Is all 66 Books Bible the infallible, inerrant Word of God?
- Thread starter memyselfi
- 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.
The Bible is infallible but it is not inerrant. The word "inerrant" means "being without errors" and the truth is that there are a few insignificant scribal-copying mistakes and acccidental inserts of a marginal note into the main Bible verse so that the Bible that we have today is no longer without errrors.
But what it says in the Bible iS infallible, which means that what it says in there "will not fail to occur".
So the Bible is errant with some scribal mistakes, but it IS infallible.
YehovaYeshua
But what it says in the Bible iS infallible, which means that what it says in there "will not fail to occur".
So the Bible is errant with some scribal mistakes, but it IS infallible.
YehovaYeshua
-
1
-
1
- Show all
It is obvious that you had to look it up. Why is that. The Bible is supposed to be translated into the modern language of the people. Oops KJV fails in this regard. Then there are the nonexistent animals in it. Oops KJV fails again. The flaws of language changing over time and scientific advances in nature have made KJV flawed. This is why there are a couple of updated KJV versions. I prefer modern translations since they don't have these flaws created by 400 years of language changes plus more knowledge of nature.
Only the original languages of Hebrew, Aramaic and koine Judeo Greek. Judeo Greek is Greek with Hebrew concepts forced in it. When Jews use a language they force Hebrew concepts into it. Thus modifying the language. Yiddish is a modern Jewish language. It is Judeo German. English is so convoluted because it is a mixture of Celtic, Latin, German, and French. This made it easy for the Jews to just use it as is. Nothing needed to be forced into English.
-
1
- Show all
Such a disdain for the bible's accuracy.
To read all that ,one concludes that we have no idea what God has said in his word. No inspiration,help or guidance from the Holy Spirit speaking through the copiers of the rextus receptus or the board of king james translators.
This type of approach strikes at the heart of the believer who ,like the bereans,insists on the pure word illuminated by the Holy Spirit.
Who seeks to unsettle the textus receptus???????
In favor of what???????
What is the "NEW" standard.
For my 40 years of study I have relied on the textus receptus which you call a gimmick.
I don't think i have ever seen such a vile attitude against God's word.
Your post could be powerful fodder for an atheist platform against God's people and their gimmick they call the bible
The only encounter i have ever experienced similar to your disdain is the watchtower adherants,who favor the Alexandrian text which is useful in disenfranchising Jesus the creator and God,or 2nd person of the Godhead.
It could be that your kjv attack is predicted on a attempt to disenfranchise the textus receptus.
That kjv is extremely close and that seems to bother you somehow.
To read all that ,one concludes that we have no idea what God has said in his word. No inspiration,help or guidance from the Holy Spirit speaking through the copiers of the rextus receptus or the board of king james translators.
This type of approach strikes at the heart of the believer who ,like the bereans,insists on the pure word illuminated by the Holy Spirit.
Who seeks to unsettle the textus receptus???????
In favor of what???????
What is the "NEW" standard.
For my 40 years of study I have relied on the textus receptus which you call a gimmick.
I don't think i have ever seen such a vile attitude against God's word.
Your post could be powerful fodder for an atheist platform against God's people and their gimmick they call the bible
The only encounter i have ever experienced similar to your disdain is the watchtower adherants,who favor the Alexandrian text which is useful in disenfranchising Jesus the creator and God,or 2nd person of the Godhead.
It could be that your kjv attack is predicted on a attempt to disenfranchise the textus receptus.
That kjv is extremely close and that seems to bother you somehow.
I'm just wondering…
If modern translations are not infallible, inerrant Word of G-d why believe the Bible at all?
The is a scarlet thread that runs thru all of Scripture... Gen to Rev. That is MESSIAH.... But if ALL of Scripture is not accurate how or why do you believe the parts about Jesus is G-d, died on a cross, rose from the dead and coming back a gain, and by "faith" you will not GO to hell... is true… Or even a heaven or Hell... Or even the silliness about some man Jesus...
Out of 66 Books... THAT IS CAZY... UNLESS ALL OF IT TRUE!?! HOW DO YOU PICK AND CHOOSE WHAT TO BELEAVE AS THE INFALLABLE, INEREENT WORD OF G-D?
If modern translations are not infallible, inerrant Word of G-d why believe the Bible at all?
The is a scarlet thread that runs thru all of Scripture... Gen to Rev. That is MESSIAH.... But if ALL of Scripture is not accurate how or why do you believe the parts about Jesus is G-d, died on a cross, rose from the dead and coming back a gain, and by "faith" you will not GO to hell... is true… Or even a heaven or Hell... Or even the silliness about some man Jesus...
Out of 66 Books... THAT IS CAZY... UNLESS ALL OF IT TRUE!?! HOW DO YOU PICK AND CHOOSE WHAT TO BELEAVE AS THE INFALLABLE, INEREENT WORD OF G-D?
-
1
- Show all
While 400 years of language and environmental science has the translation with words that don't exist and animals that don't exist doesn't mean it is without value. In many places the wording is more consise and to the point than more modern translations. My favorite example is "the carnal mind is enmity against God". Modern translations use several more words that are not as memorable as this is.