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.
When the Holy Spirit enters into each of us, He reeals our salvation is true.
After receiving the Holy Spirit the Bible makes sense to each of us, though w will never know it all perfectly,and when we read what we are not GIVEN to understand, wekeep itin ur hearts, just as Mary would do.
I await many revelations, but at the same time I know most will be come the Kingdom. I do know the Holy Spirit leads us all in understanding, faith says it is so, and experience has demonstrted this for me.......for all who believe.
After receiving the Holy Spirit the Bible makes sense to each of us, though w will never know it all perfectly,and when we read what we are not GIVEN to understand, wekeep itin ur hearts, just as Mary would do.
I await many revelations, but at the same time I know most will be come the Kingdom. I do know the Holy Spirit leads us all in understanding, faith says it is so, and experience has demonstrted this for me.......for all who believe.
The whole discussion here on this thread concerns the scriptures and you brought up the Dead Sea Scrolls which the majority of the text is non-biblical. You tell me what in the Dead Sea Scrolls can be considered scripture and what is not considered scripture since you brought them up. To me they are nothing but old, corrupt and rotten manuscripts that will turn to dust if you so much as breath on them to hard!
When Jesus was referring to the Scriptures i am confident "The Book of the Mysteries" was not included.
When Jesus was referring to the Scriptures i am confident "The Book of the Mysteries" was not included.
Last edited:
I wouldn't say that all the cults are led by the Holy Spirit.
I wouldn't say either that the mainstream church isn't fully led by the mainstream church either.
By this I mean we only have to look at the doctrinal differences we see in denominations.
A simple example is baptism saves and baptism does not save.
Only one can be right. The other one must be wrong, that being the case it's not of the Holy Spirit.
I wouldn't say either that the mainstream church isn't fully led by the mainstream church either.
By this I mean we only have to look at the doctrinal differences we see in denominations.
A simple example is baptism saves and baptism does not save.
Only one can be right. The other one must be wrong, that being the case it's not of the Holy Spirit.
You can think whatever you want, but what we need for a discussion are facts.
Historical facts are:
1. Septuagint was in a massive use in that time.
2. Septuagint differs from masoretic text used in most of Christian Bibles.
3. There are not two manuscripts that are same. Every two manuscripts have some differences, because its impossible to hand copy without errors.
4. Canon of Scriptures (which books belong to the "bible" and which not) was dynamic, forming and not always the same.
5. DSS, early manuscripts and other resources are valuable for us because we can see how the text changed or if there was one version or many versions of some books.
Historical facts are:
1. Septuagint was in a massive use in that time.
2. Septuagint differs from masoretic text used in most of Christian Bibles.
3. There are not two manuscripts that are same. Every two manuscripts have some differences, because its impossible to hand copy without errors.
4. Canon of Scriptures (which books belong to the "bible" and which not) was dynamic, forming and not always the same.
5. DSS, early manuscripts and other resources are valuable for us because we can see how the text changed or if there was one version or many versions of some books.
How do you know that the Septuagint that was supposedly "in massive use at the time" is the same as the oldest extant copy of the Septuagint? Only fragments are extant prior to about the 4th century AD so the historical fact 1 isn't worth much. Facts 2 and 3 are why you should stay away form the so called "oldest and best manuscripts." Fact 4 is only true to a certain extent and has nothing to do with whether the scriptures are inerrant or not. Finally fact 5 nothing more than an opinion.
1) Textual criticism. It applies to every old book, including Septuagint.
- you must compare manuscripts, ancient quotations etc. and fix scribal errors.
2) Ecclesiastical tradition
- there are greek churches using the Septuagint from the beginning
---
I do not suppose Septuagint to be perfectly preserved. The earliest almost full text of Septuagint is from the 4th century. Its not bad, but its not great, too.
And church tradition can add some explanations into the text, as it happened with the Byzantine readings sometimes.
- you must compare manuscripts, ancient quotations etc. and fix scribal errors.
2) Ecclesiastical tradition
- there are greek churches using the Septuagint from the beginning
---
I do not suppose Septuagint to be perfectly preserved. The earliest almost full text of Septuagint is from the 4th century. Its not bad, but its not great, too.
And church tradition can add some explanations into the text, as it happened with the Byzantine readings sometimes.
Last edited:
We have probably a different view on trust. Do you trust your wife even when you know she is not perfect in everything?
It trust my Bible in every important teaching or message. I do not need some teoretical textual perfection for this.
Of course, I pursue the best available text according to my knowledge and money. But I am not depressed by some unrealistic hunt for perfection in this material world.
I do not remember any "concern with the jots of the scriptures". The only thing I remember in this context was the fullfilment of the Law in Jesus.
It trust my Bible in every important teaching or message. I do not need some teoretical textual perfection for this.
Of course, I pursue the best available text according to my knowledge and money. But I am not depressed by some unrealistic hunt for perfection in this material world.
I do not remember any "concern with the jots of the scriptures". The only thing I remember in this context was the fullfilment of the Law in Jesus.
Last edited:
Jots and tittles are contained in writing and Jesus stressed that they are significant. The context is in verse 17 and Jesus is stressing that did not come to destroy the law or the prophets but to fulfill so you are only half right. Again your position cannot be maintained if you actually believe the Bible!