How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20846
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 214 times
Been thanked: 364 times
Contact:

How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?

Post #1

Post by otseng »

From the On the Bible being inerrant thread:
nobspeople wrote: Wed Sep 22, 2021 9:42 amHow can you trust something that's written about god that contradictory, contains errors and just plain wrong at times? Is there a logical way to do so, or do you just want it to be god's word so much that you overlook these things like happens so often through the history of christianity?
otseng wrote: Wed Sep 22, 2021 7:08 am The Bible can still be God's word, inspired, authoritative, and trustworthy without the need to believe in inerrancy.
For debate:
How can the Bible be considered authoritative and inspired without the need to believe in the doctrine of inerrancy?

While debating, do not simply state verses to say the Bible is inspired or trustworthy.

----------

Thread Milestones

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20846
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 214 times
Been thanked: 364 times
Contact:

Re: How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?

Post #2821

Post by otseng »

DrNoGods wrote: Sun Jul 02, 2023 11:28 am You've repeated this many times, but I think you're simply mischaracterizing what these placeholder descriptions are.
Yes, we have discussed this many times. And this is an area we can probably debate about a long time. But, let's go with your line of thinking. Dematerialization is simply a placeholder term until we know exactly what happened to the man in the shroud. There's then nothing extranatural or supernatural about this theory. Therefore this theory can be accepted like any other scientific theory.

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 6047
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6893 times
Been thanked: 3244 times

Re: How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?

Post #2822

Post by brunumb »

otseng wrote: Mon Jul 03, 2023 8:07 am
DrNoGods wrote: Sun Jul 02, 2023 11:28 am You've repeated this many times, but I think you're simply mischaracterizing what these placeholder descriptions are.
Yes, we have discussed this many times. And this is an area we can probably debate about a long time. But, let's go with your line of thinking. Dematerialization is simply a placeholder term until we know exactly what happened to the man in the shroud. There's then nothing extranatural or supernatural about this theory. Therefore this theory can be accepted like any other scientific theory.
Surely dematerialisation involves complete annihilation of the atoms making up the body. What happens to all that matter?
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20846
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 214 times
Been thanked: 364 times
Contact:

Re: How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?

Post #2823

Post by otseng »

brunumb wrote: Mon Jul 03, 2023 8:50 am Surely dematerialisation involves complete annihilation of the atoms making up the body. What happens to all that matter?
Of course the body had rematerialized. Jesus appeared afterwards to Mary, the disciples, and other people as well.

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20846
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 214 times
Been thanked: 364 times
Contact:

Re: How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?

Post #2824

Post by otseng »

A common charge against the shroud, particularly by Christians, is why is there no explicit mention of a shroud with the image of Jesus on it in the Bible?

Earlier I mentioned there's 4 possible reasons:
- burial shrouds were considered unclean by the Jews
- the shroud was kept secret so it could not be destroyed as evidence by the Romans or Jews
- it clashed with the mindset of the Jews since the shroud represented suffering
- it clashed with Jewish sensitivities

But even with these, I do believe there are indirect references in the Bible regarding the post resurrection shroud.

I've argued the early Christians communicated in code and also the Bible is full of indirect references. It is therefore reasonable, and perhaps also expected, no direct references will be made to the post resurrection shroud. If any references would be made, it would be indirect.

Larry Stalley has written an extensive introductory article on possible verses that indirectly reference the shroud:
Skeptics and critics make a strong argument against the authenticity of the Shroud of
Turin with this simple observation: The Biblical writers failed to mention such a
marvelous treasure! 3 However, due to the threat of confiscation and destruction of the
Shroud by enemies, a plausible inference can be made that early Church leaders would
want to keep the Shroud’s existence a secret from outsiders. This paper provides brief
analyses of statements from within the New Testament that might be “veiled” or
“cryptic” references to what we know today as the Shroud of Turin. No fewer than
twelve texts are strong candidates in that regard. Another dozen statements are
considered secondary candidates. Elsewhere the author has written an extensive
exegesis on seven of these passages. 4 This paper is intended to serve as an introduction
to these Biblical texts.
https://www.academia.edu/42193327/Are_T ... =thumbnail

The first reference is Galatians 3:1.

AMP:
O YOU poor and silly and thoughtless and unreflecting and senseless Galatians! Who has fascinated or bewitched or cast a spell over you, unto whom--right before your very eyes--Jesus Christ (the Messiah) was openly and graphically set forth and portrayed as crucified?

ESV:
O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified.

ISV:
You foolish Galatians! Who put you under a spell? Was not Jesus the Messiah clearly portrayed before your very eyes as having been crucified?

KJV:
O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?

Lamsa:
O FOOLISH Galatians, who has be witched you from your faith after Jesus Christ, crucified, has been pictured before your eyes?

NET:
You foolish Galatians! Who has cast a spell on you? Before your eyes Jesus Christ was vividly portrayed as crucified!

NLT:
Oh, foolish Galatians! Who has cast an evil spell on you? For the meaning of Jesus Christ's death was made as clear to you as if you had seen a picture of his death on the cross.

The question is what did the Galatians see?

Without the TS, the explanations are weak. First off, they could not have actually seen Jesus on the cross and there is no commentator that holds to this view. The most common interpretation is Paul so graphically preached about the crucifixion that the Galatians saw it vividly in their minds.

But, Paul emphasized the point "before your very eyes", which indicates they visually saw something. He did not say "before your very ears you heard".
The Galatians have seen something. Remember that Paul is engaged in a debate in
the form of a letter. If he attempts to make a point in a way that is weak or illogical, he
loses. He cannot appeal to the Galatians by saying in effect: “You saw it with your own
eyes,” if both he and the Galatians know no one saw anything. Paul certainly means the
Galatians saw something extraordinary, something which in the wrong hands had the
power to “bewitch.” We would have expected him to say: “It was in your hearing that
Jesus Christ was publicly proclaimed as crucified.” But that is not what he says.
https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/stlbaltzpaper.pdf

"Vividly portrayed" in the Greek is "prographō". Stalley notes this word was used by Greek writers for the posting of public notices.
Also, the verb translated “vividly depicted (or posted up)” is in the past, aorist tense
from προγράφω. In this context, the verb carries the idea “to show forth” or “to portray
publicly.” Προγράφω was used by Greek writers for posting an “official notice,” an
“edict,” or a “warrant,” such as in the public square.

- “This was the common word for the posting of public notices.”
- F.F. Bruce comments: “‘…display before (one’s audience),’ as on a public
placard—a thoroughly classical usage.”
https://www.academia.edu/42193327/Are_T ... =thumbnail

If Gal 3:1 is a reference to the shroud, it would make sense. Paul had shown the Galatians the shroud as part of his preaching. The Galatians saw with their own eyes Jesus portrayed as crucified.

earl
Scholar
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: Texas
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?

Post #2825

Post by earl »

That the body of Jesus was dematerialized and thereafter rematerialized as Jesus cannot be confirmed from the NT.
It is tradition that this is the case but
Mk.16.12 clearly states Jesus was in another form prior to the doubting Thomas account.
Since Mary was refused to touch Jesus near the tomb ,"touch me not",Jesus' body is undefined post resurrection for A Mary earlier washed Jesus' feet in public.
I propose that the Bible was edited to show Jesus was resurrected into his former body.This is the editor's claims.Christians accept it as fact.
The two accounts are not in harmony.If the editing was removed then harmony exists.
The Mark account would be the most reliant since it indicates two bodily structures that have resemblance to human form.
Therefore rematerialization or dematerialization prepatory for rematerialization is not solid ground .
The reason I suggest this is a new body is that Jesus' post resurrection body could appear and disappear.
My opinion is that dematerialization would destroy the human body and rematerialization would not be effectual.

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 3373
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 604 times

Re: How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?

Post #2826

Post by Athetotheist »

[Replying to otseng in post #2820
The path of dematerialization by layers is perpendicular to the plane of the body. The effect is like an elevator falling, so most of the pressure would be downward for the top part of the cloth and the reverse for the bottom part.
An elevator shaft is vertical. The cranium is curved. Even if the part of the cloth covering the curve fell straight downward, it would still contact the body where the curve was.

From the perspective of the TS, it is not possible.
Circular argument.

From the perspective of just the Biblical accounts themselves, I don't think it aligns with the gospels either. But, if need be, we can get to the resurrection from just the Biblical perspective later, which is another huge subtopic.
There's so much evidence against Jesus having been the Jewish Messiah beyond just the resurrection stories that it renders the Turin cloth a non-issue.

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 6047
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6893 times
Been thanked: 3244 times

Re: How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?

Post #2827

Post by brunumb »

otseng wrote: Mon Jul 03, 2023 9:10 am
brunumb wrote: Mon Jul 03, 2023 8:50 am Surely dematerialisation involves complete annihilation of the atoms making up the body. What happens to all that matter?
Of course the body had rematerialized. Jesus appeared afterwards to Mary, the disciples, and other people as well.
What became of the matter between dematerialisation and rematerialisation? It is all contrary to the laws of physics, so I am interested in what miraculous process was involved. How was the cloth essentially unscathed in all of this?
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.

earl
Scholar
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: Texas
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?

Post #2828

Post by earl »

Dematerialization theory has no purpose because the stone was rolled away from the tomb thus not requiring any effort to teleport a body outside the tomb.
Only rematerialization theory or a restoration theory for the body of Jesus would require a cellular refresh as was the case with Lazarus who Jesus resurrected.
However a new body "in another form" as Mk. stated resolves this issue.

TRANSPONDER
Banned
Banned
Posts: 9237
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 1080 times
Been thanked: 3981 times

Re: How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?

Post #2829

Post by TRANSPONDER »

earl wrote: Mon Jul 03, 2023 6:43 pm Dematerialization theory has no purpose because the stone was rolled away from the tomb thus not requiring any effort to teleport a body outside the tomb.
Only rematerialization theory or a restoration theory for the body of Jesus would require a cellular refresh as was the case with Lazarus who Jesus resurrected.
However a new body "in another form" as Mk. stated resolves this issue.
I'm still willing to give the Shroud a bit of possible credit simply because I can't come up with a halfway plausible explanation. It has flaws, like clearly not working as a wraparound and just barely as a drape - over job.

The idea that Paul put the thing on display is intriguing but I am used to Paul putting forward personal arguments as proof before 'yore werry eyes', so it at best is possible if the Shroud is a real relic of the resurrection, but it is not in itself evidence FOR the Shroud being a relic of the crucifixion.

However, your post raises a few problems, apart from the idea of a new incorruptible body with the marks of crucifixion put in for identification purposes. It smacks of plot holes rather than any other kind. Also Matthew makes it clear that the tomb door was rolled away as the women were about to arrive, but Jesus is already gone. Unless Jesus really could walk through walls, we have to discard Mathew as invented narrative, as though there was really any doubt of it.

User avatar
boatsnguitars
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2060
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2023 10:09 am
Has thanked: 477 times
Been thanked: 582 times

Re: How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?

Post #2830

Post by boatsnguitars »

otseng wrote: Mon Jul 03, 2023 9:10 am
brunumb wrote: Mon Jul 03, 2023 8:50 am Surely dematerialisation involves complete annihilation of the atoms making up the body. What happens to all that matter?
Of course the body had rematerialized. Jesus appeared afterwards to Mary, the disciples, and other people as well.
There is absolutely no science involved in this statement. This is religious belief.

It's absurd that this has gone on this long. If someone believes God can attach an elephants head to keep a decapitated man alive (Ganesha) then surely there are no limits to the "hypotheses" that that person can invent to "explain" any event.

Would you agree that if a person used such reasoning that it wouldn't be science, but religious belief?
“And do you think that unto such as you
A maggot-minded, starved, fanatic crew
God gave a secret, and denied it me?
Well, well—what matters it? Believe that, too!”
― Omar Khayyâm

Post Reply