Does the Bible claim to be inerrant?

[KJV1611]

The KJV is wrong on nothing, every word is there for a specific purpose and every jot and tittle is invaluable. It is the Word of God in written form created for our ultimate benefit and the glory of God.

I believe that all major versions and translations are the Word of God and that God knew beforehand the form they would take. It is all spiritually inspired, and faithfully translated to conform to the current means of communication at the time that it is read, contemplated, and acted upon.

Personally, I prefer the NKJV but to each his own as led by the Holy Spirit. The important thing is to take in God's word, and act upon it in your humble service to the Lord performing the work that the heavenly Father has prepared beforehand.

I don't believe a well can produce sweet and bitter water at the same time. That's just me, you are welcome to your opinion.

 

[trofimus]

I prefer you not lump me in that group, I know the KJV has changed and added many words.

Yeah, you are a special case. You are even more extremistic than other KJVO guys, but your views or reasons are manytimes different.

 

[trofimus]

Are you guys buying this crappola about the KJV is wrong on Luke 1???? Have any of you actually read the verses in context from both sides? The NIV rendering is complete nonsense, the sentence doesn't even make sense.


Luke 1 New International Version (NIV)

Introduction

1 Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled[a] among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3 With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellentTheophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

Verse 1 - Things that have been fulfilled among us.
Verse 2 - Those fulfilled things were HANDED DOWN to us?????? Fulfilled prophecy's were handed down by eye witnesses? No, the things they saw and heard about were handed down.

Seriously, is there any common sense here? Can you guys not see that Luke is organizing an account of the things they saw and believed. There is nothing about fulfilled prophecies in the context whatsoever.

I would say I understand the NIV reading quite well. It can be because English is not my native language so maybe I am missing some nuances, but it seems OK to me.

 

[KJV1611]

I would say I understand the NIV reading quite well. It can be because English is not my native language so maybe I am missing some nuances, but it seems OK to me.

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

2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word.

In verse 2 what was being handed down by the eyewitnesses and servants?

 

[trofimus]

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

2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word.

In verse 2 what was being handed down by the eyewitnesses and servants?

Just from NIV reading without looking anywhere else I would say "the things".

 

[KJV1611]

Just from NIV reading without looking anywhere else I would say "the things".

What are the things lol.

 

[tourist]

I would say I understand the NIV reading quite well. It can be because English is not my native language so maybe I am missing some nuances, but it seems OK to me.

After I finish my current reading of the bible from cover to cover I will start another project using the NIV. I like to use a different version for each complete reading to get a more comprehensive perspective on the Word of God and how to apply it to how it shapes my spiritual values and to apply this to how I live my life.

 

[tourist]

I don't believe a well can produce sweet and bitter water at the same time. That's just me, you are welcome to your opinion.

Actually, I was replying in agreement to the post I quoted from you.

 

[KJV1611]

Actually, I was replying in agreement to the post I quoted from you.

My bad I'm sorry.

 

[trofimus]

What are the things lol.

Events people were waiting for?

 

[James37]

I was just saying that I know words have been changed.

Mostly in orthography but it was a process right? (Psalm 12:6)

 

[tourist]

My bad I'm sorry.

It's all good brother, nothing to be sorry about. I love the KJV and the NKJV as I find it holds a deeper spiritual truth for me. In the book of Genesis it starts out by saying "In the beginning...". The other versions say the same thing but it doesn't seem as poetic and eloquent as the King James Version.

 

[notuptome]

Your opinion is there are no inerrant English bible but common sense dictates that your conclusion of inerrancty is based on your knowledge and understanding of scripture.

Some one with more knowledge than you will conclude that what you deem as errors are a lack of understanding on your part.

Apart from your obvious sanctimony there can be no inerrant English translation of the bible. Languages are fluidic and change over time. Gods word is inerrant in its original languages but no complete copies exist to this day. The Jews argue over the OT scriptures in the Hebrew language getting into heated debates over a single jot or tittle in the text.

The Holy Spirit takes the word of God and brings men to Christ. Even the meanest version of Gods word is still Gods word when the Holy Spirit moves to convict a man about sin, righteousness and judgment.

I use the KJV because I like it. I do not delude myself into believing that it is inerrant. I often use additional references to clarify what is found in the original texts and trust the Holy Spirit to guide into the truth.

For corporate worship it is useful to have all the folks in the same version of the bible. Hard to read a passage in one version while the pastor is reading the same passage in another. Perfectly useful to read the same passage in several versions in personal study.

Only through profound sanctimony can a man declare that which is obviously untrue to be absolute truth.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[James37]

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).

In the King James Bible and the number 37 threads started by me, I posted numerical patterns of 7, 37, 73 (21st or 3x7 prime) that are found in Matthew 1:1, Mark 1:1; and John 1:1. During my lunch break I plan on posting this same pattern that can be found in Luke 1:1 which would be largely destroyed if the translators had used a word other than "believed" in that verse. I challenge any naysayer to demonstrate 1 pattern in any of these four verses in any other translation.

 

[trofimus]

I challenge any naysayer to demonstrate 1 pattern in any of these four verses in any other translation.

I challenge you to prove that any "number patterns" are relevant.

 

[James37]

I challenge you to prove that any "number patterns" are relevant.

The fact that they exist makes them relevant. I am still waiting for the answers to the questions I asked you about your belief about the scripture because your answer was wanting. For now I will settle for the 1st question and that is WHERE IN THE BIBLE?

 

[trofimus]

The fact that they exist makes them relevant. I am still waiting for the answers to the questions I asked you about your belief about the scripture because your answer was wanting. For now I will settle for the 1st question and that is WHERE IN THE BIBLE?

Just existence does not make anything relevant for theology. Also, when you presented your supposed patterns, nobody accepted them as patterns because you needed to do too much magic with it.


Where in the Bible:
Psalm 23, Christ´s words that Scriptures witness about Him etc.

 

[Musicus]

What are the things lol.

The story, gospel of Jesus.

 

[Joseppi]

Apart from your obvious sanctimony there can be no inerrant English translation of the bible. Languages are fluidic and change over time. Gods word is inerrant in its original languages but no complete copies exist to this day. The Jews argue over the OT scriptures in the Hebrew language getting into heated debates over a single jot or tittle in the text.

The Holy Spirit takes the word of God and brings men to Christ. Even the meanest version of Gods word is still Gods word when the Holy Spirit moves to convict a man about sin, righteousness and judgment.

I use the KJV because I like it. I do not delude myself into believing that it is inerrant. I often use additional references to clarify what is found in the original texts and trust the Holy Spirit to guide into the truth.

For corporate worship it is useful to have all the folks in the same version of the bible. Hard to read a passage in one version while the pastor is reading the same passage in another. Perfectly useful to read the same passage in several versions in personal study.

Only through profound sanctimony can a man declare that which is obviously untrue to be absolute truth.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

All you presented was judgment of another poster and your personal philosophy about whatever sounds good to you.
You presented no standard by which you reached any of your conclusions.

 

[notuptome]

All you presented was judgment of another poster and your personal philosophy about whatever sounds good to you.
You presented no standard by which you reached any of your conclusions.

So you want to state that your copy of the bible translated into English meets the standard worthy to be called inerrant?

Does your copy of the English translation need to be inerrant to make you wise unto salvation? Is it important to the sinner before he is saved or does he develop this great theological standard later?

The bible does declare that we are all sinners and need to be saved. Does it matter which translation we use to come to this simple truth?

The poster to whom I replied has an established track record.

Pr 26:17 He that passeth by, and meddleth with strife belonging not to him, is like one that taketh a dog by the ears.

For the cause of Christ
Roger