"I can defend the Bible" Can you?

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

polonius
Prodigy
Posts: 3904
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 3:03 pm
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 1 time

"I can defend the Bible" Can you?

Post #1

Post by polonius »

JP Cusick posted:
I can defend the Bible, but Christianity needs to be given excuses.

On beginning this thread, I'd like to gather some opinions on the accuracy of the bible which some claim can be "defended."

I don't want to create a survey, but do some posters have reasoned arguments for or against defense of the Bible that they are willing to share?

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21073
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 1114 times
Contact:

Re: Fact and fiction in the Bible?

Post #31

Post by JehovahsWitness »

polonius.advice wrote: http://www.religioustolerance.org/inerran1.htm

The teachings of the Church have evolved over the years. In recent decades, Catholic sources have given conflicting views about biblical inerrancy:

Absolute inerrancy: Some Catholic theologians have claimed that, in its original autograph version, the Bible is inerrant -- without error. This appears to be the consensus of popes, of most of the Catholic scholars and of other church leaders until the mid 20th century. This belief developed naturally from their conviction that God inspired the authors of the Bible. If God controlled the writers' words directly or indirectly, then he would not have led them into error. Deceit and error are not normally attributes expected of God.

Limited inerrancy: Other Catholics teach a more recent concept: that the Bible is without error in certain matters such as faith, morals and the criteria for salvation. However, the Bible contains errors when describing other matters, such as scientific observations and historical events. This belief had its origins in the church with the writings of Richard Simon (1638 - 1712) who rejected Moses as author of the Pentateuch. He partly inspired the literary-criticism method of analyzing biblical passages which became influential among some 19th century Christians.

No inerrancy: Still other Catholic theologians and scholars have deviated entirely from the church's official teaching. They agree with liberal Protestants in rejecting the inerrancy of the Bible. They interpret it as containing much legend, myth, historical and scientific inaccuracies, religious propaganda, etc.

Interesting and informative posts, thank you. Have you by any chance come across anything on this topic directly from the vatican website (which if I am not mistaken is the only source of the official teachings of RC? (The times I have ventured to that site the difficulty of navigating it and finding relevant information gives me a migrain and I give up)
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

Justin108
Banned
Banned
Posts: 4471
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:28 am

Re: "I can defend the Bible" Can you?

Post #32

Post by Justin108 »

JehovahsWitness wrote:
Justin108 wrote:
JehovahsWitness wrote: [Replying to post 1 by polonius.advice]

I have yet to find anything in the bible that is inaccurate.
Of course you haven't.
Well on that we can agree. It's nice to find common ground.


Have a nice day,

JW
In case someone actually mistakes this snippet for my actual post, here's the rest of it...

Of course you haven't. Because whenever an inaccuracy is pointed out, you will forcibly interpret it to make it sound accurate.


Did you take me out of context just to deliver a zinger for your own amusement, or are you actually misguided enough to think I sincerely agree with you on this?

polonius
Prodigy
Posts: 3904
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 3:03 pm
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Fact and fiction in the Bible?

Post #33

Post by polonius »

JehovahsWitness wrote:
polonius.advice wrote: http://www.religioustolerance.org/inerran1.htm

The teachings of the Church have evolved over the years. In recent decades, Catholic sources have given conflicting views about biblical inerrancy:

Absolute inerrancy: Some Catholic theologians have claimed that, in its original autograph version, the Bible is inerrant -- without error. This appears to be the consensus of popes, of most of the Catholic scholars and of other church leaders until the mid 20th century. This belief developed naturally from their conviction that God inspired the authors of the Bible. If God controlled the writers' words directly or indirectly, then he would not have led them into error. Deceit and error are not normally attributes expected of God.

Limited inerrancy: Other Catholics teach a more recent concept: that the Bible is without error in certain matters such as faith, morals and the criteria for salvation. However, the Bible contains errors when describing other matters, such as scientific observations and historical events. This belief had its origins in the church with the writings of Richard Simon (1638 - 1712) who rejected Moses as author of the Pentateuch. He partly inspired the literary-criticism method of analyzing biblical passages which became influential among some 19th century Christians.

No inerrancy: Still other Catholic theologians and scholars have deviated entirely from the church's official teaching. They agree with liberal Protestants in rejecting the inerrancy of the Bible. They interpret it as containing much legend, myth, historical and scientific inaccuracies, religious propaganda, etc.

Interesting and informative posts, thank you. Have you by any chance come across anything on this topic directly from the vatican website (which if I am not mistaken is the only source of the official teachings of RC? (The times I have ventured to that site the difficulty of navigating it and finding relevant information gives me a migrain and I give up)
RESPONSE: Once again,you are mistaken. The Vatican website is hardly the "only source of official teachings of the RC."

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21073
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 1114 times
Contact:

Re: Fact and fiction in the Bible?

Post #34

Post by JehovahsWitness »

[Replying to post 32 by polonius.advice]

Do you have a reference to confirm this? Do you have a list of recognized sources of official Catholic church teachings?

I am not an expert on RC teachings by any means so I would welcome any references you have to confirm the above

JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
ttruscott
Site Supporter
Posts: 11064
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: West Coast of Canada
Been thanked: 3 times

Post #35

Post by ttruscott »

"I can defend the Bible" Can you?
We are all called to different things...Romans 12:3 For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the faith God has distributed to each of you.
4 For just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function,
5 so in Christ we, though many, form one body, and each member belongs to all the others.
6 We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is prophesying, then prophesy in accordance with your faith;
7 if it is serving, then serve; if it is teaching, then teach;
8 if it is to encourage, then give encouragement; if it is giving, then give generously; if it is to lead, do it diligently; if it is to show mercy, do it cheerfully.


Not all are called to be apologists nor scholars.
PCE Theology as I see it...

We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.

This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.

Elijah John
Savant
Posts: 12235
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
Location: New England
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 16 times

Re: "I can defend the Bible" Can you?

Post #36

Post by Elijah John »

JehovahsWitness wrote:
Justin108 wrote:
JehovahsWitness wrote: [Replying to post 1 by polonius.advice]

I have yet to find anything in the bible that is inaccurate.
Of course you haven't.
Well on that we can agree. It's nice to find common ground.


Have a nice day,

JW
Question, JW. Does God's existence depend entirely on the complete accuracy and infallibility of the Bible?

If so, why?

And does your faith in God depend entirely on the complete accuracy and infallibility of the Bible?

If so, why should that be so?

Also, if both of these things are so with you, don't you think such such pre-determination hinders you from having an objective view of the Bible?

I mean, considering what's at stake.
My theological positions:

-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.

I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.

polonius
Prodigy
Posts: 3904
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 3:03 pm
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Fact and fiction in the Bible?

Post #37

Post by polonius »

JehovahsWitness wrote: [Replying to post 32 by polonius.advice]

Do you have a reference to confirm this? Do you have a list of recognized sources of official Catholic church teachings?

I am not an expert on RC teachings by any means so I would welcome any references you have to confirm the above

JW
RESPONSE: Of course I have a reference. Unlike some posters I don't
generally make assertions without evidence.

http://store.usccb.org/catechism-of-the ... =catechism

The Catechism of the Catholic Church

"The full, complete exposition of Catholic doctrine, this second edition of the international bestseller has been significantly expanded, enhancing both its content and usability. Revised in accordance with the official Latin text promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 1997, the second edition now includes more than a hundred additional pages, offering such new features as a glossary of terms, an index of citations from sources and in-brief texts on core teachings. The essential elements of faith are presented in the most understandable manner, enabling everyone to read and know what the Church professes, celebrates, lives, and prays in her daily life."

polonius
Prodigy
Posts: 3904
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 3:03 pm
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 1 time

Another New Testament contradiction

Post #38

Post by polonius »

Matthew 1:6: Jesus of the blood line of David and Solomon, not David and Nathan. See Lk 3:31

Nathan was never a king of Israel.

Ref: 2 Samuel 5:14, & 1 Chronicles 3:5 & 14:4.

Checkpoint
Prodigy
Posts: 4069
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:07 pm
Has thanked: 105 times
Been thanked: 63 times

Re: "I can defend the Bible" Can you?

Post #39

Post by Checkpoint »

[Replying to post 35 by Elijah John]
Does God's existence depend entirely on the complete accuracy and infallibility of the Bible?

If so, why?

And does your faith in God depend entirely on the complete accuracy and infallibility of the Bible?

If so, why should that be so?

Also, if both of these things are so with you, don't you think such such pre-determination hinders you from having an objective view of the Bible?

I mean, considering what's at stake.

What an ideal subject for a new thread...please set it in motion, EJ!

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21073
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 1114 times
Contact:

Re: Fact and fiction in the Bible?

Post #40

Post by JehovahsWitness »

[Replying to post 36 by polonius.advice]

I think you may have misunderstood what I was asking, I was just asking apart from the vatican website, is there a website (perhaps one that contains the universal caticism) that one can go to for authoritive (official) catholic teachings.

I am not challenging anything you said at all, I'm just asking since you seem to know a bit about the Catholic faith.


JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

Post Reply