Is the Bible the inerrent word of God?

[Avatar4321]

The Bible doesn't claim to be inerrant. I see no reason to exalt it beyond what it is.

It's a collection of books that contains the Word of God given to our progenitors in the House of Israel. It contains the doctrines of Christ that point us to Jesus Christ, the Son of God. He is our perfect source of eternal life.

The Bible is a tool to bring men to Him. Good for uplifting and edifying man.

 

[Avatar4321]

Is the Bible the inerrent word of God?

I don't know.

There is only one way fine out.

Study it. Live its precepts. Ask and receive. Seek and find.

 

[Czernobog]

The Bible doesn't claim to be inerrant. I see no reason to exalt it beyond what it is.

It's a collection of books that contains the Word of God given to our progenitors in the House of Israel. It contains the doctrines of Christ that point us to Jesus Christ, the Son of God. He is our perfect source of eternal life.

The Bible is a tool to bring men to Him. Good for uplifting and edifying man.

Interesting equivocation in your answer. It contains the "Word of God", but it is not inerrant? So...if, as suggested by implication, it has errors, how do you know that it contains the "Word of God"? After all, would God allow his word to be transcribed erroneously? If so, why?

 

[Meriweather]

And herein lies the problem with your assessment. If the Bible is only "valid" from "the perspective of the authors of the book, at the time", then doesn't that fly in the face of an ever-present, unchanging, everlasting God? Would not this all-knowing God see that we in the modern world would come into being, and design the Bible so that it would be just as valid, and accurate for us, today, as it was for the writers of Genesis? Or was God not capable of such forethought?

I did not say it was only valid from the perspective of the authors of the time. I said people, today, miss the perspective of the authors of that time period. The authors wrote a vivid, picturesque view of the goodness of God that humans were failing miserably at emulating. The story was about human corruption which was washed away...at least for a time.

The same would be very true today. For example, don't some view the liberal agenda and the Democratic Party (or the conservative agenda and the Republican Party) as corrupt/inept beyond belief? If a someone in our time about this and told of the day where the __________ Party crumbled into non-existence because of how corrupt it had become, pointing out divine justice finally had its day, might not later people, unfamiliar with these times, decry a divine justice that would destroyed an entire party, thereby missing the original point of such a story?

The Bible is a timeless revelation about God. First it tells of God's goodness, comparing that goodness to humans failing at goodness. The next revelation about God is His justice. Notice people striving to become as just as God by keeping His law always before them. The third revelation about God is His love, the love of a father who would devote and ultimately give his very life to his children.

Corruption cannot stand in the face of Goodness, Justice, and Love. These are the timeless tales of the Bible, so simple, yet still flying over the heads of some people today. In their confusion the corruption becomes their hero and anyone ending corruption is seen as the ultimate evil.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The Bible doesn't claim to be inerrant. I see no reason to exalt it beyond what it is.

It's a collection of books that contains the Word of God given to our progenitors in the House of Israel. It contains the doctrines of Christ that point us to Jesus Christ, the Son of God. He is our perfect source of eternal life.

The Bible is a tool to bring men to Him. Good for uplifting and edifying man.

Then there is no ‘him.’

An omnipotent deity wouldn’t need a book – or any other media, for that matter – to attract adherents, it would simply make it so.

If an omnipotent deity were to rely on a book to attract adherents, then it’s neither omnipotent nor a deity, and unworthy of worship.

There is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists, the bible was written solely by men, not a ‘god.’

And save the nonsense about 'god' giving man ‘free will.’

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The Bible doesn't claim to be inerrant. I see no reason to exalt it beyond what it is.

It's a collection of books that contains the Word of God given to our progenitors in the House of Israel. It contains the doctrines of Christ that point us to Jesus Christ, the Son of God. He is our perfect source of eternal life.

The Bible is a tool to bring men to Him. Good for uplifting and edifying man.

Interesting equivocation in your answer. It contains the "Word of God", but it is not inerrant? So...if, as suggested by implication, it has errors, how do you know that it contains the "Word of God"? After all, would God allow his word to be transcribed erroneously? If so, why?

Why would an omnipotent deity need to rely on ‘transcription’ to begin with.

 

[Czernobog]

And herein lies the problem with your assessment. If the Bible is only "valid" from "the perspective of the authors of the book, at the time", then doesn't that fly in the face of an ever-present, unchanging, everlasting God? Would not this all-knowing God see that we in the modern world would come into being, and design the Bible so that it would be just as valid, and accurate for us, today, as it was for the writers of Genesis? Or was God not capable of such forethought?

I did not say it was only valid from the perspective of the authors of the time. I said people, today, miss the perspective of the authors of that time period. The authors wrote a vivid, picturesque view of the goodness of God that humans were failing miserably at emulating. The story was about human corruption which was washed away...at least for a time.

The same would be very true today. For example, don't some view the liberal agenda and the Democratic Party (or the conservative agenda and the Republican Party) as corrupt/inept beyond belief? If a someone in our time about this and told of the day where the __________ Party crumbled into non-existence because of how corrupt it had become, pointing out divine justice finally had its day, might not later people, unfamiliar with these times, decry a divine justice that would destroyed an entire party, thereby missing the original point of such a story?

The Bible is a timeless revelation about God. First it tells of God's goodness, comparing that goodness to humans failing at goodness. The next revelation about God is His justice. Notice people striving to become as just as God by keeping His law always before them. The third revelation about God is His love, the love of a father who would devote and ultimately give his very life to his children.

Corruption cannot stand in the face of Goodness, Justice, and Love. These are the timeless tales of the Bible, so simple, yet still flying over the heads of some people today. In their confusion the corruption becomes their hero and anyone ending corruption is seen as the ultimate evil.

Okay. So, I wasn't going to get to this until I had an actual answer to my question in the OP, but, since you brought it to this, how about you point to some group of people who just, "crumbled" into non-existence, all on their own, according to the biblical record.

 

[Meriweather]

An omnipotent deity wouldn’t need a book – or any other media, for that matter – to attract adherents, it would simply make it so.

If an omnipotent deity were to rely on a book to attract adherents, then it’s neither omnipotent nor a deity, and unworthy of worship.

There is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists, the bible was written solely by men, not a ‘god.’

And save the nonsense about 'god' giving man ‘free will.’

People who want to learn about Kings or Presidents, want to read books about kings and presidents. The kings/presidents themselves don't need such books. In the same way, people who have had experiences of God, or would like to learn more about God, search out books about Him. And yes, those books are written by men, but many of them are indeed inspired by God, or inspired by experiences of God.

 

[Meriweather]

Okay. So, I wasn't going to get to this until I had an actual answer to my question in the OP, but, since you brought it to this, how about you point to some group of people who just, "crumbled" into non-existence, all on their own, according to the biblical record.

What caused the non-existence of people in the flood?

 

[Czernobog]

Okay. So, I wasn't going to get to this until I had an actual answer to my question in the OP, but, since you brought it to this, how about you point to some group of people who just, "crumbled" into non-existence, all on their own, according to the biblical record.

What caused the non-existence of people in the flood?

And what about the Amelakites? Or the Midianites?

 

[Meriweather]

And what about the Amelakites? Or the Midianites?

Same thing. The authors saw the Amalekites and the Midianites as very cruel people and a great threat to them. They saw it as justice served or a grave threat being eliminated.

 

[Czernobog]

And what about the Amelakites? Or the Midianites?

Same thing. The authors saw the Amalekites and the Midianites as very cruel people and a great threat to them. They saw it as justice served or a grave threat being eliminated.

And so they just made up the part where God commanded them to do it?

 

[Avatar4321]

The Bible doesn't claim to be inerrant. I see no reason to exalt it beyond what it is.

It's a collection of books that contains the Word of God given to our progenitors in the House of Israel. It contains the doctrines of Christ that point us to Jesus Christ, the Son of God. He is our perfect source of eternal life.

The Bible is a tool to bring men to Him. Good for uplifting and edifying man.

Interesting equivocation in your answer. It contains the "Word of God", but it is not inerrant? So...if, as suggested by implication, it has errors, how do you know that it contains the "Word of God"? After all, would God allow his word to be transcribed erroneously? If so, why?

The Holy Spirit testifies to the truths found in the Bible.

God works through flawed people. Probably because if He didn't, nothing would ever happen.

Recognizing the truth isn't an equivocation. I believe what the Bible claims to be. Not what others say it is

 

[Avatar4321]

The Bible doesn't claim to be inerrant. I see no reason to exalt it beyond what it is.

It's a collection of books that contains the Word of God given to our progenitors in the House of Israel. It contains the doctrines of Christ that point us to Jesus Christ, the Son of God. He is our perfect source of eternal life.

The Bible is a tool to bring men to Him. Good for uplifting and edifying man.

Then there is no ‘him.’

An omnipotent deity wouldn’t need a book – or any other media, for that matter – to attract adherents, it would simply make it so.

If an omnipotent deity were to rely on a book to attract adherents, then it’s neither omnipotent nor a deity, and unworthy of worship.

There is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists, the bible was written solely by men, not a ‘god.’

And save the nonsense about 'god' giving man ‘free will.’

Of course He doesn't need a book. The Bible was written based off the interactions men had with God. Its a tool to help us come to Him. And omnipotent God uses all tools available to accomplish His work.

Stop begging the question and starting asking and seeking. You will find Him when you do.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

I have noticed that in several discussions I have with Christians, the point of contention seems to be in attempting to separate the Bible into two parts - the part that must be accepted as accurate (The New Testament), and the part that doesn't (The Old Testament).

So, I have a question. The creation Truth Foundation, in their statement of faith, claims, “The unique divine inspiration of all the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments as originally given, so that they are infallibly and uniquely authoritative and free from error of any sort, in all matters with which they deal, scientific and historical as well as moral and theological.”

I would ask the Christians on this forum if they agree with that statement, bearing in mind:

First, they make no distinction between the Old, and the New Testament, and
Second, paying particular attention to the highlighted portion.

Yes. It is. Those who reject the OT don't understand WHO God really is.

 

[Czernobog]

The Bible doesn't claim to be inerrant. I see no reason to exalt it beyond what it is.

It's a collection of books that contains the Word of God given to our progenitors in the House of Israel. It contains the doctrines of Christ that point us to Jesus Christ, the Son of God. He is our perfect source of eternal life.

The Bible is a tool to bring men to Him. Good for uplifting and edifying man.

Interesting equivocation in your answer. It contains the "Word of God", but it is not inerrant? So...if, as suggested by implication, it has errors, how do you know that it contains the "Word of God"? After all, would God allow his word to be transcribed erroneously? If so, why?

The Holy Spirit testifies to the truths found in the Bible.

God works through flawed people. Probably because if He didn't, nothing would ever happen.

Recognizing the truth isn't an equivocation. I believe what the Bible claims to be. Not what others say it is

Really?

Joshua 1:7-8 (NIV) - Be strong and very courageous. Be careful to obey all the law my servant Moses gave to you; do not turn from it to the right or to the left, that you may be successful wherever you go. Keep this Book of the Law on your lips; meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do everything written in it. Then you will be prosperous and successful.

Matthew 4:4 (NIV) - Jesus answered, “It is written; ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”

2 Timothy 3:16-17 (NIV) - All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

James 2:10 (NIV) - For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it.

The Bible claims to come directly from God - All. Of. It.. So, unless you are suggesting that God was unreliable, then the Bible seems to suggest that every word of it should be accepted as reliable, and accurate.

Now, what were you saying about believing the Bible to be what it claims to be?

 

[Meriweather]

And so they just made up the part where God commanded them to do it?

Probably not the first or last time, when faced with criticism of their deed, a people has passed it off as the will of God. On the other hand we are left to wonder if there was prayerful consideration beforehand. If so, was it the human mind/heart or the voice of God that the priest heard? We are often warned we are not to trust the human heart. We all seem to agree that the decree doesn't sound like the voice of God. It seems more like human justice and may even cross the line into vengeance. But we weren't there, so we could be wrong. It just might have been the voice of God commanding justice after these people tormented the Israelites when the Israelites were in great need and not a threat.

 

[Czernobog]

And so they just made up the part where God commanded them to do it?

Probably not the first or last time, when faced with criticism of their deed, a people has passed it off as the will of God. On the other hand we are left to wonder if there was prayerful consideration beforehand. If so, was it the human mind/heart or the voice of God that the priest heard? We are often warned we are not to trust the human heart. We all seem to agree that the decree doesn't sound like the voice of God. It seems more like human justice and may even cross the line into vengeance. But we weren't there, so we could be wrong. It just might have been the voice of God commanding justice after these people tormented the Israelites when the Israelites were in great need and not a threat.

Soooo...basically, even though the Bible claims of itself, that every word is the word of God, this might have been the word of God...or it might have been a bunch of evil bastards just trying to justify their own blood-thirsty behaviour? This is the Bible that we are expected to take seriously, and view as a reliable source of morality?!?!? REALLY??????

 

[cnelsen]

I have noticed that in several discussions I have with Christians, the point of contention seems to be in attempting to separate the Bible into two parts - the part that must be accepted as accurate (The New Testament), and the part that doesn't (The Old Testament).

So, I have a question. The creation Truth Foundation, in their statement of faith, claims, “The unique divine inspiration of all the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments as originally given, so that they are infallibly and uniquely authoritative and free from error of any sort, in all matters with which they deal, scientific and historical as well as moral and theological.”

I would ask the Christians on this forum if they agree with that statement, bearing in mind:

First, they make no distinction between the Old, and the New Testament, and
Second, paying particular attention to the highlighted portion.

Of course the Bible is not the Word of God. God doesn't even speak English. He speaks Chinese, obviously, or He wouldn't have made China the Middle Kingdom.

 

[Meriweather]

Soooo...basically, even though the Bible claims of itself, that every word is the word of God, this might have been the word of God...or it might have been a bunch of evil bastards just trying to justify their own blood-thirsty behaviour? This is the Bible that we are expected to take seriously, and view as a reliable source of morality?!?!? REALLY??????

Problems occur between those who take every word of the Bible literally and those who fight against the very concept of God.

Most of us do not take every word literally. Many of us understand the difference between a story account and a factual news account. In those days, no newspapers; it was stories that survived. Stories written by man, that we believe were inspired by God and mankind's various experiences with God and understanding of God. These stories, which some now ridicule, were told and written to tell of God's goodness, His justice and His protection of the oppressed.

If we could go back in time would return to those ill and dying in the desert and tell them that their oppressors--those who were killing their husbands, wives, and children--should be admired, should be supported, and should have monuments built to them to honor them for the cruel deaths and treatment they visited upon those struggling to survive in the desert. We can tell them that's the modern view of justice. We can tell them of how corruption should be allowed to reign, that standing up and beating back corruption is now the ultimate evil.

Before modern day people condemn, criticize, and accuse what is in the Bible, it might be best if they first take time to understand the original story as presented by those who lived through it.