Biblical Inerrancy

[Midwestguy]

There are times when people talk about the "inerrancy" of the Bible. Is there a commonly agreed definition of the word? Does it mean the Bible is without error? If so, which manuscript does one rely on to arrive at this conclusion?

For example, in Revelation chapter 13 the number of the beast is stated as 666 while other manuscripts have 616. Which is inerrant and why?

I remain that curious but confused Midwest Guy.

[Tilia]

Like the parables.

Not like the parables, since the parables were purely fictious stories told to convey some moral message. In general, Genesis type stories are "fictional", meaning they aren't de facto literal, but are still historically true.

That sentence seems to me to be complete gibberish. If they are historically true, they are factual, not fictional.

[perplexed101]

Creationism is accepting God's Truth as told in Genesis.

Which did God make first, man, then plants and animals, or plants and animals, then man?

God created the Son of Man later known as Jesus Christ, first.

colossians 1:14-15

[McCulloch]

What need does one have for logic, reason or evidence when you start with the a priori belief in god?

Am I to take this that God-believer = hater of logic/science? I beg to differ.

No. Believe in god if you can show that a belief in god is consistent with logic and reason. Your position sounded dangerously close to "I'll assume god and from there apply logic and reason to make any evidence fit into that belief.

Any discovery must me either denounced or reconciled with His Holy Word. If the earth is shown to be older than the bible says it is then either

• revise your interpretation of the bible OR
• denounce the evidence OR
• introduce a miracle

This approach is not the one of reason or of science.

Are you sure? Reason does this all the time. If I say "The man is both a black and a non-black at the same time", the logician will take an a priori belief in the unprovable law of noncontradiction, and eem the statement false. Science also does this. It assumes that the scientific method is true, even though it cannot be proven scientifically.

The scientific method does presume a minimum number of axioms. The unprovable law of noncontradition is one of them. The existence of god is not.

[hiramabbi2]

Creationism is accepting God's Truth as told in Genesis.

Which did God make first, man, then plants and animals, or plants and animals, then man?

God created the Son of Man later known as Jesus Christ, first.

colossians 1:14-15

Wrong religious view again my friend! The Son was not created.

Let me further explain it to you, since, you're less informed and seems confuse from your minister' teaching.

The Son (Word) was spoken in the beginning and was Brought Forth physically from the invisible realm of his Father, (before the world was) when God said "LET THERE BE LIGHT"

The brightness of the glory of the Son provided the physical light during the creation as he would also provide light at the New Jerusalem to come.

REVELATION 21
23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the LIGHT thereof.

[hiramabbi2]

Creationism is accepting God's Truth as told in Genesis.

Which did God make first, man, then plants and animals, or plants and animals, then man?

Adam was physically made first on the 3rd. Day becoming a natural living soul!

These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created (by God), in the day that the LORD God (Son) made the earth (Day 3..Gen. 1:9-10) and the heavens, (Plural, the 1st Heaven (Singular) was made on the 2nd Day...Gen. 1:6-8)

And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, (Day 3.. Gen. 1:11) and every herb of the field before it grew:(Day 3...Gen. 1:12) for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Genesis 2:4-7

On the Day the Son made the Earth, Day 3, before the plants and herbs, Day 3, and AFTER the rain, Jesus made Adam.

If Adam had not been made on the 3rd Day, then he would have not been present to name the animals, from the ground, which Jesus made at the beginning of the 6th Day. Gen. 2:18-20

[perplexed101]

Creationism is accepting God's Truth as told in Genesis.

Which did God make first, man, then plants and animals, or plants and animals, then man?

God created the Son of Man later known as Jesus Christ, first.

colossians 1:14-15

Wrong religious view again my friend! The Son was not created.

Let me further explain it to you, since, you're less informed and seems confuse from your minister' teaching.

The Son (Word) was spoken in the beginning and was Brought Forth physically from the invisible realm of his Father, (before the world was) when God said "LET THERE BE LIGHT"

The brightness of the glory of the Son provided the physical light during the creation as he would also provide light at the New Jerusalem to come.

REVELATION 21
23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the LIGHT thereof.

Wrong again,

where did you learn how to read? perhaps you should strictly stick with the milk of the word.

Pro 8:22 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.
Pro 8:23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
Pro 8:24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.
Pro 8:25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:
Pro 8:26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.
Pro 8:27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:
Pro 8:28 When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep:
Pro 8:29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth:

now child, He is stating He was before all of the above, from verse 24-29

Pro 8:30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;
Pro 8:31 Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.
Pro 8:32 Now therefore hearken unto me, O ye children: for blessed are they that keep my ways.
Pro 8:33 Hear instruction, and be wise, and refuse it not.
Pro 8:34 Blessed is the man that heareth me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at the posts of my doors.
Pro 8:35 For whoso findeth me findeth life, and shall obtain favour of the LORD.
Pro 8:36 But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death.

----------------------------------------

Col 1:13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
Col 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
Col 1:17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
Col 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

would you like that in its original format? i seriously doubt you can understand and interpret the original language but i will give you the benefit of the doubt:


Col 1:13 ος ερρυσατο ημας εκ της εξουσιας του σκοτους και μετεστησεν εις την βασιλειαν του υιου της αγαπης αυτου
Col 1:14 εν ω εχομεν την απολυτρωσιν Bδια TSδια TSBτου TSBαιματος Bαυτου TSαυτου την αφεσιν των αμαρτιων
Col 1:15 ος εστιν εικων του θεου του αορατου πρωτοτοκος πασης κτισεως
Col 1:16 οτι εν αυτω εκτισθη τα παντα TSBτα εν τοις ουρανοις και TSBτα επι της γης τα ορατα και τα αορατα ειτε θρονοι ειτε κυριοτητες ειτε αρχαι ειτε εξουσιαι τα παντα δι αυτου και εις αυτον εκτισται
Col 1:17 και αυτος εστιν προ παντων και τα παντα εν αυτω συνεστηκεν
Col 1:18 και αυτος εστιν η κεφαλη του σωματος της εκκλησιας ος εστιν αρχη πρωτοτοκος εκ των νεκρων ινα γενηται εν πασιν αυτος πρωτευων
Col 1:19 οτι εν αυτω ευδοκησεν παν το πληρωμα κατοικησαι

Pro 8:22 יהוה קנני ראשׁית דרכו קדם מפעליו מאז׃
Pro 8:23 מעולם נסכתי מראשׁ מקדמי־ארץ׃
Pro 8:24 באין־תהמות חוללתי באין מעינות נכבדי־מים׃
Pro 8:25 בטרם הרים הטבעו לפני גבעות חוללתי׃
Pro 8:26 עד־לא עשׂה ארץ וחוצות וראשׁ עפרות תבל׃
Pro 8:27 בהכינו שׁמים שׁם אני בחוקו חוג על־פני תהום׃
Pro 8:28 באמצו שׁחקים ממעל בעזוז עינות תהום׃
Pro 8:29 בשׂומו לים חקו ומים לא יעברו־פיו בחוקו מוסדי ארץ׃
Pro 8:30 ואהיה אצלו אמון ואהיה שׁעשׁעים יום יום משׂחקת לפניו בכל־עת׃
Pro 8:31 משׂחקת בתבל ארצו ושׁעשׁעי את־בני אדם׃
Pro 8:32 ועתה בנים שׁמעו־לי ואשׁרי דרכי ישׁמרו׃
Pro 8:33 שׁמעו מוסר וחכמו ואל־תפרעו׃
Pro 8:34 אשׁרי אדם שׁמע לי לשׁקד על־דלתתי יום יום לשׁמר מזוזת פתחי׃
Pro 8:35 כי מצאי מצאי חיים ויפק רצון מיהוה׃
Pro 8:36 וחטאי חמס נפשׁו כל־משׂנאי אהבו מות׃


would you like it according to the septuagint?

Pro 8:22 κύριος ἔκτισέν με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ,
Pro 8:23 πρὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος ἐθεμελίωσέν με ἐν ἀρχῇ,
Pro 8:24 πρὸ τοῦ τὴν γῆν ποιῆσαι καὶ πρὸ τοῦ τὰς ἀβύσσους ποιῆσαι, πρὸ τοῦ προελθεῖν τὰς πηγὰς τῶν ὑδάτων,
Pro 8:25 πρὸ τοῦ ὄρη ἑδρασθῆναι, πρὸ δὲ πάντων βουνῶν γεννᾷ με.
Pro 8:26 κύριος ἐποίησεν χώρας καὶ ἀοικήτους καὶ ἄκρα οἰκούμενα τῆς ὑπ᾿ οὐρανόν.
Pro 8:27 ἡνίκα ἡτοίμαζεν τὸν οὐρανόν, συμπαρήμην αὐτῷ, καὶ ὅτε ἀφώριζεν τὸν ἑαυτοῦ θρόνον ἐπ᾿ ἀνέμων.
Pro 8:28 ἡνίκα ἰσχυρὰ ἐποίει τὰ ἄνω νέφη, καὶ ὡς ἀσφαλεῖς ἐτίθει πηγὰς τῆς ὑπ᾿ οὐρανὸν
Pro 8:29 καὶ ἰσχυρὰ ἐποίει τὰ θεμέλια τῆς γῆς,
Pro 8:30 ἤμην παρ᾿ αὐτῷ ἁρμόζουσα, ἐγὼ ἤμην ᾗ προσέχαιρεν. καθ᾿ ἡμέραν δὲ εὐφραινόμην ἐν προσώπῳ αὐτοῦ ἐν παντὶ καιρῷ,
Pro 8:31 ὅτε ἐυφραίνετο τὴν οἰκουμένην συντελέσας καὶ ἐνευφραίνετο ἐν υἱοῖς ἀνθρώπων.
Pro 8:32 νῦν οὖν, υἱέ, ἄκουέ μου.
Pro 8:33 (OMITTED TEXT)
Pro 8:34 μακάριος ἀνήρ, ὃς εἰσακούσεταί μου, καὶ ἄνθρωπος, ὃς τὰς ἐμὰς ὁδοὺς φυλάξει ἀγρυπνῶν ἐπ᾿ ἐμαῖς θύραις καθ᾿ ἡμέραν τηρῶν σταθμοὺς ἐμῶν εἰσόδων·
Pro 8:35 αἱ γὰρ ἔξοδοί μου ἔξοδοι ζωῆς, καὶ ἑτοιμάζεται θέλησις παρὰ κυρίου.
Pro 8:36 οἱ δὲ εἰς ἐμὲ ἁμαρτάνοντες ἀσεβοῦσιν τὰς ἑαυτῶν ψυχάς, καὶ οἱ μισοῦντές με ἀγαπῶσιν θάνατον.

you can explain with all of your contradictory explanations but in the end, its from within your confined circular reasoning that derails you everytime.

[Dilettante]

perplexed101 wrote:

Wrong again,
where did you learn how to read? perhaps you should strictly stick with the milk of the word.

would you like that in its original format? i seriously doubt you can understand and interpret the original language but i will give you the benefit of the doubt:

would you like it according to the septuagint?

perplexed101, by all means make your point, but please try to avoid this kind of approach. There's no need to be patronizing.

[Tilia]

Creationism is accepting God's Truth as told in Genesis.

Which did God make first, man, then plants and animals, or plants and animals, then man?

Adam was physically made first on the 3rd. Day

'Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness.... So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him.... And there was evening, and there was morning- the sixth day. (Gen 1:26-31 NIV)

[perplexed101]

perplexed101 wrote:

Wrong again,
where did you learn how to read? perhaps you should strictly stick with the milk of the word.

would you like that in its original format? i seriously doubt you can understand and interpret the original language but i will give you the benefit of the doubt:

would you like it according to the septuagint?

perplexed101, by all means make your point, but please try to avoid this kind of approach. There's no need to be patronizing.

Without further guilding the lily, my point only specifies the Son of Man as the only begotten Son befitting every aspect and in conjunction to documention within scripture, taking heed towards the time frames, events, and places of events given for purpose and as symbols. My hope is to secure another string; an event that transpired and unconsidered, an event being yet another aspect for His fulfilling role. i acknowledge and embrace the fact that Jesus Christ is Lord of all on earth and in this way, gives cause to the following:

John 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

[micatala]

I know there is a separate forum for creation/evolution, but it is hard to avoid the subject when talking about the inerrancy of the Bible. you say that you cannot see how a global flood could account for the millions of layers of sedimentary rock and the ice in Greenland? Wouldn't this be exactly what you would expect to find if there had been a global flood?

Regardless of the timing question brought up by Jose, a flood should ordinarily produce only one sedimentary layer. To get multiple layers, you need sediment to wash into place and settle, and then harden before the next layer comes in. The hardening, whether it takes place under water or not, takes some time, and in the meantime there cannot be a disturbing of the sediment until it is hardened. I don't see how this could reasonably happen many many times over during a single flood.

As for the ice...everything I have read by creationists would predict an Ice Age after the flood...the water is hot from all the energy, the land is cool, lots of evaporation and precipitation.

You were addressing my comment on the Greenland ice layers. Here is a general discussion of ice layers, including a discussion of the Vostok ice cores which indicate an age of the earth of at least 145,000 years. Here is a discussion of the ice cores in relation to ice ages .

Specifically with regards to Greenland, here[\url], as part of a discussion of many of the problems with the flood model, is a discussion of those ice cores including the following quote.

Why is there no evidence of a flood in ice core series? Ice cores from Greenland have been dated back more than 40,000 years by counting annual layers. [Johnsen et al, 1992,; Alley et al, 1993] A worldwide flood would be expected to leave a layer of sediments, noticeable changes in salinity and oxygen isotope ratios, fractures from buoyancy and thermal stresses, a hiatus in trapped air bubbles, and probably other evidence. Why doesn't such evidence show up?

There are just so many inconsistencies between a global flood and the evidence we see, not to mention the implausibility of the mechanisms, that I continue to see this as the very weakest link in an already weak case for traditional creationism.

And have you ever heard of polystrate fossils (things like trees that stick vertically through supposedly millions of years of rock)? I have never heard any kind of old-earth argument that can account for those.

This has been addressed in various threads. See also [url=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/polystrate/trees.html] here for one discussion of polystrate tree fossils.

The whole evolution/creation debate is critically important because the authority of the scripture is at stake. If people think the first books of the Bible are just a bunch of made up stories, they aren't nearly as likely to take the stories of Jesus seriously and thus are less likely to find salvation. On the other hand, if the culture at large admitted to the correctness of scripture in all areas, how would that change people's response to the Gospel and how they applied God's commandments to their lives?

This is a possibly valid point, but not a foregone conclusion. Even so, the fact that people may take scripture less seriously because of evolution says

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

about the truth of evolution. You cannot conclude something is not true because it has consequences which you find unfortunate.

ALso, we have been through this before. In the 16th and 17th centuries, people opposed Copernicanism because they felt it was counter to, even injurious to, scripture and the faith. Was it?

Finally, there is at least as much danger in opposing evolution and insisting it is inconsistent with the Bible and Christianity as there is in your scenario. As more and more evidence supports evolution, those who continue to insist it is evil (you haven't said this but a lot of writers to the newspaper in my area do), unscriptural, immoral, etc. are looking increasingly foolish, except to the choir to whom they are preaching. Galileo was rightly worried about exactly this phenomenon in his day. Unfortunately, the Catholic Church went a different direction, to the detriment of their reputation and arguably their influence, particularly within scientific circles.

In other words, I think creationism will ultimately backfire in that it will lead more people to take scripture less seriously. Even on this forum, you will find atheists who used to be Christians, but could not in good conscience, continue to believe one or another doctrine of the faith, and in my view many of these doctrines are questionable or completely irrelevant to the central message of Christianity and the bible. I would certainly say creationism fits this description.

As Jesus says, "my words are spirit and they are life. The flesh counts for nothing."

I believe God cares not one whit about whether we accept evolution as fact or not.