On the Bible being inerrant.

[nobspeople]

I came across a post the other day as follows:
"My argument doesn’t rely on the Bible being inerrant."
It has meaning in the context of that discussion, of which I wasn't privy. But it got me thinking:

Does (or should, if you wish) a christian believe the bible is inerrant?

There seems to be a couple camps on the subject:
1) A christian should believe the bible is 100% true and accurate in every way
1a) This seems to indicate the bible was 'god written' (by whatever means you think necessary)
2) A christian should believe the bible is capable of being wrong or inaccurate
2a) This seems to indicate the bible may or may not have been 'god inspired'
2a1) To what extent is it god inspired and when do you know it is and when it isn't?
2b) To what percentage is the bible capable of being wrong or inaccurate?
3) A christian should be able to pick-n-choose their beliefs when they fit their chosen lifestyle agenda (this seems to be a popular choice for obvious reasons)

For discussion:
Do you believe the bible is infallible or not?
Why or why not?
How did you come to this belief?

NOTE: This should be about one's belief and why, not taken as a challenge to 'prove' the bible is or isn't correct and or devoid of errors, contradictions, lies or ½ truths.

[nobspeople]

There are many ancient religious works from other groups of people:
Tipitaka
The Vedas And The Upanishads
The Quran And The Hadiths
The Agamas
The Dao De Jing
The Seven Valleys and The Four Valleys
The Avesta
Even the Sumerians were influential, even today.

Rather or not you consider them relevant only matters to you.

Plenty of great examples of influential works there, thanks. Just to expand upon the point, it's worth pointing out just how 'influential' the Sumerians really were.

The Eridu Genesis for example, dates back to around 1600 BCE and details an interesting story about a man who is instructed to build an ark for 'preserving the animals and the seed of mankind', before a god causes a flood designed to destroy mankind.

If it hadn't been written a thousand years before a certain Hebrew book, one might think the Sumerians were guilty of plagiarism...

Thanks for that!
I don't know a whole lot of the Sumerians, but what I do know is quite interesting. I find it odd (though perhaps I shouldn't) that more isn't taught about them in the USA.

[otseng]

What I mean is, Bible can be seen contradictory, but it can also be seen non-contradictory. Often it seems atheist want to see it contradictory. Reason why I think so is that those lists of alleged contradictions are so silly most of the time that only reason why I think one would make such issues is that person just needs to see contradictions even where they do not exist. Maybe their atheism is so weak that it needs the contradictions, I don’t know.

Given that some theists recognize the contradictions in the Bible, it is clearly NOT an atheist vs. theist issue:

I would agree contradictions is not an atheist vs theist issue. As a Christian myself (and I would consider myself fairly orthodox), I see it as the opposite - Christians want to see the Bible as perfect, inerrant, and without contradictions. And the reason is the assumption that the authority of the Bible hinges on inerrancy. I'm not sure how to dislodge this assumption. It is ingrained in Christians as well as skeptics, but I'm trying to address this in How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?.

[Eloi]

Sometimes the problem is that some information is not given, like when everyone who read that specific document in the time it was written knew the data, even if they don't see it in the document. It is obvious that even if certain information is not included, the information that is included is exact and verifiable.

For example, when Matthew and Luke wrote about Jesus' genealogies, it was easy to verify with the official jewish documents any mistake ... Obviously, if there was something wrong with what they wrote we would not have had to wait for some "wise" modern enemies of the Bible to tell us that there were errors there ... The very enemies of the Christians of that very moment would have ended up right there with the Christians showing them those supposed errors.

[Eloi]

Jesus believed that the Bible did not contain errors.

He regarded the Scriptures as a document whose formal declarations could never be annulled (John 10:35). For him the Scriptures (which includes three parts: the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets _ Luke 24:44) were the truth and absolutely necessary in order to be "sanctified" (John 17:17).

Modern Jehovah's Witnesses view the Scriptures in the same way as Jesus, and that includes the inspired writings that later became part of the canon of Christian writings (Compare to 2 Pet. 3:15,16).

2 Tim. 2:16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.

It would be impossible for Paul to say these things about the inspired Scriptures if there were errors in them. How then could it be someone "fully competent, completely equipped for every good work" or "setting things straight"? What kind of "righteous discipline" could be applied based on the Scriptures if they contained errors in their formal statements? God's justice is not like that of humans ... that's why in some other comment I compared to be a lawyer and adjust to the references in the law books and previous cases to judge current cases ... There is no just law without a reliable document. The Bible contains the information necessary to learn God's point of view on the issues we need to understand for our salvation.

Rom. 5:4 For all the things that were written beforehand were written for our instruction, so that through our endurance and through the comfort from the Scriptures we might have hope.

1 Cor. 10:11 Now these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for a warning to us upon whom the ends of the systems of things have come.

If Jesus considered the Scriptures have not errors, then the problem the people loosing their faith have is not that ... The problem is that they are allowing the wrong opinions in their life. It is like: you are what you eat. I may love McDonalds and all kind of fast food, but I would not allow any "apology" against my faith get into my mind. If I KNOW the Bible is the Word of God as Jesus also believed and I am his follower, I need to do a better research with the right persons ... not with the wrong ones.

Who is so stupid to go to an atheist forum to read their opinion about the Bible? They live in another world . Or is it that you are somehow hoping that atheists will tell you anything that can make your faith stronger? Really? If they have to lie, exaggerate, invent anything, or anything else to destroy your faith, then they will. Anyway, in their conscience, to what god are they going to be accountable?

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to otseng in post #112]

... Christians want to see the Bible as perfect, inerrant, and without contradictions. And the reason is the assumption that the authority of the Bible hinges on inerrancy.

It is a lack of faith.
It does not matter if the bible has errors, if one can turn and listen to Christ - the true Word of God - to know what is or is not true; to know what may have been mistranslated or copied wrong in what is written. But this requires faith - faith in Christ and so also in His promises, that He truly is alive, that He truly does speak and call His sheep by name, that He truly does lead us (to life, yes, and into all truth). He, Himself, the Word of God who is alive and active. If one is lacking in this faith, and if one WANTS this faith, then one can always ASK for that faith, and keep asking, keep knocking, having faith in the promise (and the One who made the promise) that the door WILL be opened.


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Eloi]

(...) Christians want to see the Bible as perfect, inerrant, and without contradictions. And the reason is the assumption that the authority of the Bible hinges on inerrancy. I'm not sure how to dislodge this assumption. It is ingrained in Christians as well as skeptics, but I'm trying to address this in How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?.

Most Christians know that the Bible is inspired and has no contradictions or mistakes. When I say "the Bible" I mean that which is really the Bible ...

It is not Christians with a wishfull thinking, but atheists who want the Bible to be a book different to what it really is. The Bible has a lot of enemies and false friends; they even tried to kill "her" but they could not do it (Is. 40:8).

Many people have even tried to create books like the Bible, or to try and do something similar to what it does for the people who take it seriously ... but no book created by men has been comparable to it.

[bluegreenearth]

Peace to you,

[Replying to otseng in post #112]

... Christians want to see the Bible as perfect, inerrant, and without contradictions. And the reason is the assumption that the authority of the Bible hinges on inerrancy.

It is a lack of faith.
It does not matter if the bible has errors, if one can turn and listen to Christ - the true Word of God - to know what is or is not true; to know what may have been mistranslated or copied wrong in what is written. But this requires faith - faith in Christ and so also in His promises, that He truly is alive, that He truly does speak and call His sheep by name, that He truly does lead us (to life, yes, and into all truth). He, Himself, the Word of God who is alive and active. If one is lacking in this faith, and if one WANTS this faith, then one can always ASK for that faith, and keep asking, keep knocking, having faith in the promise (and the One who made the promise) that the door WILL be opened.


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

What evidence would demonstrate to your satisfaction that faith is an unreliable method for distinguishing true claims from false claims?

[Diagoras]

Most Christians know that the Bible is inspired and has no contradictions or mistakes.

argumentum ad populum for starters. Flat out wrong as any basic research would tell you.

When I say "the Bible" I mean that which is really the Bible ...

Could you be more specific? "Really" the Bible, or REALLY the Bible? Perhaps you could provide a link to a 'real' Bible.

It is not Christians with a wishfull (sic) thinking, but atheists who want the Bible to be a book different to what it really is.

If you're going to make a claim like this in a debate forum, it would be useful to remember that making sweeping statements like the one above are rarely a strong argument. Providing a single example of an atheist who doesn't want the Bible to be any different would be sufficient to counter your claim.

Furthermore, your statement is extremely vague and open to much misunderstanding. Different in content, meaning, historical reliability - what? And to what extent? Can you provide any evidence of an atheist's statement that supports this claim?

The Bible has a lot of enemies and false friends; they even tried to kill "her" but they could not do it (Is. 40:8).

I had to look this up, and it's not clear who "they" are, or "her" in the context of grass withering and flowers fading. So I'm not sure what point you're making here - I'm as confounded as a moon, I suppose. (Isaiah 24:23)

Many people have even tried to create books like the Bible, or to try and do something similar to what it does for the people who take it seriously ... but no book created by men has been comparable to it.

There's certainly a long history of deuterocanonical books and pseudographa being argued over (whether they be included in the biblical canon or not), and given that different denominations disagree on the exact content of their bibles, it would suggest that there isn't one 'real' Bible out there. I don't expect that's your intended point, though. There are other 'holy books' of course - but since this thread isn't trying to compare them, it's again not really relevant to debate.

[brunumb]

Who is so stupid to go to an atheist forum to read their opinion about the Bible? They live in another world . Or is it that you are somehow hoping that atheists will tell you anything that can make your faith stronger? Really? If they have to lie, exaggerate, invent anything, or anything else to destroy your faith, then they will. Anyway, in their conscience, to what god are they going to be accountable?

The irony here is that in many surveys atheists have demonstrated better knowledge of the Bible than Christians. Go figure. Christians don't need to worry about losing their faith if they keep their minds firmly closed as is so often the case. Lies and exaggerations are not necessary to undermine faith. Curiously, when one examines so-called creation-science, it is replete with lies and deliberate misdirection directed at keeping the initiated misinformed and convinced that genuine science is false. If a religion relies on such tactics and can't stand up to close scrutiny then it deserves to crumble.

[Eloi]

I just laugh when reading atheists talking about the Bible. They really live in a different world where verbiage pays.