Disproving Biblical Infallibility 101

[DisciplePAG]

It only became intolerable when you got smoked out.

Define "Smoked Out"? If you mean "proven wrong"- uhhh- news flash for you genius- MANY people on this post agree with me and im even more entrenched in my belief that you, Elin Degenerate....are really a troll. Yes you!

Not real successful there....smh

 

[DisciplePAG]

It's not about the book. You'll never resolve your issues with the 4 accounts because it can't be done (other than a suggestion on page one that different people will often witness different things out of one incident). But again, it's not about the book.

It's about another realm of existence. You don't need a book to discern that. You know, science is reporting conflicting information about dark matter and energy. Do those conflicts mean that they don't exist? Not if you ask those scientists who are researching it. They know it exists and they struggle with how to quantify it in the human realm. Just like the Apostles did.

If you're looking for God in a book you're going to be disappointed. If you're looking for God in the spiritual then the book will make more sense. Then you'll see that the important thing isn't the different viewpoints of the various witnesses to the resurrection, it's that there was a freaking resurrection!

Find the Bible thru God - not the other way around.






And admit that you're trolling because you keep the debate hot while knowing you'll never budge no matter what someone says. And you shouldn't. In print on paper it makes no sense because there is a conflict.

So get your nose out of the print and paper and set your heart on an honest search. Look up once in a while and God may open your eyes.

The funny thing is, ive responded with much effort when posted a question and have actually entertained many theories and researched them in the last 3 days. What really suprises me is the number of isiots who come here discounting what i post and NEVER do the homework- never actually read the 4 accounts themselves and take notes of what they read, notating the differences....i feel sad for people like that- they will fall for popular deception when the time draws close for lack of knowledge- they will believe wht they are told over researching it- and when they do not get raptured BEFORE the trib- they will fall. Hard. Mark my words.

I know there is conflict there- i know that the accounts do not match- i want answers man- why do i keep the debate hot? i dont. Im attacked. i defend. I have never changed my OP position- HOW DOES THIS AFFECT DOCTRINE? how does this affect my black and white interpretation of alot of scripture? How does this affect what DiscipleDave teaches??? How does this affect the doctrine of sinless perfection?

There ARE. doctrinal implications that REALLY MATTER TO ME becuase i feel some are actually salvation related. What if i am holdong myself to too high of a standard?

 

[slave]

^^^ TRUTH WITH REASON.

Thank you.

We live by faith, based on truth, reason is subjective to the person holding the faith. To whom or which Spirit do we have faith in? This will give out the reasoning of each, and they are different. And result in different outcomes.

I would like to say you are trying to further understand God, you seem to be changing the tone of your quest for truth however, by giving speeches of how silly we are to not admit what we "logical humans" must conclude that God's Word is fallible. But I simply see your stance as silly. When I have gone thru the 'seeking to understand' what the reasons behind the indifferences in scriptures are, it was to better understand my faith to represent it, not to find fault in it, and rewrite a new version of scripture.

My suggestion to the man in you that is looking for the truth to better understand your faith found in Christ is to have the faith first then seek after.

But if you are truly simply looking for understanding Here are some of the things I think about when confronted with indifferences:: If it is a question of Chronology then the first question to ask is "What calendar is the writer using?" For example the differences in the chronology of Daniel or Ezekiel, and the corresponding events in Kings or Chronicles is that the former uses the Babylonian method of reckoning, and the later the Jewish method. Thus, any differences are easily resolved.

I've already mentioned, in my other posts how 2 writers can write on the same event but can be coming from different perspectives and they can omit facts from the other, not necessarily contradicting themselves at all.

Events that appear at different times, for instance,... Jesus overthrowing the money tables in the Temple, where John 2:13-17, and Matt. 21:12-13 seem to say an action happened at different times, is very easy to solve, when God's Spirit guides us. The simple fact is that the cleansing of the Temple happened twice. Once at the start and once at the end of the Lord's earthly ministry. The Synoptics mention the latter, and John the former; No contradiction at all!

God also simply tells us there are some things of God we cannot fathom in our human minds. Which is only to say how deep His knowledge is. There are some paradoxes that appear to have no resolution at all. We then have to choose whether we believe God's Word as being true or believe the fallen thoughts of men and accuse God of contradicting Himself!

If one follows the latter, God tells us there will be a way that seems right to a man, but it is foolishness to God.

 

[gotime]

The assumption which spawns this question is that all four gospels are there to say the same thing. Therein lies the error. Four Gospels from four differing people from four perspectives. The Key is to put them together to complete the picture. Not everyone saw the same thing, not everyone recorded the same stories.

Some may speak of the first time someone went to the tomb while others speak of the second third etc.

 

[slave]

Define "Smoked Out"? If you mean "proven wrong"- uhhh- news flash for you genius- MANY people on this post agree with me and im even more entrenched in my belief that you, Elin Degenerate....are really a troll. Yes you!

Not real successful there....smh

This is your biblical response to Elin? That many agree with you thus.....etc. Many people agreed with killing Jesus on a cross too. Many more than agree with you I guess based on this logic, they are even more right than you. The thing is you need to stay in the Word in reflecting your doubts of the Word. It sounds like a weird answer but it's the right one. This isn't about proof hence belief becomes worthy, it's a matter of faith; then understanding becomes visible.

I don't agree with anyone who says scripture will never be completely provable, so we need to just except it anyway ...because God does back truth up, even when we can't understand all of His depths we can be clear of His Word. Otherwise Proverbs 30:5 would be a lie, and I believe it to be true, "Every Word of God proves true." These debates on the fallibility of God's Word are not new to history, many have expounded on the many difficulties in scripture to understand, So search! Many are wiser than me and internets are a great tool to find out others work already done. Anything I would know I would share but I am a limited man, but it's out there. Every Word of it. Seek with all your heart and mind and soul...and it will be given you!

 

[Dan58]

I have a question though: Why does the sequence of events we call "The Resurrection Morning", located in all 4 of the gospels...why do these accounts differ in there sequence of events? Matthew's account finds the tomb sealed, and is opened by an angel of the Lord via earthquake, who proceeds to speak to Mary- now if we closely examine the accounts of Mark, Luke and John, the bible reveals a dramatically different account from those disciples....there are differences in regards to the Angels, both in location upon Mary's arrival, as well as in number, even that the tomb is already opened- even Jesus appears to them at different times, and even Peter shows up at the tomb at a different time, etc...the 4 accounts appear to wholly contradict each other? What gives here??

I haven't read this whole thread, but I found no infallibility in what your initial post stated.
There were 2 angels at the tomb. Matthew 28:5-6 quotes one angel who spoke to the women outside of the tomb, saying; "He is not here... come see". Mark 16:5 quotes another angel inside the sepulcher who told the women; "He is risen...go tell his disciples". But Luke 24:4 and John 20:12 both confirm there were 2 angels at the tomb.

A partial report is not a false report. Just because each gospel author doesn’t report every detail of a story doesn’t mean it’s inaccurate. A divergent account is not a false account. For example, Matthew speaks of one angel at Christ’s tomb whereas John mentions two. A contradiction? Not at all. Simple math says if you have two, you also have one. Matthew did not say there was only one angel; if he had then we would have a true contradiction. Instead, he just records the words of the one who spoke.
The same critics who try and point out contradictions in the gospels would no doubt cry 'collusion' if they found exact verbal parallelism and a singular account of the resurrection. The recordings of the resurrection found in the four gospels are found to harmonize quite well upon closer examination.

1. An angel rolls away stone from tomb before sunrise (Matt. 28:2-4). The guards are seized with fear and eventually flee
2. Women disciples visit the tomb and discover Christ missing (Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:1-4; Luke 24:1-3; John 20:1)
3. Mary Magdalene leaves to tell Peter and John (John 20:1-2)
4. Other women remain at tomb; they see two angels who tell them of Christ’s resurrection (Matt. 18:5-7, Mark 16:5-7, Luke 24:4-8)
5. Peter and John run to the tomb and then leave (Luke 24:12; John 20:3-10)
6. Mary Magdalene returns to the tomb; She see's 2 angels standing at the head and feet of where the body had lain (John 20:12). Christ appears to her (Mark 16:9-11; John 20:11-18).
7. Jesus appears to the other women (Mary, mother of James, Salome, and Joanna) (Matt. 28:8-10).
   

The fact that John only mentions Mary Magdalene going to the tomb is not a contradiction, because its true. John chose to just focus on Mary Magdalene, but failing to mention the other women does not constitute a contradiction or even a discrepancy. Mark mentions 3 women, Luke just specifies women, and Matthew mentioned the 2 Mary's. Having something mentioned in one gospel but not another does not constitute a contradiction. Now if one gospel said that 'no' women went to the sepulcher while the others said they did, then you would have a contradiction.

 

[Hepzibah]

Its really funny how people think that the gospel writers did not take particular care in meticulously recording the events of such a monumental occasion, and had not colluded with each other afterwards, (not like witnesses of an accident) gaining extra details that they may have missed. Or perhaps the writers were suffering from senility by the time they wrote it up!?

It makes no difference to me whether scripture is fallible because I do not worship a book like some, and that scripture is not the Word of God but the word. Jesus is the Word (John 1).

The Holy Spirit within me reveals the truth and teaches me and I need no man to teach me doctrine after all of this time. I regard scripture as authoritive and hold it in a high place, but it is the Spirit who teaches me. Scripture then verifies what I have been taught. I will not accept anything that is not writen therein, but do not do what others do in picking verses here and there to get their doctrine.

The men who wrote it were taught by the Holy Spirit and one in particular solely by Him, that is Paul, who when he found the other apostles, discovered that they were in one accord. Scripture is not written to form our doctrines from. It is to confirm what we have learned through obedience because if we obey we know that we are in the same Spirit as the original writers. People want to know the doctrines without having to obey.

The early Quakers were big on this one and that is why they were not considered Protestants. Revelation comes through the Spirit and if we are filled with the Spirit, we can accept inconsistencies without them making any difference to us. We will discerne what is of God and what is not in any writings.

 

[Hepzibah]

Also why would Mary be left alone by the other Mary, at the tomb, placing herself at risk, when something unusual had happened concerning the body of Jesus and the 'robbers' might return and she would be a witness?

 

[realchild4life]

I believe all scripture applies to todays professing christians , and i believe all sanctified christians follow it to a T.


I have a question though: Why does the sequence of events we call "The Resurrection Morning", located in all 4 of the gospels...why do these accounts differ in there sequence of events? Matthew's account finds the tomb sealed, and is opened by an angel of the Lord via earthquake, who proceeds to speak to Mary- now if we closely examine the accounts of Mark, Luke and John, the bible reveals a dramatically different account from those disciples....there are differences in regards to the Angels, both in location upon Mary's arrival, as well as in number, even that the tomb is already opened- even Jesus appears to them at different times, and even Peter shows up at the tomb at a different time, etc...the 4 accounts appear to wholly contradict each other? What gives here??


Thee are huge doctrinal implications to this. The resurrection accounts are conflicting- which would prove fallibility, which would change the whole soapbox many stand on. The foundation of MOST doctrine is now shaky at best....

One could ask the question "Why does the bible have to be infallible?"

 

[valiant]

Jesus said, 'not one yod or tittle (accent) of the Torah shall fail until all has been fulfilled.' I go with Jesus.

It was Jesus Who called the Old Testament 'the word of God' in contrast to tradition.

 

[purgedconscience]

I haven't read this whole thread, but I found no infallibility in what your initial post stated.
There were 2 angels at the tomb. Matthew 28:5-6 quotes one angel who spoke to the women outside of the tomb, saying; "He is not here... come see". Mark 16:5 quotes another angel inside the sepulcher who told the women; "He is risen...go tell his disciples". But Luke 24:4 and John 20:12 both confirm there were 2 angels at the tomb.

A partial report is not a false report. Just because each gospel author doesn’t report every detail of a story doesn’t mean it’s inaccurate. A divergent account is not a false account. For example, Matthew speaks of one angel at Christ’s tomb whereas John mentions two. A contradiction? Not at all. Simple math says if you have two, you also have one. Matthew did not say there was only one angel; if he had then we would have a true contradiction. Instead, he just records the words of the one who spoke.
The same critics who try and point out contradictions in the gospels would no doubt cry 'collusion' if they found exact verbal parallelism and a singular account of the resurrection. The recordings of the resurrection found in the four gospels are found to harmonize quite well upon closer examination.

1. An angel rolls away stone from tomb before sunrise (Matt. 28:2-4). The guards are seized with fear and eventually flee
2. Women disciples visit the tomb and discover Christ missing (Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:1-4; Luke 24:1-3; John 20:1)
3. Mary Magdalene leaves to tell Peter and John (John 20:1-2)
4. Other women remain at tomb; they see two angels who tell them of Christ’s resurrection (Matt. 18:5-7, Mark 16:5-7, Luke 24:4-8)
5. Peter and John run to the tomb and then leave (Luke 24:12; John 20:3-10)
6. Mary Magdalene returns to the tomb; She see's 2 angels standing at the head and feet of where the body had lain (John 20:12). Christ appears to her (Mark 16:9-11; John 20:11-18).
7. Jesus appears to the other women (Mary, mother of James, Salome, and Joanna) (Matt. 28:8-10).
   

The fact that John only mentions Mary Magdalene going to the tomb is not a contradiction, because its true. John chose to just focus on Mary Magdalene, but failing to mention the other women does not constitute a contradiction or even a discrepancy. Mark mentions 3 women, Luke just specifies women, and Matthew mentioned the 2 Mary's. Having something mentioned in one gospel but not another does not constitute a contradiction. Now if one gospel said that 'no' women went to the sepulcher while the others said they did, then you would have a contradiction.

If you're going to quote somebody else's work, then please provide a link to the source. Thank you.

Do the gospel resurrection accounts contradict each other?

 

[valiant]

Also why would Mary be left alone by the other Mary, at the tomb, placing herself at risk, when something unusual had happened concerning the body of Jesus and the 'robbers' might return and she would be a witness?

She was not originally left alone. She left to find Peter and John whilst the other Mary went back to tell the other women the situation. It was when she chose to return, following Peter and John, that she found herself alone.

 

[Brother_Don]

the only errors in the Word are in the readers eyes, the Word does not carry errors.

 

[DisciplePAG]

Its really funny how people think that the gospel writers did not take particular care in meticulously recording the events of such a monumental occasion, and had not colluded with each other afterwards, (not like witnesses of an accident) gaining extra details that they may have missed. Or perhaps the writers were suffering from senility by the time they wrote it up!?

It makes no difference to me whether scripture is fallible because I do not worship a book like some, and that scripture is not the Word of God but the word. Jesus is the Word (John 1).

The Holy Spirit within me reveals the truth and teaches me and I need no man to teach me doctrine after all of this time. I regard scripture as authoritive and hold it in a high place, but it is the Spirit who teaches me. Scripture then verifies what I have been taught. I will not accept anything that is not writen therein, but do not do what others do in picking verses here and there to get their doctrine.

The men who wrote it were taught by the Holy Spirit and one in particular solely by Him, that is Paul, who when he found the other apostles, discovered that they were in one accord. Scripture is not written to form our doctrines from. It is to confirm what we have learned through obedience because if we obey we know that we are in the same Spirit as the original writers. People want to know the doctrines without having to obey.

The early Quakers were big on this one and that is why they were not considered Protestants. Revelation comes through the Spirit and if we are filled with the Spirit, we can accept inconsistencies without them making any difference to us. We will discerne what is of God and what is not in any writings.

Thank you for the perspective, as it is true. Helped me more than you know....

 

[valiant]

Its really funny how people think that the gospel writers did not take particular care in meticulously recording the events of such a monumental occasion, and had not colluded with each other afterwards, (not like witnesses of an accident) gaining extra details that they may have missed. Or perhaps the writers were suffering from senility by the time they wrote it up!?

It makes no difference to me whether scripture is fallible because I do not worship a book like some, and that scripture is not the Word of God but the word. Jesus is the Word (John 1).

The Holy Spirit within me reveals the truth and teaches me and I need no man to teach me doctrine after all of this time. I regard scripture as authoritive and hold it in a high place, but it is the Spirit who teaches me. Scripture then verifies what I have been taught. I will not accept anything that is not writen therein, but do not do what others do in picking verses here and there to get their doctrine.

The men who wrote it were taught by the Holy Spirit and one in particular solely by Him, that is Paul, who when he found the other apostles, discovered that they were in one accord. Scripture is not written to form our doctrines from. It is to confirm what we have learned through obedience because if we obey we know that we are in the same Spirit as the original writers. People want to know the doctrines without having to obey.

The early Quakers were big on this one and that is why they were not considered Protestants. Revelation comes through the Spirit and if we are filled with the Spirit, we can accept inconsistencies without them making any difference to us. We will discerne what is of God and what is not in any writings.

The Holy Spirit speaks to us through God's word as He guides our thinking and reveals its truth. But we are earthen vessels, and thus only receive the Spirit's guidance imperfectly. If the Scripture is not basically inerrant then we have no certainty on which to base our faith. Anyone can simply choose out what he wants to believe and say 'the Holy Spirit showed me.' The Scripture is the measure whereby we can tell whether it really was the Holy Spirit.

If Jesus had to call on the word of God as His backing, how much more do we. That is why Jesus confirmed that every smallest letter and accent in the word of God is unbreakable and will be fulfilled.

 

[purgedconscience]

The Holy Spirit speaks to us through God's word as He guides our thinking and reveals its truth. But we are earthen vessels, and thus only receive the Spirit's guidance imperfectly. If the Scripture is not basically inerrant then we have no certainty on which to base our faith. Anyone can simply choose out what he wants to believe and say 'the Holy Spirit showed me.' The Scripture is the measure whereby we can tell whether it really was the Holy Spirit.

If Jesus had to call on the word of God as His backing, how much more do we. That is why Jesus confirmed that every smallest letter and accent in the word of God is unbreakable and will be fulfilled.

Amen.

Perhaps you're not so bad after all.

 

[valiant]

Amen.

Perhaps you're not so bad after all.

Phew!! Thank you LOL ........

 

[Elin]

Define "Smoked Out"? If you mean "proven wrong"- uhhh- news flash for you genius- MANY people on this post agree with me and im even more entrenched in my belief that you, Elin Degenerate....are really a troll. Yes you!

Not real successful there....smh

So you really haven't "had enough". . .and you aren't really "through" after all. . .why is that not surprising. . .

 

[Elin]

MANY people on this post agree with me. . .

The funny thing is, ive responded with much effort when posted a question and have actually entertained many theories and researched them in the last 3 days. What really suprises me is the number of idiots who come here discounting what i post

So it seems many are not in agreement with you. . .

What really suprises me is the number of idiots who come here discounting what i post and NEVER do the homework- never actually read the 4 accounts themselves and take notes of what they read, notating the differences....i feel sad for people like that

Of course, it's surprising, the bible is a closed book to you.

You think its truth is based in no discrepancies.
You don't know the difference between contradictions and immaterial discrepancies.
You don't know that the proof of the truth of the Bible to the believer is the witness of the Holy Spirit to his spirit of the Bible's truth and power.
You are so earth-bound and entrenched in human reasoning and "critical thinking" that you are incapable of understanding anything outside of and above it.

You are pitying the wrong one.
Stop your incessant attempt to murder what you do not understand.
You are only showing who is your father.

Humbly ask God to deliver you from your bondage to human reason and "critical thinking."
You can't get here (saving faith) from there.
Ask him to enable you to receive faith from his Holy Spirit and his powerful witness.

"Critical thinking" has successfully helped you avoid many pitfalls and to navigate your earthly life.
But that is where its boundaries end.
To understand and receive the life that is from above, you must transcend it and receive the wisdom of God over the wisdom of man, to which you are truly in bondage.
It's grip on you is so strong that only the power of God in saving faith can free you from it.
You cannot free yourself.

So in the meantime you are actually angry at that which holds you in bondage, and desperately want us to free you from it by critical thinking, the very thing to which you are in bondage.
And when we don't, you then become angry at us.

God is your only help.
You must acknowledge to him your powerlessness to set yourself free from your earth-bound "critical thinking"
that you might receive with faith his divine thinking in the Scriptures.

What you need is our prayer, not more arguing from critical thinking.
And you certainly have mine.

 

[Elin]

The assumption which spawns this question is that all four gospels are there to say the same thing. Therein lies the error. Four Gospels from four differing people from four perspectives. The Key is to put them together to complete the picture. Not everyone saw the same thing, not everyone recorded the same stories.

Some may speak of the first time someone went to the tomb while others speak of the second third etc.

It's not for lack of good explanations, it's for proving the untrustworthiness of the word of God over "critical thinking," and being foolish enough to think he has a clinching argument in immaterial discrepancies.