WILLOWTREE

Hi Steve:

I read your post.

We agree there are major grammatical errors in the Bible.

I know there are no factual errors.

Ray

FatherMithras

I believe that this is one of the most important things to remember when debating die hard believers. Nothing will change their opinion. We can bring up every contradiction and they'll call it "bad translation". We can show the factual innacuracy of the history and they'll claim "absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence" and ignore the fact we can substantiate a counter claim. They think they already know. They don't "believe" or "think" there are no factual errors. They claim to know. And thus they will never be capable of knowing the truth when it conflicts with what they want to believe. I honestly don't mind too much, because that regimented belief, once shown to be in error a single time, can cause the whole house of cards to crash down. Acquiring knowledge is a process in which you learn that you're preconceived notions are wrong, and that your new insights are wrong, over and over again as you become more and more right. Unfortunately, some people will never get there, and will continue to use belligerene instead of facts to attempt to claim the superior position (Ie Atheist philosophy, atheism is inherentyl truth suppression etc.).

Steven Avery

Hi Ray.. not exactly .. there are grammatical difficulties to the max in the alexandrian texts, which basically give the modern versions. Difficulties or unusual grammar, much less 'errors' in the Textus Receptus (behind the Geneva, KJB, etc) are comparitively few. A lot of time there is harumphing because of not understanding that our current Mark is likely a 'translation Greek'.

WILLOWTREE

God reveals Himself as a Person to an oracle nation. Science has proven that complexity and God are synonymous (logical). All appearances of contradiction are misunderstandings of this complexity. I have never been shown a contradiction that cannot be adequately explained.


There are none. I have studied under the best. The Bible contains no factual errors. I am willing to hash this out if you like.


We are believers because of the evidence.

Substitute "unbeliever" in your quote then it is really accurate.

Ray

knotted paragon

That's the point Ray, you already know it - you won't ever be shown a contradiction.

Genesis 7:23 - Never happened. Mark 9:1 - Jesus got it wrong. Hash away, please.

What evidence? Are you talking about all those moved mountains or trees uprooted and replanted? Or perhaps you had in mind your profile's basic belief, "THE BIBLE WAS AUTHORED BY GOD AND IS THE PROTECTED VERSION OF EVENTS."

Nice to know you start with an open mind Ray.

sharon45

Here is the issue with the bible:

1. Jesus speaks about his dying and resurrection three times in mathew 16:21-28, matthew 17:22-23, and matthew 20:17-19.

2. Say in time jesus and his disciples are about to have what would be named the last supper and everyone including jesus goes out to the markets for supplies.

3. Everyone except jesus comes back with their food and wine and they wait for him to arrive, but he never does show up.

4. After a long while, under much sadness, they accept the fact that jesus has left them and is probably never coming back. They do try to keep to much of what he was teaching them, but in time, they have extreme disagreements with each other on content and meanings and so much of these messages then dwindle down to almost nothingness. Eventually, the disciples decide to separate and they go back to about what they were doing before they all met.

5. A few years go by and a newer group comes into the area with some other supposedly fresh and bold ideas which sparks yet another following...

Johnny Skeptic

But why should anyone believe that the original texts were inspired verbatim by God?

Hundreds of millions of people have died without ever having heard the Gospel message. What good was the Gospel message to those people?

Why did you become a Christian? Why do you believe that God is a good God and not an evil God who is masquerading as an evil God and plans to send everyone to hell? Mark 13:22 says “For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.� Why do you believe that it is not possible for the elect to be deceived? 2 Corinthians 11:14-15 say “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.� If God is evil, and if he is omnipotent, and omnipresent, he could easily duplicate anything that it attributed to the God of the Bible.

The only way that skeptics can fairly be held accountable for rejecting the God of the Bible is if they know that he exists and still reject him. If God exists, if he clearly revealed himself to everyone, surely some skeptics would become Christians. Regarding skeptics who would become Christians if God clearly revealed himself to everyone, that would prove that they did not actually reject God, and that they deserve to go to heaven.

I am well aware that you will refuse to reply to some of my comments because they are supposedly off-topic, but I can easily open new threads to discuss those comments. If I do, will you participate?

What in the world are you talking about? Your viewer profile says that you are an atheist. Do you believe that Jesus rose from the dead or not. If not, why not?

Imnotspecial

Here is another mystery for which I would like an explanation. Matt. 2.9

How can anyone locate the house where Jesus was born, by looking at a star?

TomboyMom

I'm not sure I understand the import of your OP. Is it something like:
Christianity requires inerrancy.
The bible is not inerrant.
Therefore Christianity is a crock?

Sorry for the over simplification, but is that where you're going?

Johnny Skeptic

Although I most certainly do not believe that the Bible is inerrant, for debate purposes, my position is not that the Bible is inerrant, but that there are not any good reasons at all for anyone to believe that it is inerrant. There are good reasons to assume that the Bible is not inerrant. What good were supposedly inerrant Gospels to hundreds of millions of people died without ever having heard about them? The correct answer is, no good at all. If the God of the Bible exists, since he created Hurricane Katrina and sent it to New Orleans, we know that he is not really concerned with the welfare of mankind. Exodus 4:11 says "And the Lord said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the Lord?"

Why should anyone expect an inerrant Bible from such a God? Rather than raise his children himself, God chose to raise them by proxy (the Bible writers). What a Dad. Instead of a single parent household, God offers a no parent household. Of what possible benefit could it be for God and for mankind for God to raise his children by proxy instead of by himself? If no God exists, then it is expected that no God will ever show up in person for everyone to clearly see. If a God exists, and if he is loving and compassionate, then it is to be expected that he would clearly show himself to everyone. In addition, if a loving God exists, then it is to be expected that he would never create natural disasters and send them to kill people and destroy their property.