Shake

Oh really? And just which translation would that be? Perhaps you could explain exactly which Bible you're talking about: the Catholic one, the Torah, or one of the many Protestant varieties. They don't all share the same books, nor the same number of them. Many people like to use the KJV, but I don't see why his version is any more special than any others. In fact, I just found this:
(emphasis added & quoted from here)

Inerrant? If theologians can't even decide on which version to use, I have a hard time swallowing claims to inerrancy, and I've not even mentioned the many glaring inconsistencies and contradictions found within its pages. So, do let us know when you can answer these challenges.

EthnAlln

What do ANY of these things have to do with its reliability?

Same question, ignoring the dogmatic, unsupported assertion in the last sentence.

And only a few languages, like English and Chinese and Spanish have millions of speakers all over the world. Does that make those languages superior to other languages? (I'm assuming when you say "as much manuscript evidence" you mean simply quantity of manuscripts. Well, duh! The manuscripts that get preserved are the ones that are popular. Are you claiming popularity is a guide to truth?)

Same comment as above. The number of printed copies of a text proves NOTHING about the truthfulness of the text itself.

Those attempts were very local. God also allowed the Quran, the Zendavesta, and the Upanishads to survive. Is that an argument for their truth?

What is there in this farrago of unsupported and/or irrelevant assertions that requires a reply? You haven't made any case for biblical inerrancy here.

crazyfingers

However, it's your OP. I think that it would be interesting if you'd try to show that the bible is "Inerrant" within this topic. The OP of course does no such thing. I think that a fresh start might be in order.

Here is a starting point, a point that is necessary for you to make your case. The only person who is qualified to say whether your bible is without error is your god, if it is, as you claim, it's word. So you'll need to demonstrate not only that your god exists, but that it believes that the bible is without error. And note that quotes from the bible will not do. They could easily be errors.

So, please show that your god exists and that in the mind of your god the bible is without error. Statements of faith as I pointed out in Post #26, don't cut it.

Johnny Skeptic

Oh I think that you do. For example, the accounts of the events at the tomb and the death of Judas are two excellent examples of confusing texts that cannot easily be understood, and which could easily have been written much more clearly than they were written if the God of the Bible exists. If any other religious book contained claims of a similar nature, you would not be so quick to try to explain them away. How can you expect to fairly evaluate the Bible when you have already made up your mind that it does not contain any contradictions?

Ridicule? Now please, whatever ridicule you have gotten is nothing compared to what the disciples and millions of other early Christians gladly endured. When I use to debate at the Theology Web, which is run by Christians, I was treated rudely by Christians on many occasions, even though I was always polite to Christians. I did not pay any attention to the ridicule. Most people use pen names, and no one knows where participants live.

If we may get back to the topic of inerrancy, what evidence convinced you that the Bible is inerrant, and that God inspired the originals?

Biff the unclean

First page of the first book

1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
1:7 And God made the firmament and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

The whole second day of creation spent building an ocean in the sky and a firmament. Later it tells how this firmament is as hard as beated brass and how it has doors and even flood gates.

Have you ever flown in an airplane BJ?

Jobar

To prove the Bible inerrant, BJ, you're going to have to address each apparent error and show how it isn't *really* erroneous. Simply declaring that it's inerrant cuts no mustard. It requires an astonishing and infuriating degree of blind arrogance to even make the assertion of inerrancy, without addressing the blatant contradictions, fallacies, and inaccuracies that exist in the book- several of which we've pointed out here.

Johnny Skeptic

Hey, I can't help it if Bible John likes to have discussions with me. He has certainly made replies to people other than me in this thread. One reason that Bible John likes to have discussions with me is because I do not insult him. To his credit, he is only defending that which he believes is true. In addition, he has admitted on several occasions in some other threads that he was wrong, and he has apologized for his behavior on certain occasions. That is quite rare for a fundie, at least from what I have seen at these forums during the past two years.

Sure, Bible John has wacky ideas that do not make any sense, but what fundie has any ideas that make any sense?

bobhope2112

You crack me up, Bible John. Did I mention that I'm the Director of an intergalactic software design and catering amalgam?
How does she feel about your whole women should never be in authority over a man schtick? Or, have you had the good sense not to whip that one out yet?

Alethias

Many christian women agree with that one. If he whips it out on her she might just oooh and aaah and get all excited over it.

Johnny Skeptic

It is not likely that the Bible is inerrant, and that God inspired it. An inerrant and inspired Bible quite naturally indicates a desire that people have access to it, and we know that it was God's intention to make sure that hundreds of millions of people died without hearing the Gospel message because that is exactly what happened, assuming of course for the sake of argument that the God of the Bible exists. Since God deliberately withheld the Gospel message from hundreds of millions of people who died without hearing it, why would he want anyone to hear it?

If the universe is naturalistic (I am not saying that it is), the Gospel message would have been spread according to the prevailing methods of communication, transportation, printing, and translation of a given time period. Those means are entirely secular. On the other hand, if a God exists, and inspired the Bible, and wanted people to have access to it, he certainly would not depend upon human effort over millennia to make it accessible to people.

A child is much more likely to become a Christian if his parents are Christians. This means that God discriminates against the children of skeptics. In the U.S., a much higher percentage of women become Christians than men. This means that God discriminates against men. A much smaller percentage of elderly skeptics become Christians than younger people. That is because elderly people are much less likely to change their worldviews than younger people are. This means that God discriminates against elderly sketpics. If God performs miracle healings today, it is not even debatable that he always discriminates against amputees. However, to God's credit, when he creates hurricanes and kills people with them, he does not discriminate against anyone, and he does not discriminate against innocent animals.