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 / Summary argument universe was created

[otseng]

I don't need to refer back to posts which you say you forgot.

It's a simple ask to just provide a link to where you provided the evidence. After you do, we can evaluate your evidence.

Pre flood deposits sheared off by the Flood and then covered by new flood deposits are also (supposedly) the continental plates of the hydroplate split up by the flood waters and floated apart by them. Explain how they could be the Flood -sea floor and the floating continents at the same time.

What "pre-flood deposits" are you referring to?

Research rather than a first impression will give the better answers.

I take this as "We don't know what the answer is, but it sure ain't what the Bible says. One day science will have the answer."

However the meandering river of the Grand Canyon is evidence for millions of years of slow valley cutting, not a year long flood.

And even if the Colorado river could form the Grand Canyon by slowly eroding it for millions of years, nobody has answered why in the billion+ years before that no such monumental erosion ever took place (unless one throws in the ad hoc unconformities explanation).

It only remains to repeat that in the face of this catastrophe, I doubt the Ark would survive, never mind protect the animals.

The question is first did a global flood occur? If it did not, who cares about the ark. If it did, then somehow people and land animals survived it.

Or you can stick on this geological discussion if you like.

In the interest of time (which I have little), it's best to continue with the arguments that directly relate to the OP.

[otseng]

Flood stories are found in all cultures around the globe, or at least in all near rivers. Indeed, it would be exceedingly strange if flood stories were NOT widespread since floods are so common, thousands every year. As you say, stories grow legs. Each re-teller wants his version to get attention. These things are like fish stories

That would be true for local floods, however global flood stories would be quite a claim. Yes, global flood stories would each have their own embellishments, like all legends. But, the question is why is this found all around the world in various cultures? Not only that, the flood stories have specific details that match the Biblical account. What can account for that? I can only think of three possibilities: it could be coincidence, there was a common legend that passed on to all cultures around the world, or there actually was a worldwide flood.

[TRANSPONDER]

Flood stories are found in all cultures around the globe, or at least in all near rivers. Indeed, it would be exceedingly strange if flood stories were NOT widespread since floods are so common, thousands every year. As you say, stories grow legs. Each re-teller wants his version to get attention. These things are like fish stories

That would be true for local floods, however global flood stories would be quite a claim. Yes, global flood stories would each have their own embellishments, like all legends. But, the question is why is this found all around the world in various cultures? Not only that, the flood stories have specific details that match the Biblical account. What can account for that? I can only think of three possibilities: it could be coincidence, there was a common legend that passed on to all cultures around the world, or there actually was a worldwide flood.

As to that of course, the answer is 'We don't know'. The answer is not 'Of course the Noachian Flood must be true'. It's been pointed out that Egypt and China do not have Flood stories, any nobody kept records of these early times like they did. A possible explanation is that the Flooding of the Nile is a necessity, not a disaster, and the Chinese river Flood story is not Global and more about river management. Nor of course is the Babylonian Flood global (though it was all their local world) and the Bible just borrowed the story and inflated it to the wider (but still flat and mountain -ringed) world of their time, though it still seemed possible to cram all the animals on board.

It just doesn't seem possible now we know the world is round and you'd have to get everything on board including whales, disease bacteria and prehistoric animals. And the less said about what they'd eat when let out (if they'd survived the catastrophism of the hydroplate break up or ice globe or whatever theory the Creationist had invented) the better.

I might argue that human fear of destruction by natural forces is universal and one can survive fires, or storms, but a flood is inescapable. Of course you need a hero in the story to escape by floating on something. Just a possible suggestion as to why flood stories are ubiquitous. When you read them, they don't look much like the Flood story.

[TRANSPONDER]

I don't need to refer back to posts which you say you forgot.

It's a simple ask to just provide a link to where you provided the evidence. After you do, we can evaluate your evidence.

Pre flood deposits sheared off by the Flood and then covered by new flood deposits are also (supposedly) the continental plates of the hydroplate split up by the flood waters and floated apart by them. Explain how they could be the Flood -sea floor and the floating continents at the same time.

What "pre-flood deposits" are you referring to?

Research rather than a first impression will give the better answers.

I take this as "We don't know what the answer is, but it sure ain't what the Bible says. One day science will have the answer."

However the meandering river of the Grand Canyon is evidence for millions of years of slow valley cutting, not a year long flood.

And even if the Colorado river could form the Grand Canyon by slowly eroding it for millions of years, nobody has answered why in the billion+ years before that no such monumental erosion ever took place (unless one throws in the ad hoc unconformities explanation).

It only remains to repeat that in the face of this catastrophe, I doubt the Ark would survive, never mind protect the animals.

The question is first did a global flood occur? If it did not, who cares about the ark. If it did, then somehow people and land animals survived it.

Or you can stick on this geological discussion if you like.

In the interest of time (which I have little), it's best to continue with the arguments that directly relate to the OP.

I am not going to let you waste my time. If I can explain the points quickly, there is no need for me to go back and search out the links which will not help as they only led to a discussion. I have said what the pre -flood deposits were - the strata under the unconformity and overlying the basal rock that you'd made a big deal about. That strata would have to be pre flood and the unconformity would have to be tilted by the flood, scraped off by the flood and new strata deposited by the Flood, and yet the Hydroplate theory (as you have presented it) requires that all of this be a continental plate sliding about on top of the flood water gushing out of the underground ocean. Don't you see the contradiction?

Well yes, as explained it sure ain't what the Bible says and the research we have seems to further discount the Genesis account. There is evidence for tectonic plate movement on top of olten rock Volcanoes, Faults, meandering river valleys, buried river valleys, geology of past subduction - events, mountain ranges on the leading side (1)of continental plates, neat inverted strata rather than a mess and tectonic plate movement going on today long after all the supposed flood activity. I'd say the Bible sure ain't the true account and (as said in many other contexts) science has made its' case so often and the Bible accounts been shown wrong that maybe science deserves better than you dissing it because it doesn't support Genesis.

Yes, as pointed out above (yet again) whatever the reason for the unconformity (glacier erosion during 'snowball earth is hypothesised) the hydroplate theory (as explained by you) sure ain't the explanation.

No a global flood did not occur, aside the Ark. The geology alone does not support the claim. Nor the dating, the problems with the Ark, fossil distribution, historical records of Egypt and China) and really not the various Flood stories, including the Mesopotamian original which shows that the Bible just adapted it. In fact, you have nothing. Whether you stick with the Geology or want to discuss other aspects which I am still going to refer to as extra reasons not to believe the Noachian Flood, just as I feel appropriate.

Otseng, mate, why don't you accept that Genesis is a myth adapted from a myth, and you'd embarrass yourself less if you swallowed that and just went for cafeteria Christianity instead?

(1) according to your theory of the break -up of Pangaea with the flood causing the mountains to pile up, they should be on the east of America and West of Africa, but they are on the West of America and only a continental bow -wave could cause it.

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #554]
The 'success' argument is, of course, based on a logical fallacy which Osteng and, well, most of us frequently complain about; the ad populum fallacy.
Regarding people believing the supernatural nonsense, one must remember that times were very different in terms of what most people found credible. Belief in ghosts, angels of various sorts, demons, devils, gods and magic was common, if not universal throughout history, until science began explaining natural causes for weather and other phenomenon.

Tis the eye of childhood that fears a painted devil.
__ Lady Macbeth
Even today, tho' religion is losing its influence, belief in the supernatural remains common. A recent article suggests evolution may account for this:
https://www.discovermagazine.com/mind/w ... pernatural

“Our brains almost seem prewired for what I would call weird beliefs,”Christopher French.

Tangled up in this tendency are cognitive biases like patternicity: the tendency to see false connections in unrelated or meaningless data. It could explain why so many people claim that random events are proof of the recently deceased trying to contact them.

Pareidolia, the tendency to see recognizable patterns or objects in things, such as a face in a cloud, is another example. People are predisposed to seeing ghosts and ghouls where there aren’t any.

I should add that we, as homo sapiens remain oddly credulous. I just saw a poll that found 71% of Republicans still believe Trump's claim he won the election in 2020.

Though I'm reluctant to open up this can of worms, I am horribly fascinated by human capacity to follow instinctive thinking which includes ad hoc justification of a personal viewpoint and how this is the method of political thinking, religious thinking and cult -thinking, and I found that UFO - believer apologetics made just the same arguments and excuses (including science -dissing) as Creationist apologetics does. I have noted the alarming similarity between Cult -think and the Trump - cult which thrives on a string of wild claims and damn' the evidence. This goes back to the science - skeptic Tea party, Red - scare McCarthyism and the Scopes trial before that and even earlier (civil war evangelism and the flat earth town) and (I suspect) is based on the lack of a state church, sad to say. And this, even sadder to say, has been exported along with Coca cola to the whole world, though really only Islam has jumped on the Creationist band -waggon. In KL I was jumped by a bunch of girls in Burkas doing a JW, except that they were pointing to the Quran, not the Bible.

Like they say, Genesis only raises the question: "Which god?"

[Diogenes]

Flood stories are found in all cultures around the globe, or at least in all near rivers. Indeed, it would be exceedingly strange if flood stories were NOT widespread since floods are so common, thousands every year. As you say, stories grow legs. Each re-teller wants his version to get attention. These things are like fish stories

That would be true for local floods, however global flood stories would be quite a claim. Yes, global flood stories would each have their own embellishments, like all legends. But, the question is why is this found all around the world in various cultures? Not only that, the flood stories have specific details that match the Biblical account. What can account for that? I can only think of three possibilities: it could be coincidence, there was a common legend that passed on to all cultures around the world, or there actually was a worldwide flood.

When an area got flooded 3000 years ago, that indeed seemed to the chroniclers to be the (their) entire world. As for an actual global flood your claim that these stories are found around the world, we would have to examine each one individually. I don't know of such stories, tho' I have heard this claim. But as I say, each of these would have to be examined individually.

If, for example a claim of a world wide flood, with 40 days straight of rain and lasting a year and matching all the particulars of the Genesis account, were also found in North America for the same year, that might constitute powerful evidence for a true world wide flood.
On the other hand, a story from the nearby Sumerian culture, say, the Epic of Gilgamesh, this would mean little except that the scholars are correct, that the Genesis story comes from the Gilgamesh myth.

I understand that suspect sites like "Answers in Genesis" promote such claims, like those in Echoes of Ararat. I don't believe that book is taken seriously by scholars, but I haven't looked, yet. I do know that in my own undergraduate studies in anthropology, nothing of the sort was found, according to my memory, but I'll search.

Of course, there is another theory, that there was a dramatic end of an ice age that may have had world wide implications, but that hardly supports the supernatural aspects of the Noah story. As I recall, Lake Missoula was repeatedly created by huge dams of ice, which when finally released, resulted in flooding so dramatic and swift, the Columbia River basin was created. But those floods are dated 13,000 to 15,000 years ago, not 4000.

[edit] I can find no reference to that book or the author, Nick Liguori, except on AIG and Christian references. He is referred to as a civil engineer and creationist "avocational researcher" rather than as a historian, anthropologist, or scientist of any kind.

[Diogenes]

Currently, we are in Christmas season, the biggest holiday season of the year for Americans and for many around the world. This is all based on the birth of Christ. Of course, Easter season is also a major holiday.

There also has been no other single person in human history that has been more influential in books, music, arts, movies, poetry, culture, ethics, etc.
....
Yes, they [Siddhartha, Mohamed,Gandhi]
were influential, but less so than Jesus.

Is time split based on their lives? What holidays do we celebrate based on their lives? How many books, music, arts, movies, and poetry are based on these people compared to Jesus?

I understand this is your opinion, but what evidence is there about the influence of his teachings? Certainly the CULTURE has been influenced by his FOLLOWERS. Pagan celebrations of the winter solstice have been co-opted by culture Christianity. As you say, Jesus himself predicted few would follow him. He was right. That is my point. That the culture, the superficial trappings of what has become Christianity has infiltrated much of Western culture, I do not dispute.

[otseng]

Just a possible suggestion as to why flood stories are ubiquitous. When you read them, they don't look much like the Flood story.

Again, the question remains why stories would share similar details.

"Flood stories pervade hundreds of cultures and there are striking similarities to many of the accounts. It seems that at least some of these stories could be based upon actual events."
https://www.pbs.org/independentlens/blo ... d-stories/

"A good deal of similarity exists between several of the flood myths, leading scholars to believe that these have evolved from or influenced each other."
https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Great_Flood

How would cultures across the globe have influenced each other? Or if they all evolved from a single source, how could that have happened?

It just doesn't seem possible now we know the world is round and you'd have to get everything on board including whales, disease bacteria and prehistoric animals.

The FM is based on the world being round, so it's possible.

Whales or any other marine animal did not need to be in the ark. Microbes, though they could be on the ark, are pretty hardy by themselves. They can even survive in outer space.

It's been pointed out that Egypt and China do not have Flood stories, any nobody kept records of these early times like they did.

Yes, China has flood stories.

"There are many sources of flood myths in ancient Chinese literature. Some appear to refer to a worldwide deluge."
https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/en ... lood#China

Egypt had a flood myth, but it was of blood.

"The flood myth in Egyptian mythology involves the god Ra and his daughter Sekhmet. Ra sent Sekhmet to destroy part of humanity for their disrespect and unfaithfulness which resulted in a great flood of blood."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_flood_myths

I am not going to let you waste my time.

I'm simply asking for you to back up your claim. But, if you can't back it up, then we can consider your claim to be an unsupported claim.

I have said what the pre -flood deposits were - the strata under the unconformity and overlying the basal rock that you'd made a big deal about.

They are not pre-flood. The tilted supergroup was formed during the flood as I explained in post 410:

How can the angular unconformity be explained in the Grand Canyon?

The sedimentary layers are formed from rock being eroded at the mid-oceanic ridges. The tilted supergroup formation was formed by erosion of the Pacific ridge west of the American continent. After this strata was deposited, tectonic activity caused the layers to be tilted. Then the layers in the tonto group and above were formed by the continental crust eroded along the mid-Atlantic ridge.

I'd say the Bible sure ain't the true account and (as said in many other contexts) science has made its' case so often and the Bible accounts been shown wrong that maybe science deserves better than you dissing it because it doesn't support Genesis.

Here is the fundamental flaw in your argument -- I never used or appealed to the Bible when presenting the FM. I only used secular sources for my evidence. So, because the FM coincides with what the Bible says, then the FM is a priori rejected. It doesn't matter what evidence or arguments is presented. Because it happens to affirm the Bible, then it is on that basis it is rejected. How can I say this? Because this is exactly what happened when Bretz (who is not a Christian) theorized that the Washington Scablands was formed by a catastrophic flood. It was rejected by others because it sounded too much like the Bible. But, it was only later accepted when ice dams (which there was no evidence for) were proposed to have multiple, local floods instead of a single, massive flood.

There is evidence for tectonic plate movement on top of olten rock

What molten rock are you speaking of? Do you mean the molten rock at the plate boundaries? If so, it is molten only because of the forces of the plates crushing against each other, not because of any source deep within the earth.

Otseng, mate, why don't you accept that Genesis is a myth adapted from a myth, and you'd embarrass yourself less if you swallowed that and just went for cafeteria Christianity instead?

Posturing and claiming I'm embarrassing myself doesn't help your case.

(1) according to your theory of the break -up of Pangaea with the flood causing the mountains to pile up, they should be on the east of America and West of Africa, but they are on the West of America and only a continental bow -wave could cause it.

No, it does make more sense that the largest deformation would be on the west coast. The American plate was moving west. Which side of a car would you expect to have more deformation when it runs into a wall, the front or the back?

Though I'm reluctant to open up this can of worms, I am horribly fascinated by human capacity to follow instinctive thinking which includes ad hoc justification of a personal viewpoint and how this is the method of political thinking, religious thinking and cult -thinking, and I found that UFO - believer apologetics made just the same arguments and excuses (including science -dissing) as Creationist apologetics does.

Not sure who you're referring to, but I assume it's me. Regardless, attacking the person, rather than arguments, is an ad hominem fallacy and doesn't help your case either.

[Diogenes]

Otseng wrote:
Again, the question remains why stories would share similar details.

"Flood stories pervade hundreds of cultures and there are striking similarities to many of the accounts. It seems that at least some of these stories could be based upon actual events."
https://www.pbs.org/independentlens/blo ... d-stories/

"A good deal of similarity exists between several of the flood myths, leading scholars to believe that these have evolved from or influenced each other."
https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Great_Flood

How would cultures across the globe have influenced each other? Or if they all evolved from a single source, how could that have happened?

It should not be surprising that 'flood stories pervade hundreds of cultures,' since hundreds of cultures have experienced floods. Floods are catastrophic events where millions of lives have been lost, entire villages (if not cities and cultures) literally washed away. However, the more challenging argument is

... there are striking similarities to many of the accounts.

Many of these accounts share elements:
A punishing God who is angry that people have broken his laws [sinned].
The lone hero who grabs a log, builds a raft, or constructs a substantial boat.
The collection of species to use to renew the world.
A bird that is sent from the vessel as a possible indicator of land re-emerging from the waters.

After some reflection, none of these elements should surprise:
The appeal to a god who punishes 'bad' behavior is universal.
The myth of the Hero is well documented in mythology [e.g. Joseph Campbell's many works on myth, including The Hero with a Thousand Faces.
The hero building a boat is an obvious solution the the flood. What else could he do?
Obviously, when the world is being destroyed (renewed) seeds and animals must be preserved.
What more logical way would preindustrial man have at his disposal, for testing whether there is dry land, than to send out a bird to see if it returns.

But, there is another class of explanations which include the concept of syncretism:

Syncretism is the merging or assimilation of several mythologies or religions, a process well known by anthropologists.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Native ... cal-change

There is also a reporting problem, particularly in aboriginal cultures such as those in North America, where the first contacts with natives was frequently with Christian missionaries untrained in anthropology and cultural contamination, who likely tainted the culture they interacted with, and were eager to see and report creation and flood myths in ways that were similar to their own culture.

[Diogenes]

There is an additional point that has not been addressed.

With all these creation and flood myths we are expected by the Christian faction to accept absolutely only one of them, the account in Genesis. It seems the height of ethnocentric arrogance to pronounce ONE scripture out of thousands of similar traditions that represents the 'one true belief.'
Why should the Biblical account in Genesis be considered the inerrant word of God, and the one and only true account?