Is it necessary for the Bible to be inerrant?

[otseng]

Is it necessary for the Bible to be inerrant and still be authoritative? Can the Bible be authoritative while still have errors in it?

Also up for discussion is what is meant by the Bible and inerrancy.

As is the case for all debates in TD&D, it is assumed the Bible is authoritative and is not up for debate.

[polonius]

Is it necessary for the Bible to be inerrant?

RESPONSE: If it is supposed to be "God breathed" and inerrant and we have to believe it as true then it must be inerrant.

Unless, of course we are willing to admit that the Bible contains both fiction and historical errors.

It does. If fact quote a few!!!

[onewithhim]

Focusing myself in the first post: The Bible to be inerrant is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY ... because it is the only way we can be sure that what is said everywhere in there is totally truth.

If we think the Bible as containing any kind of originally written error, then it is impossible to talk about the Bible as an AUTHORITY ...

I'll tell this in another way: suppose the text X has an error and that error will give an idea Y. Obviously if we think that the Bible is authoritative we will teach Y as a truth coming from the Bible, since it is coming from X in the Bible ... but if we teach Y and X is an error, we are teaching errors based on the Bible and telling people that the Word of God is not reliable ... so, we could not use the Bible at all, since any text A, B, C, etc, could be other errors.

There can not be a single error originally written in the Bible for the Bible to be really AUTHORITATIVE. The truth can not be learned or taught from a book that is not considered to be without errors.

I assume you did not read my previous posts where I discussed why the Bible is authoritative regardless of small embellishments here or there.

Whenever a human puts anything together it will not be perfect. Moses added things that made no sense ("bridegroom of blood"), and the account about the sun stopping in its tracks ....... The sun cannot possibly stand still in the sky (or, of course, the earth could not stop turning on its axis), without dire consequences. No one has a clue what "a bridegroom of blood" means. Yet these embellishments do not neutralize the main message that is being set forth. It doesn't really matter whether or not the sun stood still or somebody is a "bridegroom of blood." The message of the Bible remains........the purpose of our existence, why there is sin and death and suffering in the world, exactly Who God is, who Christ is and what his role is in the scheme of things, what we have to do to be saved, what the future is for the earth, and so on.

[onewithhim]

Focusing myself in the first post: The Bible to be inerrant is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY ... because it is the only way we can be sure that what is said everywhere in there is totally truth.

If we think the Bible as containing any kind of originally written error, then it is impossible to talk about the Bible as an AUTHORITY ...

I'll tell this in another way: suppose the text X has an error and that error will give an idea Y. Obviously if we think that the Bible is authoritative we will teach Y as a truth coming from the Bible, since it is coming from X in the Bible ... but if we teach Y and X is an error, we are teaching errors based on the Bible and telling people that the Word of God is not reliable ... so, we could not use the Bible at all, since any text A, B, C, etc, could be other errors.

There can not be a single error originally written in the Bible for the Bible to be really AUTHORITATIVE. The truth can not be learned or taught from a book that is not considered to be without errors.

RESPONSE:

Let's begin with the first biblical contradiction.

Matthew claims that Jesus was born during the lifetime of King Herod the Great who died in 4 BC.

Luke says Jesus was born during the (6AD) Roman census of Judea.

A ten year difference. So, logically Mary had two sons named Jesus born ten (10) ears apart.

Question: How many animals did Jesus ride into Jerusalem (one or two)?

This further surrounds my point about minor discrepancies. Does it really matter exactly when Jesus was born? Does it matter how many donkeys Jesus rode into Jerusalem? Is thinking one way or another about these minor things going to matter concerning our salvation in the end?

[onewithhim]

Is it necessary for the Bible to be inerrant?

RESPONSE: If it is supposed to be "God breathed" and inerrant and we have to believe it as true then it must be inerrant.

Unless, of course we are willing to admit that the Bible contains both fiction and historical errors.

It does. If fact quote a few!!!

The Bible is "God breathed" in that it was inspired by God---NOT DICTATED. As I have commented, men wrote it down. It is amazingly harmonious as far as the main theme is concerned! Minor deviations here and there do not take away from the main message. The Bible is not perfect because God didn't write it Himself and drop it down through the clouds. Yet men have done a pretty good job of getting God's points across on the important things.

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 182 by onewithhim]

The Bible is not perfect because God didn't write it Himself and drop it down through the clouds.

If he had actually done that he might have got everything clear and concise without the need for us to interpret the quite ordinary efforts of his selected (holy) ghost writers.

Yet men have done a pretty good job of getting God's points across on the important things.

That is seriously debatable considering the hundreds of different sects that have arisen with quite different opinions of many of the points he was trying to make.

The Bible is "God breathed" in that it was inspired by God---NOT DICTATED. As I have commented, men wrote it down.

You have to wonder at the poor judgement of a god who would rely on ignorant, sinful people to record what is supposedly the most important document ever produced. The notion of inspired can be applied to all of the great works of fiction ever produced. In this instance, dictation would probably have been a wiser option.

[Eloi]

For a Jehovah's witness there is not error in the Bible, since we believe that that is involved in what is called God's inspired. Jehovah does not need to dictate something to get it correctly expressed for whoever would read it.

If someone does not understand or does not believe in what is written, that counts as a lack of knowledge, information or faith on that person, not as any kind of error in the Scriptures; that's why they are called The Word of God.

[Tcg]

If someone does not understand or does not believe in what is written, that counts as a lack of knowledge, information or faith on that person, not as any kind of error in the Scriptures; that's why they are called The Word of God.

As has been clearly displayed in this thread, their are many who have knowledge, information and faith, and yet realize that the Bible isn't error free. It is also clear that recognizing this reality hasn't stopped them from considering it authoritative.

Accusing others of lacking knowledge or of possessing lesser faith doesn't address the issue at hand. Even if this were true, and I certainly wouldn't conclude that about anyone here, it is still entirely possible that they are right.

That's why it is more productive to address the details of the issue rather than questioning the character of those who reach conclusions that differ from ours.


Tcg

[polonius]

Focusing myself in the first post: The Bible to be inerrant is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY ... because it is the only way we can be sure that what is said everywhere in there is totally truth.

If we think the Bible as containing any kind of originally written error, then it is impossible to talk about the Bible as an AUTHORITY ...

I'll tell this in another way: suppose the text X has an error and that error will give an idea Y. Obviously if we think that the Bible is authoritative we will teach Y as a truth coming from the Bible, since it is coming from X in the Bible ... but if we teach Y and X is an error, we are teaching errors based on the Bible and telling people that the Word of God is not reliable ... so, we could not use the Bible at all, since any text A, B, C, etc, could be other errors.

There can not be a single error originally written in the Bible for the Bible to be really AUTHORITATIVE. The truth can not be learned or taught from a book that is not considered to be without errors.

RESPONSE:

Let's begin with the first biblical contradiction.

Matthew claims that Jesus was born during the lifetime of King Herod the Great who died in 4 BC.

Luke says Jesus was born during the (6AD) Roman census of Judea.

A ten year difference. So, logically Mary had two sons named Jesus born ten (10) ears apart.

Question: How many animals did Jesus ride into Jerusalem (one or two)?

This further surrounds my point about minor discrepancies.


Does it really matter exactly when Jesus was born? Does it matter how many donkeys Jesus rode into Jerusalem? Is thinking one way or another about these minor things going to matter concerning our salvation in the end?

RESPONSE: Yes. It matters if the claimed word of God is factual or erroneous.

[onewithhim]

Focusing myself in the first post: The Bible to be inerrant is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY ... because it is the only way we can be sure that what is said everywhere in there is totally truth.

If we think the Bible as containing any kind of originally written error, then it is impossible to talk about the Bible as an AUTHORITY ...

I'll tell this in another way: suppose the text X has an error and that error will give an idea Y. Obviously if we think that the Bible is authoritative we will teach Y as a truth coming from the Bible, since it is coming from X in the Bible ... but if we teach Y and X is an error, we are teaching errors based on the Bible and telling people that the Word of God is not reliable ... so, we could not use the Bible at all, since any text A, B, C, etc, could be other errors.

There can not be a single error originally written in the Bible for the Bible to be really AUTHORITATIVE. The truth can not be learned or taught from a book that is not considered to be without errors.

RESPONSE:

Let's begin with the first biblical contradiction.

Matthew claims that Jesus was born during the lifetime of King Herod the Great who died in 4 BC.

Luke says Jesus was born during the (6AD) Roman census of Judea.

A ten year difference. So, logically Mary had two sons named Jesus born ten (10) ears apart.

Question: How many animals did Jesus ride into Jerusalem (one or two)?

This further surrounds my point about minor discrepancies.


Does it really matter exactly when Jesus was born? Does it matter how many donkeys Jesus rode into Jerusalem? Is thinking one way or another about these minor things going to matter concerning our salvation in the end?

RESPONSE: Yes. It matters if the claimed word of God is factual or erroneous.

I disagree most fervently. I would ask again that you explain exactly how Jesus riding on either one or two donkeys affects whether or not I am going to live forever.

[Eloi]

As I said: a true Jehovah's witness never thinks there is any originally written error in the Word of God. That is what "Jehovah's witness" means, that we are giving testimony of the declarations of God, all He have done and will do ... How can someone give testimony of "errors"? If someone thinks the Bible contains errors, then that person is not a Jehovah's witness in the practice.