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

[otseng]

From the On the Bible being inerrant thread:

How 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?

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

• Case study of Hezekiah
• Start discussing global flood / Flood Model summary
• Recap arguments of authority of the Bible
• Start discussing Tower of Babel / Tower of Babel summary
• Start discussing archaeology / Philosophy of science / Origin of alphabet / End of discussion on archaeology
• Start discussing cosmology / Concluding cosmology
• Start discussing Shroud of Turin / Summary top TS imaging theories / Created DefendingChristianity.com and TS subforums / Shroud of Turin summary
• Start discussing Bible and resurrection
• Start discussing the Messiahship of Jesus / Messiahship of Jesus wrap up
• Start discussing Old Testament ethics
• Summary argument of atheism and morality / God basis for objective morality
• Start discussing genocide / Genocide summary argument
• Start discussing slavery / Slavery summary argument
• Start discussing homosexuality / Homosexuality summary argument
• Old Testament ethics summary argument

[otseng]

[Replying to William in post #1422]

The most logical answer is no aliens exist, not that they are hiding from us.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #1422]

The most logical answer is no aliens exist, not that they are hiding from us.

Can you break that down for us?

[brunumb]

The difference is that we have an awful lot of hard evidence for stars, planets, what the universe is made from and how life functions. Not so much for any gods.

Just in the discussion on cosmology alone, the evidence to me is overwhelming for the existence of a creator/designer. And as we learn more about physics and biology, we find the conditions for life is quite rare and special. To the point now that as we've seen even scientists have to resort to extranatural explanations.

I am pretty confident that there are forms of life elsewhere in the universe.

Of course my next question is what evidence do you have to support that life exists elsewhere?

I see no evidence for the existence of a creator/designer. Life on Earth exists in a wide range of conditions even if a lot of them are not conducive to humans. As far as I know, there is no evidence for the existence of life elsewhere in the universe so I do not claim that it is actually there. From what we know about the structure of the universe and the existence of life here on Earth, I am confident that it does exist elsewhere. That does not mean that it has to be anything more than simple forms like those that dominate our own planet.

[otseng]

Of course my next question is what evidence do you have to support that life exists elsewhere?

I see no evidence for the existence of a creator/designer.

Even if there is no evidence for a creator/designer, one can still confidently believe God exists. Just like what you've said that no evidence exists for alien life, yet you confidently believe life exists elsewhere.

But, as for no evidence for God, that is not true. You might not accept them, but there are plenty of indirect evidence. Further, it is also the most plausible explanation for a wide-ranging host of issues, issues in cosmology being one of the areas.

Life on Earth exists in a wide range of conditions even if a lot of them are not conducive to humans.

We're not talking about life on earth, but on other planets. There are so many necessary requirements for any life to exist on a planet that to have all of them on a single planet among all the planets in the universe would be very rare. Some of these are covered in the Rare Earth book.

As far as I know, there is no evidence for the existence of life elsewhere in the universe so I do not claim that it is actually there. From what we know about the structure of the universe and the existence of life here on Earth, I am confident that it does exist elsewhere. That does not mean that it has to be anything more than simple forms like those that dominate our own planet.

How can you be confident if there's no evidence for it?

But, you are not alone in this belief. We can add this as another belief in cosmology that has no empirical support for.

[otseng]

[Replying to William in post #1422]

The most logical answer is no aliens exist, not that they are hiding from us.

Can you break that down for us?

Let's start with what is the Fermi paradox.

The Fermi paradox is the conflict between the lack of clear, obvious evidence for extraterrestrial life and various high estimates for their existence. As a 2015 article put it, "If life is so easy, someone from somewhere must have come calling by now."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox

The Fermi Paradox refers to the dichotomy between the high probability that extraterrestrial intelligence exists and the fact that we have no evidence for such aliens.

https://www.livescience.com/fermi-paradox

This prompted Fermi to ask what was (to him) an obvious question: “where is everybody?” In a galaxy assumed to be filled with clever beings, why don’t we see any? This dissonance is known as the Fermi Paradox.

https://www.seti.org/fermi-paradox-0

There's obviously only two possible scenarios. Either aliens do not exist or aliens exist.

This paradox was described by the late British science-fiction author, Sir Arthur C. Clarke, who said: "Two possibilities exist: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying."

https://www.livescience.com/fermi-paradox

And it's obvious we do not have any evidence aliens exist. That's the whole point of the Fermi paradox.

So, if aliens do not exist and there's no evidence for them, this would simply affirm each other.

If aliens do exist and there's no evidence for them, then you have to provide reasons for why no evidence exists. These explanations would all be speculative and there would be no evidence to support these explanations.

So, the most logical answer is no aliens exist.

Let me give an illustration. Suppose I believe a person named Jessica Galba exists. She is rich and beautiful and a godly Christian. She lives in Paris. But, she is not in the Paris phone book. She cannot be found in any government records. She has no birth certificate. She does not show up in any Google search. Further, I believe she is secretly in love with me. However, she has not communicated with me in any form (telephone, email, post card, text, etc). Which is a more logical position to hold? 1) I confidently believe Jessica Galba exists or 2) Jessica Galba does not exist.

[William]

[Replying to otseng in post #1425]

Using the same logic and reasoning...

What is the difference between aliens not existing and YHVH not existing?

[JoeyKnothead]

...
Let me give an illustration. Suppose I believe a person named Jessica Galba exists. She is rich and beautiful and a godly Christian. She lives in Paris. But, she is not in the Paris phone book. She cannot be found in any government records. She has no birth certificate. She does not show up in any Google search. Further, I believe she is secretly in love with me. However, she has not communicated with me in any form (telephone, email, post card, text, etc). Which is a more logical position to hold? 1) I confidently believe Jessica Galba exists or 2) Jessica Galba does not exist.

Is God In the phone book? Is God listed in any government records beyond his acolytes putting him there? Does God have a birth certificate?

Jessica Galba, googled.

We're told by others, but not God, that he's in love with us.

Which is the more logical position to hold ?

1) You confidently believe God exists, or

2) God does not exist

[William]

[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #1427]

Which is the more logical position to hold ?

1) You confidently believe God exists, or

2) God does not exist

All things being equal, why is 2) worded differently from 1)?

[JoeyKnothead]

[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #1427]

Which is the more logical position to hold ?

1) You confidently believe God exists, or

2) God does not exist

All things being equal, why is 2) worded differently from 1)?

I tried to stick to the original wording and intent best I could.

Did I goof something up?

[William]

[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #1427]

Which is the more logical position to hold ?

1) You confidently believe God exists, or

2) God does not exist

All things being equal, why is 2) worded differently from 1)?

I tried to stick to the original wording and intent best I could.

Did I goof something up?

Which is the more logical position to hold ?

1) You confidently believe God exists, or

2) You confidently believe God does not exist