JoeWallack

JW:
I think it would be beneficial for the Skeptical Effort to have a formal identification of Standards For Determination Of Error In The Bible as well as accompanying definitions of all related key terms. The initial purpose of this thread is to find out what level of interest in this topic exists here. If there is sufficient interest the next step would be discussion of what the Standards should be and when (if) Standards can be determined the next step would be creating a list of errors in the Bible using these standards. Here is an outline of the above:

1) Discussion of need for Standards Determining Error in the Bible.

2) Development of Standards Determining Error in the Bible.

3) Creation of list of errors in the Bible using these standards.

I'd like to know if there is already something like this on the Web.

The problem I see now by Skeptics generally not having any "official" list of errors in the Bible is that it's easier for Believers/Seekers to ignore/be unconvinced of claimed errors by various Skeptics since there is so much disagreement in general about what are errors, even among Skeptics. On the other side I would guess that some Skeptics like not having official Skeptical lists of errors because this gives the impressions of objectivity and that the individual should examine claims on both sides of the issue for themselves.



Joseph

wardy

first of all, great idea for a thread. today's burger king ("have it your way") religious ideas has crept into the church. Most christians are approaching the bible with a "what does this verse mean to me" type of attitude. That is the one of the last steps anyone should do in doing textual interpretation. It's giving the atheist a ton of ammunition to attack and rightly so. I have a few suggestions that would apply to any book including the bible that may help set a standard in interpretation. the bible however will have a few unique barriers as to the claims the book makes.

Barriers to interpretation of the Bible:
1. cultural (understanding the culture will all us to interpret the text better)
2. language (understanding the actual meaning of the words of the original languages)
3. spiritual (unique to the Bible)

Standards of interpretation: (or methods to interpret any text)
Survey the book:
1. find the who wrote it, when, why, where, audience
2. find repeated themes
3. find main ideas
4. examine the flow of thought, how does one chapter or paragraph relate to the other.

Observe:
1. What does the verse say (not what does the verse mean, this should come after the above steps)
2. what is the verb tense of the words.
3. what do words mean in the original languages?
4. how is this word used throughout the bible (example: baptism means "immersion" and does not always refer to water. a person could be immersed in about 12 different things in the NT.)
5. is the language figurative, a parable, an allegory, or historical
6. what is the flow of thought?

interpretation:
1. a person should list all possible options for interpretation (make your own multiple choice test)
2. eliminate the options that do not agree with the context

there may be a few more.

Vorkosigan

I think we should start with the concept of "error." What do you mean by "error?" Give some examples.

spin

And perhaps error attributable to whom. Reader, writer, redactor, scribe...


spin

Vorkosigan

Shit, that's practically poetry....tinker, tailer, soldier, sailor...it even scans, almost.

JoeWallack

Dr. KerVorkian: (Doctor Death to Believers)
"I think we should start with the concept of "error." What do you mean by "error?" Give some examples."

JW:
And what is "truth". Polemics has long been dominated by BizStrawmantics, created by Christianity, which is fueled by the observation that the normal rules of Logic and Reason do not apply within the sphere of Religious discussion. For most of its history publicly arguing Against The Christians was very bad for your health. It's only relatively recently that Skeptics have been able to publicly challenge Christianity and the Skeptical presentation is still largely the defensive mindset inherited where Skeptics generally limit themselves to doubting Christian Assertians rather than simply stating that Christianity is wrong (although the Prophet Bill Maher is testing the unholy water by starting to publicly criticize Christianity in the Media).

We need to apply the same Standards for determining error in the Bible that we would use to determine error outside of Religion. Your question should now be answered but for those who need points sharply explained, outside of Religion, in a Formal setting, we use Law to set Standards for determination of error. We would find the Legal definition of error in Legal Dictionaries (surprise):

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Error

"ERROR. A mistake in judgment or deviation from the truth, in matters of fact and from the law in matters of judgment."

in an Informal setting, we use Common Sense to set Standards for determination of error. We would find the Common Sense definition of error in Dictionaries:

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionar...rror&x=12&y=18

"Main Entry: er•ror
Pronunciation: 'er-&r
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English errour, from Middle French, from Latin error, from errare
1 a : an act or condition of ignorant or imprudent deviation from a code of behavior b : an act involving an unintentional deviation from truth or accuracy c : an act that through ignorance, deficiency, or accident departs from or fails to achieve what should be done:"

As you can see, the Legal definition of "error" takes the Common Sense definition and applies it to the Law.

As I see it, Dictionaries give a Range of meaning for "Error" from:

1) False statement - which would be at the narrow definition end

to

2) Inaccurate statement - which would be at the broad definition end. "Inaccurate" would include statements that are not clearly false but are clearly less than an accurate statement.

In my opinion, a list of Errors In The Bible should only include 1), False statements, but at the same time I would not criticize anyone for using 2) since technically they meet some of the definition of error.


Joseph

TRUTH, n.
An ingenious compound of desirability and appearance. Discovery of truth is the sole purpose of philosophy, which is the most ancient occupation of the human mind and has a fair prospect of existing with increasing activity to the end of time.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors...yguid=68161660

http://hometown.aol.com/abdulreis/myhomepage/index.html

CJD

Are hyperbole, exaggerations, etc., "errors"?

Vorkosigan

I don't think you quite got the gist of spin's post, Joe. Take the Acts of the Apostles. There are two versions, one slightly different and about 8% longer than the other. Are the differences "error?" What if Luke created both versions, as a number of exegetes have argued? When the scribes altered John 1:34 to say "Chosen one of God/Son of God" did they make an "error" if it was done deliberately and piously? What about deliberately and maliciously? If a document veers from the original, is it in error? If so, what if later scribes correct an error in an earlier document, for example, in 1 Cor 15 where they change "Twelve" to "Eleven" to make up for Paul's perceived error? Is that an "error?" Or is Paul's original statement the "error?" Both? Neither? If Mark deliberately but erroneously cites the Old Testament, did he really make an "error?"

Also, without an outside vector, how can you tell where the "error" is? Maybe Stephen's death was exactly as reported in Acts. Maybe Pilate really did release Bar-abbas to the crowd. After all, absence of evidence of this custom is not evidence of absence. Can we say an "error" was made? Or what?

How does this construction of "error" help us understand the documents? In Mark the Book of Esther is used to construct the tale of John the Baptist's death. Did Mark commit an "error" when he did that, or if he had a theological motive and did it on purpose, is that "error?" I don't think a focus on "error" is really instructive or constructive.

Beware the dichotomous category, my son,
the scylla that bites and the charbydis that catches,
beware the job-job burr of easy sorting,
and the luminous that comes in snatches.

JoeWallack

The Vorkmeister:
"I think we should start with the concept of "error." What do you mean by "error?" Give some examples."

JW:
Hmmm. This is starting to remind me of stand up comedy and sex. I'm up here doing all the work and you're down there making all the noise. This is an excellent related question:

What is the Source material for error determination?

I've thought long and hard about this one and first let me say that from now on Chili will be known as "Flounder" in this Forum. Secondly, the Faux back Inerrantist position that unly the original, unknown, unavailable, unused and about as useful in crisis as the un text is Inerrant reminds me too much of the classic Addams Family episode where they decide to give Cousin It a haircut and when they finish, there's nothing left.

My suggestion for Source material would be a reconstruction of the likely Original based on all available evidence such as manuscript, Church Father and common sense also known as NA (does not stand for "not applicable"). In other words, I suggest that an attempt to determine whose error it is is not necessary. I understand that it's possible that the NA is not a reconstruction of what was Originally written. Yuri's suggestion that the original Gospel was written in Jerusalem would explain some things such as how "Mark" is familiar with famous Pharasaic disputes of the time and place and how the later "outside" reviser either didn't understand this or just changed it to imply these were all original disputes by Jesus.

The bottom line is I want to create an official list of errors based on the "Bible" that current Christianity uses.



Joseph

BAAL, n.
An old deity formerly much worshiped under various names. As Baal he was popular with the Phoenicians; as Belus or Bel he had the honor to be served by the priest Berosus, who wrote the famous account of the Deluge; as Babel he had a tower partly erected to his glory on the Plain of Shinar. From Babel comes our English word "babble." Under whatever name worshiped, Baal is the Sun-god. As Beelzebub he is the god of flies, which are begotten of the sun's rays on the stagnant water. In Physicia Baal is still worshiped as Bolus, and as Belly he is adored and served with abundant sacrifice by the priests of Guttledom.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors...yguid=68161660

http://hometown.aol.com/abdulreis/myhomepage/index.html

Peter Kirby

In the United States, Protestant churches use most often the New International Version, the King James Version, or the (New) Revised Standard Version. English-speaking Catholic churches use the New American Bible or the (New) Jerusalem Bible.

best,
Peter Kirby