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: 20660
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 202 times
Been thanked: 347 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

JoeMama
Apprentice
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2023 1:47 am
Has thanked: 26 times
Been thanked: 38 times

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

Post #2141

Post by JoeMama »

[Replying to otseng in post #2127]

This conversation about the properties of the Shroud of Turin strikes me as silly, if not absurd and a ridiculous waste of time. Why would anyone believe that a random cloth, seeming to bear that image of a dead person, be a cloth placed on the son of God? Could it not have been a cloth placed on any number of other deceased persons? What evidence exists that it covered a resurrected "Jesus"? If there is none, then why talk about carbon-14 content and contaminations?

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20660
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 202 times
Been thanked: 347 times
Contact:

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

Post #2142

Post by otseng »

Athetotheist wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 8:24 pm
Don't see how this is relevant with cotton contamination.
It's one of the areas you've been promising enlightenment in.
Yes and I also said I'll be presenting that at the end.
As for image formation, I'll be covering that later.
So you're willing to move on, but only if we stay in your comfort zone?
If there's no arguments left for the skeptics, then make personal observations.

As for being in my comfort zone in discussing the most probable theory, actually I'm already prepared to do that. But I already warned people this will be a long topic, so everyone will have to be patient.

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20660
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 202 times
Been thanked: 347 times
Contact:

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

Post #2143

Post by otseng »

JoeMama wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 11:18 pm St. Augustine (354-430) was one of the founders of the Roman Catholic Church. He well understood that Christianity was like a house of cards; if the church dared to admit to even a single error in the Bible, who could say there wasn't an error on every page? The resurrection story might then be false and everyone's hopes are in vain.
Yes, the resurrection story might be false. As a matter of fact, I've already stated if someone wants to falsify Christianity, then all you need to do is falsify the resurrection. So, this is why I'll be spending considerable time on debating the resurrection.
JoeMama wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 11:27 pm The image on the shroud is obviously not Jesus'. The image is of a long-haired, bearded person, but Jesus when he was crucified was bald and was clean-shaven.
Please provide evidence for your claim.
JoeMama wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 1:54 am Why do persons on this site think the cloth in question might be the burial cloth of Jesus? Might it not be the burial cloth of some other person?
That's what we're debating now -- who is the person on the TS? Please provide evidence it's someone else.
At about the time this "Jesus" was alleged to have died, were there not tens of thousands of other men who died, too, who also might also have had cloth placed over their body?
Could be. I'll be presenting evidence it was Jesus. If there's no evidence from another position, then it's most reasonable to conclude it is Jesus.
What is it beyond blind faith that leads some persons to claim that the cloth holds image of the dead son of God?
I've been providing evidence. Where have I appealed to faith in my arguments?
JoeMama wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 2:08 am This conversation about the properties of the Shroud of Turin strikes me as silly, if not absurd and a ridiculous waste of time. Why would anyone believe that a random cloth, seeming to bear that image of a dead person, be a cloth placed on the son of God? Could it not have been a cloth placed on any number of other deceased persons? What evidence exists that it covered a resurrected "Jesus"? If there is none, then why talk about carbon-14 content and contaminations?
I admit it does sound ridiculous. But as I posted earlier:
otseng wrote: Mon Mar 13, 2023 8:22 am Yes, I understand how ridiculous it sounds to claim we actually have the burial shroud of Jesus locked in a box in Turin, Italy. It is also ridiculous that it is the most scientifically studied artifact in human history. It is also ridiculous that all the evidence points to its authenticity and there is no viable argument that it is a fake. And all the naturalistic methods to attempt to try to replicate the shroud are ridiculous.

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20660
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 202 times
Been thanked: 347 times
Contact:

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

Post #2144

Post by otseng »

Another area of blood marks is on the head that match the accounts on the crown of thorns.
According to the New Testament, a woven crown of thorns (Greek: στέφανος ἐξ ἀκανθῶν, translit. stephanos ex akanthōn or ἀκάνθινος στέφανος, akanthinos stephanos) was placed on the head of Jesus during the events leading up to his crucifixion. It was one of the instruments of the Passion, employed by Jesus' captors both to cause him pain and to mock his claim of authority.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_of_thorns

Passages mentioning the crown of thorns:

Matthew 27:29
And after twisting together a crown of thorns, they put it on His head, and a reed in His right hand; and they knelt down before Him and mocked Him, saying, "Hail, King of the Jews!"

Mark 15:17
They dressed Him up in purple, and after twisting a crown of thorns, they put it on Him;

John 19:2
And the soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on His head, and put a purple robe on Him;

John 19:5
Jesus then came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. Pilate *said to them, "Behold, the Man!"

Most of the depictions and relics of the crown of thorns resemble more like a Roman crown.

Here is more info on a Roman crown:
The Civic Crown (Latin: corona civica) was a military decoration during the Roman Republic and the subsequent Roman Empire, given to Romans who saved the lives of fellow citizens. It was regarded as the second highest decoration to which a citizen could aspire (the Grass Crown being held in higher regard). It took the form of a chaplet of common oak leaves woven to form a crown. It was reserved for Roman citizens who saved the lives of fellow citizens by slaying an enemy on a spot held by the enemy that same day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civic_Crown

Image
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... -_4640.jpg

Here is the crown of thorns in the Notre Dame:

Image
The crown is considered one of Christianity's Instruments of the Passion (otherwise known as Arma Christi) — objects associated with Jesus's Passion in Christian symbolism and art — and was believed to have been employed by his captors to mock his claim of authority and to cause pain.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-07/ ... c/11488594

Master of Osma (Spain, Castile, died N/A)
Christ with the Crown of Thorns, circa 1500

Image
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... Thorns.jpg

But, the crown of thorns as commonly depicted in relics and artwork is not what is depicted on the TS. This is obvious from the blood marks on the head. Instead of a nice circular tiara pattern, it is a more like a cap of thorns was placed on Jesus.
On the front portion of the forehead
are several blood prints, one of which assumes the appearance of the figure 3. This was
formed by the blood flow following the normal skin creases of the forehead. Circling the
scalp posteriorly is a row of blood prints and high on the scalp at the vertex are similar
prints. Any puncture of the scalp ordinarily produces bleeding excessively because of
retraction of torn vessels. To account for all the bloodstains on the head, one must assume
that more than a simple circlet of sharp pointed objects was used. A cap-like structure
with thorns at the center and periphery would account for the bloodstains on these
portions of the head.
https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/ssi05part3.pdf
Completing the count of the clots (fig. 6), I have come to the conclusion that at least twenty
thorns were implanted in the occipital region. And since the injuries reach the parietal-occipital area, we can suppose that the crown of
thorns was in the form of a cap. These numerical calculations give us the certainty that at least
some thirty thorns (thirteen on forehead, twenty in the occipital region) perforated the head in
front and back. Since we have no way to study injuries produced in the parietal-temple area
(because the sides of the head did not register) we can deduce that at least some fifty thorns
tortured the head of the Crucified.
https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/ssi01part5.pdf
There are over 30 small puncture wounds on the scalp and numerous blood flows on the forehead, the nape of the neck, and along the hairline. These wounds go radially around the head and reach the top of the occipital bone (the one at the base of the skull). They appear to have been made by something looking more like a cap of thorns rather than a crown of thorns because the wounds are all over the head.
https://slmedia.org/blog/deacon-structi ... is-the-man

This is more likely what the crown of thorns looked like according to the TS blood stains.

Image

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 491 times

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

Post #2145

Post by Athetotheist »

[Replying to otseng in post #2142
Athetotheist wrote:So you're willing to move on, but only if we stay in your comfort zone?
If there's no arguments left for the skeptics, then make personal observations.
If there's an argument to be made against my personal observation of the absence of a distortion image, then make it.

JoeMama
Apprentice
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2023 1:47 am
Has thanked: 26 times
Been thanked: 38 times

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

Post #2146

Post by JoeMama »

[Replying to otseng in post #2143]

Otseng,

You say "all of the evidence" points to the authenticity of the shroud, but where is the evidence that Jesus had a beard and a full head of hair, as the shroud image indicates?

You say, that, "If one cannot give evidence that the image is NOT that of Jesus, then we should assume that it IS." Could I not equally well say to you, "If you cannot give evidence that the image IS that of Jesus, then we should assume it is NOT"?

User avatar
Diogenes
Guru
Posts: 1352
Joined: Sun May 24, 2020 12:53 pm
Location: Washington
Has thanked: 893 times
Been thanked: 1306 times

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

Post #2147

Post by Diogenes »

otseng wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:42 am
JoeMama wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 1:54 am Why do persons on this site think the cloth in question might be the burial cloth of Jesus? Might it not be the burial cloth of some other person?
That's what we're debating now -- who is the person on the TS? Please provide evidence it's someone else.
This is the wrong approach. The estimated population of the world in the 1st Century CE and the 14th Century is, very roughly, 200-400 million; therefore, without more qualifiers the chance the Shroud is that of Jesus of Nazareth is about 200-400 million to one AGAINST, even IF the image was actually created by an impression of a human body.

Butt... nice try at burden shifting. ;)
___________________________________

Before You Embark On A Journey Of Revenge, Dig Two Graves

— Confucius

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20660
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 202 times
Been thanked: 347 times
Contact:

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

Post #2148

Post by otseng »

Athetotheist wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 7:52 am If there's an argument to be made against my personal observation of the absence of a distortion image, then make it.
As I said, I will present it at the end of my arguments for the TS.

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20660
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 202 times
Been thanked: 347 times
Contact:

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

Post #2149

Post by otseng »

JoeMama wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 12:18 pm You say "all of the evidence" points to the authenticity of the shroud, but where is the evidence that Jesus had a beard and a full head of hair, as the shroud image indicates?
I've never claimed the length of the hair on the TS is an indicator that it was Jesus. So, there's no need for me to produce any evidence.

Whereas you claimed, "The image on the shroud is obviously not Jesus'. The image is of a long-haired, bearded person, but Jesus when he was crucified was bald and was clean-shaven." So, where is your evidence he was bald and clean-shaven?

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20660
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 202 times
Been thanked: 347 times
Contact:

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

Post #2150

Post by otseng »

Diogenes wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 12:57 pm This is the wrong approach. The estimated population of the world in the 1st Century CE and the 14th Century is, very roughly, 200-400 million; therefore, without more qualifiers the chance the Shroud is that of Jesus of Nazareth is about 200-400 million to one AGAINST, even IF the image was actually created by an impression of a human body.
In case nobody is catching my argument so far, let me make it explicit. It is the description in the gospel accounts of what Jesus went through during the Passion that correlates with what is depicted on the TS that demonstrates the man on the shroud is Jesus.

Here's what I've argued so far the TSM (Turin Shroud Man) exhibits:

1. He was crucified. Even rationalwiki acknowledges the TSM is a crucified person:

"Even if the shroud was authentically proven to come from 1st century Judea, this would only show that someone was crucified"
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Shroud_of_Turin

Because he was crucified dramatically reduces the number of possible people. We don't know exactly how many people were crucified in the 1st century, but from archaeological records, we only have a handful of artifacts of crucified people.

viewtopic.php?p=1108120#p1108120

2. He was scourged. We don't know exactly how many crucified people were also scourged, but it's doubtful all crucified people were scourged. Crucifixion is already one of the most severe forms of torture, why would they need to spend more time and energy to have done additional torture?

So, the evidence of scourging further narrows down the number.

viewtopic.php?p=1116515#p1116515

3. He had a crown of thorns. There is no textual or artifact evidence of anyone else in history that has been crucified, scourged, and had a crown of thorns other than Jesus.

viewtopic.php?p=1116603#p1116603

So, just from these three arguments alone, the blood patterns uniquely points to a single person in all of human history -- Jesus of Nazareth.

But these are not all, I'll be pointing out more blood evidence to provide additional confirmation.

Post Reply