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

[Diogenes]

As to Joseph, since the colored coat was given to him as a mark of favour, how does that translate into the statue at Avaris which you now seem to say isn't actually of Joseph? So you are now supposing that Joseph was advisor to Senusret III and died before the Hyksos dynasty?

I've always suggested the statue in the palace at Avaris was most likely Joseph. I claimed in post 807 that Joseph would've been during the reign of Senusret III.

So, the date of entering Egypt was 1876 BC (1446 + 430).
During this time would be the Pharaohs of the 12th Dynasty:
Senusret III - 1878 BC to 1839 BC
Amenemhat III - 1818–1770 BC

But I take your point. I suppose I'd have to invest $30.95 and many hours of study in a book like ...

I likewise have invested money in books and much hours of study just for this discussion on archaeology. The amount of resources I've invested in on par with any coursework I've had in graduate school. This is hard work and not much people are willing to put in the time into this. But I'm learning a lot diving into all this and it's actually all quite fascinating.

I admire your diligence; however, resource selection may be even more important than hours of study. I don't know your bibliography, but the 'scholarship' and bias of sources like Patterns of Evidence may lead one farther away from the truth than toward it. And isn't truth the goal, rather than supporting our biases? Have you examined sources like the ones in the Christianity Today article or Grabbe's Ancient Israel?

[otseng]

Thank you. So far as I can see you can only dispute the chronology of those Egyptian kings, claim an extraordinary long life for Moses or drop his involvement with either Senusret or the Hyksos.

I'm not sure what you claim that I'm claiming. Please cite what I've claimed and how you interpret it.

(bring me me pipe and slippers and lock those doors again, Gareth..) in a debate about Paul's escape from Damascus where I pointed out that Luke (Acts) contradicts Paul's account, my opponent 'wove them together' though it amounted to 'making stuff up' whereby the Jews conspired to kill Paul by selling him out to the general of the Nabatean army.

This is not relevant to what we're discussing now - archaeology and the Exodus. This will have to be tabled until later.

. I don't know your bibliography, but the 'scholarship' and bias of sources like Patterns of Evidence may lead one farther away from the truth than toward it. And isn't truth the goal, rather than supporting our biases? Have you examined sources like the ones in the Christianity Today article or Grabbe's Ancient Israel?

Sure, truth is the goal. If you have counter-evidence, please present it. Simply stating a source has a bias does not invalidate the evidence.

As for Patterns of Evidence, again, I believe Mahoney does a good job in presenting various views and tries to be balanced. I don't believe in everything he says either. But, he does make some good points.

[nobspeople]

I've been watching this thread go on and on (up to 100 pages now!) and it enlightens me even more about christainty. Centuries of tales, witnesses, wars, deaths, converts, deconversions, church splits, arguments over what's the bible 'says' and what it 'means', evidence the bible isn't 'error proof', zero proof of god and or jesus existing... and the arguing continues. It's a very 'christian' thing.

How can we trust the bible if it's not inerrant? You can't trust it without faith. That is the answer.

Yet page after page after page of discourse on the subject, spawning new 'thought's that may or may not have anything to do with the subject. It truly is fascinated, this human need for god and to be 'right'.
Moreover, it seems christianty doesn't 'want' any real answers. It only 'wants' to discussions, arguments and publicity (not to mention your money as well as power/influence).

This testifies to christianty's ingenious methodology: create something that encourages discussion without providing any tactile proof.
Well done, authors of christianity... well done!

[TRANSPONDER]

Thank you. So far as I can see you can only dispute the chronology of those Egyptian kings, claim an extraordinary long life for Moses or drop his involvement with either Senusret or the Hyksos.

I'm not sure what you claim that I'm claiming. Please cite what I've claimed and how you interpret it.

(bring me me pipe and slippers and lock those doors again, Gareth..) in a debate about Paul's escape from Damascus where I pointed out that Luke (Acts) contradicts Paul's account, my opponent 'wove them together' though it amounted to 'making stuff up' whereby the Jews conspired to kill Paul by selling him out to the general of the Nabatean army.

This is not relevant to what we're discussing now - archaeology and the Exodus. This will have to be tabled until later.

. I don't know your bibliography, but the 'scholarship' and bias of sources like Patterns of Evidence may lead one farther away from the truth than toward it. And isn't truth the goal, rather than supporting our biases? Have you examined sources like the ones in the Christianity Today article or Grabbe's Ancient Israel?

Sure, truth is the goal. If you have counter-evidence, please present it. Simply stating a source has a bias does not invalidate the evidence.

As for Patterns of Evidence, again, I believe Mahoney does a good job in presenting various views and tries to be balanced. I don't believe in everything he says either. But, he does make some good points.

Whee...made it to 100. And I'm sorry if you have the idea that you get to decide what questions and doubts about the Bible I post, but I shall post whatever I choose with one eye on the topic.

Now you are kidding me. Surely you get the point that for someone with a half -way normal life span, if Senusret III and the Hyksos are 200+ years apart Joseph can't live in both of them.

I've been watching this thread go on and on (up to 100 pages now!) and it enlightens me even more about christainty. Centuries of tales, witnesses, wars, deaths, converts, deconversions, church splits, arguments over what's the bible 'says' and what it 'means', evidence the bible isn't 'error proof', zero proof of god and or jesus existing... and the arguing continues. It's a very 'christian' thing.

How can we trust the bible if it's not inerrant? You can't trust it without faith. That is the answer.

Yet page after page after page of discourse on the subject, spawning new 'thought's that may or may not have anything to do with the subject. It truly is fascinated, this human need for god and to be 'right'.
Moreover, it seems christianty doesn't 'want' any real answers. It only 'wants' to discussions, arguments and publicity (not to mention your money as well as power/influence).

This testifies to christianty's ingenious methodology: create something that encourages discussion without providing any tactile proof.
Well done, authors of christianity... well done!

That's a handy post about the mindset brought to the subject and (as I pointed up) Christians or Bible believers approach it as a given book of credible events until it is shown not to be.

And (unlike some Bible critics) I approach it in the same way. For a Long time I took it it as largely reliable (Back to Exodus though not the flood), give or take the miraculous aspect. And I do consider both that Bible critics have to give good reason to doubt the Bibles' veracity and that this has been done, and the problem is that most people don't know it or hear of it.

For a long time I accepted a 'woven together' gospel. The Sanhedrin trial happened even though John doesn't have one. The raising of Lazarus happened even though it doesn't get a mention in the Synoptics.

Just before I logged on I saw a bit of an online chat where someone mentioned the Penitent thief as being the only person to be guaranteed saved (because Jesus said he would be) and I was thinking 'small print'. To Paradise, yes, but not heaven, because after the crucifixion Jesus would tell Mary (Magdalene) that he hasn't yet ascended. So wherever he and thief were having their tea and biscuits, it wasn't heaven.

But nobody seems to mention that this is pretty roundly contradicted by Mark and Matthew who have both 'thieves' abuse Jesus. The Question is, "If they knew of the penitent thief, wouldn't one have mentioned it?" It's an important doctrinal point as well as a significant event. Mostly I get no response because this isn't as easy to excuse with 'didn't bother to mention it'. It's like the Transfiguration; If the writer is going to talk about the event, why not just put it in? Especially hard to explain why neither Mark nor Matthew (let alone John) would mention it. Even worse, when there is the inkling that the synoptics were based on an original gospel, then it means it was there and both Mark and Matthew edited it out.

Already I can hear the Apologetics to excuse this 'It wasn't in the original and only Luke knew about it' or (possibly) for doctrinal reasons, Mark omitted it and Matthew copied Mark. or some say that Mark copied Matthew. But that's a can of worms I prefer to leave closed.

[otseng]

I've been watching this thread go on and on (up to 100 pages now!) and it enlightens me even more about christainty. Centuries of tales, witnesses, wars, deaths, converts, deconversions, church splits, arguments over what's the bible 'says' and what it 'means', evidence the bible isn't 'error proof', zero proof of god and or jesus existing... and the arguing continues. It's a very 'christian' thing.

This qualifies as a rant or random rambling than anything substantive.

Surely you get the point that for someone with a half -way normal life span, if Senusret III and the Hyksos are 200+ years apart Joseph can't live in both of them.

As I mentioned in post 794, the Hyksos entered Egypt starting in the 12th Dynasty, so this would be the time Joseph.

"Tell el-Dab'a is an archaeological site in the Nile Delta region of Egypt where Avaris, the capital city of the Hyksos, once stood. Avaris was occupied by Asiatics from the end of the 12th through the 13th Dynasty (early second millennium BC)."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tell_El-Dab%27a

During this time would be the reign of Senusret III. In post 836, I discussed Senusret III and the alignment with his reign and what happened during the time of Joseph.

So, exactly what 200+ year gap are you referring to?

And I'm sorry if you have the idea that you get to decide what questions and doubts about the Bible I post, but I shall post whatever I choose with one eye on the topic.

It's an open forum, you can post anything you want. But, I will only be addressing one topic (or closely related topics) at a time. My time is very limited and this topic of archaeology is very broad and deep, esp the topic of the Exodus. If you want to me to address anything else, you'll have to add it to the queue and wait. And I believe one of the next topics in the queue was cosmology.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to otseng in post #995]

This qualifies as a rant or random rambling than anything substantive.

If you want to talk about random rambling, let's look at this 100+ page thread when the answer's already been addressed well before page 100!
This unsubstantive-ness that you address, while it may hurt your feelings (which is not a concern of mine) signifies a consistent thread among believers, like it or not, to which this ongoing thread attests.
Going on and on and on and on with different ideas and concepts and mind jumps. Not that this is always a bad thing, but it's worth noting, if for nothing else to succinctly trim the topic, which has already been answered.

I find it sad you don't see that, but not entirely surprising given current events.

[otseng]

Egypt had numerous festivals dedicated to various gods.

"Communal gatherings for worship took place during festivals, and as the Egyptians set a premium on enjoying life, there were many of them throughout the year. These festivals (known as heb) allowed people to experience the god intimately, give thanks for gifts that were given, and make requests for divine favors."
https://www.worldhistory.org/article/10 ... ent-egypt/

The Egyptians observed national and local festivals annually. There were many such celebrations but those listed below are among the most important and best-documented.

Wepet-Renpet Festival: The Opening of the Year - This was the New Year's Day celebration in ancient Egypt.

Wag Festival: Dedicated to the death of Osiris and honoring the souls of the deceased on their journey in the afterlife.

Wag and Thoth Festival: A combining of the Wag Festival with the birth of the god Thoth and centered on rejuvenation and rebirth.

Tekh Festival: The Feast of Drunkenness: This festival was dedicated to Hathor ('The Lady of Drunkenness') and commemorated the time when humanity was saved from destruction by beer.

Opet Festival: One of the most important festivals in which the king was rejuvenated by the god Amun at Thebes.

Hathor Festival: Held annually at Dendera, the main site of Hathor's cult, this festival celebrated the birth of the goddess and her many blessings.

Sokar Festival/Festival of Khoiak: Sokar was an agricultural god in the Early Dynastic Period in Egypt (c. 3150 - c. 2613 BCE) whose characteristics were later taken on by Osiris.

Bast Festival: This was the celebration of the goddess Bastet at her cult center of Bubastis and another very popular festival.

Nehebkau Festival: Nehebkau was the god who bound the ka (soul) to the khat (body) at birth and then attached the ka to the ba (the traveling aspect of the soul) after death.

Min Festival: Min was the god of fertility, virility, and reproduction from the Predynastic Period in Egypt (c. 6000 - c. 3150 BCE) onwards. He is usually represented as a man standing with an erect penis holding a flail. The Min Festival was probably celebrated in some form starting in the Early Dynastic Period but is best attested to in the New Kingdom and afterwards.

Wadi Festival/The Beautiful Feast of the Valley: Similar in many ways to the Qingming Festival in China and the Day of the Dead in Mexico and elsewhere, the Beautiful Feast of the Valley honored the souls of the deceased and allowed for the living and dead to celebrate together while, at the same time, honoring Amun.

Sed Festival: Usually given as the Heb-Sed Festival, this celebration honored the king and revitalized him.

The Epagomenae: The Super-added Days. The Epagomenae were not festivals, although observances could be conducted and, no doubt, rituals were performed in temples, but still are counted among others because they formed the transition in the cycle of the year between the old and the new.

The Festival of Neith, for example, united the entire nation as people lighted candles and oil lamps at night to mirror the sky and bring earth into harmony with the realm of the gods.

The Festival of Ptah was one of the earliest, honoring the creator god.

The Raising of the Djed, dates from the Predynastic Period and is another of the earliest rites observed in Egypt which came to be associated with Osiris.

https://www.worldhistory.org/article/10 ... ent-egypt/

Even slaves were given days off to worship their gods.

"As a result of those numerous religious beliefs, ancient Egyptians paid enormous reverence and adulation to the gods. It was not just an important part of their lives, it was a matter of civic and moral duty for every Egyptian, regardless of economic or social class."
https://www.worldhistoryedu.com/importa ... ent-egypt/

So, it would not be out of place for Moses to ask for some holiday vacation for the Hebrew slaves.

Exod 5:1 (ESV)
Afterward Moses and Aaron went and said to Pharaoh, "Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, 'Let my people go, that they may hold a feast to me in the wilderness.'"

But, since Yahweh was not on the approved list of Egyptian gods, Pharaoh would not allow it.

Exod 5:2 (ESV)
But Pharaoh said, "Who is the LORD, that I should obey his voice and let Israel go? I do not know the LORD, and moreover, I will not let Israel go."

Exod 7:3-4
3 But I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in the land of Egypt,
4 Pharaoh will not listen to you. Then I will lay my hand on Egypt and bring my hosts, my people the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt by great acts of judgment.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to nobspeople in post #1000]

... while it may hurt your feelings (which is not a concern of mine) ...

I find it sad you don't see that, but not entirely surprising given current events.

Moderator Comment

Please stick to comments on the debate subject and avoid personal comments about the poster, per the forum Rules.

______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics..

[Diogenes]

. I don't know your bibliography, but the 'scholarship' and bias of sources like Patterns of Evidence may lead one farther away from the truth than toward it. And isn't truth the goal, rather than supporting our biases? Have you examined sources like the ones in the Christianity Today article or Grabbe's Ancient Israel?

Sure, truth is the goal. If you have counter-evidence, please present it. Simply stating a source has a bias does not invalidate the evidence.

As for Patterns of Evidence, again, I believe Mahoney does a good job in presenting various views and tries to be balanced. I don't believe in everything he says either. But, he does make some good points.

While in a sense I agree with your "Simply stating a source has a bias does not invalidate the evidence," conclusions of experts should be examined for bias. Your cited sources all freely admit their bias is not to seek truth, but to validate the Bible through archeology. This is hardly a new endeavor.
William F. Albright is famous for this approch.
"Albright advocated "biblical archaeology" in which the archaeologist's task is... to 'prove' the Bible."*

Looking for other experts to support this theme, I found an interesting article which contains some great quotes to show the lack of evidence for the Biblical Exodus, but then goes on to suggest a plausible scenario for it.

"The whole subject of the Exodus is embarrassing to archaeologists. The Exodus is so fundamental to us and our Jewish sources that it is embarrassing that there is no evidence outside of the Bible to support it."
but this is followed by,
"We do not look for evidence from the biblical text, but we can look to it for the general context of a sojourn in, and an exodus from, Egypt, and there are three major elements.
The first is that the Israelites were slave workers in mudbrick.
...."
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/op-ed-con ... say-348464

______________________
*It's important to give the full quote, but I wanted to highlight:
'Albright advocated "biblical archaeology" in which the archaeologist's task, according to fellow biblical archaeologist William G. Dever, is "to illuminate, to understand, and, in their greatest excesses, to 'prove' the Bible."'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_F._Albright

[otseng]

Your cited sources all freely admit their bias is not to seek truth, but to validate the Bible through archeology.

Please cite where my sources state they are not out to seek the truth. Sure, they have a bias to validate the Bible, but that does not mean they are not out to seek the truth. I can as well claim those who are out to disprove the Bible are not out to seek the truth.

"The whole subject of the Exodus is embarrassing to archaeologists. The Exodus is so fundamental to us and our Jewish sources that it is embarrassing that there is no evidence outside of the Bible to support it."

Yes, I cited this at the onset in post 783. And as I've demonstrated in the past 20 pages since then, there is certainly evidence to support it.