Does the Bible claim to be inerrant?

[crossnote]

Here is a good read on the topic...
The CHICAGO STATEMENTS on INERRANCY and HERMENEUTICS

 

[crossnote]

Jesus Christ is inerrant.

Our books about Him are not.

Our 'Books' about Him are of Divine origin, so if they are errant so is He.

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

 

[trofimus]

So according to you there is no written Word of God. Have you joined the ranks of the theological liberals?

Try to define the term "word of God", then I will try to respond if it equals my Bible.

 

[trofimus]

Our 'Books' about Him are of Divine origin, so if they are errant so is He.

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

Our Bibles != Scriptures.

Bibles are print of translation of compiled editions of hand made copies of Scriptures. I do not understand why are people so uneducated about this. Paul did not have the KJV.

 

[trofimus]

So faith comes by hearing Jesus Christ and not by believing the Bible?

I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth;Deut 18:18

Do you believe that Jesus Christ was born of the flesh?


It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. John 6:63

So does the word come from the flesh or the Spirit?


For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.
1 Thess 2:13

I am not sure if I understand your questions properly...

 

[phil36]

All scripture is inerrant.. Yes Trophimus even the words about Paul sending for his cloak. Has Pauls cloak getting got a theological message ? Not much except, we see other christians willing to help! But it is part of a human letter written by a man, using words that at the same time where his words and inspired by the Holy Spirit. They are the Words God wanted us to have.. If they are not then we have no basis for any authority about faith except ones own whims. The bible is not written in a theological vacuum it is real human history.

As to how we have our bible today that is a discussion on transmission.. And we can see that the bible going back through the centuries is totally reliable and authoritative in all matters of faith.. And where there are scribe mistakes these are usually duly noted.. But it shows the care God Himself has taken down through the ages to transmit his original inerrant word.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Try to define the term "word of God", then I will try to respond if it equals my Bible.

Word of God = All Scripture = the 66 books of the Bible. No need to dodge the issue. The Bible is either the Word of God or it is not worth bothering with.

 

[Ariel82]

Seeds sewn on rocks, then, but sewn nonetheless. And you mean One Version, right? Ain't falling for it.

Yeah only would work if everyone was fluent in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek....since folks aren't...one Bible woipdnt work ...

Unity is found in those who all have One Spirit teaching us...not one version of the Bible

 

[Ariel82]

Am not understanding how you praise The Messiah the Christ the son of Mary , while He himself praised Jehovah and called the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel to do the same ,,,I see that you reject much of the O/T but you are even rejecting the N/T in preference to the teachings 14 letters of Saul ,,, In my studies it's appears that the people whom He [ Jesus ] was sent to and attended his gathering thought he was a prophet as seem here

Matthew 21:11
And the multitude said, This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee. [

Matthew 14:5
And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet. [

Matthew 11:9
But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet ] .. MANY YEARS BEFORE THE CLAIM THAT HE WAS A GOD OR
THE SON OF GOD ...​

​

​

Are you Muslim by any chance?

 

[trofimus]

All scripture is inerrant.. Yes Trophimus even the words about Paul sending for his cloak. Has Pauls cloak getting got a theological message ? Not much except, we see other christians willing to help! But it is part of a human letter written by a man, using words that at the same time where his words and inspired by the Holy Spirit. They are the Words God wanted us to have.. If they are not then we have no basis for any authority about faith except ones own whims. The bible is not written in a theological vacuum it is real human history.

As to how we have our bible today that is a discussion on transmission.. And we can see that the bible going back through the centuries is totally reliable and authoritative in all matters of faith.. And where there are scribe mistakes these are usually duly noted.. But it shows the care God Himself has taken down through the ages to transmit his original inerrant word.

Mt 5:1 And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set...

Lk 6:17 And he came down with them, and stood in the plain...

---

Was Jesus sitting on a mountain or was he standing in a plain?

A clear contradiction/inconsistency in Gospels. On the other hand, which Christian creed is in danger because of it? These are minor details.

 

[trofimus]

Word of God = All Scripture = the 66 books of the Bible. No need to dodge the issue. The Bible is either the Word of God or it is not worth bothering with.

Well, if you define word of God as being equal to Bible, than you said that Bible is Bible and I have nothing against it.

 

[Depleted]

Many who have wanted to defend the credibility of the Bible have claimed that is inerrant. Does it?

I think you're phone auto-corrected once too often. Or you were in a rush when writing this. Either way, not sure what you're asking. "Does it?" Does what what? I don't get what "it" is and I don't get what it reportedly "does" to answer the question.

That said, here are my two best guesses with answers:

-- Is the Bible incapable of error? Well, yes and no. Yes, because it's a book with paper and ink, so can't do anything to error. No, because it is a book translated through the centuries from languages not used anymore, so it does have some booboos. But really? Is the fact that the word "rabbit" isn't in The Law all that much of an error? The original word was right. The translators simply didn't know there were no rabbits in the Middle East back then, so they guessed from local understanding.

-- Is God inerrant? YES!

Honestly, this is a straw man argument so old that most people feel like it has merit. It really doesn't. Do you ever go to the user manual or the Help section for your computer/digital device? Ever spot grammatical mistakes? Assuming you have, does it mean the manual or help section were errant? Not really, because it still teaches you how to do what you want to do.

If Man is capable of writing down directions on how to use machinery correctly even as an errant being, why can't God, the only perfect one anywhere, use Man to write down what he wanted men to know?

The Bible is God's words -- inerrantly -- even if humans have yet to translate them free from error!

 

[Depleted]

As for these lost critics, if one cannot trust all that is written, it is very difficult to believe a portion of it. One Bible would create unity among the brethren, as far as, the validity of the text and it's truth.

LOL Too funny, especially from a KJVOnlyist. How do you deal with the rabbits are unclean section of the law? Because rabbits are not cloven, like the passage says. Truth is the KJV translators goofed there and you're still talking about trusting them.

 

[James37]

Our Bibles != Scriptures.

Bibles are print of translation of compiled editions of hand made copies of Scriptures. I do not understand why are people so uneducated about this. Paul did not have the KJV.

What did Paul have?

 

[Depleted]

Am not understanding how you praise The Messiah the Christ the son of Mary , while He himself praised Jehovah and called the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel to do the same ,,,I see that you reject much of the O/T but you are even rejecting the N/T in preference to the teachings 14 letters of Saul ,,, In my studies it's appears that the people whom He [ Jesus ] was sent to and attended his gathering thought he was a prophet as seem here

Matthew 21:11
And the multitude said, This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee. [

Matthew 14:5
And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet. [

Matthew 11:9
But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet ] .. MANY YEARS BEFORE THE CLAIM THAT HE WAS A GOD OR
THE SON OF GOD ...​

​

​

Pssst, the Messiah -aka Jesus -- IS Jehovah!
John 8:58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.”

Have you considered staying on topic? (Because whatever you were talking about here wasn't topic either.)

 

[trofimus]

What did Paul have?

Probably some mixture of Septuagint and Hebrew texts, personal revelations from God, some apostolic writings and who knows what else, maybe even some books that did not manage to be in our canon or got lost completely.

 

[James37]

Probably some mixture of Septuagint and Hebrew texts, personal revelations from God, some apostolic writings and who knows what else, maybe even some books that did not manage to be in our canon or got lost completely.

Septuagint? Isn't that a translation? What Paul had was the word of God in a a language that he understood plain and simple! I can't understand why people are so "uneducated" about this!

 

[trofimus]

Well, if you define word of God as being equal to Bible, than you said that Bible is Bible and I have nothing against it.

than = then

.... sorry, Engliiiiiiiish

 

[trofimus]

Septuagint? Isn't that a translation? What Paul had was the word of God in a a language that he understood plain and simple! I can't understand why people are so "uneducated" about this!

Yes, Septuagint is a translation, used by Jews and Christians as authoritative in those times.

 

[Ariel82]

Mt 5:1 And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set...

Lk 6:17 And he came down with them, and stood in the plain...

---

Was Jesus sitting on a mountain or was he standing in a plain?

A clear contradiction/inconsistency in Gospels. On the other hand, which Christian creed is in danger because of it? These are minor details.

Maybe they are two different accounts of two diffrent events that just sound similar?

For example many Christian bands or preachers return and preach at the same location several times.