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.

Joseppi

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2018
887
7
18
LOL you are chasing unicorns. No one has said that the authorized version is not the bible. God has most certainly protected His word through the millennia. What most protest is elevating one translation one version above another to the point that all others are worthless in comparison.

The original authorized version was translated from the Latin vulgate. Later translated from the Hebrew and Greek. KJV is good and easy to memorize but it is not the only reliable translation available in the English language.

You are arguing that Coke is better than Pepsi. Kind of pointless as it comes down to personal preference.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
You present nothing of faith just your rambling philosophy that isn’t grounded in any scripture of God.
 

Joseppi

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2018
887
7
18
Not to authorize Bibles.
You are denying the authority of scripture that proved King James the first was ordained of God, and then you also deny the authority King James the first used to publish the authorized version out of his own treasury.
You need a reality check.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
You are denying the authority of scripture that proved King James the first was ordained of God, and then you also deny the authority King James the first used to publish the authorized version out of his own treasury.
You need a reality check.
Yes, I deny both.

I deny that any Scripture talks about King James and I deny his authority over Bible or church.
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
You are denying the authority of scripture that proved King James the first was ordained of God, and then you also deny the authority King James the first used to publish the authorized version out of his own treasury.
You need a reality check.
You present nothing of faith just your rambling philosophy that isn’t grounded in any scripture of God.
LOL Someone needs more than a reality check.

Just how did you come to know Christ as Savior?

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

Joseppi

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2018
887
7
18
God ordains all kings both good and bad.
That’s what the scripture says.
Now can someone get saved if they have a different version of the bible?
Can God use an ass to speak to a prophet?
Can ignorant men be saved?
Can saved men remain ignorant?

All who follow Jesus, love the truth, and they that love truth turn away from corrupt bibles when they are proven corrupt.

Is John 3:16 as powerful in the NIV and the KJV?
The NIV promotes the antichrist spirit in John 3:16.

Does the Holy Spirit use the new versions or does the Holy Spirit use only the authorized version?
Only the authorized version is used by the Holy Ghost as a book.
God hates confusion.
 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
9,273
5,632
113
That’s what the scripture says.
Can God use an ass to speak to a prophet?
Can ignorant men be saved?
Can saved men remain ignorant?

All who follow Jesus, love the truth, and they that love truth turn away from corrupt bibles when they are proven corrupt.

The NIV promotes the antichrist spirit in John 3:16.

Only the authorized version is used by the Holy Ghost as a book.
God hates confusion.
So you believe that anyone who reads a more modern translation is not saved and going to hell?
 

Joseppi

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2018
887
7
18
God ordains all governments, not just kings.
And your point is?

But not to authorize Bibles.
You’re making up a lie and adding it to the word of God?

To protect good people and to punish evil people.
Only to do what you authorize?

Which king authorized 1769 KJV?
You’re just playing around pretending you can escape the authority of God’s Holy Bible. You can’t.
What’s more obvious though, is that you have nothing backing up any of your unbelief in the Authorized Version.


Tell that to apostles that because they were not worldly kings, they had no authority to judge what God ordained.
Jesus Christ is head of the church.

Whereas, King James the first, published the Holy Bible by the authority given him by God.
 

Joseppi

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2018
887
7
18
Maybe King Jimmy had a royalty arrangement with his publisher.
King James threw the king’s printer in jail for making a mistake.

One reason God chose the king was because everyone was afraid of his authority before God.
 

Joseppi

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2018
887
7
18
So you believe that anyone who reads a more modern translation is not saved and going to hell?
I believe that anyone that is ignorant only remains ignorant as a rebel.
At some point the “I’m ignorant” defense is no longer excusable.
Are you a lover of truth, or not?
 

tourist

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2014
41,533
16,411
113
69
Tennessee
King James threw the king’s printer in jail for making a mistake.

One reason God chose the king was because everyone was afraid of his authority before God.
How can you be sure that God chose King James to authorize a written copy of his word? For the record, I prefer the KJV and the NKJV. Also, I'm sure that God has indeed authorize the versions of His written word though each generation in a language and format that the average person can relate to and understand. I just don't see how anyone con conclusively say that a person, church, or entity was placed in such a position to make a claim of authority over the translation, revision or compilation of God's written word.
 

MarcR

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2015
5,486
183
63
Actually the Greek word plerophoreo can have several meanings, depending on the context. One of those meanings is "fully convince" or "fully believe". So the KJV translators were certainly NOT in error when they put down "most surely believed". In fact, contextually it is more appropriate than "fully accomplished" since Luke wanted Theophilus to know "the certainty of those things".

[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
[TD]
Strong's Concordance
plérophoreó: to bring in full measure, to fulfill
Original Word: πληροφορέω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: plérophoreó
Phonetic Spelling: (play-rof-or-eh'-o)
Short Definition: I carry out fully, fully convince
Definition: (lit: I carry full), (a) I complete, carry out fully, (b) I fully convince, satisfy fully, (c) I fully believe.

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 4135: πληροφορέω

πληροθορηθεις, persuaded, fully convinced or assured,

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

If you are going to cite Thayer's Lexicon, you should cite the full discussion of the word in question!

First Thayer agrees that as used in Luke 1:1, πληροφορέω means accomplished or completed. (See geeen highlight)

While Thayer does indeed say πληροφορέω can mean fully persuaded he states conditions (see blue highlight)

We do NOT find
τινα ....... [FONT=lucida\ console]ἐν[/FONT] ‎with the dative of thing) in Luke 1:1.



NT:4135
NT:4135 πληροφορέω, ‎‎ πληροφόρω: (1 aorist imperative πληοφόρησον, infinitive πληροφορησαι Rom 15:13 L marginal reading); passive, present imperative ‎‎ plhroθορείσθω ; perfect participle ‎ πεπληροφορημεωος ; 1 aorist participle πληροφορηθείς‎); (from the unused adjective ‎ πληροθορος, and this from πλήρης ‎and φέρω‎); to bear or bring full, to make full; a. to cause a thing to be shown to the full: τήν διακονίαν , i. e. to fulfil the ministry in every respect, 2 Tim 4:5 (cf. = πληροῦν τήν διακονίαν, Acts 12:25); also ‎τό κήρυγμα, 2 Tim 4:17. b. "to carry through to the end, accomplish: πράγματα πεπληροφορημεωα, things that have been accomplished (Itala and Vulg. completae), Luke 1:1 (cf. ὡς ἐπληρώθη ταῦτα ‎, Acts 19:21) (cf. Meyer edition Weiss at the passage). c. τινα, to fill one with any thought, conviction, or inclination: (Rom 15:13 L marginal reading (followed by [FONT=lucida\ console]ἐν[/FONT] ‎with the dative of thing): others, πλερόω, which see, 1); hence, to make one certain, to persuade, convince, one (καί ὅρκοις πληροθορησαντες Μεγαβυζον ‎, extracted from Ctesias (401 B.C.) in Photius, p. 41, 29 ((edited by Bekker); but on this passive, see Lightfoot as below)); passive, to be persuaded, Rom 14:5; πληροθορηθεις, persuaded, fully convinced or assured, Rom 4:21; also peplhrouorήμενοι, Col 4:12 L T Tr WH; οἱ ἀπόστολοι ‎... πληροθορηθεντες διά τῆς ἀνστάσεως ‎‎ τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Κριστοῦ καί πιστωθενθες ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ Θεοῦ‎, Clement of Rome, 1 Cor. 42, 3 [ET]; frequent so in ecclesiastical writings; to render inclined or bent on, ‎

, Eccl 8:11 (cf. Test xii. Patr., test. Gad 2). The word is treated of fully by Bleek, Brief an d. Heb 2:2, p. 233ff; Grimm in the Jahrbb. f. Deutsche TheoI. for 1871, p. 38ff; (Lightfoot's Commentary on Col 4:12. Cf. also Sophocles' Lexicon, under the word.)*
 

Joseppi

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2018
887
7
18
How can you be sure that God chose King James to authorize a written copy of his word? For the record, I prefer the KJV and the NKJV. Also, I'm sure that God has indeed authorize the versions of His written word though each generation in a language and format that the average person can relate to and understand. I just don't see how anyone con conclusively say that a person, church, or entity was in placed in such a position to make a claim of authority over the translation, revision or compilation of God's written word.
I know because God authorizes kings and King James the first, authorized the English version called the Holy Bible.

God does all things well and thus, always in accordance with his own written word.

I also note that the instructions of King James resulted in the literal fulfillment of Psalm 12:6, by insuring that every translated word in the Holy Bible was judged seven times in the hearts of the translators as per their committee rules.
That is, I perceive that the heart of men filled by the Holy Ghost are the earthen furnace God spoke of.

But the evidence has been set before men’s for over 4oo years.
Simply compare the Authorized with any other supposed scripture from any source.
 
Last edited:

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
12,503
4,119
113
the reason why the word of God is inerrant, is because God is without Error.
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
So you believe that anyone who reads a more modern translation is not saved and going to hell?
While he will never stand up and admit it that is clearly the implication intended.

All this would be quite amusing of it were not simply a blemish on his testimony.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
9,273
5,632
113
I know because God authorizes kings and King James the first, authorized the English version called the Holy Bible.

God does all things well and thus, always in accordance with his own written word.

I also note that the instructions of King James resulted in the literal fulfillment of Psalm 12:6, by insuring that every translated word in the Holy Bible was judged seven times in the hearts of the translators as per their committee rules.
That is, I perceive that the heart of men filled by the Holy Ghost are the earthen furnace God spoke of.

But the evidence has been set before men’s for over 4oo years.
Simply compare the Authorized with any other supposed scripture from any source.
Psalm 12:6 isn't about the KJV specifically. Where did you learn this gross misuse of scripture? You have been lead astray I tell thee.
 

tourist

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2014
41,533
16,411
113
69
Tennessee
I know because God authorizes kings and King James the first, authorized the English version called the Holy Bible.

God does all things well and thus, always in accordance with his own written word.

I also note that the instructions of King James resulted in the literal fulfillment of Psalm 12:6, by insuring that every translated word in the Holy Bible was judged seven times in the hearts of the translators as per their committee rules.
That is, I perceive that the heart of men filled by the Holy Ghost are the earthen furnace God spoke of.
God indeed appoints all in positions of authority whether that person is good or evil to accomplish His expressed purpose. That doe not mean that God condones everything that such a leader does. I am sure that God did in fact approve of the efforts this king made to spread His precious word to the masses. I believe that you have made valid points in your defense that King James was placed in a position of authority to say that this book is indeed the Word of God. I believe that it is the Word of God also but I also believe that all of the major versions or translations are the Word of God also and these too serve and accomplish His expressed purpose.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,851
13,459
113
You aren’t fooling anyone.
You have no scripture that supports your unbelief in the authorized Holy Bible.
I have asked numerous questions you haters of God’s written word haven’t responded to.
When folks present scripture you haters start obfuscating by any means necessary.
Acting like you can’t read English all of a sudden.

Instead of giving excuses why not establish the truth you claim is more righteous than the faith of them that believe what the authorized Bible says?
I have no need to defend assertions I have not made.

I have no need to respond to assertions or questions made to "haters of God's written word" as I am not one.

I haven't made excuses.

I only see you continuing to engage in logical fallacies and emotionally-charged badgering in an apparent attempt to get your way in this discussion. When you present evidence to support your assertions, then we can have a rational discussion.