OneInFundieville

Having read many of the leading modern apologists, generally an apologist will not even touch this sort of thing. However when touched a common handling is that the Bible is inerrant in matters of faith and doctrine and that this is not a matter of such and that copyist mistakes may have occured but none of which involved matters of doctrinal significance.

Out of a 300 page book, typically the address of such isn't much longer than the paragraph I just gave you.

Asha'man

I thought the original hebrew had no punctuation at all?

Lucretius

You mean to tell me that the KJV is not the original version of the Bible and the people in it did not speak ENGLISH ?
I am so shocked

Roger Pearse

I'm sorry but this is to argue from a numerical error to a general principle of not knowing what the text says. If true, the same argument would cause all books to disappear since even printed books have mistakes in them.

What what?

You don't believe that, tho, so you're already working with something on which you might be mistaken. I don't think that we know how (if at all) this relates to the point at issue. In the process you have to make, without realising it, all kinds of theological and logical jumps.

Start at the other end. Start with what we do know and do believe. Start with the fact that we live in a fallible world. Everyone knows that. That is a fact.

You see, I think that all you're really doing (boiling it all down) is arguing that the bible cannot be inspired if it is transmitted like all other books. It is certainly possible to disagree. Since Christians do believe that it is possible, without having any defined view on how this is effected technically, nearly everything you repeat here misses the point. IMHO anyway.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Lugubert

"Copying error" would be more than just a case of writing the correct number of zeroes. It's a matter of different fully spelled out words for hundreds and thousands, respectively: meot vs. alfim.

gregor

Can people stop using the tired, old chestnut about how different witnesses see different things.

Of explanatory options, logic would reflect that two different groups of people recorded different versions of the fable, later and the stories were cobbled together with conflicts intact so as to not anger either camp.

blastula

No, you don't get what I'm saying. I thought it was easy enough to understand, but apparently not, so I'll go into more detail here.

The point of a numerical contradiction is that it's evidence against inerrancy, which is a fundie belief not held by all Christians.

Biblical inerrancy

The argument for inerrancy is basically a circular argument. "The Bible is inerrant because it's the word of God." And if inerrant then whatever it says is true. So to refute inerrancy (and hence that everything in the Bible is true), one way is show a contradiction. However, the common claims of contradictions usually have some ambiguity and wiggle room to reconcile the alleged contradiction. A numerical contradiction has no such ambiguity or wiggle room. 700 does not equal 7,000. (However, it has already been pointed out that my contradiction claim can be reconciled (though in a weaselly way).)

And if the only way to reconcile such a contradiction is copyist error, then what does that say about any other claim in the Bible? We couldn't know what is copyist error on any statement for which we have no other data (outside or inside the Bible).

That's silly. First, all books don't claim inerrancy, so your point is irrelevant on that fact alone. Second, it doesn't bother me if a book is not inerrant, I wouldn't ask for it to be disappeared. Who would? It could still have value. The point is not to make the Bible disappear, just to show it's not inerrant. Don't be so Bible defensive, I'm not demanding to have them all burned.

What are the doubtful theological presumptions?

Yes, I don't believe in inerrancy, but unless that Wiki description I posted is wrong, my argument stands.

I wasn't arguing that it can't be inspired if it's not inerrant. If a book has no contradictions, that's not alone proof of inspiration. Anybody can write a book with no contradictions. It doesn't take a supernatural act to do so.

I was simply arguing that a numerical contradiction disproves inerrancy, and therefore no other claim in the Bible can be asserted as authoritative if that authoritative claim relies on the doctrine of inerrancy.

Sauron

Ahem: "copying errors" and "inerrancy" are contradictions. You *do* realize that, don't you?

Excuse me?

The only so-called 'assumption' involved is to take the claim of inerrantists at face value; to wit, divine protection of the text to preserve it faithfully and without any errors. It is 'babyish' to take a group's claim on face value?

Totally irrelevant. The last time I checked, the media wasn't claiming to be divinely inspired. Nor were they trying to tell the general public that their reports were divinely protected from errors, and that people should base their beliefs and even their lives upon their news reports. Biblical inerrantists claim all this for the bible, however. Which makes your attempt to draw an analogy between the two sets of circumstances rather laughable.

As usual, Roger, your rebuttal misses the point, and deliberately so. Babyish. :devil:

sky4it

Let me put one other suggestion forward to you of this time.

I Samuel 3:19 describes Samuel as a person in relationship with the Lord who " did let none of his words fall to the ground."

Thus it seems during this time the scribes and Chroniclers were treating "those words" a little hap hazardly. Remember that God entrusted what he said to someone, who than copied that to record. Furthermore, the priests of that Era weren't only dropping God's word to the ground, they were in fact bringing hookers into the door of the temple of the Lord and having sex.

The skinny is there appeared during this era to be people who treated the Lord's word carelessly. God was impressed with Samuel, because HE DIDN'T.

Minimalist

So let's take a contradiction between Chronicles and Kings which does not involve numbers ( although, frankly, 40,000 foot soldiers at that time period is pretty absurd based on population.)

2 Kings 23

2 Chronicles 35 20-24


Certainly seems that the author of Chronicles was unsatisfied with the idea that his righteous king had been whacked by Necho on sight and decided to give him a more glorious death in battle. Sure as shit seems like one of those blasted "contradictions" to me. Especially since Chronicles seems to be a fairly late addition to the roster of holy drivel.

http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mbible2.html