Does the Bible claim to be inerrant?

[James37]

Yes, Septuagint is a translation, used by Jews and Christians as authoritative in those times.

What made it authoritative? Was it by the "word of a King"? (Ecclesiastes 8:4) Who authorized it?

 

[trofimus]

Maybe they are two different accounts of two diffrent events that just sound similar?

For example many Christian bands or preachers return and preach at the same location several times.

Oh no, again two different events... I wonder why Jesus did almost everything three times

 

[trofimus]

What made it authoritative? Was it by the "word of a King"? (Ecclesiastes 8:4) Who authorized it?

Ptolemaios II Philadelphus

 

[Ariel82]

Oh no, again two different events... I wonder why Jesus did almost everything three times

Cuz we need the reinforcement.....and the repetition is suppose to help us learn...there is a scientific study that says we need to hear something 7 times before we really remember and understand it...or something like that.

 

[trofimus]

Cuz we need the reinforcement.....and the repetition is suppose to help us learn...there is a study we need to hear something 7 times before we really remember and understand it...or something like that.

Come on, you know its not the answer.

 

[James37]

Ptolemaios II Philadelphus

Are you telling me Paul used scriptures authorized by a pagan king? It was certainly a translation and it was in a language that Paul and the readers of his letters understood! Are these the "holy scriptures" that Timothy had as a child? (2 Timothy 2:15)

 

[phil36]

Mt 5:1 And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set...

Lk 6:17 And he came down with them, and stood in the plain...

---

Was Jesus sitting on a mountain or was he standing in a plain?

A clear contradiction/inconsistency in Gospels. On the other hand, which Christian creed is in danger because of it? These are minor details.

Hi trophimus,

I am afraid to inform you that the confusion seems to be on your part. There is no inconsistency in scripture and especially your given 'proof texts'.

You make a huge assumption in thinking that the events described by Matthew and Luke are the same event. We can safely assume that over a three or so year period Jesus would have taught they sayings numerous times..they are important teachings!

And, even if they were the same event.. there still is no inconsistency.. The plain was on the mountain... what type of plain.. we have no idea except it would have been flat enough. many hills have them! And secondly Luke does not actually say Jesus taught standing up.. It says he came down and stood with his disciples on the plain...then a few sentences of description then the teaching. Pay careful attention to verse 19. No one can teach they way described while this was going on. Luke stops and proceeds with the teaching section.. he doesnt describe the the crowds calming down or Jesus sitting or standing during the teaching. Sitting was the actual norm for teaching cf. Matt 13:2; Luke 4:20.

So we can see, either way the confusion is on your part, this is what makes you think there are inconsistencies in the bible.

 

[crossnote]

Our Bibles != Scriptures.

Bibles are print of translation of compiled editions of hand made copies of Scriptures. I do not understand why are people so uneducated about this. Paul did not have the KJV.

Who mentioned the KJV?? Bibles are print translations of early Greek and Hebrew manuscripts which have proven true through their contained and fulfilled prophecies. How would you know anything about Jesus apart from the bible? Which voice in your head would be the real Jesus? LOL

 

[trofimus]

Hi trophimus,

I am afraid to inform you that the confusion seems to be on your part. There is no inconsistency in scripture and especially your given 'proof texts'.

You make a huge assumption in thinking that the events described by Matthew and Luke are the same event. We can safely assume that over a three or so year period Jesus would have taught they sayings numerous times..they are important teachings!

And, even if they were the same event.. there still is no inconsistency.. The plain was on the mountain... what type of plain.. we have no idea except it would have been flat enough. many hills have them! And secondly Luke does not actually say Jesus taught standing up.. It says he came down and stood with his disciples on the plain...then a few sentences of description then the teaching. Pay careful attention to verse 19. No one can teach they way described while this was going on. Luke stops and proceeds with the teaching section.. he doesnt describe the the crowds calming down or Jesus sitting or standing during the teaching. Sitting was the actual norm for teaching cf. Matt 13:2; Luke 4:20.

So we can see, either way the confusion is on your part, this is what makes you think there are inconsistencies in the bible.

Yeah, again... every difference in Gospels = different events.

Easy explanation, but unrealistic.

 

[phil36]

Yeah, again... every difference in Gospels = different events.

Easy explanation, but unrealistic.

Not at all trofimus, I showed that even if your two 'proof texts' where the same event they still had no inconsistencies. Many believe they are the same event, many don't.. we don't know. But they are both in total harmony .

That is why we can fully trust that scripture and all of it is God's word.

 

[Hungry]

Jesus Christ is inerrant.

Our books about Him are not.

I will take it a step further. Our understanding of the imperfectly translated books is flawed.

 

[Depleted]

Mt 5:1 And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set...

Lk 6:17 And he came down with them, and stood in the plain...

---

Was Jesus sitting on a mountain or was he standing in a plain?

A clear contradiction/inconsistency in Gospels. On the other hand, which Christian creed is in danger because of it? These are minor details.

If you weren't so busy thinking your version is the only one to read, this would have been an easy one for you. He stood on a level place in on the mountain.

Matt. 5:1 [FONT=&quot]Seeing the crowds, [/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot]he went up on the mountain, and when he [/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot]sat down, his disciples came to him.[/FONT]

Luke 6:17 17 [FONT=&quot]And [/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot]he came down with them and stood on a level place, ...[/FONT]

How about not trying to prove your right, and instead figure out what God says? All you're doing is the same stupid game atheists throw at believers all the time. If the message is Jesus, (and I often wonder if you get that), then why play word games?

 

[Budman]

If the Bible wasn't inerrant, I wouldn't waste my time reading it.

 

[Depleted]

What did Paul have?

Probably the same versions the Essenes had before they hid their library in some mountains and ran. (The Dead Sea Scrolls.)

 

[Depleted]

Yeah, again... every difference in Gospels = different events.

Easy explanation, but unrealistic.

Only because you like (thinking you're) proving God wrong because of your linguistic abilities.

 

[trofimus]

Are you telling me Paul used scriptures authorized by a pagan king? It was certainly a translation and it was in a language that Paul and the readers of his letters understood! Are these the "holy scriptures" that Timothy had as a child? (2 Timothy 2:15)

Complain to Paul, not to me.

 

[trofimus]

Only because you like (thinking you're) proving God wrong because of your linguistic abilities.

Because I am reading what Bible says not what I want it to say.

Many of you just have some faith you brought from various backgrounds like "there is no inconsistency" and try to justify everything to fit this faith.

I am looking for truth, whatever it will be like. I am not afraid of it. My salvation is not based on a perfect Bible.

 

[James37]

Am not understanding how you praise The Messiah the Christ the son of Mary , while He himself praised Jehovah and called the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel to do the same ,,,I see that you reject much of the O/T but you are even rejecting the N/T in preference to the teachings 14 letters of Saul ,,, In my studies it's appears that the people whom He [ Jesus ] was sent to and attended his gathering thought he was a prophet as seem here

Matthew 21:11
And the multitude said, This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee. [

Matthew 14:5
And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet. [

Matthew 11:9
But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet ] .. MANY YEARS BEFORE THE CLAIM THAT HE WAS A GOD OR
THE SON OF GOD ...​

​

​

"Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Philippians 2:9-11)

This is why!

 

[trofimus]

If the Bible wasn't inerrant, I wouldn't waste my time reading it.

What would you do instead?

 

[trofimus]

Only because you like (thinking you're) proving God wrong because of your linguistic abilities.

No linguistic abilities were used... up to mountain or down to plain, whats linguistic about it?

Also, it is not God I am proving to be wrong.

I am not even proving that something is "wrong". I said its a minor detail and changes nothing important.

The fact that something is not perfect does not make it automatically wrong.