Is the Bible the inerrant Word of God?

[Elijah John]

For those who claim that the Bible is the "inerrant Word of God" why do you believe this?

Seems to me the arguments to support this belief are usually circular. As in "The Bible is inerrant because it is the Word of God". And evidence that the Bible is the Word of God?" Because the Bible is without error or contradiction", i.e. inerrant.

Consider this OP a challenge. Give the skeptic a better argument to convince them that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God than the usual circular argument.

Why do you believe and why should the skeptic believe that the Bible is the "inerrant Word of God"?

Break out of the circle.

[JehovahsWitness]

I'm not sure I follow any of you three on this "issue." .

Okay, did you have a question to ask me?

[PinSeeker]

Okay, did you have a question to ask me?

Nope. Thanks anyway, though.

[Clownboat]

Finally, someone offers something in the way of "contradiction," that we can actually talk about. I've been hoping and praying for this. Okay, I'm in:

Rom 13:12 Paul says: the night is far gone, the day is at hand.
Luke 21:8 Jesus Says: Take heed that you are not led astray, for many will come in my name saying, the time is at hand! Do not go after them.
It's almost like Jesus was warning us about Paul.

Well, aside from the fact that simply an exhortation (and thus not contradictive or affirming of anything), Paul was actually sent by Jesus. And Paul's whole message, for crying out loud, is, "Go after Jesus." Paul even called himself a wretch (Romans 7) and the chief of sinners (! Timothy 1). Not a contradiction.
That was easy.

Rom 14:9 Paul says: For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.
Luke 20:38 Jesus says: Now he is not God of the dead, but of the living, for all live to him.
Lord of the dead if you ask Paul, not Lord of the dead if you ask Jesus.

There are two ways to understand death: 1. temporal, or earthly death, which is what Paul is talking about, and 2. eternal death, which is what Jesus is talking about in Luke 20. In other words, from the earthly human perspective Paul is speaking from and to, Jesus is their Lord whether they are still walking this earth (living) or not (deceased). From the eternal perspective that Jesus is speaking from and to, the believers who have "died," or passed from this world do not die but enter into eternal life. From different perspectives (one side of glory as opposed to the other), they are talking about the same thing. Not a contradiction. That was easy.

Rom 13:9 Paul says: The commandments, you shall not commit adultrery, you shall not kill, you shall not steal, you shall not covet, and any other commandments, are summed up in this sentence, "you shall love your neighbor as yourself."
Matt 22:37-39 Jesus says: And he said to him, you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. [38] This is the great and first commandment. [39] And a second is like it, you shall love your neighbor as yourself.
Paul highlights loving your neighbor. Jesus highlights loving the Lord your God.

Paul's whole purpose in Romans 12-16 was to show how we should live in this world in view of all that God has done for us, which was what Romans 1 through 11 were about. Therefore, he was just focusing on how we should conduct ourselves in this world and how we should treat one another. Commandments 5 through 10, to be exact. Paul was well aware that only summed up part of the God's Law. On the other hand, Jesus was commenting on the whole Law -- including Commandments 1 through 4, which deal exclusively with how we should act toward God Himself. It makes sense that the first commandments deal with God, because God comes first. Then how we should act toward other people comes second, but follows very closely. Thus we should love God with everything we have and are, and we should love others as ourselves. Not a contradiction. That was easy.

Rom 9:15-16 +18 Paul says: For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." [16] So it depends not upon man's will or exertion, but upon God's mercy. [18] So then he has mercy upon whomever he wills, and he hardens the heart of whomever he wills.
Matt 5:7 Jesus says: Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.
Paul claims that God will have mercy on whom he has mercy. Jesus shares with us that the merciful will obtain mercy.

In Romans 9, Paul is talking about God's sovereignty concerning salvation, which applies to all people. In Matthew 5-7, Jesus is preaching to His disciples (who are believers). In short the answer to this "contradiction" is the basically the same as the previous one, only in reverse. Paul is applying God's sovereignty over all creation, while Jesus is focusing only on believers and how they should treat one another -- and others -- in light of what God has done for them Not a contradiction, That was easy.

I'm sensing a pattern here. Shall I go on? Well, okay, at least a couple more:

Eph 1:7 Paul says: In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace.
Rom 4:25 Paul says: who was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification.
Matt 6:14-15 Jesus says: For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father also will forgive you, [15] but if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
Pauls says you need to accept the sacrifice of Jesus to be redeemed (compensate for the faults). Jesus claims that if you forgive others, God will forgive you too.

The same is true here as in the previous answer. Paul is preaching to unbelievers as well as believers -- but mainly unbelievers. What Jesus says in Matthew 6 is a continuation of the Sermon on the Mount, to His disciples, concerning believers only and how they should treat all people in light of what God has done for them. Not a contradiction. That was easy.

Rom 3:24 + 28 Paul says: they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus,… [28] For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law.
Rom 5:9 Paul says: Since, therefore, we are now justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God.
Matt 12:37 Jesus says: for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.
More of Paul making this about the sacrifice if Jesus. Jesus on the other hand claims that we will be justified by our words.

Again, sort of the same as the previous two answers. Except this time, Jesus is speaking to the Pharisees, who are unrepentant, and unbelievers (despite what they think of themselves). Unrepentant, unconverted people will absolutely be justified and condemned by God -- based on themselves and their own works and words, which means they won't be justified at all and thus condemned (unless they do repent and believe). Which leads us to what Paul is saying in Romans 5, that since believers have repented and believed, Christ has become the propitiation for our sins, and we are now justified by his blood (His work of atonement). This is the Gospel. Does man stand on his own sufficiency and works and words? Or does he stand IN those of Christ because he has acknowledged his need of a Savior -- Jesus -- to reconcile and redeem him to God? Not a contradiction. That was easy.

These seem to be getting more fun as we go. I'll continue.

Rom 6:23 Paul says: For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Matt 19:29 Jesus says: And every one who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name's sake, will receive a hundredfold, and inherit eternal life.
Paul once again makes this about the death of Jesus. Jesus on the other hand alludes to a very different way to receive eternal life and does not mention human sacrifice.

Ohhhhh, on the contrary. Jesus most definitely is saying one must give up his own life to gain His. But Paul is talking about what will happen to each one of us if we don't accept Jesus's sacrifice/atonement on our behalf. This is an apples to oranges comparison, too. An apples to apples comparison would be to take what Jesus says here and putting it up against what Paul says in Romans 12:1, that we should "present (our) bodies as a living and holy sacrifice. Not a contradiction. That was easy.

2 Cor 8:21 Paul says: for we aim at what is honorable not only in the Lord's sight but also in the sight of men.
Luke 16:15 Jesus says: But he said to them, You are those who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts, for what is exaled among men is an abomination in the sight of God.
Paul, be honorable in the sight of men.
Jesus, what is exalted among men is an abomination in the sight of God.

Good Lord. This is no kind of comparison at all. To be honorable in the sight of men is wholly different than being "exalted" among men. Paul was talking to Christians at Corinth, telling them not to act superior to other people, especially other Christians. Jesus, like in the answer to the previous question, was addressing Pharisees, who thought they were superior to everyone else, and craving exaltation from others was their modus opperandi. Both Paul and Jesus, in different ways, were preaching humility before God and other people. Not a contradiction. That was easy.

Rom 2:12 Paul says: All who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law.
John 12:48 Jesus says: He who rejects me and does not receive my sayings has a judge, the word that I have spoken will be his judge on the last day.
Paul says you will be judged by the law. Jesus says you will be judged by the words he has spoken.

This is a broken record. Paul is drawing a distinction between believers, those who have sinned without the law (which means those who have believed in Jesus for salvation), and those who have sinned under the law (those who don't believe in Jesus for salvation and rely only on themselves). Jesus is talking about unbelievers only. Apples to oranges. Not a contradiction. That was easy.

1 Cor 4:15 Paul says: For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
Matt 23:9 Jesus says: And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven.
Paul says to call him father, Jesus says to call no man on earth your father.

LOL! My, my. I mean, what you copy and paste from 1 Corinthians 4:15 is all we need to refute this "contradiction" claim. Paul just means "father" in the sense of a guide in Christ and how to follow Him. Jesus is basically restating Commandment 2 to the Pharisees, not to have any other gods before God. Okay, this is just getting kind of ridiculous. I mean no offense by that, but really. Come on, man. Anyway, not a contradiction. That was easy.

Rom 10:4 Paul says: For Christ is the end of the law, that every one who has faith may be justified.
Matt 5:17 Jesus says: Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets, I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them.
Paul said that Christ is the end of the law. Jesus said he did not come to abolish the law.

Paul did not say the Law was abolished, but that the old Law was obsolete and that Christ is the new end of the law. Again, Jesus came to fulfill the Law, because no one else can. Jesus didn't come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it on our behalf, and to actually become the new Law. Thus, we (believers, anyway) are not subject to the old Law anymore. This does not mean that the old Law serves no purpose anymore for believers, it merely means the old Law is a mirror in which we see our need for Christ and redemption in Him, and thus drives us to Him. Hebrews 7 sums this up nicely:

"Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of Aaron? For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also... For, on the one hand, there is a setting aside of a former commandment because of its weakness and uselessness (for the Law made nothing perfect), and on the other hand there is a bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God."

Not a contradiction. That was easy.

1 Cor 12:28 Paul says: And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third, teachers.
Eph 4:11 Paul says: And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers,
1st Tim 2:7 Paul says: For this I was appointed a preacher and apostle (I am telling the truth, I am not lying), a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.
Matt 23:8 Jesus says: But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren.
John 10:16 Jesus says: And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold, I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one pastor (shepherd).
It's like Paul is justifying creating a church while Jesus tells us that we only have one teacher (God).

Same as above. Paul is talking to Christians, all of whom have different spiritual gifts as given to them by God, and that they should use them accordingly for the glory of God and the edification of His church. Jesus is talking to Pharisees and basically excoriating them for exalting themselves, asserting superiority over others, and putting themselves in the place of God.

Not a contradiction. That was easy.

1 Cor 4:15 Paul says: For though you have countless leaders in Christ…
Matt 23:10 Jesus says: Neither be called leaders, for you have one leader,
More of the same? Paul justifying the creation of a church, and Jesus sticks to the idea that the kinddom of heaven is within us.

Same as above. That was easy. Not a contradiction.

1 Cor 5:7 Paul says: For Christ, our pachal lamb, has been sacrificed.
Eph 5:2 Paul says: And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.
Matt9:13 Jesus says: Go and learn what this means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice'.
Paul, again all about the sacrifice of Jesus. Jesus claiming that sacrifice is not desired.

Right, Jesus is the sacrifice to end all sacrifices. No need to sacrifice lambs or goats or offer any kind of burnt offerings like the Israelites did, which foreshadowed the final Sacrifice (Jesus, the Lamb of God) to come.

Not a contradiction. That was easy.

How is Paul different than a Joseph Smith?
Paul: Seriously, I had a vision.
Joseph Smith: Seriously, I found golden plates.
All it takes is to put your faith into either of these guys, right?

LOL!!!

That was fun, man. Let's keep going.

I hear your attempted justifications and even acknowledge that some could be sound for all we know and can assume about the Bible.
How you can be so sure about what Jesus was trying to say when we all know that Jesus wrote nothing down is an assurance that is not justified.

No matter though. The words are clear and poorly executed if we are going to claim that the Bible is some message from a god.

Why would a god have a book written, with a message for EVERYONE, but then require pastors and theologians to tell us what it really means? An all powerful god would not fail so horribly IMO. Just look at all the tens of thousands of denominations there now are for this one religion!

That alone informs us that attempting to justify what people 'really meant' when often times what they were claimed to have said was written down by unknown authors is not an assurance that they said any such thing. What is clear to me is how the message of Paul seems to differ quite a bit compared to the message of Jesus (assuming we can trust what we now have in the Bible of course).

[PinSeeker]

The words are clear and poorly executed if we are going to claim that the Bible is some message from a god.

No, the words are clear and excellently executed, as is everything God does. Human understanding, though, oftentimes is assuredly not. But that's because of the sin that dwells within.

Why would a god have a book written, with a message for EVERYONE, but then require pastors and theologians to tell us what it really means?

That's a good question, actually. In short, God gives man (male and female) the privilege of relating His Word to others and in this way participating in His administering salvation (a one-time event) and sanctification (a life-long process) to others. We might observe Romans 10 regarding this:

"How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? How will they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news of good things!� (vv.14-15)

An all powerful god would not fail so horribly IMO. Just look at all the tens of thousands of denominations there now are for this one religion!

Men -- and Christians -- fail. God does not.

And denominations are good in a certain way: Except for the essentials (Jesus atoned for our sin and reconciled us to God by His blood), not everybody agrees with everybody. One day they will, but as of now, nothing is really as it should be. But for now, denominations make it possible for folks to stay in unity with at least part of the Body of Christ. But again, one day -- one Great Day -- there will be no more disunity on anything, and no "denominations."

That alone informs us that attempting to justify...

You mean 'clarify.'

...what people 'really meant'...

Well, what God was saying... through those people. But yeah, on a human level, experientially speaking, what they were actually saying. It's just a matter of understanding them correctly.

What is clear to me is how the message of Paul seems to differ quite a bit compared to the message of Jesus (assuming we can trust what we now have in the Bible of course).

Well, I think there were some things in there before where I showed you this wasn't the case. But I'm more than willing to speak with you further on where you see Paul and Jesus "differing."

[Clownboat]

No, the words are clear and excellently executed, as is everything God does.

Your level of faith in your god is not in question.
Why, if everything your god does is excellently executed do we have nearly 40,000 versions of Christianity? Certainly not due to its excellence.

Human understanding, though, oftentimes is assuredly not. But that's because of the sin that dwells within.

Sin is your burden to bare. Please don't project your sin on to the rest of us.
You are just poisoning the well here. Believe like me, or you just have failed human understanding is not a convincing argument.

Why would a god have a book written, with a message for EVERYONE, but then require pastors and theologians to tell us what it really means?

That's a good question, actually. In short, God gives man (male and female) the privilege of relating His Word to others and in this way participating in His administering salvation (a one-time event) and sanctification (a life-long process) to others. We might observe Romans 10 regarding this:

Then your god has failed to have his message delivered due to all the differing versions that are now available to us.
Just look at the differing ways to get to heaven. Something crucial. Heck, even atheists can go to heaven now according to the Pope.

"How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? How will they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news of good things!� (vv.14-15)

Not sure how this helps you as this applies to all religions and most cults.

An all powerful god would not fail so horribly IMO. Just look at all the tens of thousands of denominations there now are for this one religion!

Men -- and Christians -- fail. God does not.

Again, your level of faith is not in dispute. I believe your faith is strong. What your faith does not address though is all the differing denominations of your faith or why an all powerful god would desire such thing to happen to his message.

And denominations are good in a certain way: Except for the essentials (Jesus atoned for our sin and reconciled us to God by His blood), not everybody agrees with everybody. One day they will, but as of now, nothing is really as it should be. But for now, denominations make it possible for folks to stay in unity with at least part of the Body of Christ. But again, one day -- one Great Day -- there will be no more disunity on anything, and no "denominations."

How good are denominations when the day that there will no longer be any is being called a 'Great Day'? This is illogical.

That alone informs us that attempting to justify...

You mean 'clarify.'

And to clarify further, you quote mind out how they were written down by unknown authors and how that is not an assurance that they said any such words you claim they said.

Well, what God was saying... through those people.

Do you mean Allah and the way he spoke through Mohammed or something else?

It's just a matter of understanding them correctly.

40 thousand denominations does not assist to help understanding.

[JehovahsWitness]

[#5] Eph 1:7 /Rom 4:25 v Matt 6:14-15

I have already addressed the issue of Mercy/forgiveness =/= Redemption. Here is the link in case you missed it.
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 929#837929

"Mercy vs. forgiveness" ? That kind of abritary distinction is just the kind of "word splitting" apologists seem to love to engage in.

Do you know the function of forward slash "/" in written English? or did you simply misread my post?

[rikuoamero]

Matthew 27:9–10
"Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, “And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the value of Him who was priced, whom they of the children of Israel priced, and gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord directed me.�

Where do you find this in Jeremiah?

While drawing on a combination of words from Jeremiah (19:1-13) and Zechariah (11:11-13), Matthew attributes the prophecy to Jeremiah as the more prominent prophet. In the same way, Mark (1:2) combines quotations from Isaiah (40:3) and Malachi (3:1) but cites only Isaiah as the more prominent prophet.

A nice try, and a mistake easily made because the references are pretty obscure. That one is not so easy. But alas, not a contradiction.

Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet,
Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet,
Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet,

Here is something spoken by JehovahsWitness
Finally, someone offers something in the way of "contradiction," that we can actually talk about. I've been hoping and praying for this. Okay, I'm in:
Oh wait...that was actually spoken by Pinseeker. Ya see, when I (rikuo) said that that quote was said by JW, what I actually meant was that it was spoken by Pinseeker but I attributed to JW, since he's a more prominent member of the forum.

So then...wouldn't my claiming it was spoken by JW be a non-truth? A misdirection?

[rikuoamero]

At face value, the disciples could well have been left with the impression that the Commandments are the way to salvation, as is taught in the Torah.

The disciples already believed in Jesus, and they knew He was the way, the truth, and the life. I can't speak for them, but I feel sure they knew exactly what Jesus was doing and saying here. Jesus took this tack in many situations. I'm quite sure they knew.

And maybe that is just what Jesus too was saying. Being a good, Torah observant Jew and all.

Jesus was certainly an observant Jew, for sure. But nah.

Are you talking about the same disciples the rest of us are familiar with? You say the disciples "knew exactly" what Jesus was saying and doing...and yet, the New Testament itself tells us that even the most prominent members didn't know what he was doing.
Take the Last Supper scene from Gospel John for example. They don't know who the traitor is, despite the fact Jesus identifies him and tells him to do what he must.

What about when Peter denies Jesus three times? That looks to me to be a follower who doesn't know what his master is doing.

[JehovahsWitness]

Here is something spoken by JehovahsWitness
Finally, someone offers something in the way of "contradiction," that we can actually talk about. I've been hoping and praying for this. Okay, I'm in:

Excuse me but I didn't say that [in red] I think if you look back that was Pinsseeker,
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 685#923685




JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

Edit: Okay I see you were using me to make a point, okay...but I would appreciate if you didn't in future, I'm sure you can illustrate misquoting without using me as a specific poster as that could lead to confusion.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 43 by PinSeeker]

No, the words are clear and excellently executed, as is everything God does. Human understanding, though, oftentimes is assuredly not. But that's because of the sin that dwells within.

Pin, I want you to try thinking this through.
Let's say you agree with me that Shakespeare's plays are excellently written.
Now let's say you live in a universe where you have never heard of, or read, Shakespeare.
You read this line
Yo If you prick us, do we's not bleed? If you tickle us, do we's not laugh? If you poison us, do we's not die? an' if you wrong us, shall we's not revenge? otay buh-weet
Would you describe that as "excellent" writing?