How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?

[otseng]

From the On the Bible being inerrant thread:

How can you trust something that's written about god that contradictory, contains errors and just plain wrong at times? Is there a logical way to do so, or do you just want it to be god's word so much that you overlook these things like happens so often through the history of christianity?

The Bible can still be God's word, inspired, authoritative, and trustworthy without the need to believe in inerrancy.

For debate:
How can the Bible be considered authoritative and inspired without the need to believe in the doctrine of inerrancy?

While debating, do not simply state verses to say the Bible is inspired or trustworthy.

----------

Thread Milestones

• Case study of Hezekiah
• Start discussing global flood / Flood Model summary
• Recap arguments of authority of the Bible
• Start discussing Tower of Babel / Tower of Babel summary
• Start discussing archaeology / Philosophy of science / Origin of alphabet / End of discussion on archaeology
• Start discussing cosmology / Concluding cosmology
• Start discussing Shroud of Turin / Summary top TS imaging theories / Created DefendingChristianity.com and TS subforums / Shroud of Turin summary
• Start discussing Bible and resurrection
• Start discussing the Messiahship of Jesus / Messiahship of Jesus wrap up
• Start discussing Old Testament ethics
• Summary argument of atheism and morality / God basis for objective morality
• Start discussing genocide / Genocide summary argument
• Start discussing slavery / Slavery summary argument
• Start discussing homosexuality / Homosexuality summary argument
• Old Testament ethics summary argument
• Start discussing philosophy / Summary argument on philosophy
• Start discussing creation of universe

[otseng]

I'm suggesting that my natural reading of Bible text is as good as yours.

OK, then how do you interpret the passages that I presented that everything was created? Is the universe actually real or not?

[Gen 1:1 KJV] 1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

[Col 1:16 KJV] 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:

[Heb 11:3 ESV] 3 By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.

[Jhn 1:3 ESV] 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to otseng in post #4081

OK, then how do you interpret the passages that I presented that everything was created? Is the universe actually real or not?

You mean it doesn't depend on "interpretation"?

[otseng]

[Replying to otseng in post #4081

OK, then how do you interpret the passages that I presented that everything was created? Is the universe actually real or not?

You mean it doesn't depend on "interpretation"?

I just asked you "how do you interpret the passages". So, yes, it depends on one's interpretation.

But the root issue is if the universe is real or not. What is your position?

[William]

[Replying to otseng in post #4080]
a) He that sent me is with me.
b) I do always those things that please him.
c) I am not missing the mark.

The actual truth therein is that the benefit it provides is within the means to study through a particular framework of reference which enables the observer-participator of a) b) and c) to "see" The Creator Mind as it truly is.

This is not answering my question.

It certainly is answering your question.

If you cannot present an actual list of benefits, then who's to say there are actually any benefits.

I did produce an actual list of benefits. I did not make my own list, but used an example of another list recorded in a biblical passage. Matthew 6:25-34 KJV

It's like a commercial saying to buy a product and the benefits will only be seen after you buy the product.

Even so, you are arguing against the one who produced that list, so would have to take that up with Jesus is (as it appears) you have a problem with it.

You have to state what is the evidence and arguments are in order for someone to be able to confirm it. You can't just ask someone to go and study and find the evidence as your evidence.

This might surprise you coming from me, but I do think there are arguments and evidence to support the idea we're in God's mind. But I'll leave it up to you to find it and present it.

I am surprise (and why wouldn't I be) because now you are declaring something disingenuous is occurring between you and I (individual growing human personalities).
Rather that pointing as to where the source of that thing which is between us (I will refer to it as a veil/curtain) I will leave you to your concealing of those things, and to your thinking that I am also concealing those evidences from you (and the reader in general).
What we each independently think of as "evidence we exist within The Creator Mind" can remain a secret unshared between us for the time being then.

What claim is it you think I am made and have to back up?

We are in God's mind.

Indeed. I have offered - let's call them "points of view" - what I think of as evidence supporting the notion.
I have even shown that I can use the same biblical verses that you have used (to support your notion that The Creator Mind exists independently of the creation), to also support my notion that we exist within The Creator Mind.

I have further elaborated in my posts, by offering ("less biblical") examples of what I think of as also being evidence.

You haven't directly opposed any of those examples as being non-indicators (re my "claim") and now with this extra data you have provided (re your thinking we could be existing within The Creator Mind), I am left wondering if we have reached a point where those things which have you thinking that way, ought to be placed upon our table of discussion out in the open as it were.
Then perhaps we can begin to sort the data and discuss the "most likely" truth, from the results.

The claim I am making (re "evidence") is that a human personality has to study for themselves and align their understanding with what actually is true.

Isn't this true for everyone regardless of their position?

Yes. It is yet another trait that both atheist and theist human personalities have to follow.

What's the point of making this claim if it's a tautology?

I make the observation and then make the claim that the evidence being observed shows us that we exist within The Creator Mind.

A smallish part the overall evidence (that I consider "evidence") is the existence of the Bible - which is why I am specifically posting in this particular thread.

Re that, my understanding is
IF
We exist within The Creator Mind.
THEN
What reason is there for us to think the Bible God is outside The Creator Mind?

I see no evidence in the whole Bible that would have us need to believe that the Bible God is outside The Creator Mind.

Do you see any biblical evidence that we have reason to believe that the Bible God is outside The Creator Mind?

What is salient is verifiable evidence and logical arguments. But if you want to use ChatGPT as a source, it does not state whether the universe is real or not:

Why would you think GPT would have anything to say on the matter, since I was not inputting that data into GPT prompts.

My argument remains that there is no difference between what is Real, and The Creator Mind.
GPT kept its responses "Realman" (re "strawman").

Your thinking you are arguing about what is real and what is not, is not on the same track as what I am arguing.

OK, but this can apply to either the universe being actually real or not.

Again, I am not arguing any such thing.

Rather,

IF
We exist within The Creator Mind,
THEN
Whatever is experienced can be considered Real.

That is what I am actually arguing...

You and I are engaged in a dialogue exploring the concept of reality existing within The Creator Mind, as well as its implications for understanding biblical teachings.

You might be, but I'm specifically focusing on the justification for such a belief, which has yet to be presented.

Ironically, atheists are "awaiting" the same from theists re the claim that The Creator Mind exists (let alone exists outside of the creation.) I have already pointed this (irony) out in prior posts.

You are conflating Simulation Theory with being within The Creator Mind. These are two different subjects.

I'm not addressing your Creator Mind theory, but I'm addressing what is mentioned in the original article and the dominant alternative theory to the universe being real.

Then we could agree to drop that line of argument, since my focus is on addressing the "We Exist Within The Creator Mind" theory.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to otseng in post #4083

I just asked you "how do you interpret the passages". So, yes, it depends on one's interpretation.

Then what good does a "natural reading" do?

But the root issue is if the universe is real or not. What is your position?

The root issue is how we can trust the Bible if it's not inerrant, whether the universe is real or not.

[otseng]

I'm not addressing your Creator Mind theory, but I'm addressing what is mentioned in the original article and the dominant alternative theory to the universe being real.

Then we could agree to drop that line of argument, since my focus is on addressing the "We Exist Within The Creator Mind" theory.

What should be dropped is your Creator Mind theory, since you alone are the one espousing it and (in my opinion) avoiding providing logical reasoning and supporting evidence. As I mentioned, what has been proposed is we are in a computer simulation as what was stated in the original article.

So what I see you are doing is using this discussion on philosophy to just promote your Creator Mind theory, but not willing to support why it is true.

[otseng]

[Replying to otseng in post #4083

I just asked you "how do you interpret the passages". So, yes, it depends on one's interpretation.

Then what good does a "natural reading" do?

But the root issue is if the universe is real or not. What is your position?

The root issue is how we can trust the Bible if it's not inerrant, whether the universe is real or not.

Here's my argument:
- The natural reading of the Bible based on several passages is God created everything (and we are not in a simulation).
- Our intuitive sense and practical interaction with the world is the universe is actually real.
- Since the two are in alignment, it supports the Bible is reliable and trustworthy.

If the universe was actually in a simulation, it would not align with a natural reading of the Bible and be a disconfirmation of its reliability and trustworthiness.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to otseng in post #4087

If the universe was actually in a simulation, it would not align with a natural reading of the Bible and be a disconfirmation of its reliability and trustworthiness.

Then doesn't the universe align just as well with a natural reading of the Quran or the Book of Mormon?

[otseng]

[Replying to otseng in post #4087

If the universe was actually in a simulation, it would not align with a natural reading of the Bible and be a disconfirmation of its reliability and trustworthiness.

Then doesn't the universe align just as well with a natural reading of the Quran or the Book of Mormon?

Maybe, maybe not. I'm not here to argue for either of those books in this thread.

[otseng]

More philosophical questions:

* What is reality? Materialism maintains that there is no reality beyond the physical.
* What is our basis of knowledge? Rationalism seeks to discover the structure of reality guided by human reason alone. Empiricism declares that reason alone is not sufficient, all our knowledge must be based on information provided by our senses.
* How can we know what is right or wrong? Existentialism evaluates everything from subjective personal experience. Agnosticism maintains it’s impossible to settle the primary questions in life because of the limitations of human
* What is man? The evolutionist maintains we are matter in motion, evolved slime, mere meat machines, monkeys who mutated from goo to the zoo to you. From mud to monkeys to man. A cosmic accident. The result of random chance.
* What happens to a person after death? According to Hinduism, we are reincarnated in a kind of cosmic recycling of souls, either moving up the ladder to become holy cows, or sliding down, because of bad karma, to possibly become insects.
* What is the meaning of history? Marxism maintains that history is driven by economic determinism. The post-modernist maintains that there is absolutely no meaning to history.
* Why is there suffering and evil? The polytheist, who believes in many gods, maintains that it’s because of conflict between the various gods.
* What is the purpose for our existence? The hedonist maintains we should live for our own personal pleasure. The materialist proclaims, “He who dies with the most toys wins!” Humanism ultimately destroys all purpose for one’s existence. You came from nothing, you are going nowhere, life is meaningless.
* How should we live? The Muslim claims we should live in obedience to a whimsical, angry god through Sharia law, based on the Quran and the Hadith, the teachings and practices of Mohammed.

How Christianity addresses these philosophical questions:

* The Bible makes clear that God is ultimate reality. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1).
* Our basis for knowledge is God’s Revelation, but that Revelation is not illogical or irrational because logic is part of God’s essential nature. “In the past God spoke. . . through the prophets. . . but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son” (Heb. 1:1-2). (Note: If logic were not part of God’s essential nature, then the words in this biblical verse would have no inherent meaning.)
* We can know what is right and what is wrong from the Word of God. “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16).
* Man was created by God, but human nature is sinful. Because we have been created by God, in the image of God, there is some good even in the worst of us. However, because we are fallen, there is bad even in the best of us. “For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works” (Eph. 2:10).
* After death, each one of us shall face eternal judgment. We will either enjoy God’s gracious rewards in Heaven or endure just punishment in Hell. “Man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment” (Heb. 9:27).
* God is ruler over history. “The Most High is ruler over the kingdom of men and He gives it to anyone He wants” (Dan. 4:25).
* Suffering and evil are a result of man’s rebellion against God since the Fall. “Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows” (Gal. 6:7).
* The purpose of our existence is to glorify God and to worship Him forever. “Whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God” (1 Cor. 10:31).
* We should therefore live in obedience to the Bible. “The Lord your God commands you this day to follow these decrees and laws; carefully observe them with all your heart and with all your soul” (Deut. 26:16).

https://www.movieguide.org/news-article ... tions.html