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: 20609
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 340 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: 20609
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 340 times
Contact:

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

Post #2411

Post by otseng »

Calcium particles on the feet area of the shroud chemically match those in areas of Jerusalem.
In addition, a fiber taken from the foot-area of the Shroud's body-image was tested for
calcium and was found to match the chemical composition of limestone found in
Jerusalem, in particular the limestone found at the burial sites of the Church of the Holy
Sepulcher and the Garden Tomb.
https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/sjoseph.pdf
The limestone found on the feet contains calcium in the form of aragonite. Similar
characteristics were found on samples coming from Ecole Biblique tomb in Jerusalem.
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... RIN_SHROUD
According to Kohlbeck the Jerusalem limestone ... was primarily
travertine aragonite deposited from springs, rather than the more
common calcite. Calcite and aragonite differ in their crystalline structure - calcite
being rhombohedral and aragonite orthorhombic. Aragonite is less common than
calcite. Aragonite is formed under a much narrower range of conditions than calcite.
In addition to the aragonite, our Jerusalem samples also contained small quantities of
iron and strontium but no lead.

We then examined a calcium sample from the Shroud taken from the area known as the
"bloody foot" because his showed a larger concentration of calcium carbonate than other
areas. This calcium carbonate turned out to be aragonite, not the more common calcite - and
exhibited small amounts of strontium and iron.

Further analysis was conducted by Dr. Ricardo Levi-Setti, of the Enrico Fermi Institute of the
University of Chicago, who put both Shroud and Jerusalem samples through his high-
resolution scanning ion microprobe and produced graphs; these graphs revealed that the
samples were an unusually close match, except for minute pieces of flax that could not be
separated from the Shroud's calcium and caused a slight organic variation.
https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n14part3.pdf

If the TS was the result of a Medieval forgery, why would a forger go through the effort of getting dirt from a Jersusalem tomb? Especially since nobody would've discovered this level of detail until hundreds of years later.

User avatar
POI
Prodigy
Posts: 3723
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2021 5:22 pm
Has thanked: 1665 times
Been thanked: 1126 times

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

Post #2412

Post by POI »

You did not answer the pivotal questions, as they are related to this debate topic. Below, will be my 3rd attempt. They will be highlighted in red, and also rephrased (again) for even further clarity.
otseng wrote: Sun Apr 30, 2023 12:22 pm Then there's no indication you are actually interested in what I have to say, even if I do post a synopsis of all my arguments for the Exodus. Rather, this entire exercise of yours is to derail the topic and avoid discussing the current topic, which is the Turin Shroud.
I would be interested in what you have to say, but you refuse to say it, in an actual thread labelled the Exodus, for people to see, without running into in this thread by some happy accident. And, again, going through many subtopics, one-by-one, in one main topic, seems counterproductive, if you want the majority of the populous to know what you are even saying. Again, unless someone were to ask YOU, they may never know that the 'flood' is in posts 300-440, and 'the Exodus' is in 665-785, etc etc etc....

*********************************************************

YOU No, the discussion of the resurrection is the capstone topic of this thread. And the TS is presented as artifact evidence of the resurrection, so the discussion of the TS is of central importance to this entire thread.

POI Then maybe the title shouldn't be about whether we can trust the Bible or not, based upon errors. Because I already posed some follow up... It's more than clerical errors. It's about possibly getting extraordinary events wrong. And how many of those need to be unfounded to make the Bible no longer trustworthy? Maybe instead, just fast-forward to the resurrection claim, and this claim alone?

YOU Yes, I recognize that. Unfortunately a forum is not a good method to present information in an organized way.

POI Then doing so anyways will not yield much productivity.

YOU Why are these important if I've already stated it is doctrinal issues that are the important issues. And I also stated I believe in a supernatural creation of the universe, global flood, tower of Babel, and Hebrews in Egypt. What else is there that needs to be true in order for Genesis to be accepted as reliable?

POI If you would answer the pivotal questions in red, we may actually get somewhere. I'm not asking what you 'believe'.

1. Do the Genesis claims actually need to be true? Yes or No.
2. If it should turn out that the described Genesis events indeed did not happen, is it logical for a seeker to rule YWHW out of the 'creator' equation? Yes or No?
3. If the Exodus was another event, which did not actually happen in reality, does this matter? Yes or No?
4. Is the Resurrection the only claim which needs to actually be investigated after all? Yes or No?


YOU All claims I've made I've backed up with empirical evidence, and primarily from secular sources. So the standard I've used is no different than anything else used outside the Bible.

POI Interesting. So when you argue in favor of an actual Exodus account, for example, you do not lean towards publications, which attempt to prove its veracity because they are already believers in this extraordinary claim? In my investigate, consensus is that a severe lack in evidence exists to support such an extraordinary claim?

YOU The issue is rather you do not want to read through the "wall of text" that I've already presented.

POI That's not the issue. I read through it. But this is not how debate works. I'm not in a Christian history class, where I'm asked, by the instructor, to give a 5000 word essay on my disagreement(s), based upon a few article links.

YOU Again I ask, if I did provide a single source that gave a synopsis of all my arguments for the Exodus, would that resolve your issue?

POI Again, depends on the given point? But I still do not know what the point would even be? To fast-forward a bit, here's my starting point(s).... The lack in evidence to support such a large claim.....

I trust we would agree that an Exodus account is quite the large and extraordinary claim.... As such, seems as though it would at least be clear that millions of Israelites were even in this region, at this time. But the lack in evidence supports no such claim. Further, why did no Egyptians write about Israelites in this region, when Egyptians kept meticulous recordings of events?

All in all, this is a rather large claim. I trust we agree on this point. And yet, only the Bible had something to say about this claim? Where mounds of evidence should otherwise have also been left behind, we have basically almost nothing? We have virtually no evidence, if not any at all, that millions of people inhabited a particular region at a particular time, for 100's of years?

YOU It does say why we should trust the Bible. And they can then read a comprehensive series of arguments why it should be considered trustworthy without finding all the threads scattered throughout the forum.

POI Depends on how you answer the Q's in red.

YOU I've been trying to veer this back to the TS and yet everyone keeps trying to derail the topic. And will anybody try to stay on topic? Doesn't appear that way.

POI Let's await how you address the Q's in red.
Last edited by POI on Mon May 01, 2023 7:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.
In case anyone is wondering... The avatar quote states the following:

"I asked God for a bike, but I know God doesn't work that way. So I stole a bike and asked for forgiveness."

User avatar
Diogenes
Guru
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sun May 24, 2020 12:53 pm
Location: Washington
Has thanked: 869 times
Been thanked: 1279 times

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

Post #2413

Post by Diogenes »

otseng wrote: Mon May 01, 2023 6:41 am Calcium particles on the feet area of the shroud chemically match those in areas of Jerusalem.
In addition, a fiber taken from the foot-area of the Shroud's body-image was tested for
calcium and was found to match the chemical composition of limestone found in
Jerusalem, in particular the limestone found at the burial sites of the Church of the Holy
Sepulcher and the Garden Tomb.
https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/sjoseph.pdf
:) Calcium (Ca) is an element. Calcium is Calcium, but never mind. Again you are not using a secular source. This comes from shroud.com. But let's look...
It appears evident that the spectra of particles taken from Mt. Zion (Fig. 15) are quite similar to
those of Stubs H5 and H6 (Fig. 17 and 19). Even if more accurate analyses should be necessary for
a complete identification, those mineral particles are very similar to the typical local clay of
Jerusalem (and of other Mediterranean areas influenced by the winds of the Sahara desert).
https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/fantiveng.pdf
THIS is offered as evidence? :) At least they mention the wind blowing particles EVERYWHERE. :)

I think these people have gotten so amped up over their 'Shroud proofs' they have lost sight of how much of a 'nothing burger' their evidence is.
___________________________________

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

— Confucius

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20609
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 340 times
Contact:

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

Post #2414

Post by otseng »

POI wrote: Mon May 01, 2023 11:32 am POI If you would answer the pivotal questions in red, we may actually get somewhere. I'm not asking what you 'believe'.

1. Do the Genesis claims actually need to be true? Yes or No.
2. If it should turn out that the described Genesis events indeed did not happen, is it logical for a seeker to rule YWHW out of the 'creator' equation? Yes or No?
3. If the Exodus was another event, which did not actually happen in reality, does this matter? Yes or No?
4. Is the Resurrection the only claim which needs to actually be investigated after all? Yes or No?

As I've stated:
otseng wrote: Mon May 01, 2023 6:35 am
As I've noted already, a literal interpretation of Genesis is not a necessary requirement to be a Christian or to accept the Bible as authoritative.
otseng wrote: Sun Oct 10, 2021 3:30 pm I do believe Adam, global flood, etc to be literal events. But, there are true born-again Christians that love Jesus that do not believe these to be literal events. Are they still going to heaven? Yes. So, ultimately, it doesn't matter if a Christian takes these literally or figuratively.
otseng wrote: Thu Nov 04, 2021 11:42 pm It's my personal belief that I believe in a global flood. I do not claim, nor believe, that belief in a global flood is necessary to accept the Bible as authoritative. There are many Christians that do not believe in a global flood and still are saved. But, for myself, if the Bible makes such a large claim of a global flood and it is actually not true, then it makes the Bible more suspect. Judging from how many have clamored for me to debate these, it looks like we all feel the same way.
1. Do the Genesis claims actually need to be true? No
2. If it should turn out that the described Genesis events indeed did not happen, is it logical for a seeker to rule YWHW out of the 'creator' equation? No
3. If the Exodus was another event, which did not actually happen in reality, does this matter? No
4. Is the Resurrection the only claim which needs to actually be investigated after all? Yes

The resurrection is the key claim of Christianity. If this is not true, then Christianity if falsified.
otseng wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 6:41 am One of the most important doctrines in Christianity is the resurrection of Jesus and is one of the beliefs necessary for salvation.

Romans 10:9
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Also, if Jesus was not resurrected, then all of Christianity is undermined. If the resurrection of Jesus is falsified, then Christianity is falsified.

1 Corinthians 15:17
And if Christ be not raised, your faith [is] vain; ye are yet in your sins.
Now your turn to answer my questions:

Since you're complaining that my posts are not easy to find, if I did provide a single source that gave a synopsis of all my arguments for the Exodus, would that resolve your issue? Yes or no.

Since by your own admission that you are not on topic, why do you not want to discuss the TS (which arguably is the most important topic so far in this thread) and continue to derail it by wanting to rehash what I've already covered many pages ago?

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20609
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 340 times
Contact:

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

Post #2415

Post by otseng »

Diogenes wrote: Mon May 01, 2023 11:48 amAgain you are not using a secular source. This comes from shroud.com.
Shroud.com only hosts the papers, it did not write them. Also, shroud.com is operated by a Jew. Why would a Jew want to show the shroud wrapped Jesus of Nazareth?
At least they mention the wind blowing particles EVERYWHERE.
I'm not discounting there could be other explanations other than the person on the shroud to have walked in Jerusalem. But limestone particles blowing from the Mediterranean that match the limestone from Jerusalem and traveling into Lirey, France or Turin, Italy and landing only at the feet of the TS would seem quite miraculous to me.

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20609
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 340 times
Contact:

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

Post #2416

Post by otseng »

Using Wide Angle X-ray Scattering (WAXS), a sample of the TS was compatible with a 1st century dating.
A team from the Institute of Crystallography in Bari, Italy, with the support of the National Research Council, led by Liberato De Caro, has published a new study on the dating of the Shroud of Turin which concludes that it is 2,000 year old relic.

The article entitled "X-Ray Dating of a Linen Sample from the Shroud of Turin" was published in the journal Heritage on April 11, 2022. The method used is that of the "Wide Angle X-ray Scattering" or WAXS.

The technique is based on the study of the natural aging of cellulose which can be measured by the aforementioned technique. This is explained in detail by Mr. De Caro during a long interview granted to the National Catholic Register (NCR) on April 19.

The new technique was developed there three years ago. It is used to date samples taken from linen fabrics. It is based on the observation of the gradual breaking of the polymer chains of cellulose over the centuries "due to the combined effect of temperature, humidity, light and the action of chemical agents in the environment in which they are found."

The method measures the natural aging of flax cellulose and then converts it to time elapsed since its fabrication. It is carried out using the WAXS technique, which was first tested on already dated linen samples.

This technique makes it possible to work on very small samples, which, unlike what happens in carbon-14 dating, are not destroyed by the experiment. Therefore, it can be repeated several time on the same sample.

Application to the Shroud

According to the abstract of the paper, "the dating method was applied to a sample from the Shroud of Turin, consisting of a thread taken in the proximity of the 1988/radiocarbon area (corner of the TS corresponding to the feet area of the frontal image, near the so-called Raes sample)."

"The size of the TS linen sample was approximately 0.5 mm × 1 mm. The data profiles were fully compatible with analogous measurements obtained on a linen sample whose dating, according to historical records, is 55-74 AD, found at Masada, Israel [Herod's famous fortress built on a limestone bedrock overlooking the Dead Sea]."

"The degree of natural aging of the cellulose that constitutes the linen of the investigated sample, obtained by X-ray analysis, showed that the TS fabric is much older than the seven centuries proposed by the 1988 radiocarbon dating."

"The experimental results are compatible with the hypothesis that the Shroud is a 2000-year-old relic, as supposed by Christian tradition, under the condition that it was kept at suitable levels of average secular temperature…for 13 centuries of unknown history, in addition to the seven centuries of known history in Europe."

"To make the present result compatible with that of the 1988 radiocarbon test, the TS should have been conserved during its hypothetical seven centuries of life at a secular room temperature very close to the maximum values registered on the earth."

The article was published after an evaluation by three independent experts and the editor of the journal. The article is presented on the National Research Council website. No doubt, it remains to evaluate the impact of the two fires that affected the relic, especially that of Chambéry during which drops of molten silver fell on the fabric.

In the NCR interview, the Italian researcher remains cautious, especially about the discrepancy with carbon-14 dating. He begins by pointing out that, to be reliable, the latter a very careful cleaning of the fabric must be carried out, because over the centuries, contaminates become lodged in the weft and can skew the results. "If the cleaning procedure of the sample is not thoroughly performed, carbon-14 dating is not reliable."

Mr. De Caro therefore proposes to make a series of WAXS measurements, carried out by several laboratories, on samples taken from various places in the Shroud. These samples can be very small – at most millimeters.

The researcher therefore turned to the Vatican, which is the owner of the relic, and to the Archdiocese of Turin, which is responsible for its conservation, to authorize the implementation of an analysis protocol. Given the non-destructive nature of the technique, it would undoubtedly be desirable to carry out this new dating.
https://fsspx.news/en/news-events/news/ ... roud-73303

On a sample of the Turin Shroud (TS), we applied a new method for dating ancient linen threads by inspecting their structural degradation by means of Wide-Angle X-ray Scattering (WAXS). The X-ray dating method was applied to a sample of the TS consisting of a thread taken in proximity of the 1988/radiocarbon area (corner of the TS corresponding to the feet area of the frontal image, near the so-called Raes sample). The size of the linen sample was about 0.5 mm × 1 mm. We obtained one-dimensional integrated WAXS data profiles for the TS sample, which were fully compatible with the analogous measurements obtained on a linen sample whose dating, according to historical records, is 55–74 AD, Siege of Masada (Israel). The degree of natural aging of the cellulose that constitutes the linen of the investigated sample, obtained by X-ray analysis, showed that the TS fabric is much older than the seven centuries proposed by the 1988 radiocarbon dating. The experimental results are compatible with the hypothesis that the TS is a 2000-year-old relic, as supposed by Christian tradition, under the condition that it was kept at suitable levels of average secular temperature—20.0–22.5 °C—and correlated relative humidity—75–55%—for 13 centuries of unknown history, in addition to the seven centuries of known history in Europe. To make the present result compatible with that of the 1988 radiocarbon test, the TS should have been conserved during its hypothetical seven centuries of life at a secular room temperature very close to the maximum values registered on the earth.
https://www.mdpi.com/2571-9408/5/2/47

The authors also point out since the shroud came to Europe around 700 years ago, the lower average temperature decreased the speed of aging of the linen and decreased the speed of the degradation of the image on the shroud.
Finally, since X-ray dating indicates that the TS is older than its seven centuries of European history, we can also argue that it was fortunate that the TS was carried to Europe seven centuries ago. Indeed, our analysis has shown that, from the XIV century until today, the natural aging of the cellulose of the TS linen has been very low, due to the low secular European average room temperatures, thereby preventing the TS body image from fully disappearing, which would have happened at an average secular room temperature of 22.5 °C. Indeed, Equation (4) implies that, under the hypothesis that the TS is 20 centuries old, after 20 centuries at an average value of Tr = 22.5 °C and a relative humidity of 55%, a natural aging of about 90% would have already occurred; this value is much higher than the 60% that was experimentally determined for the TS sample. Therefore, by chance, only the recent history of the TS in Europe has prevented the TS linen from fully yellowing and the TS image from fully disappearing, thus preserving a puzzle that is very difficult for science to solve. New WAXS analyses on the natural aging of the cellulose in linen could allow for the correct age of the TS to be determined, which is a fundamental piece of this puzzle.
https://www.mdpi.com/2571-9408/5/2/47

User avatar
POI
Prodigy
Posts: 3723
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2021 5:22 pm
Has thanked: 1665 times
Been thanked: 1126 times

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

Post #2417

Post by POI »

otseng wrote: Tue May 02, 2023 6:17 am 1. Do the Genesis claims actually need to be true? No
2. If it should turn out that the described Genesis events indeed did not happen, is it logical for a seeker to rule YWHW out of the 'creator' equation? No
3. If the Exodus was another event, which did not actually happen in reality, does this matter? No
4. Is the Resurrection the only claim which needs to actually be investigated after all? Yes
If some of these testable claims are false, then how in the heck would you deem the Bible trustworthy, in regards to its assertions of the untestable?

And since the resurrection claim is to be taken upon faith, as it is completely unfalsifiable and not really testable, and it's also possible many of these large falsifiable claims, like a flood account and an Exodus account are not supported with evidence, then the Bible does not appear to be a trustworthy document, for which one would want to apply their faith in a resurrection claim.
otseng wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 6:41 am Now your turn to answer my questions:
:approve:
otseng wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 6:41 am Since you're complaining that my posts are not easy to find, if I did provide a single source that gave a synopsis of all my arguments for the Exodus, would that resolve your issue? Yes or no.
This question is no longer relevant, since you finally answered my repeated question. If the Exodus is proven false, you do not care. Even though it seems pretty safe to say the intent of the author(s) is to represent this event as literal.
otseng wrote: Wed Dec 14, 2022 6:41 am Since by your own admission that you are not on topic, why do you not want to discuss the TS (which arguably is the most important topic so far in this thread) and continue to derail it by wanting to rehash what I've already covered many pages ago?
Well, this answer is easy. (3) independent labs tested this cloth. They all independently concluded the cloth is from many centuries later, among other things....

There will always be fringe groups trying to use bias arenas to prop up and/or 'demonstrate' their case, i.e. flat-earthers, YEC's (not fringe yet, but will be a few generations from now), etc....
In case anyone is wondering... The avatar quote states the following:

"I asked God for a bike, but I know God doesn't work that way. So I stole a bike and asked for forgiveness."

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2706
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 486 times

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

Post #2418

Post by Athetotheist »

[Replying to otseng in post #2414
The resurrection is the key claim of Christianity. If this is not true, then Christianity if falsified.
-------
otseng wrote:Jesus already explained this
Athetotheist wrote:And I explained, citing several verses from Deuteronomy, how Jesus' explanation is at odds with what the law of Moses says.
Jesus answered him, “If I have spoken wrongly, testify to the wrong; (John 18:23)

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20609
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 340 times
Contact:

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

Post #2419

Post by otseng »

POI wrote: Tue May 02, 2023 7:45 am And since the resurrection claim is to be taken upon faith, as it is completely unfalsifiable and not really testable.
This is false. If anyone can falsify the resurrection, then they've falsified Christianity. I make the further claim that if anyone falsifies the TS, then they've falsified the resurrection.
Well, this answer is easy. (3) independent labs tested this cloth. They all independently concluded the cloth is from many centuries later, among other things....
Yeah, this is the number one claim made by skeptics. I've countered this at:
viewtopic.php?p=1114068#p1114068

Please address my counterarguments about the 1988 C-14 dating.

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20609
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 340 times
Contact:

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

Post #2420

Post by otseng »

Athetotheist wrote: Tue May 02, 2023 2:26 pm Jesus answered him, “If I have spoken wrongly, testify to the wrong; (John 18:23)
And how did Jesus speak wrongly?

Post Reply