Does the Bible claim to be inerrant?

  • 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.

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,851
13,459
113
And the scholars with their perfect knowledge no exactly what was added or taken away? I wouldn't put an ounce of faith into textual criticism or it practitioners. The real fact of the matter is that you cannot prove your argument based on anything that Jesus, Paul or any authoritative figure in the Bible said so you rely on men and scholars.
RE: the bolded statement... this is exactly what you do by asserting that the KJV is the perfect word of God. It is the result of textual criticism by Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza, and the KJV translators.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
Where in Bible?

Will the testimony of the Holy Spirit contradict anything in the Bible?

Who's logic?

Faith in what?

Whos theology?

What church?

What creeds?
You have soooo many questions :)

Its 11 p.m. here, so I am going to sleep, for today...
 
Nov 24, 2017
1,004
31
0
RE: the bolded statement... this is exactly what you do by asserting that the KJV is the perfect word of God. It is the result of textual criticism by Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza, and the KJV translators.
Actually I do not since there was a time in my life I was in the same camp as you, but it is the words contained in the King James Bible itself that changed my view and the number patterns contained therein reinforced them.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,851
13,459
113
Actually I do not since there was a time in my life I was in the same camp as you, but it is the words contained in the King James Bible itself that changed my view and the number patterns contained therein reinforced them.
Fair enough. Do you recognize that the KJV is the result of textual criticism?
 

MarcR

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2015
5,486
183
63
Maybe Luke 1:1 should read "completed among us." What standard do you use to decide which cherries you want to pick out of a lexicon. I wonder if there is an opening on the UBS for you?
The KJV rendering of Lk 1:1-3 is not about cherry picking a lexicon! it changes words and even exchanges nouns for verbs and adverbs for adjectives. You can't with any honesty dismiss it so lightly.
 
Nov 24, 2017
1,004
31
0
The KJV rendering of Lk 1:1-3 is not about cherry picking a lexicon! it changes words and even exchanges nouns for verbs and adverbs for adjectives. You can't with any honesty dismiss it so lightly.
I know the KJB rendering is not about cherry picking. Your rendering was and I dismissed it without even giving it a second thought!
 
Nov 24, 2017
1,004
31
0
Fair enough. Do you recognize that the KJV is the result of textual criticism?
I recognize that it is the most amazing book that can be found in the English language so it is the product and not necessarily the process by which it came into being that is the determining factor for me.
 

MarcR

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2015
5,486
183
63
Maybe Luke 1:1 should read "completed among us." What standard do you use to decide which cherries you want to pick out of a lexicon. I wonder if there is an opening on the UBS for you?

Luke 1:1-3

1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are fulfilled (or accomplished) among us,

The Greek word used is πεπληροφορημένον (accomplished, fulfilled, or completed) not πἐρίστευένων (believed).

While many accounts were published, few were accurate and undistorted.

2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and servants of the Word;

servants (ὑπηρέται ) literally under-rowers.) Ones under the command of another.
the Word a reference to the LORD.

These could be the apostles or any other of His regular followers such as the seventy of Luke chapter 10.

3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
3 It seemed good to me also, having accurately followed after all things from above, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

having NOT having had This is the perfect active participle NOT the pluperfect!
diligently (or accurately) NOT perfect this is the adverb ἀκριβῶς NOT the adjective τέλειον.
pursued (or followed) NOT understanding this is the verb παρηκολυθηκότι NOT the noun συνέσει.
all things NOT of all things this is the dative NOT the genitive case.
above NOT the very first this is ἄνωθεν not ἀρχῆ.

The accuracy of most of this translation demonstrates that the translators had better scholarship than one would deduce from their rendering of this verse. I believe that this is an example of allowing one’s theology to drive translation. One should rather translate the text as strictly as possible; and allow the unaltered text to drive one’s theology.

Theophilus Friend of God. There is some scholarly disagreement whether the name is intended to apply to all believers, or to an individual. In my opinion the title ‘most excellent’ suggests an individual; but, the content is certainly applicable to and pertinent to all believers

ίφ υοθ αρε γοινγ το ρεσπονδ ατ αλλ, πλεασε ρεσπονδ ηονεστλυ

sorry about that I forgot to change keyboards

If you are going to respond at all, please respond honestly!
 
Nov 24, 2017
1,004
31
0
Luke 1:1-3


If you are going to respond at all, please respond honestly!
I did give an honest response. Why don't you just quote the NIV (fulfilled) or ESV (accomplished) instead of butchering the rendering of the King James Bible?
 
Nov 24, 2017
1,004
31
0
Luke 1:1-3

1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are fulfilled (or accomplished) among us,

The Greek word used is πεπληροφορημένον (accomplished, fulfilled, or completed) not πἐρίστευένων (believed).
Why would you insert "fulfilled" or "accomplished" and not change the present tense verb "are?" The verse doesn't even make sense anymore.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,851
13,459
113
And the scholars with their perfect knowledge no exactly what was added or taken away? I wouldn't put an ounce of faith into textual criticism or it practitioners.

Fair enough. Do you recognize that the KJV is the result of textual criticism?

I recognize that it is the most amazing book that can be found in the English language so it is the product and not necessarily the process by which it came into being that is the determining factor for me.

Your latter statement is a dodge if I ever saw one. I asked you a direct question and you danced around it very obviously. Please answer my question directly: do you acknowledge that the KJV is the result of textual criticism, or do you deny such?
 

MarcR

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2015
5,486
183
63
Why would you insert "fulfilled" or "accomplished" and not change the present tense verb "are?" The verse doesn't even make sense anymore.
What language do you speak? Things which are fulfilled or accomplished is the English present perfect which appropriately translates the Greek perfect passive participle.

Furthermore I have inserted NOTHING. your flawless KJV changed the verb creating an ERROR which you refuse [in your ignorance] to acknowledge.
 
Nov 24, 2017
1,004
31
0
Your latter statement is a dodge if I ever saw one. I asked you a direct question and you danced around it very obviously. Please answer my question directly: do you acknowledge that the KJV is the result of textual criticism, or do you deny such?
I acknowledge that it was the "result" of an order by a king and the discernment of the KJB translators. The phrase "textual criticism" probably didn't even exist at that time. Call it what you will!
 
Nov 24, 2017
1,004
31
0
What language do you speak? Things which are fulfilled or accomplished is the English present perfect which appropriately translates the Greek perfect passive participle.

Furthermore I have inserted NOTHING. your flawless KJV changed the verb creating an ERROR which you refuse [in your ignorance] to acknowledge.
Why do modern translators prefer "have been" over "which are?"

I am curious how many translations agree with your rendering.
 
Last edited:
Nov 24, 2017
1,004
31
0
Luke 1:1-3

1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are fulfilled (or accomplished) among us,

The Greek word used is πεπληροφορημένον (accomplished, fulfilled, or completed) not πἐρίστευένων (believed).
What language do you speak? Things which are fulfilled or accomplished is the English present perfect which appropriately translates the Greek perfect passive participle.

Furthermore I have inserted NOTHING. your flawless KJV changed the verb creating an ERROR which you refuse [in your ignorance] to acknowledge.
I think you have made corrections to every existing English translation of the Bible with your rendering.


Many have undertaken to compile a narrative about the events that have been fulfilled among us, HCSB

Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, NIV

Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, NKJV

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, ESV

Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a narration of the things that have been accomplished among us; 1899 Jesuit Bible

Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to draw up a narrative concerning those matters which have been fulfilled among us, ASV

Since many have undertaken to set down an orderly account of the events that have been fulfilled among us, NRSV

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things which have been accomplished among us, RSV

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, NASB
 
Last edited:
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
What language do you speak? Things which are fulfilled or accomplished is the English present perfect which appropriately translates the Greek perfect passive participle.

Furthermore I have inserted NOTHING. your flawless KJV changed the verb creating an ERROR which you refuse [in your ignorance] to acknowledge.
I'm interested in KJV errors, what error is this you're talking about?
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,851
13,459
113
I acknowledge that it was the "result" of an order by a king and the discernment of the KJB translators. The phrase "textual criticism" probably didn't even exist at that time. Call it what you will!
That's playing games and avoiding the obvious. The work that Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza, and the KJV translators were doing was fundamentally identical to what the translators of the 20th-century versions were/are doing: comparing different available sources, trying to determine with God's guidance what the originals said, and translating as best they can. I don't care what it is called, but if you believe that the kind of work that produced the KJV was fundamentally different in nature to that which produced the NIV, NASB, HCSB, ESV, or any other "modern" translation, you need to reconsider your biases.
 

MarcR

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2015
5,486
183
63
Why do modern translators prefer "have been" over "which are?"

I am curious how many translations agree with your rendering.
I neither know nor care. I parsed my reading from the Greek, and did so accurately. Sometimes when I parse the Hebrew none of the translations agree with me and I am still right.

I studied Hebrew 2 hrs per day, 6 days per week from the time I was 4 until I was 13; so I know the language.

I studied Greek in a Summer session 9 weeks 6 hrs / day 5 days / wk; and one full semester; so my Hebrew skills are much stronger.