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: 20565
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 337 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

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2705
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 #2921

Post by Athetotheist »

[Replying to otseng in post #0
Joe Marino has cataloged the areas of scientific study has been done on the shroud so far
And the Catholic Church, the keeper of the cloth, isn't willing to commit to an authentic declaration of authenticity on the cloth. They don't seem to have the same level of confidence in all the "study" that you have.

Law is only one of the meanings. From your source, it is "law, direction, instruction".
It definitely means "law" pertaining to everything in Deuteronomy, since that book declares everything in it to be "all that the Lord gave him in commandment (tsavah) unto them".

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon ... v/wlc/0-1/

Of course Moses said it. And it's also obvious Jesus expounded on it.
What's obvious is that Jesus countermanded it.

Jews have been doing this all the time. Strictly speaking the Torah is just the 5 books of Moses. But the Torah has expanded to the entire Hebrew Bible and also into the Mishnah and Talmud and oral traditions.
That works if----and only if----it's expanded consistently.

When details were added for what was to be included in a bill of divorce, it didn't run counter to the initial commandment that the bill be presented. When Jesus says that divorces were allowed because their hearts were hard, he's flat-out contradicting the law's declaration that such divorces were right in Jehovah's eyes (Dt. 13:18). When he says, "Do not swear at all", he's countermanding the law's command not to add (Dt. 4:2) a law against a practice which is allowed (Num. 30:1-2).


"I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No man cometh unto the Father but by me."
There's probably a lot more to that verse than anyone can imagine.
"What's the bare minimum it should be taken to mean?"
There is no other way to God except through Jesus Christ. Jesus is the way to the Father. Jesus alone is the truth. Jesus is the source of all life.
And why can't it be "interpreted" in myriad ways?

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20565
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 337 times
Contact:

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

Post #2922

Post by otseng »

Athetotheist wrote: Thu Jul 20, 2023 6:36 pm And the Catholic Church, the keeper of the cloth, isn't willing to commit to an authentic declaration of authenticity on the cloth. They don't seem to have the same level of confidence in all the "study" that you have.
They don't have a position on any of their relics. And who cares what the RCC would state anyway? Would skeptics start believing in the shroud if the Pope declared it was authentic? I highly doubt it.
Law is only one of the meanings. From your source, it is "law, direction, instruction".
It definitely means "law" pertaining to everything in Deuteronomy, since that book declares everything in it to be "all that the Lord gave him in commandment (tsavah) unto them".
Law is a subset of the Torah. Yes, there are commandments as part of the Torah.
Of course Moses said it. And it's also obvious Jesus expounded on it.
What's obvious is that Jesus countermanded it.
Could be. But in the case of divorce, Jesus would've been reverting the countermand of allowing divorce and going back to the original intent of marriage.
That works if----and only if----it's expanded consistently.
I think it does.
When details were added for what was to be included in a bill of divorce, it didn't run counter to the initial commandment that the bill be presented. When Jesus says that divorces were allowed because their hearts were hard, he's flat-out contradicting the law's declaration that such divorces were right in Jehovah's eyes (Dt. 13:18). When he says, "Do not swear at all", he's countermanding the law's command not to add (Dt. 4:2) a law against a practice which is allowed (Num. 30:1-2).
Deut 13:18 does not say divorce is right.

Deu 13:18
When thou shalt hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep all his commandments which I command thee this day, to do that which is right in the eyes of the LORD thy God.

As a matter of fact, where in the Bible does it command someone to divorce?

As for not swearing/making a vow, it's another example of Jesus getting to the heart. There isn't really any contradiction with what Jesus said and Num 30:2.

Num 30:2
When a man makes a vow to the LORD or takes an oath to obligate himself by a pledge, he must not break his word but must do everything he said.

Plus, is anyone actually following all that Jesus preached? Hardly. What Jesus was getting to was the heart of man, not the actions of man. We are lustful, angry, double tongued, unforgiving, self-righteous people. We think we're so great, but not even the righteousness of the most religious is good enough.

Mat 5:20
For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
"I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No man cometh unto the Father but by me."
There's probably a lot more to that verse than anyone can imagine.
"What's the bare minimum it should be taken to mean?"
There is no other way to God except through Jesus Christ. Jesus is the way to the Father. Jesus alone is the truth. Jesus is the source of all life.
And why can't it be "interpreted" in myriad ways?
Sure, it can be interpreted in a myriad of ways. I only gave you my minimum interpretation.

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20565
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 337 times
Contact:

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

Post #2923

Post by otseng »

Dan Barker gave a presentation questioning the resurrection of Jesus:

Did Jesus Really Rise From the Dead?


In the presentation, Barker gave several reasons against Jesus rising from the dead.

His first argument is history assumes naturalism and so history cannot investigate miraculous claims. I don't disagree too much with him here. Just like science cannot propose supernatural causation, historians cannot as well.
19:44
Number one is the historical objection. The resurrection of Jesus might have happened. A miracle in
the past might have happened. We can't rule it out right. Maybe the laws of nature were different back then.

In order for history to work it has to make some assumptions. One of the biggest assumptions that history has to make is that the laws of nature are constant throughout time. They might not be the laws of nature might not be causal but history has to assume that. They are otherwise you can't do history.

I'm not ruling out miracles with this argument just saying if they happen history is the wrong tool for it.
The second argument is there could be a naturalistic explanation. Yes, there could be, but it would need to have more explanatory power than a supernaturalistic explanation.
23:16
The second line of criticism that people often offer and the stories that the New
Testament can have other explanations than a miracle. It might have seemed like
a miracles with them at the time but it was actually something else that happened.
Like he actually didn't die on the cross. He just passed out and he thought it was dead.
That's called the swoon theory.

Another theory is that everybody was hallucinating.

Another possible natural theory is that they moved the body he was really buried there but they
moved it somewhere else.
He doesn't even offer any justification for these naturalistic explanations. Plus, with the evidence of the TS, it rules out all these scenarios. Jesus was dead as evidenced by the rigor mortis. They were not hallucinating, unless we are all also hallucinating about the shroud. It could not have been moved since the blood stains are intact and undisturbed.

His third argument is the contradictions in the gospel accounts. I grant him this as well. Since inerrancy is not on the table, it is not a relevant argument.
25:22
Number three is the fact that the documents themselves disagree with each other so
radically that we really don't even know what happened.

26:51
Jesus and I turn to him is the worst example anyone could ever possibly offer
for the reliability of the Bible. And I'm not exaggerating because unlike most
stories that you find in the Bible which are given me once or maybe twice the
resurrection story is given five times.
And rather than being a poor example of reliability, it is a good example since the resurrection is attested to multiple times in the Bible.

Barker admits these first three arguments do not disprove the resurrection.
46:24
The first three points throw considerable doubt on the story
but they don't disprove it. It could have happened in spite of the problem of history.
It could have happened in spite of our understanding of natural events.
It could have happened even though they were contradictory. Maybe one of them got
it right so it could have happened. Maybe one of them was telling the truth.
He says his fourth argument is the strongest.
46:12
I'll get to the fourth point which I think is the strongest.
He argues the resurrection account is a legend.
48:08
But many critics and many scholars are convinced that the resurrection story is a legend.
Some are convinced that it's a myth that have never even happened.

Something might have happened. Who knows what. A story started or
something and from that point the legend can grow. And the story itself contains
within it the footprints of the legend and here's how we know that if you take all the accounts that we have of the
resurrection of Jesus and put them in order in which they were written you start first of all with Paul. Paul and first Corinthians 15 wrote this thing that he said was handed to him from someone else.

Paul wrote his epistles sometime in the year 52-55. First Corinthians
would have been around the year 55 or so which is what depending
up when these events supposedly happened in the year 28 to 33 or something.
It would have been about 25 years after the events.
Could there be legendary parts to the resurrection account? There could be. But it doesn't mean the entire account is fictional and that the fundamental message (crucifixion, death, and resurrection) is legendary. In order to claim the fundamental message is false, one has to know which parts are truthful and which parts are fictional and which parts are related to the fundamental message. Only then it can be determined the fundamental message is fictional. Baker does not do this.
55:36
There are some scholars who think the dates that I just gave should be pushed
earlier. Those are conservative scholars that think the date should be pushed a lot closer.
There are other scholars who think the date should be pushed later because we can't be totally sure about the exact dates of them.
Richard Carrier, who is probably one of the most skeptical scholars, accepts the 1 Cor 15 creed to be very early.
So the Corinthian Creed, at least verses 3-5, definitely existed and was the central “gospel” Christians were preaching in the early 30s A.D. That’s definitely no later than a few years after the purported death of Jesus. And since the sect’s formation only makes sense in light of this being its seminal and distinguishing message, it must have been formulated in the very first weeks of the movement. We can’t be certain how soon that actually was after the death of Jesus (though the creed says Jesus was raised on the third day, it conspicuously does not say how much later it was when he appeared). But it can’t have been more than a few years, and could well have been mere months (though one can’t then assert that it was mere months; that would be another possibiliter fallacy).

So, yes, 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 is almost certainly a pre-Pauline text composed within a few years of when Jesus was believed to have died.
https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/11069

Though it is possible for legendary elements to develop over a few years, it's highly doubtful it could've drastically evolved in such a short time. Perhaps it could've evolved from 50 people seeing Jesus to 500. But it could not have evolved from a mass hallucination to Jesus bodily resurrecting.

So, his argument of the accounts being legendary to dispute the resurrection of Jesus is not as strong as he claims.

His last argument is Jesus was raised spiritually, not bodily.
58:06
The early followers of Jesus after he was crucified believed that Jesus was
raised spiritually, not bodily.
There are several scriptural arguments against this. The gospels spend considerable time mentioning the disciples could touch him and he could eat. But he then dismisses these as legendary.

And with the Shroud of Turin, we have empirical evidence Jesus did not just raise spiritually, but bodily.

Interestingly, an audience member did mention about the Shroud of Turin at 14:57, but doesn't sound like Barker either heard him or knows anything about it.

Waterfall
Scholar
Posts: 450
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2016 10:08 am
Has thanked: 34 times
Been thanked: 3 times

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

Post #2924

Post by Waterfall »

[Replying to otseng in post #2923]

Namaskaram otseng

God works in mysterious ways ;-) God made the body disappear and left a footprint. That is all you can say. No bodily resurrection. The spirit of Jesus was seen. The rest is just makeup stories = bodily resurrection. What do you think about that? Let me come with the true story about the crucifixion and the missing body and so on. It is from this book (scroll down to download it in english)...

https://vandrer-mod-lyset.dk/e-boeger/#page-content
27.
What were the Words Spoken by Jesus before he Died on the Cross?

But when Jesus was led through the city, large multitudes followed him, and they shouted at him, scorned him and derided him; but Jesus answered them not.
And he was led by the guards unto the place which was called Calvary, where the condemned were crucified.
When Jesus passed through the gate of the city, he saw some women weeping. And he said: „Weep not over me, for my sufferings will soon be ended; weep for yourselves and the unborn generations, for many sorrows and great sufferings await them.“
But when they were come unto the place, the soldiers took from him his robe, and they bound him unto the cross, placing a piece of wood beneath his feet; this they did so as to prolong his sufferings.
But when the cross had been raised, the multitudes broke forth and gathered about him; and the people continued to deride and to mock Jesus; yea, many took stones and cast them upon his body. And the guards sought to drive away the multitudes, but time and again they returned.
And behold, it came to pass that the sun was darkened; for slowly a heavy, black veil was drawn across the heavens, covering the radiant circle of the sun; and close darkness fell everywhere, while the Earth was shaken to its very foundation.
Then, great fear and terror came upon them all; for many remembered the words of the prophets foretelling the destruction of the Earth, and they thought that the end was nigh. And terrified, they fled into the city, where they hid themselves in their houses for as long as the darkness prevailed.
But some of the followers of Jesus and some of the women remained at the foot of the cross.
And among the women was the mother of Jesus.
When darkness fell upon the Earth, in great fear she stretched her hands toward her son and she cried out: „My son, my son! Why did you not abide in the faith of your fathers? Behold, the Most High has forsaken you!“
But when Jesus heard the words, he said unto those who were with her: „Sustain her and comfort her, for her sufferings are very great.“
When he had said this, he felt his body weaken, and he prayed unto his Heavenly Father to forgive all who had sinned against him, who had sinned by condemning him unjustly.
And he prayed unto his Father for greater strength, that he might bear his sufferings with patience.
And God heard the prayer of Jesus.
And He sent unto him some of the Youngest, and Jesus felt his sufferings no more.
But when a time had passed, he lowered his head, and he said: „ Father, receive my spirit. “
And behold, then his spirit was delivered from the earthly body; and the Youngest who were with him brought him unto their Father’s Kingdom.
And God took him in His embrace, and He forgave him all in which he had failed in his life upon the Earth.
But they grieved with one another over the son and brother who still walked upon the Earth, grieved over the son and brother who had failed in the promise that he had given.

28.
Was the Resurrection of Jesus Bodily or Spiritual?

When Jesus had died, some of his followers went unto Joseph of Arimathea; for they had often seen him among the people when Jesus spoke. And they besought him to seek leave for them from the Council to take the body of Jesus and to bury it.
And Joseph promised to speak to Caiaphas thereof.
But when he came unto them with the leave of the Council, he questioned them whether they had a place in which to lay the body of Jesus. But they answered him that they had no place. Then said Joseph: „Bring his body unto my garden, which I shall show you; for there in the rock is hewn a grave where I myself should be laid to rest. This place shall I give unto you, that the Master’s body may rest in peace!“
The followers and disciples of Jesus thanked him much for this gift.
But Joseph spoke not these words for the sake of Jesus, nor for the sake of the disciples, but for his own; for he had often heard it spoken that Jesus would rise from the dead and appear before them; therefore would he hold watch, that none should steal the body and thus be able to say: behold, he is risen from the dead!
But the disciples carried the body of Jesus unto the tomb, and the women anointed his body, wrapping it in white linen, and they laid it in the tomb and rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre.
When all this was done they left the garden, that together they might mourn over him who had departed from them.
Only Joseph remained, watching over the tomb until the light of day broke forth. Then he went back unto his home; for he knew that upon that day of rest, while the sun was high, none would remove the body.
And he pondered all day on how he might hinder that anyone should take the body of Jesus.
While he pondered, the Elder, the Servant of Darkness stood at his side and gave him evil counsel.
And when the last hour of the day of rest had passed, Joseph summoned an old servant and bade him to go with him unto the garden. And they took implements with them, that with these they might dig in the ground.
But when they were come unto the place they rolled away the stone and they laid upon the ground the white linen which had been spread upon the body of Jesus. Then they bore his body unto a distant corner of the garden and buried it in the earth. And they covered the place with branches, that none should see what they had done.
When they had accomplished this the dawn began to break, and they hastened back unto the tomb so as to return the stone to its place before the entrance.
But when they reached the place, Joseph heard a faint and distantvoice that said: „Brother, why did you this?“ And when he turned he saw the insubstantial form of the radiant figure of Jesus. And in great fear he fell unto the ground.
But when the old servant hastened to help his master, behold, he stood before the man whose body he had lately buried in the earth. And great fear and terror came upon him, and he fled from the garden.
When Joseph awoke to his senses the vision was gone, and he was alone. But he heard a distant voice which said: „Return the body of Jesus unto the place whence you took it; for should you not do this, then will your evil act bring much confusion upon mankind.“
But the Elder, the Servant of Darkness, stood at his side. And Darkness descended upon Joseph, while his heart was filled with fear, so that he dared not go back unto that place where he had laid the body of Jesus.
And he fled out of the garden unto his house.
But when he was come there, behold, there sat the old servant, wailing and lamenting upon the threshold, while many confused words issued from his mouth.
Then Joseph knew that this man was not able to keep silent upon that which he had seen.
And the Elder, the Servant of Darkness, whispered evil counsel unto him; and Joseph said: „Behold, I shall bring you a cup of wine, that you may be strengthened thereby, for that which you have seen has made you exceeding weak.“
Joseph brought him the wine, but in the cup was death.
And a while after the old man had drunk thereof, he fell back upon the ground, and his spirit departed from his body.
But Joseph went into his house, so as to be alone with his terror and with his remorse.
And when the day broke, the servants of the house found the old man. Some of the servants bore him inside, while others told their master of what had come to pass; and they all believed that the old man had died of infirmity, and none came to know that his master had taken his life.

But a while after Joseph had fled from the garden, some women came to mourn by the tomb and in stillness to talk of the one who had left them.
When they were come unto the place they saw that the stone was taken away from the sepulchre. And they wondered much and dared not enter therein; for they feared that someone lay hiding in the darkness.
But when they had spoken with one another on this, the woman who was Mary Magdalene said: „I will go therein, for I fear not.“
And when she stood by the hewn grave, she saw that it was empty, and she found the white shroud in disarray upon the ground.
And she returned in haste unto the waiting women, and she said: „He is gone! Perchance unto his Heavenly Father, as so often he said that he would? Or has someone taken away his body? Let us go unto the city and tell of what has come to pass!“
But as she turned to leave the garden, she saw before her the insubstantial form of a radiant figure, Jesus of Nazareth.
He smiled and stretched his hands toward her.
When Mary Magdalene saw him she cried out with joy: „Master, have you come back to us?“ And she ran forward to greet him.
But when she reached the place, he was no longer there.
And with sorrow she called unto the other two women and said: „I saw him, he was here; but he is gone once more. Stay in this place, that he shall not be alone, should he return to us again. I shall make haste unto the city and call upon Simon Peter and some of the others.“
And she hastened away.
The women who remained wondered at her words, for they had not seen Jesus of Nazareth. They saw only Mary Magdalene run forth, and they heard her cry out; but him they did not see.
And they said unto each other: „Let us seek him in the garden, for surely has he not gone far away.“
While they wandered about they searched everywhere, but they found him not.
Then one of the women said: „Let us look in the tomb; perchance he is hiding there.“
And they went therein.
But they saw only the empty grave, saw only the white shroud upon the ground. And disappointed they returned. And they agreed to go to meet the friends who were on their way.
When they had walked along the road in silence for some time, the woman who was Salome said: „Behold, I had a vision in the dark tomb; for I saw an angel in a radiant garb. He sat by the hewn grave, but a great fear tied my tongue so that until now I was afraid to speak thereof.“
The other woman, Mary, who was the mother of Jacob, one of the followers of Jesus, answered and said: „Surely, I had the same vision, but there were two angels; for I saw another behind the one sitting by the grave. His hand pointed upward and he spoke some words, but I could not distinguish them clearly.“
Salome, the woman who had spoken first, maintained that but one angel had sat by the grave. And they quarrelled heatedly and at length over something neither one had seen. For each had knowingly spoken falsely unto the other of her vision; for not all people are equally truthful, and these women would not be second to Mary Magdalene.
And later when Simon Peter, followed by certain of the disciples, came unto the place where the women awaited them, they both spoke of what they had seen in the darkness of the tomb. And they all wondered much.
Simon Peter and the others hastened unto the garden, and they searched everywhere; but they found him not.
And they saw that the tomb was empty, but him they did not see.

29.
How many Times did Jesus Appear before the Apostles? Did he Speak to them?

But Simon Peter sent for the followers of Jesus — though not Judas Iscariot — and he asked them to meet him that evening at the house of Samuel the Water Bearer, that they might speak together of that which had come to pass.
When the hour was come and they were all assembled, Simon Peter said: „You have all heard that our beloved Brother and Master has appeared before Mary Magdalene. And I, and others with me, have searched the tomb, searched the garden, but we found him not. And we have sought him in many places in the city, but still we did not find him, none has seen him. I believe that he is ascended unto the Kingdom of Heaven, unto his Father, as often he said he would. Therefore, let us pray of the Lord God that He may grant us the joy once more to behold our beloved Master among us, so that from our heart’s conviction and our sure faith we may proclaim unto all that he was the Messiah, the Son of God.“
When Simon Peter had spoken thus, he prayed on behalf of them all.
And when his prayer was ended, behold, visible to all, Jesus of Nazareth stood by the upper end of the table and a bright radiance emanated from his body. And he raised his hands toward them, and he smiled and said: „Peace be with you!“
The followers of Jesus knew their Master’s countenance and they knew his voice, though it sounded faint and distant.
And they rose so as to embrace him and to greet him; but he vanished before their eyes.
And they all grieved that he had left them in such haste.
And it became known to the people in the city that the Nazarene 12 had risen from the dead and had ascended unto the Kingdom of Heaven, that he had appeared before his followers, and that a woman had seen him.
Then they all wondered much. Many believed the words, and many were converted from their life of sin and vice.
But Pilate and Caiaphas caused a search to be made everywhere for the body of Jesus, for they believed that his disciples had removed and hidden it.
But it was never found.
And in the following days Jesus was seen in diverse places by many; some saw him on the roads near Jerusalem, others saw him on the Mount of Olives, where he was wont to linger; some saw him at Bethesda, yea, he was even seen by the Sea of Galilee, and many had heard him speak.
But it was the same with these visions as with the visions of the angels that the women had seen at the tomb. Many false words were spoken of the resurrection of Jesus, for only few are entirely truthful.

The many reports of the Nazarene also reached Joseph of Arimathea.
And again the distant voice sounded unto him. And it spoke: „Go unto the Council and tell of that which you did; for you know that the spirit of Jesus lives; for you know that his body is dead, and you know where it is to be found.“
But Joseph dared not reveal his evil deed, for he feared to lose his dignity, feared to lose his esteem.
And he remained silent. —
Thus was it on account of the doubter and murderer Joseph of Arimathea that the false belief in the bodily resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth spread abroad among the people.
Your friend forever

Waterfall
Love is the salt of life. It takes a moment to understand and eternity to live.

Carsten Ploug Olsen

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2705
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 #2925

Post by Athetotheist »

[Replying to otseng in post #2922
who cares what the RCC would state anyway? Would skeptics start believing in the shroud if the Pope declared it was authentic? I highly doubt it.
That doesn't stop them from declaring that Mary was assumed bodily into heaven, and they don't even have anything physical to point to on that.

in the case of divorce, Jesus would've been reverting the countermand of allowing divorce and going back to the original intent of marriage.
He's going back to what he says is the original intent of marriage, but "original intent" doesn't matter. What matters is what the law being given by Moses tells people to do (present a bill for divorce) and what not to do (don't add to or take from the law).

Deut 13:18 does not say divorce is right.
Yes, it does. It says that divorcing in the prescribed way, with a bill of divorce, is "right in his eyes" because it is allowed in the law and nothing is to be added to or taken from the law (4:2).

As a matter of fact, where in the Bible does it command someone to divorce?
I've seen this red herring tossed out there before. It isn't about the law not commanding divorce; it's about the law not forbidding divorce.

As for not swearing/making a vow, it's another example of Jesus getting to the heart. There isn't really any contradiction with what Jesus said and Num 30:2.
Yes, there is.

"Num 30:2
When a man makes a vow to the LORD or takes an oath to obligate himself by a pledge, he must not break his word but must do everything he said.
"

Jesus says, "Do not swear at all" (Mt. 5:34). Moses does not say, "Do not swear at all" and does say, "Do not add to the law".

Plus, is anyone actually following all that Jesus preached? Hardly. What Jesus was getting to was the heart of man, not the actions of man. We are lustful, angry, double tongued, unforgiving, self-righteous people. We think we're so great, but not even the righteousness of the most religious is good enough.
How well anyone follows what Jesus preached is irrelevant. The law of Moses directs the actions of man, and Jesus declares in Matthew 5 that every jot and tittle of the law was still in force and still to be kept. That would include the command not to add to or take from the laws allowing divorce and oath-taking.


"I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No man cometh unto the Father but by me."
Sure, it can be interpreted in a myriad of ways. I only gave you my minimum interpretation.
So why should your "interpretation" be preferred over another?

earl
Scholar
Posts: 370
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 #2926

Post by earl »

To show how relaxed the Jewish laws were then ,remember the cock crowing as Peter was forewarned by Jesus.
This indicates they were outside the city proper.
The city law was not to have poultry inside the city limits.
The Hall of hewn stone was the only place where the Sanhedrin was to assemble and pronounce criminal penalties.
The Jews were restricted from this power under Roman rule.
They pressed charges regardless
The Sanhedrin pronounced Jesus guilty.Remember they provoked the crowd to say and chanted crucify Jesus.
Pilate found him not guilty but feared the Jews so he threw Jesus to the wolves anyway.

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2705
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 #2927

Post by Athetotheist »

earl wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 11:43 am To show how relaxed the Jewish laws were then ,remember the cock crowing as Peter was forewarned by Jesus.
This indicates they were outside the city proper.
The city law was not to have poultry inside the city limits.
The Hall of hewn stone was the only place where the Sanhedrin was to assemble and pronounce criminal penalties.
The Jews were restricted from this power under Roman rule.
They pressed charges regardless
The Sanhedrin pronounced Jesus guilty.Remember they provoked the crowd to say and chanted crucify Jesus.
Pilate found him not guilty but feared the Jews so he threw Jesus to the wolves anyway.
None of this has anything to do with what Jesus himself says about the law. The issue is his inconsistent teaching. First he tells the people that every command of the law is to be kept, then he prohibits divorces and oaths which the law allows, breaking one of the commandments he just told them to keep (do not add to the law).

earl
Scholar
Posts: 370
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 #2928

Post by earl »

Moses favored an easy divorce,-Hearts were hard
The Sanhedrin likewise favored an easy tribunal to put Jesus to death breaking the thou shall not kill law,
Jesus could hardly have said the only reason for divorce was by adultery,knowing as we do that.
Morally
There are some very good reasons such as safety and security for divorce other than that only.
Every one knows that terrible relationships may eventuate into terrible and dangerous outcomes in a marriage.
Therefore does God welcome evil or is mercy in the court of law a course of action to free a person from volatile conditions?
There were two operating standards of divorce from the Law,relaxed or strict and both were used hypocritically at that time by which Jesus later accused them of being. If not then why would the Pharisees even ask?
That is why the Pharisees baited Jesus.

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2705
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 #2929

Post by Athetotheist »

[Replying to earl in post #2928
earl wrote:Moses favored an easy divorce,-Hearts were hard
The Sanhedrin likewise favored an easy tribunal to put Jesus to death breaking the thou shall not kill law,
Jesus could hardly have said the only reason for divorce was by adultery,knowing as we do that.
Morally
There are some very good reasons such as safety and security for divorce other than that only.*

Every one knows that terrible relationships may eventuate into terrible and dangerous outcomes in a marriage.

Therefore does God welcome evil or is mercy in the court of law a course of action to free a person from volatile conditions?
There were two operating standards of divorce from the Law,relaxed or strict and both were used hypocritically at that time by which Jesus later accused them of being. If not then why would the Pharisees even ask?
That is why the Pharisees baited Jesus.

A comment of mine from elsewhere:
"In the Mishnaic period the theory of the law that the husband could divorce his wife at will was challenged by the school of Shammai. It interpreted the text of Deut. xxiv. 1 in such amanner as to reach the conclusion that the husband could not divorce his wife except for cause, and that the cause must be sexual immorality (Git. ix. 10; Yer. Soṭah i. 1, 16b). The school of Hillel, however, held that the husband need not assign any reason whatever; that any act on her part which displeased him entitled him to give her a bill of divorce (Giṭ. ib.). The opinion of the school of Hillel prevailed."
---JewishEncyclopedia.com

Read literally, the texts of Mark and Matthew suggest that the authors were on opposite sides of the Hillel/Shammai debate and that each author has Jesus supporting his respective position.

*According to Matthew chapters 5 and 19, that's exactly what he said. And according to Mark, he didn't even make that allowance.

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20565
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 337 times
Contact:

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

Post #2930

Post by otseng »

Waterfall wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:02 am God works in mysterious ways ;-) God made the body disappear and left a footprint. That is all you can say. No bodily resurrection. The spirit of Jesus was seen.
Well, if it was a spiritual resurrection, then the spirit could as well be physically touched and could eat and drink. So, it was not a disembodied ghost-like appearance.

John 20:17
Jesus replied, "Do not touch me, for I have not yet ascended to my Father. Go to my brothers and tell them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'"

Luke 24:39
Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Handle me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have.' When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet.

John 20:27
Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and examine my hands. Extend your hand and put it into my side. Do not continue in your unbelief, but believe."

Luke 24:41-43
But while they still did not believe for joy, and marveled, he said to them, 'Have you any food here?' So they gave him a piece of broiled fish and some honeycomb. And he took it and ate it in their presence.

Act 10:41
not by all the people, but by us, the witnesses God had already chosen, who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead.
The rest is just makeup stories = bodily resurrection. What do you think about that? Let me come with the true story about the crucifixion and the missing body and so on. It is from this book (scroll down to download it in english)...

https://vandrer-mod-lyset.dk/e-boeger/#page-content
Anybody can make up any claims, but it's got to have some evidence to back it up. The primary textual source for our information about Jesus is the Bible. Simply asserting claims without scriptural support holds little weight.

Post Reply