a claim then run should not be allowed. It is disrespectful to those who are here to debate. Allowing a person to run from a debate and continue posting on your site abandoning debate after debate is not acceptable. It's not acceptable for atheists not acceptable for theists. This is a place of debate. If the actions of JW is acceptable then I will start doing the same. Maybe we all should

SACRIFICES ARE ONLY GOOD FOR UNINTENTIONAL SINS

You are correct in this. We cannot intentionally sin and be forgiven according to the bible or Tanakh. Yet, many lie or steal intententally. Since Ha'shem still forgives us, has He violated His law? "Come back to me, and I will wash you clean as fleece".

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Thu Oct 31, 2019 6:22 am

Continued from post #70 by JehovahsWitness

While accepting that the original scripture was indeed inerrant, many believe this original perfect product was subsequently corrupted by copiests. Thus they call into question any word, verse chapter or episode they read as being a possible interpolation, even in the absence of any supporting evidence. The reasoning being if it could happen, it probably did. And if it did happen it probably will again.

IF COPIES ARE NOT PERFECT SHOULD THAT NOT PUT EVERY BIBLE STORY INTO DOUBT?

It is true no copy or translation can claim be "perfect" and the bible itself has indeed been subject to attempts to corrupt its content but the body of manuscripts we have in our modern times removes any doubt that what we are reading is now substantially what was originally written. By "substantially" it is meant that there may be omissions of single words in various texts, inversion of figures or the use of a synonym where another word may have originally been used but that there are no narratives, stories, chapters or verses that are currently accepted as authentic which were not in the originals (nor have any such been removed). Any translation is subject to the constraints and limitation of its target language and so of itself may not fully transmit the force of the original words chosen, but today's bible reader need not pause after every sentence to deliberate if the thought or narrative itself is the word of God, of a copiest or interpolator.

The bible has had a long and arduous struggle to survive to our day, and thanks to the diligent work and courage of the men and women who valued it, protected it and carefully copied and translated it over two millennia those that are searching for God do not have to do so without a completely reliable guide.

FURTHER READING Christendom & Inerrancy
http://www.religioustolerance.org/inerran5.htm

RELATED POSTS

What do various groups have to say about biblical inerrancy? (otseng)
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 85#p985185

What is the Jehovah's Witness position on biblical inerrancy ?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 43#p985343

Why would God choose to communicate via the written word?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 08#p766608

What are copyist errors ?
viewtopic.php?p=1058539#p1058539

Does Jeremiah 8:8 imply that the scribes in Jeremiah's day had corrupted the scriptures ?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 09#p779409

Would God's use of human "secretaries" to write the bible not have corrupted it from its start?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 83#p833783

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

BIBLICAL INERRANCY , CONTRADICTIONS and CORRUPTION OF SCRIPTURE

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Thu Oct 31, 2019 6:51 am

[Replying to post 71 by Avoice]

Did God write every line of the Hebrew Bible? OR did he inspire it. I would ask you the same question that I ask Christians. If the Bible (Hebrew Bible) can be shown to have even one error in it, does it lose authority for a Jew? If so, why should that be so?

Yes, the New Testament should be validated

Yes, the New Testament claims to have solid roots in the "Old" Testament. But scrutiny demonstrates that many of the claimed fulfilled prophecies either 1) are not prophecies at all, 2) are mistranslations of key words "almah

Post by **otseng** » Thu Oct 31, 2019 6:31 pm

JehovahsWitness wrote: Yes but this thread as you said is not about proving inerrancy it's about defining what it means and discussing in view of that definition if it would be important.

I'm not asking that inerrancy needs to be proved. But, it certainly cannot be assumed to be true.

JehovahsWitness wrote: It means we would have a starting point.

I see it as a starting point for confusion.

I've pointed out the widely accepted position among Christian groups and leaders is inerrancy only applies to the autographs. However, if you ask the layman about inerrancy, they typically would not limit it to the autographs, but to their own translation. So, they would have an incorrect view of what is inerrancy.

Once one accepts there is an omnipotent God

At a minimum, not everyone accepts this assumption. As for myself, I would disagree with this assumption.

and that he could produce inerrant scripture albeit using imperfect humans, and that the original texts would have been free of any kind of error we at least are in a position to start the investigation to see *if* gaining access to that original product is possible.

It is not necessary for the autographs to be inerrant in order to gain access to it.

It potentially raises the bible from the valuable to the divine.

There exist people, even Biblical scholars, who do not accept inerrancy, but believe the Bible is divine. So, it is not necessary for the Bible to be inerrant.

Post by **otseng** » Thu Oct 31, 2019 6:52 pm

I think one reason there's such a battle over the view of inerrancy is people think there's only two positions. But it's a false dilemma. Just because someone denies Biblical inerrancy does not mean he's necessarily claiming the autographs has errors. It is not either one accepts Biblical inerrancy or Biblical errancy. One does not need to accept either.

We might as well argue if the Bible is indistinguishable or inextricable or inconspicuous. The debate would be meaningless.

I agree with John Frame that we should drop the term inerrancy to describe the Bible.

"Other things being equal, I would prefer to drop all extra-scriptural terms including â€œinfallibleâ€� and â€œinerrantâ€� and simply speak, as Scripture does, of Godâ€™s Word being true."
https://frame-poythress.org/is-the-bible-inerrant/

Avoice · Post by **Avoice** » Thu Oct 31, 2019 7:39 pm

[Replying to post 73 by JehovahsWitness]

I'm not sure who 'they' are that question translations. I guess I'll call them Translation Checkers or TC. You state (paraphrasing) that they call into question everything they read even if they have no evidence to support their suspicions. And you feel the TC's shouldn't do that? We are to just expect it so why bother looking seems to be how you see it.

If we should expect it from any it would be the Hebrew Scriptures. It is far, far older than the Christian testament and much, much larger in volume. Which means it has had a lot more time in which to make mistakes and more passages to make the mistakes in. The Christian Testament is the exact opposite. There should be less mistakes because the entire corpus of that testament is small in comparison to the HS and copyists have had less time to mess it up.
But here is what we find -. Every Torah scroll no matter where you go in the world says the same thing. EXCEPT for one scroll in Yemen or Morocco. There was one letter that was different. But it did in no way change the meaning of the message. In 1947 or 48 the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered. What was the relevancy of this discovery? They too say what the Torah scrolls say. All that nonesense that the Jews changed passage that could be about Jesus came to a screeching halt. For you see the Dead Sea Sea Scrolls predate Christianity. No one knew of Jesus.

You praise those that translated the scriptures. But limited it to over two milennia. Which could at the most mean up to 3,000. You are therefore speaking of those who gave you the King James version and all those that followed. You used the phrase 'arduous struggling to survive'. Survive? It survived, really? Guess what part bit it survived? The five books of Moses. They became part of the Septugiant. The Septugiant of course is Christianitys root work. The books of Moses were the only books translated by the Jews. These contain the laws The rest of the Hebrew scriptures was in the hands of others. The Church couldn't tamper with that which contains the laws. They were stuck with it.

If one is to just expect there to be mistakes as you do then the mistakes should be spread out all over. Well....what do we find? The five books of Moses made it through the ages!! The laws of God have not changed. Why? Because the church was stuck with it. But the rest if the Hebrew Scriptures... that is where the text was raped. The church did the sane to it's own works

You say there are no chapters or verses that are currently accepted that we're not in the originals. That is not true. I can give many examples. My examples aren't going to be the ones that are basically harmless. Such as the titles to the gospels. Which have Christians believe that's who write them. Lies. But don't change Gods message.

What is currently accepted is not in the originals? Well, let's look at the oldest gospel. No, it's not Mathew. Mark is the oldest. It is most definitely not the same as Mark today. Guess what was added to it? The resurrection. Yes! The original book ended at the tomb. The church doesn't hide it. Christian Bible's that are annotated will footnote this fact that. That is a HUGE difference. You don't accept the original. You believe the writer of Mark testified to the resurrection. He didn't. Jesus did not resurrect. Just ask Mark (whoever he really was) You want to uphold Mark as true? You want to speak the truth? Then speak it. According to the sacred gospel of Mark there was no resurection. Jesus died.

THE GOSPEL TRUTH OF MARK IS THAT JESUS DID NOT RESURRECT.
JESUS DIED. THAT IS THE GOSPEL TRUTH.

Oddly enough I am trying to uphold the truth of YOUR bible. Something you won't do. I could be wrong. Let me make sure:.

According to the book called Mark did the ORIGINAL WRITER say Jesus resurrected?

brianbbs67 · Post by **brianbbs67** » Thu Oct 31, 2019 11:04 pm

[Replying to post 76 by Avoice]

Mark originally eneded at 16:8. The rest was added later. But, in this fact the JW's get it correct. Their NWT stops at 16:8.

https://biblehub.com/text/hebrews/10-26.htm

The Greek here shows the true gospel of Christ. These Hebrew new comers to the way, are told in Hebrews, That they have been shown the truth, the true law of Moses. Remember, most were illiterate or could not afford a Torah to study. The Hebrews were told by the Pharisees what the law was. The problem was they added man made traditions that negated the law. This was the call of Christ. To call Hebrews back to the truth, the true actual law of Moses.

Hebrews 10:28 spells this out. Actually the whole book spells this out.

https://biblehub.com/text/hebrews/10-28.htm

114 [e] á¼€Î¸ÎµÏ„Î®ÏƒÎ±Ï‚
athetÄ“sas Having set aside V-APA-NMS
5100 [e] Ï„Î¹Ï‚
tis anyone IPro-NMS
3551 [e] Î½ÏŒÎ¼Î¿Î½
nomon [the] law N-AMS
3475 [e] ÎœÏ‰Ï‹ÏƒÎÏ‰Ï‚
MÅ�useÅ�s of Moses, N-GMS
5565 [e] Ï‡Ï‰Ï�á½¶Ï‚
chÅ�ris without Prep
3628 [e] Î¿á¼°ÎºÏ„Î¹Ï�Î¼á¿¶Î½
oiktirmÅ�n mercies N-GMP
1909 [e] á¼�Ï€á½¶
epi on the basis of Prep
1417 [e] Î´Ï…Ïƒá½¶Î½
dysin two Adj-DMP
2228 [e] á¼¢
Ä“ or Conj
5140 [e] Ï„Ï�Î¹Ïƒá½¶Î½
trisin three Adj-DMP
3144 [e] Î¼Î¬Ï�Ï„Ï…ÏƒÎ¹Î½
martysin witnesses, N-DMP
599 [e] á¼€Ï€Î¿Î¸Î½Î®ÏƒÎºÎµÎ¹Â·
apothnÄ“skei he dies. V-PIA-3S

This says anyone who sets aside the law of Moses and does not get pity or mercy from the 2 or 3 witnesses, dies.

2 or 3 witnesses were required to convict under Moses' law.

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Thu Oct 31, 2019 11:44 pm

otseng wrote:
JehovahsWitness wrote: It means we would have a starting point.
I see it as a starting point for confusion.

And each individual deciding based on their feelings which parts of the bible are authentic is a NOT as starting point for confusion? 10,000 Christian denominations with conflicting beliefs who have historically even killed each other in political wars is evidence of what?! Unity?

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:35 am

I didn't see where in the OP it has to be assumed that the bible has errors in it and I'm not here to discuss whether or not it has. I don't mind stating for the record that I don't believe it has any errors (historical, scientific) or any contradictions but we are not here to discuss that ...

otseng wrote: Seems like people still want to discuss if the Bible has errors in it.

otseng wrote:
The topic is not is the Bible inerrant...

I'm here to discuss what inerrancy is...

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

...and whether such inerrancy is important.

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

My answer is no, a corrupted bible mixed with human thinking inserted by copiests or interpolators cannot be trusted, the integrity of the text would have to be maintained for it to be of value. A compromised text, without a means to verify and rectify inaccurtate statements which have no basis in reality, would leave the door open for the wholesale rejection of parts or entire narratives and this in turn would lead to perverted doctrine.... and 10,000 different denominations worth of utter confusion.

JW