Question: Is There an Innerrant Bible?
- Thread starter Andrew1
- 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.
H
Re: 40 Moth Swatters Vs. Skeptical Errors
Ockham's razor as in William of Ockham the Franciscan Friar? In what facet are you referring to Ockham's Razor ?
"simplicity"—parsimony or elegance—that in a hypothetical formulation the facets of simplicity may work in different directions: a simpler description may refer to a more complex hypothesis, and a more complex description may refer to a simpler hypothesis.
In another words simplicity may not be what it appears, only speculation and not the correct answer!
I believe we get what we need, when we need it and how we need it... your only arguing semantics... In the end they (bibles) all lead to Christ! Does it really matter what path you took for the journey?
1 Corinthians 14:33 "For God is not the author of confusion"
Ockham's razor as in William of Ockham the Franciscan Friar? In what facet are you referring to Ockham's Razor ?
"simplicity"—parsimony or elegance—that in a hypothetical formulation the facets of simplicity may work in different directions: a simpler description may refer to a more complex hypothesis, and a more complex description may refer to a simpler hypothesis.
In another words simplicity may not be what it appears, only speculation and not the correct answer!
I believe we get what we need, when we need it and how we need it... your only arguing semantics... In the end they (bibles) all lead to Christ! Does it really matter what path you took for the journey?
1 Corinthians 14:33 "For God is not the author of confusion"
It's really not that complicated. Let me try explaining another way.
The correct spelling of 'metal'. An errant spelling of metal would be 'metle'. But the only reason the word 'metle' is an 'error' is because the correct version exists, and you know what the correct version exists. Saying that 'metle' is an errant spelling is a completely meaningless statement unless you are comparing it to 'metal'
So, in the case of the Scriptures, there are to my mind two modes in which the Scriptures could be errant: what they contain does not correspond with reality, or what they contain does not correspond with what God has said/inspired.
So, what are you comparing to?
The correct spelling of 'metal'. An errant spelling of metal would be 'metle'. But the only reason the word 'metle' is an 'error' is because the correct version exists, and you know what the correct version exists. Saying that 'metle' is an errant spelling is a completely meaningless statement unless you are comparing it to 'metal'
So, in the case of the Scriptures, there are to my mind two modes in which the Scriptures could be errant: what they contain does not correspond with reality, or what they contain does not correspond with what God has said/inspired.
So, what are you comparing to?
T
The books contained in the Protestant Old Testament were officially accepted as Scripture by a group of Rabbi's in about 125ad. Prior to that the only books that were recognised as the actual word of God were the five books of Moses although the rest of the Bible was obviously used as Scripture. The main reason for creating a cannon of scripture was to prevent Christian writings ie New Testament books and other works from being used by Jews. A few of the Old Testament books were nearly excluded such as Esther and the Song of Soloman. Other books were also used frequently by the Jewish community. A notable example is the Book of Enoch which is quoted in Jude.
T
Your timeline is waaaay off. Luke wrote his Gospel long before Jerusalem fell in 70AD. And the whole NT had been written prior to that. It's quite possible the gospels had all been written down a few years after Jesus ascended back into Heaven. I don't know where you got your information, but it's liberal Bible scholar/theologian nonsense. They don't believe the Bible is God's revelation to mankind, so why bother studying it all their lives? I don't get it.
T
TinTin So how do you think the Old Testament books were selected ? As far as inspiration is concerned there are degrees
of it in the Tanakh (Jewish Bible). The whole Bible is divided into three sections. The Law, The Prophets and the Writings.
each section is placed in order of inspiration. Unlike our Bible the section that includes the Prophets also includes what we call the History Books. The Minor Prophets are all grouped together, this is how they were placed in the Scrolls that were used. The writings include the Psalms Proverbs and the book of Daniel. For the past 2000 years or so readings from the law and Prophets have been read in Synagogues every Sabbath. The pattern of reading has changed very little since the time of Jesus. Antiochus Epiphanes banned the reading of the Law(Torah) and destroyed any copies found. At the time the Torah only was read in the Synogogue. The Rabbi's found a clever way around this by using selections of the prophets that had references to the Torah. In this way they could still worship more or less as before.
of it in the Tanakh (Jewish Bible). The whole Bible is divided into three sections. The Law, The Prophets and the Writings.
each section is placed in order of inspiration. Unlike our Bible the section that includes the Prophets also includes what we call the History Books. The Minor Prophets are all grouped together, this is how they were placed in the Scrolls that were used. The writings include the Psalms Proverbs and the book of Daniel. For the past 2000 years or so readings from the law and Prophets have been read in Synagogues every Sabbath. The pattern of reading has changed very little since the time of Jesus. Antiochus Epiphanes banned the reading of the Law(Torah) and destroyed any copies found. At the time the Torah only was read in the Synogogue. The Rabbi's found a clever way around this by using selections of the prophets that had references to the Torah. In this way they could still worship more or less as before.
Last edited:
In my my mind errant would mean the scriptures didn't correspond with the reality of what God said. If the scriptures today are not 100% true to the originally inspired scriptures they are not inerrant. If we have an inerrant Bible today there are no mistakes in it in comparison to the originals. And we do have an inerrant Bible in those terms. The KJV.
Thank you.
I look at Modern Versions like I do the Internet. There is good and bad in the Internet when you research things. The Internet is just a tool and it depends on how you use it that determines whether or not it is bad or not. The same is true with Modern Versions.
Yes, I am aware that Modern Versions have:
(a) Placed the devil's name in many of them.
(b) Eliminated many important verses that I love and cherish.
(c) Twisted many important verses that I love and cherish.
(d) Lead a person to believe that God failed to perfectly preserve His Word for us today. For Modern Versions can cause confusion and doubt because they all say something a little differently. Meaning, there is no one perfect Word of God that you can trust today in one's own language (that we can understand). This is wrong (of course). God does not fail to keep His Word.
English is the world language for today. This is why God chose English as the chosen language to preserve His Word today (with the KJV).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_language
Okay, that said,
There have been several times I misunderstood what God's Word was saying because I did not understand 1600's English (i.e. Early Modern English). For we speak Modern English (i.e. Late Modern English). The New Testament is pretty clear for the most part, but even then there are some passages that are confusing in the way that they are spoken (Which is made clear by way of a Modern Version).
For example: Take Colossians 2:16-17.
When I read the KJV, it says this,
"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. " (Colossians 2:16-17 KJV).
Not sure what it is really saying here. The body of Christ? What is that talking about?
Now, let's look at what it says in God's Word Translation (and we see that it helps to clear up the confusion),
"Therefore, let no one judge you because of what you eat or drink or about the observance of annual holy days, New Moon Festivals, or weekly worship days. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the body [that casts the shadow] belongs to Christ." (Colossians 2:16-17 GWT).
So with a Modern Translation, I can now see what it is saying a little more clearly; And there are many more examples like this. Numbers 18:15 is another one. It says "matrix" instead of womb. I have no idea what the word "matrix" means. The first thing I can think of is the movie called the "Matrix." But I know it is not talking about that, though (obviously).
For I look at Modern Versions as sifting thru the dirt to get to the gold that is in the KJV and the original languages.
I hope this helps you to understand where I am coming from, my friend.
May God bless you and please be well.
I look at Modern Versions like I do the Internet. There is good and bad in the Internet when you research things. The Internet is just a tool and it depends on how you use it that determines whether or not it is bad or not. The same is true with Modern Versions.
Yes, I am aware that Modern Versions have:
(a) Placed the devil's name in many of them.
(b) Eliminated many important verses that I love and cherish.
(c) Twisted many important verses that I love and cherish.
(d) Lead a person to believe that God failed to perfectly preserve His Word for us today. For Modern Versions can cause confusion and doubt because they all say something a little differently. Meaning, there is no one perfect Word of God that you can trust today in one's own language (that we can understand). This is wrong (of course). God does not fail to keep His Word.
English is the world language for today. This is why God chose English as the chosen language to preserve His Word today (with the KJV).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_language
Okay, that said,
There have been several times I misunderstood what God's Word was saying because I did not understand 1600's English (i.e. Early Modern English). For we speak Modern English (i.e. Late Modern English). The New Testament is pretty clear for the most part, but even then there are some passages that are confusing in the way that they are spoken (Which is made clear by way of a Modern Version).
For example: Take Colossians 2:16-17.
When I read the KJV, it says this,
"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. " (Colossians 2:16-17 KJV).
Not sure what it is really saying here. The body of Christ? What is that talking about?
Now, let's look at what it says in God's Word Translation (and we see that it helps to clear up the confusion),
"Therefore, let no one judge you because of what you eat or drink or about the observance of annual holy days, New Moon Festivals, or weekly worship days. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the body [that casts the shadow] belongs to Christ." (Colossians 2:16-17 GWT).
So with a Modern Translation, I can now see what it is saying a little more clearly; And there are many more examples like this. Numbers 18:15 is another one. It says "matrix" instead of womb. I have no idea what the word "matrix" means. The first thing I can think of is the movie called the "Matrix." But I know it is not talking about that, though (obviously).
For I look at Modern Versions as sifting thru the dirt to get to the gold that is in the KJV and the original languages.
I hope this helps you to understand where I am coming from, my friend.
May God bless you and please be well.
Last edited:
John Dominic Crossan has provided a detailed classification of our sources for the historical Jesus according to the chronological stratification of the traditions. For a brief discussion of each source, including the reasons for its proposed dating, see John Dominic Crossan, The Historical Jesus (HarperCollins, 1991) Appendix 1, pp. 427-50. All dates shown are C.E. (Common Era).
First Stratum [30 to 60 C.E.]
1. First Letter of Paul to the Thessalonians (late 40s)
2. Letter of Paul to the Galatians (winter of 52/53)
3. First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians (winter of 53/54.)
4. Letter of Paul to the Romans (winter of 55/56)
5. Gospel of Thomas I (earliest layer of Thomas, composed in 50s)
6. Egerton Gospel (50s)
7. P. Vienna G. 2325 (50s)
8. P. Oxyrhynchus 1224 (50s)
9. Gospel of the Hebrews (Egypt, 50s)
10. Sayings Gospel Q (50s)
11. Miracles Collection (50s)
12. Apocalyptic Scenario (50s)
13. Cross Gospel (50s)
Second Stratum [60 to 80 C.E.]
14. Gospel of the Egyptians (60s)
15. Secret Gospel of Mark (early 70s)
16. Gospel of Mark (late 70s)
17. P. Oxyrhynchus 840 (?80s)
18. Gospel of Thomas II (later layers, 70s)
19. Dialogue Collection (70s)
20. Signs Gospel, or Book of Signs (70s)
21. Letter to the Colossians (70s)
Third Stratum [80 to 120 C.E.]
22. Gospel of Matthew (90)
23. Gospel of Luke (90s)
24. Revelation/Apocalypse of John (late 90s)
25. First Letter of Clement (late 90s)
26. Epistle of Barnabas (end first century)
27. Didache (other than 1:3b2:1, 16:35) (end first century)
28. Shepherd of Hermas (100)
29. Letter of James (100)
30. Gospel of John I (early second century)
31. Letter of Ignatius, To the Ephesians (110)
32. Letter of Ignatius, To the Magnesians (110)
33. Letter of Ignatius, To the Trallians (110)
34. Letter of Ignatius, To the Romans (110)
35. Letter of Ignatius, To the Philadelphians (110)
36. Letter of Ignatius, To the Smyrneans (110)
37. Letter of Ignatius, To Polycarp (110)
38. First Letter of Peter (112)
39. Letter of Polycarp, To the Philippians, 1314 (115)
40. First Letter of John (115)
Fourth Stratum [120 to 150 C.E.]
41. Gospel of John II (after 120)
42. Acts of the Apostles (after 120)
43. Apocryphon of James (before 150)
44. First Letter to Timothy (after 120)
45. Second Letter to Timothy (after 120)
46. Letter to Titus (after 120)
47. Second Letter of Peter (between 125 and 150)
48. Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians, 112 (140)
49. Second Letter of Clement (150)
50. Gospel of the Nazoreans (middle second century)
51. Gospel of the Ebionites (middle second century)
52. Didache, 1:3b2:1 (middle second century)
53. Gospel of Peter (middle second century)
In addition to the above, modern analytical bible scholars have intensively studied the text of those epistles that are generally attributed to Paul. By closely examining vocabulary, grammar and thought themes they are in agreement that the following epistles are genuinely from Paul. They are 1 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, Philemon and Romans. Two more letters, Colossians and 2 Thessalonians are in dispute. Hebrews does not reflect Paul’s style and content whatsoever. Ephesians does not reflect the style of Paul but is very much Pauline in content and is thought to have been written by a close follower of Paul’s. The Pastoral letters (Titus, 1 Timothy and 2 Timothy) are attributed to Paul, but someone writing in Paul’s name wrote them around AD120, some 60 years after Paul’s death. Each letter uses vocabulary Paul is not known to have used; each has a different concept than Paul had of key matters such as faith; and each refers to Paul’s close friends Timothy and Titus in formal rather than friendly terms. They assume that Christian churches are governed by the kind of carefully organized authority structures that developed decades after Paul’s time. They are similar in style and in content and in the issues they raise. Scholars generally believe them to have been written by the same person. In addition two of Paul’s epistles are thought to be composed of what were originally several smaller letters. In particular Philippians is composed of three and 2 Corinthians is composed of six. Chapter 16 of Romans seems to be a later addition but genuinely by Paul.
First Stratum [30 to 60 C.E.]
1. First Letter of Paul to the Thessalonians (late 40s)
2. Letter of Paul to the Galatians (winter of 52/53)
3. First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians (winter of 53/54.)
4. Letter of Paul to the Romans (winter of 55/56)
5. Gospel of Thomas I (earliest layer of Thomas, composed in 50s)
6. Egerton Gospel (50s)
7. P. Vienna G. 2325 (50s)
8. P. Oxyrhynchus 1224 (50s)
9. Gospel of the Hebrews (Egypt, 50s)
10. Sayings Gospel Q (50s)
11. Miracles Collection (50s)
12. Apocalyptic Scenario (50s)
13. Cross Gospel (50s)
Second Stratum [60 to 80 C.E.]
14. Gospel of the Egyptians (60s)
15. Secret Gospel of Mark (early 70s)
16. Gospel of Mark (late 70s)
17. P. Oxyrhynchus 840 (?80s)
18. Gospel of Thomas II (later layers, 70s)
19. Dialogue Collection (70s)
20. Signs Gospel, or Book of Signs (70s)
21. Letter to the Colossians (70s)
Third Stratum [80 to 120 C.E.]
22. Gospel of Matthew (90)
23. Gospel of Luke (90s)
24. Revelation/Apocalypse of John (late 90s)
25. First Letter of Clement (late 90s)
26. Epistle of Barnabas (end first century)
27. Didache (other than 1:3b2:1, 16:35) (end first century)
28. Shepherd of Hermas (100)
29. Letter of James (100)
30. Gospel of John I (early second century)
31. Letter of Ignatius, To the Ephesians (110)
32. Letter of Ignatius, To the Magnesians (110)
33. Letter of Ignatius, To the Trallians (110)
34. Letter of Ignatius, To the Romans (110)
35. Letter of Ignatius, To the Philadelphians (110)
36. Letter of Ignatius, To the Smyrneans (110)
37. Letter of Ignatius, To Polycarp (110)
38. First Letter of Peter (112)
39. Letter of Polycarp, To the Philippians, 1314 (115)
40. First Letter of John (115)
Fourth Stratum [120 to 150 C.E.]
41. Gospel of John II (after 120)
42. Acts of the Apostles (after 120)
43. Apocryphon of James (before 150)
44. First Letter to Timothy (after 120)
45. Second Letter to Timothy (after 120)
46. Letter to Titus (after 120)
47. Second Letter of Peter (between 125 and 150)
48. Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians, 112 (140)
49. Second Letter of Clement (150)
50. Gospel of the Nazoreans (middle second century)
51. Gospel of the Ebionites (middle second century)
52. Didache, 1:3b2:1 (middle second century)
53. Gospel of Peter (middle second century)
In addition to the above, modern analytical bible scholars have intensively studied the text of those epistles that are generally attributed to Paul. By closely examining vocabulary, grammar and thought themes they are in agreement that the following epistles are genuinely from Paul. They are 1 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, Philemon and Romans. Two more letters, Colossians and 2 Thessalonians are in dispute. Hebrews does not reflect Paul’s style and content whatsoever. Ephesians does not reflect the style of Paul but is very much Pauline in content and is thought to have been written by a close follower of Paul’s. The Pastoral letters (Titus, 1 Timothy and 2 Timothy) are attributed to Paul, but someone writing in Paul’s name wrote them around AD120, some 60 years after Paul’s death. Each letter uses vocabulary Paul is not known to have used; each has a different concept than Paul had of key matters such as faith; and each refers to Paul’s close friends Timothy and Titus in formal rather than friendly terms. They assume that Christian churches are governed by the kind of carefully organized authority structures that developed decades after Paul’s time. They are similar in style and in content and in the issues they raise. Scholars generally believe them to have been written by the same person. In addition two of Paul’s epistles are thought to be composed of what were originally several smaller letters. In particular Philippians is composed of three and 2 Corinthians is composed of six. Chapter 16 of Romans seems to be a later addition but genuinely by Paul.
The Bible is complete. There is no other book like the Bible (i.e. the KJV). Biblical numerics confirm the truth of God's Word in both the original languages (Like the Hebrew and Greek) and the English with the KJV.
While I use Modern Version Bibles to help me understand the KJV and the original languages, I do not completely place my faith in all of what they say because:
#1. Many eliminate the one verse that is the clearest on the teaching of the Trinity
(1 John 5:7 KJV).
#2. Some eliminate the second part teaching on the "Condemnation" (walk after the Spirit).
(See John 3:19-21 KJV vs. Romans 8:1 KJV).
#3. Study to show yourself Approved unto God is changed to Show yourself Approved
(2 Timothy 2:15 KJV).
#4. We are not they that corrupt the Word is replaced with We are not they that peddle the Word
(2 Corinthians 2:17 KJV).
#5. Lucifer's name is in Modern Versions. In some Bibles, the devil is wrongfully called "Day Star" (Another name for Jesus) in Isaiah 14:12.
#6. In some Modern Bibles, John is eliminated from standing on the seashore (and it is the devil standing on the seashore); This is important because Genesis 22 tells us that Abraham's descendants will possess the gate of Abraham's enemies (i.e. the devil and his kingdom).
While I use Modern Version Bibles to help me understand the KJV and the original languages, I do not completely place my faith in all of what they say because:
#1. Many eliminate the one verse that is the clearest on the teaching of the Trinity
(1 John 5:7 KJV).
#2. Some eliminate the second part teaching on the "Condemnation" (walk after the Spirit).
(See John 3:19-21 KJV vs. Romans 8:1 KJV).
#3. Study to show yourself Approved unto God is changed to Show yourself Approved
(2 Timothy 2:15 KJV).
#4. We are not they that corrupt the Word is replaced with We are not they that peddle the Word
(2 Corinthians 2:17 KJV).
#5. Lucifer's name is in Modern Versions. In some Bibles, the devil is wrongfully called "Day Star" (Another name for Jesus) in Isaiah 14:12.
#6. In some Modern Bibles, John is eliminated from standing on the seashore (and it is the devil standing on the seashore); This is important because Genesis 22 tells us that Abraham's descendants will possess the gate of Abraham's enemies (i.e. the devil and his kingdom).
Last edited: