Freethought & Rationalism Archive

sidewinder · 06-03-2002, 01:50 PM

If it were proven beyond a shadow of doubt that there was at least one error in the Bible, would this convince you that the Bible was not inspired by the omnimax Christian God? Explain your response. Cheers.

foursquareman · 06-03-2002, 04:11 PM

Depends what kind of error.

I don't think one error ocurring in one piece of the bible would cause me to stop believing that the bible is the inspired word of God. It would cause me to think about my beliefs (which I do all the time), but it probably comes down to what type of error?

deank · 06-03-2002, 09:37 PM

Here's one that pisses a lot of Christians off. Usually by the time I give this example I've told them that the Gospels were re-written to prove that Jesus was the Messiah.

Get out your Bible. In Isaiah 23:12, 37:22, 47:1, and 62:5 the word "virgin" was translated from "bethulah." Now go to Isaiah 7:16. The word "virgin" (possibly "young woman" if you have a "liberal" bible) is translated from "alma." "Alma" is Hebrew for "young woman," and if Isaiah wanted to say that Jesus was going to be born to a virgin, he would have used the word that can mean only virgin - bethulah. Isaiah knew, like everyone knows, that virgins can't give birth.

Now I'm guessing you know the story of Jesus' birth according to Matthew. So tell me who the liar is?

Then it moves from "the bible is Truth" to "you have to get in touch with God, don't worry about the details." I personally stopped believing the whole thing because Christianity is completely disconnected from the Old Testament. How many followers really know what God's or Jesus' real names are? Very few. Recently some brainless kid claimed that Yahweh (YHVH) was only used twice in the bible, and described a place and not God. So, I've kind of given up on showing them inconsistancies. It's like yelling at a deaf person.

-Dean

Incoherent fool · 06-03-2002, 09:40 PM

I'm not a Christian, but when I was one, I didn't believe the Bible was inspired by God. I always believed that the Bible was written by men, and of course men make mistakes. So if I were a Christian that wouldn't shatter my faith at all, and I'm sure many Christians feel the same way.

braces_for_impact · 06-03-2002, 09:58 PM

In my many discussions with xtians about bible inerrancy I have discovered many xtians that state an error in the bible would not shake their faith. Some even admit to errors within. I find it curious however that many xtians who claim that it would not shake their faith are the same that will not admit to any errors, and claim it is all a matter of interpretation. Many if not most claim that the only way to interpret the scriptures is with the holy spirit's guidance. When it is brought up that most xtian sects claim this guidance but most sects have various different interpretations of the bible, I invariably here that in so many words, "they aren't really xtians". People will believe what the want to believe.

My standing is pretty simple. Why can't you take it at face value? There are certainly plenty of instances in the bible where what is said is clearly the intent of the writer. If this god were benevolent, and his inspired word was the only path to salvation, the least he could do is make it clear and easy to understand for everyone. But instead god assumes your literate, and he wants you to make commitments to him before you can understand his word. I.E. You must accept him on faith and "into your heart" before you can interpret the scriptures for yourself. I can allow for some ambiguity in human language, but sometimes what you read, is exactly what was meant, and a critical look reveals as much.

06-04-2002, 02:33 AM

Guys,

Sadly for you there are very few Christian inerrantists here. Most of us who hang out here accept there are some errors and problems in the bible and don't care that much. If you want inerrantists pop over to CARM where you'll find plenty.

Yours

Bede

<a href="http://www.bede.org.uk" target="_blank">Bede's Library - faith and reason</a>

Panta Pei · 06-04-2002, 02:52 AM

Hey Bede, Great Site!

Now I can apply your fine apologetic techniques for a website providing ample proof that Zeus and all the Titans are real

Fantastic!

No...really...fantastic!

<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

[ June 04, 2002: Message edited by: Panta Pei ]

Answerer · 06-04-2002, 03:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by deank:
Here's one that pisses a lot of Christians off. Usually by the time I give this example I've told them that the Gospels were re-written to prove that Jesus was the Messiah.

Get out your Bible. In Isaiah 23:12, 37:22, 47:1, and 62:5 the word "virgin" was translated from "bethulah." Now go to Isaiah 7:16. The word "virgin" (possibly "young woman" if you have a "liberal" bible) is translated from "alma." "Alma" is Hebrew for "young woman," and if Isaiah wanted to say that Jesus was going to be born to a virgin, he would have used the word that can mean only virgin - bethulah. Isaiah knew, like everyone knows, that virgins can't give birth.

Now I'm guessing you know the story of Jesus' birth according to Matthew. So tell me who the liar is?

Then it moves from "the bible is Truth" to "you have to get in touch with God, don't worry about the details." I personally stopped believing the whole thing because Christianity is completely disconnected from the Old Testament. How many followers really know what God's or Jesus' real names are? Very few. Recently some brainless kid claimed that Yahweh (YHVH) was only used twice in the bible, and described a place and not God. So, I've kind of given up on showing them inconsistancies. It's like yelling at a deaf person.

-Dean

Yeah man, Deank, furthermore, the word 'angel' simply means 'messager' and the favorite word 'Satan' also simply means 'opposer'. not 'devil'.

Panta Pei · 06-04-2002, 04:12 AM

And "Hell" can sometimes mean "Arcade" or "Rock Concert"

sidewinder · 06-04-2002, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bede:
Guys,

Sadly for you there are very few Christian inerrantists here. Most of us who hang out here accept there are some errors and problems in the bible and don't care that much. If you want inerrantists pop over to CARM where you'll find plenty.

Yours

Bede

<a href="http://www.bede.org.uk" target="_blank">Bede's Library - faith and reason</a>

Bede: Why don't you care about errors and problems in the Bible? The church has always taught that the Bible is divinely inspired. No matter how you define "divinely inspired", the bottom line is that the all perfect Christian God apparently communicated errors to mankind. Yet, how is it possible for this all perfect being to communicate error since this being is all perfect? It's not possible. You either have to change the definition of your god to match how the Bible is written or the Bible was not communicated by this all perfect being that you claim exists.

06-03-2002, 01:50 PM	#1
sidewinder Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: omnipresent Posts: 234	Question for Christians on the Bible If it were proven beyond a shadow of doubt that there was at least one error in the Bible, would this convince you that the Bible was not inspired by the omnimax Christian God? Explain your response. Cheers.

06-04-2002, 02:52 AM	#7
Panta Pei Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: in the middle of things Posts: 722	Hey Bede, Great Site! Now I can apply your fine apologetic techniques for a website providing ample proof that Zeus and all the Titans are real Fantastic! No...really...fantastic! <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> [ June 04, 2002: Message edited by: Panta Pei ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-03-2002, 04:11 PM	#2
foursquareman Junior Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 63	Depends what kind of error. I don't think one error ocurring in one piece of the bible would cause me to stop believing that the bible is the inspired word of God. It would cause me to think about my beliefs (which I do all the time), but it probably comes down to what type of error?

06-03-2002, 09:37 PM	#3
deank Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: St. Simons Island, GA, USA Posts: 87	Here's one that pisses a lot of Christians off. Usually by the time I give this example I've told them that the Gospels were re-written to prove that Jesus was the Messiah. Get out your Bible. In Isaiah 23:12, 37:22, 47:1, and 62:5 the word "virgin" was translated from "bethulah." Now go to Isaiah 7:16. The word "virgin" (possibly "young woman" if you have a "liberal" bible) is translated from "alma." "Alma" is Hebrew for "young woman," and if Isaiah wanted to say that Jesus was going to be born to a virgin, he would have used the word that can mean only virgin - bethulah. Isaiah knew, like everyone knows, that virgins can't give birth. Now I'm guessing you know the story of Jesus' birth according to Matthew. So tell me who the liar is? Then it moves from "the bible is Truth" to "you have to get in touch with God, don't worry about the details." I personally stopped believing the whole thing because Christianity is completely disconnected from the Old Testament. How many followers really know what God's or Jesus' real names are? Very few. Recently some brainless kid claimed that Yahweh (YHVH) was only used twice in the bible, and described a place and not God. So, I've kind of given up on showing them inconsistancies. It's like yelling at a deaf person. -Dean

06-03-2002, 09:40 PM	#4
Incoherent fool Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 293	I'm not a Christian, but when I was one, I didn't believe the Bible was inspired by God. I always believed that the Bible was written by men, and of course men make mistakes. So if I were a Christian that wouldn't shatter my faith at all, and I'm sure many Christians feel the same way.

06-03-2002, 09:58 PM	#5
braces_for_impact Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: In a nondescript, black helicopter. Posts: 6,637	In my many discussions with xtians about bible inerrancy I have discovered many xtians that state an error in the bible would not shake their faith. Some even admit to errors within. I find it curious however that many xtians who claim that it would not shake their faith are the same that will not admit to any errors, and claim it is all a matter of interpretation. Many if not most claim that the only way to interpret the scriptures is with the holy spirit's guidance. When it is brought up that most xtian sects claim this guidance but most sects have various different interpretations of the bible, I invariably here that in so many words, "they aren't really xtians". People will believe what the want to believe. My standing is pretty simple. Why can't you take it at face value? There are certainly plenty of instances in the bible where what is said is clearly the intent of the writer. If this god were benevolent, and his inspired word was the only path to salvation, the least he could do is make it clear and easy to understand for everyone. But instead god assumes your literate, and he wants you to make commitments to him before you can understand his word. I.E. You must accept him on faith and "into your heart" before you can interpret the scriptures for yourself. I can allow for some ambiguity in human language, but sometimes what you read, is exactly what was meant, and a critical look reveals as much.

06-04-2002, 02:33 AM	#6
Bede Guest Posts: n/a	Guys, Sadly for you there are very few Christian inerrantists here. Most of us who hang out here accept there are some errors and problems in the bible and don't care that much. If you want inerrantists pop over to CARM where you'll find plenty. Yours Bede <a href="http://www.bede.org.uk" target="_blank">Bede's Library - faith and reason</a>

06-04-2002, 04:12 AM	#9
Panta Pei Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: in the middle of things Posts: 722	And "Hell" can sometimes mean "Arcade" or "Rock Concert"

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.