Does the Bible claim to be inerrant?
- Thread starter Antony_me
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
NLT. He hasn't been able to not teach me from it. Ive found a place or two where the translation could have been better or more succinct but I'm fond of it because its what He gave me and taught me from. 
And as for the few places where I think the translation of a word might be better, scholars have helped as knowledge increases, just as we were told it would.
And even the loose translation of a word or two has not led me into any great error.
And as for the few places where I think the translation of a word might be better, scholars have helped as knowledge increases, just as we were told it would.
And even the loose translation of a word or two has not led me into any great error.
So where did you see that original Hebrew?
You have faith that the copies of copies of copies are inerrant.
Question, do you think the Holy Spirit actually moved Micah to write that Jesus had an origin? Or is it possible that the copy of copies of copies could incorrect?
Also are you aware that there is a conspiracy in the bible where Satan appears as an angel of light to decieve people?
12 But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we.
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
Do you think it's coincidnental or conspiratorial that somebody wants 72, a christ with an origin or a christ that is "a son of the gods"?
I wonder if Marlilyn Furguson was right when she clamed that Christian churches would be preaching the new age gospel to prepare the way for the cosmic christ.... Probably just a coincidence lol... no conspiracy here.
You have faith that the copies of copies of copies are inerrant.
Question, do you think the Holy Spirit actually moved Micah to write that Jesus had an origin? Or is it possible that the copy of copies of copies could incorrect?
Also are you aware that there is a conspiracy in the bible where Satan appears as an angel of light to decieve people?
12 But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we.
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
Do you think it's coincidnental or conspiratorial that somebody wants 72, a christ with an origin or a christ that is "a son of the gods"?
I wonder if Marlilyn Furguson was right when she clamed that Christian churches would be preaching the new age gospel to prepare the way for the cosmic christ.... Probably just a coincidence lol... no conspiracy here.
So where did you see that original Hebrew?
You have faith that the copies of copies of copies are inerrant.
Question, do you think the Holy Spirit actually moved Micah to write that Jesus had an origin? Or is it possible that the copy of copies of copies could incorrect?
Also are you aware that there is a conspiracy in the bible where Satan appears as an angel of light to decieve people?
12 But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we.
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
Do you think it's coincidnental or conspiratorial that somebody wants 72, a christ with an origin or a christ that is "a son of the gods"?
I wonder if Marlilyn Furguson was right when she clamed that Christian churches would be preaching the new age gospel to prepare the way for the cosmic christ.... Probably just a coincidence lol... no conspiracy here.
You have faith that the copies of copies of copies are inerrant.
Question, do you think the Holy Spirit actually moved Micah to write that Jesus had an origin? Or is it possible that the copy of copies of copies could incorrect?
Also are you aware that there is a conspiracy in the bible where Satan appears as an angel of light to decieve people?
12 But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we.
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
Do you think it's coincidnental or conspiratorial that somebody wants 72, a christ with an origin or a christ that is "a son of the gods"?
I wonder if Marlilyn Furguson was right when she clamed that Christian churches would be preaching the new age gospel to prepare the way for the cosmic christ.... Probably just a coincidence lol... no conspiracy here.
But you cannot blame the NIV or ESV for translating the underlying text properly. You can blame them for selecting a wrong text, yes. But its the same text KJV selected, too.
I do not have a faith that copies of copies are inerrant. Thats why I do not believe any translation (made from this copies) can be inerrant.
Question about Micah - I believe that Son is from Father (logically). And that it is an everlasting reality as also ancient Christian creeds say.
D
Bogus! Tell me you learned English with just one version of a textbook. Tell me the first time you ever saw the English word "run" you completely understood the definition and the complexity of the word. No! It is a complicated word from a complicated language, so you had to spend time pursuing what it meant before you got it's the same word, and yet had several meanings. And yet, here you are trying to convince us that because the one and only Bible version you use has to be the only possible translation. (And I do get it is not the KJV, and really not any of the typical translations people in English-speaking countries use, so don't go down that bunny hole again.)
You know better than this. Here's the rub. You're not the only one who knows better than this, so all you're doing now is proving how perfect you are, and guess what. No one, absolutely no one, is buying it. AND it's making you look foolish.
You looking foolish doesn't bother me. Your choice if you like looking foolish, but there is one serious problem here. Because you are taking all this time to look foolish, it has a negative side effect. Anyone can be checking out this site at any given moment. They can even find this thread 20 years from now. And, if they don't yet believe in the Lord, what you've done is to promote another bunny-hole reason to add to their excuse list of what's wrong with God.
Nothing wrong with God. Something wrong with you, given the most important thing you are concerned about now is "I am right. Everyone else is wrong, even if I don't listen to what they're saying."
Truth? You're not looking for truth. You're looking for validation. After all this whole site is supposed to be about the one thing we're supposed to agree on -- God. And here you are not looking for him, but looking for "truth," a truth that is NOT there. Your truth = I am right. You are wrong.
That's NOT truth!
You know better than this. Here's the rub. You're not the only one who knows better than this, so all you're doing now is proving how perfect you are, and guess what. No one, absolutely no one, is buying it. AND it's making you look foolish.
You looking foolish doesn't bother me. Your choice if you like looking foolish, but there is one serious problem here. Because you are taking all this time to look foolish, it has a negative side effect. Anyone can be checking out this site at any given moment. They can even find this thread 20 years from now. And, if they don't yet believe in the Lord, what you've done is to promote another bunny-hole reason to add to their excuse list of what's wrong with God.
Nothing wrong with God. Something wrong with you, given the most important thing you are concerned about now is "I am right. Everyone else is wrong, even if I don't listen to what they're saying."
Truth? You're not looking for truth. You're looking for validation. After all this whole site is supposed to be about the one thing we're supposed to agree on -- God. And here you are not looking for him, but looking for "truth," a truth that is NOT there. Your truth = I am right. You are wrong.
That's NOT truth!
D
Actually, that one isn't an error. The original used the word "horns" (in ancient Hebrew) like English uses the word "rays." When we draw pictures of the sun and put Vs around it to show it is shining, don't Vs look like the horns of a cow or rhino? Horns was a good word for people who didn't yet have headlights on their vehicles, since "beam" hadn't come to them yet.
Here is a painting of Moses with horns.
Here is a painting of Moses with horns.
So according to you, Father-Son relationship was existent just for 33 years of Jesus´ physical service in this world?
"The Father is made of none; neither created, nor begotten.
The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created; but begotten.
The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding. "
Athanasian Creed.
"The Father is made of none; neither created, nor begotten.
The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created; but begotten.
The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding. "
Athanasian Creed.
Last edited:
