I think the conversations concerning the Apocrypha in particular have been had to death, but if somebody wants to make a point on that I won't complain much.

This is open discussion, though it may end up a 10v1 debate. :P

I'd like to come right out and admit that my primary source will the Skeptics Annotated Bible, as this means much of my work has been done for me. Check it out: you'll see an obvious anti-Christian tone, but I don't think anybody can default to the "they've taken it out of context!!" excuse. If I'm unsure, I'll check up on facts. They use specific verses, so I might just need to read the passage in its entirety if it comes down to it.
Anyway, just didn't want you guys to think I'm trying to pass myself off as clever.
(i.e. set up a question, then yell "PWNT! GOTCHA!")

------------------

now, before, I must get one thing out. Stuff like the Skeptic's Annotated Bible and other such literature on the web that lists out "contradictions" are pretty much entirely crap. Out of a "dare", I took a short time to refute a section of it. Incredibly easy, most are taken out of context. Translate the hebrew word here, show the surrounding verses there. Voila!
They've tried to hard as to get the Hebrew poetry's "comparison and contrasts" to prove it was contradictory. I have little respect for those sources.
I'd much rather a real person come with a real questions, as opposed to copying and pasting off a hack job of a site like that.

anyhow, on to the devil's advocate.

The biggest doubt in my mind is the Old Testament. Much of it seems to be form the structure of the Jewish Culture(leviticus, numbers, etc) and not necessarily applying to us. I understand that it forms the foundation and the "introduction" of what was to come, but is it a foundation of Authority for us?

Second, would be the letters. Now, this is different. I understand it's relevance to the Church, but I wonder if their fully inspired by God. I know their a filled with wisdom and knowledge, but are they unfallible?
What if they are most the Word of God?
The one thing I do not doubt over would be the Gospels and the Words of Jesus.

A council a couple hundred years later got to together and decided what was canon and what wasn't. What makes them the authority? What if they were wrong, just like church councils over the last 2 millennia?
What if God's word isn't so simple as to be caught in one book (or 66), which contains maybe not a full copy, but maybe even an incomplete one.

What if they only way to truly receive the pure word of God is through prayer?

I would love to here your guy's responses and this matter I am proceeding with prayer.

------------------
"The generation of random numbers is too important to leave to chance."
Soterion Studios

Again, its free-form discussion, but consider this: There may exist a contradiction in the KJV that "shouldn't be there" according to the original language. No need to rule out the original versions, especially as we'll potentially be examining the validity of the versions that modern Christians accept as flawless.

------------------

anyhow, there might be contradictions between translations, but you can't claim they exist until you prove it.

------------------
"The generation of random numbers is too important to leave to chance."
Soterion Studios

Well, here is my current angle on the scriptures. They are infallible in the original delivery.

Even in a strictly literal, word-for-word sense, one of the problems with translation is that the languages just do not line up perfectly. I have been made keenly aware of this while attempting to learn my wife's native tongue. There are words and even whole concepts there that cannot be completely specified in English with anything short of writing a paragraph. I haven't done a study on all the words in the bible but I am sure there are cases like these.

Beyond any literal incongruence, there are also idiomatic expressions. These are like "Knock it off!" in English having nothing to do with knocking something.

And in addition to idioms are cultural metaphors that don't line up with our metaphors. An example of this is when Elijah taunts the Baal worshipers about their god saying he's "on a journey". Fairly recent literary research seems to suggest that this was a cultural metaphor for "on the can", which of course is an English(American?) cultural metaphor for urination/defecation done in a private manner, making the person unavailable.

Also, omission does not prove contradiction. The Bible was not written to be complete, just accurate. If Jesus said something at some location at some point in time, and another part says he said something else, this doesn't mean they conflict. He could have (and most likely) said both things. Along these same lines, the authors of the books of the Bible often summarize events or quotes that weren't personally important to them.

I'm looking forward to this discussion! How are we going to start it? Is someone going to pick an apparent contradiction and we'll all hack at it?

I don't particularly feel like analyzing each entry in the skeptics bible. Most are foolishly written by angst-ridden unilingual atheists who are not approaching things from a literary and/or cultural view.

For instance, first off in Genesis, those quibbling about the "two creation accounts" don't understand that this pattern of detailed account and summary is a common literary structure in the Bible. But since Americans don't do things like that there "must be a contradiction there!"

So, can you find a few that really get your goad and we'll look at them?

God Bless!

------------------
Sam Washburn

Check out my CCN SpeedGame 2 Blog

Scripture contains analogies, metaphors, exaggerations, personification of inanimate objects, etc. It uses common language to describe things in everyday terms. If we read the Bible according to the kind of literature that it is, a lot of the contradicting passages are plainly seen to not be in opposition at all.

Still, it's very helpful to look at some of these hurdles that people come up against. I've often played the part of the skeptic on this topic, and tried to honestly work through these issues over the years as I've struggled to accept the Bible as God's scripture. There are some very difficult passages in scripture -- many of which I'm still not entirely sure how to handle.

Along with Sam, I too am looking forward to the discussion. This is an issue that I've wrestled with on-and-off for a long time -- it's like an old enemy that has gradually become my friend. I'm by no means an expert on it, but I'll be happy to discuss and contribute what little I have gleaned over the years.

So Crazyish -- where would you like to start?

--clint

[This message has been edited by HanClinto (edited August 24, 2007).]

It's a perfect illustration of why translations are not considered infallible, but the original autographs are. The original language makes mention of both "pillars" and "rib pillars", which many of the translations punt rather poorly.

------------------
Never Forget to Pray!

"...prayer itself is an art which only the Holy Ghost can teach us. He is the giver of all prayer. Pray for prayer---pray till you can pray; pray to be helped to pray, and give not up praying because you cannot pray, for it is when you think you cannot pray that you are most praying. Sometimes when you have no sort of comfort in your supplications, it is then that your heart---all broken and cast down---is really wrestling and truly prevailing with the Most High."
Charles Haddon Spurgeon, from the pamphlet, "Effective Prayer"

I think to begin with, we can avoid the "conceptual contradictions" (here it says its ok, here it isn't) as many of these are wildly subject to interpretation. So for the first one, I'll submit a contradiction of factual accuracy:

Father of Kish

A)1 Samuel9:1
Now there was a man of Benjamin, whose name was Kish, the son of Abiel.

B)1 Chronicles 8:33, 9.39
And Ner begat Kish.

This appears to be the same Kish, father of Saul. Perhaps a 'son' doesn't indicate a direct father-son relationship? How much does a contradiction like this matter? Well for those who claim the Bible to be true because it holds no mistakes... this might be a bit of a problem.

[By the way, it seems that the SAB uses the KJV.]

------------------

Good choice!

I'm not the most learned one on this subject, but I think the best way to understand this one is to realize how the Hebrews often listed geneology. Israelites were "sons of Abraham", but yet Abraham only had two direct sons -- the rest of them were his descendents.

It's not always clear as to when someone is a direct "son of David" or when he's a "descendant of David", as Hebrew (I believe) used the same word for both meanings.

I don't necessarily expect that to be a satisfactory answer, but that's my initial response, and from how I've seen this used elsewhere in scripture, it's the answer that I'm very comfortable with.

--clint

[This message has been edited by HanClinto (edited August 24, 2007).]

It looks as though Abiel, and Jeiel are two names for the same person. Abiel means “God is my father”, while Jeiel means “Carried away by God”, both of which speak to his attitude toward his relationship with God.

The hints from 1 Samuel 9 and 1 Samuel 14:50-51 tell us that Abiel/Jeiel was grandfather both to Abner and Saul; to Abner through Ner, and to Saul through Kish. If you look back to 1 Chronicles 9:35-39, You can see that the Kish mentioned as Saul’s father is not the son of Ner (verse 39), but the brother of Ner (verse 36).

It's not clear from a surface glance at the text, but a little digging brings out what the truth is.

------------------
Never Forget to Pray!

"...prayer itself is an art which only the Holy Ghost can teach us. He is the giver of all prayer. Pray for prayer---pray till you can pray; pray to be helped to pray, and give not up praying because you cannot pray, for it is when you think you cannot pray that you are most praying. Sometimes when you have no sort of comfort in your supplications, it is then that your heart---all broken and cast down---is really wrestling and truly prevailing with the Most High."
Charles Haddon Spurgeon, from the pamphlet, "Effective Prayer"

------------------
Never Forget to Pray!

"...prayer itself is an art which only the Holy Ghost can teach us. He is the giver of all prayer. Pray for prayer---pray till you can pray; pray to be helped to pray, and give not up praying because you cannot pray, for it is when you think you cannot pray that you are most praying. Sometimes when you have no sort of comfort in your supplications, it is then that your heart---all broken and cast down---is really wrestling and truly prevailing with the Most High."
Charles Haddon Spurgeon, from the pamphlet, "Effective Prayer"

Perhaps now we try something more conceptual, but I'm going to let somebody else bring it to the table. I can pull junk from the SAB all month: I'd like to see the issues you guys actually care about. If a day or two goes by and nobody posts, maybe I'll go ahead and bring up another one.

------------------

I believe God's message is perfect; however, God sends this message to us, humans. So at the minimum we have

God
|
|
Human

Then we record this, tell others who record this, etc ... So we have

God
|
|
Human
|
|
Recorded

Then we have translations of recorded material that was received by someone from God (or inspired). This translated material must then be received by someone who interprets it.

God
|
|
Human
|
|
Recorded
|
|
Human
|
|
Human

This is a minimum situation. As we all know we humans are not perfect. We sin, fail, screw up, mis-interpret, mis-translate, even mis-represent and incorrectly describe at times. So we have the initial layer of this human error potential. The person who either receives the message from God, is inspired by God, or experiences events involving God's direction. At this level alone said person can mis-interpret God's intentions. Also said person can mis-represent God's intentions. Whether simple or large, who knows.

Then said person (or someone said person communicates to) must scribe this down in some written format. This leaves another chance for human error. Maybe this person isn't as articulate or as defined as they could be. Maybe they leave parts of a message too general, or use words that make sense to them but don't make the same sense to others.

Next someone receives the scribed material and translates it. This re-introduces a large chance for human error. To translate correctly someone needs to understand the context of the message. Even if the original scribe was perfect in reflecting this (unlikely) it's still difficult to do so between two different languages. So this person has many chances to insert human error into the equation.

Finally (and maybe even more human variables in between) someone reads this text. They already start at a disadvantage, they may be getting a different message than the original scribed one, nevertheless the original message from God. Another chance for human error in interpreting the message as well as a large time different between when the message took place and the end reader consumes it... which makes context much more difficult without in depth study.

To me these are a LOT of human variables. I believe the message of the Bible is fully in tact and true, though I definitely don't believe it is perfectly interpreted, expressed, written, interpreted, written, and interpreted yet again. Considering we humans are in fact very much not perfect there is a lot of room for error.

Thats why I strongly believe in bible study with logical evaluation coupled with a very personal relationship with Jesus.

That said I do not believe the Bible contradicts itself and as others have expressed I often find when people say it does they are taking things way out of context. Usually people trying to form the pieces into disproving the Bible, rather than rationally approaching it.

------------------
Matthew Langley
Lead Documentation Engineer
GarageGames

This was meant to be encouragement for us all. It conforts me that even the big questions of scripture have turned out understandable when devoting to read.

May God bless us with the wisdom and understanding.

------------------
Psa 32:5 I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the LORD; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah.

[VoHW] (Help needed) [Blog] (Contact) - Truedisciple (mp3)

[This message has been edited by jari (edited September 06, 2007).]

I don't believe the Bible ever contradicts itself, for nearly 2 millennia people have tried to find contradictions, but it has stood the test of time through intense scrutiny. It's possible that translations are translated inaccurately to a very small extent with the message still getting across, but I believe the originals have no errors but are perfectly as God wants them.

Many of the skeptics I've seen really love the King James Translation, which was completed in 1611, but it's a fact that language does not remain the same over time... but it changes. There are problems with idiom's that we don't understand from other cultures as well. If we set out with an agenda to prove something false then a lot of the times we end up seeing what we want to see.

I really encourage believers and non-believers to look at the bible like they never have before, with no preconceived ideas about what you want to find. Take the time to really observe what you read. I've started doing this lately and it's amazing the things that we just skip right over sometimes (maybe I'm the only one who does that?) ... anyway I didn't mean to get off on a rant

God Bless,

------------------
They will know that we are Christians by our love.

[This message has been edited by brandon (edited September 06, 2007).]

that being said first of all you have to understand that GOD is in control if he gave us his word what makes you think he wouldn't protect his word from things that invalidate it's accuracy and truth.

i believe the BIBLE is absolutley true down right to every single verse and word. but in translations if you look at what the translation in one language says and what another says they may use different words but the same meaning
for example take the phrase where JESUS said "ask and ye shall receive" some languages may say beg instead of ask this is why you should follow the SPIRIT not the letter but i'd leave what the true meaning of that phrase is to you.

when we say what a man says/writes is inspired of GOD in my opinion it means that the person is being led and is filled with the SPIRIT of GOD.

and all 66 books of the HOLY BIBLE are written by people who were filled with the SPIRIT of GOD and were being led by the SPIRIT of GOD when they wrote what they wrote.

and some parts like the torah were directly dictated by GOD.

as far as people adding/substracting stuff from the BIBLE the people who actually had access to he scriptures through out the ages were to the best of my knowledge(mostly) people who really feared GOD and if they didn't fear GOD they really had no reason(but this is all my opinion).

i don't know about you guys but when i read the BIBLE the LORD helps me understand the words i read .and to all of us who have recieved JESUS CHRIST as our LORD and personal SAVIOR we have received the HOLY SPIRIT.
who was with and or in the people who wrote the books in the BIBLE

this one of the ways how false teachings start out and false religions whe n people try to deny the accuracy and truth of the word of GOD.
then they start to tell you which part is true and which part is added and which part was taken out that's how entire fake religions start out(including catholics,mormons,etc..and even islam they took part of the scriptures and made it they wanted it to be) .
when JESUS told us to dig through the scriptures he knew that the scriptures were true and accurate other wise he wouldn't have told us to do so. and if anyone was going to add/subtract something from his Word he would have warned us.

and my advice to you is if you are in doubt that the HOLY BIBLE has parts not true i think you should pray about the doubt you have.and even if it does ask the SPIRIT of GOD to help you and guide you in his Word.
and that you may not spread this doubt and despising you have towards the HOLY BIBLE and spread it making other confused and even lost people doubt about the faith they have.

and keep in mind that faith comes through knowledge and when you doubt the very origin of this knowledge(the BIBLE) you are doubting the faith.

and don't forget there is a reason it's called the HOLYBIBLE it's because it's HOLY and when you criticize it you are criticizing something that's HOLY.

------------------
John 14:6

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Langley:

God
|
|
Human
|
|
Recorded
|
|
Human
|
|
Human

This is a minimum situation.

---

Indeed it is, and it is interesting to note that it is actually far more complex than most people realize. How many remember that a significant portion of Daniel was written, not in Hebrew, but in Aramaic? How many realize that parts of the New Testament were originally written, not in Greek, but in Hebrew/Aramaic? For example, from the writings of the earliest Christian disciples of the Apostles, we know that Matthew was not written in Greek at all, but was translated into Greek by John Mark. Matthew wrote in Hebrew/Aramaic (I have those two together when referring to New Testament passages because I find it sometimes confusing as to which dialect they are actually talking about when they refer to these two in New Testament reference). When Jesus spoke, it is likely that He actually spoke in Hebrew/Aramaic, which would mean that His discourses were translated right off.

So, when we consider the doctrine of Innerrency, where is the innerrency? According to that doctrine, we believe that the Holy Scriptures are innerrent in their original autographs. In other words, when Matthew wrote down his gospel account the first time, it was guided and guarded by the Holy Spirit to be without doctrinal or factual error. The same would be true of Mark’s gospel account, and of Paul’s letters, etc. Whatever language they wrote the originals down in—even if that meant translating as they wrote—that original was without doctrinal or factual error. Note that this does not cover any copies, but only the originals.

So, how do we get back to the originals? We do this by the science of Textual Criticism, whereby various copies of an ancient document are compared to each other in order to figure out what was actually in the original. This can be done because when you have multiple hand-made copies of an original document, while every copy will have errors, those errors will be different from copy to copy, so, essentially, you can compare the content of the copies to figure out what the original actually said. Now, even that is not without error—but it is pretty reliable.

------------------
Never Forget to Pray!

"...prayer itself is an art which only the Holy Ghost can teach us. He is the giver of all prayer. Pray for prayer---pray till you can pray; pray to be helped to pray, and give not up praying because you cannot pray, for it is when you think you cannot pray that you are most praying. Sometimes when you have no sort of comfort in your supplications, it is then that your heart---all broken and cast down---is really wrestling and truly prevailing with the Most High."
Charles Haddon Spurgeon, from the pamphlet, "Effective Prayer"

It's difficult because my Faith hinges upon it so much. My Faith is built upon the foundation that God can be trusted.

If God can be trusted then His Word should also be trusted. If I can't trust His Word as Truth how can I trust Him? Over 90% of what I know of God comes from His Word. If His Word contains errors, there is no way for me to know what bits are true and what bits are false. So I'm forced to discard it all.

Psalm 119:160 "The entirety of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous judgments endures forever. "

I've tried looking into Textual Criticism and the like, all it did was confuse me.

This topic then leads into the question of the Sovereignty of God. does His sovereignty extend to His Word and its purity of Truth? Is He sovereign over it at all? Or does He allow man to corrupt it, twist it and pervert it beyond repair. Does He allow human failings to interfere with copying?

I take the stance that either the Bible is 100% trustworthy or 0% trustworthy. This is the Word of God, this was given to the church to teach us about God, about His statutes and principles and about Him. By God's very nature it needs to be totally true.

so just like the apostle paul said in his letter to the galatians even if an angel came down from heaven and told me something that contradicts the Gospel i will not believe him and the same goes to anyone that says anything contradicting the gospel of the LORD JESUS CHRIST.

------------------
John 14:6

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

quote:

---

Originally posted by spade89:
we say the BIBLE is true because we have faith that it's true and we know it's true. not because of facts and not because it has been proved to us by someone who has done extensive research but because of faith.

---

We say that God exists because He does. Whether or not we believe it, it's still the way things are.

Similarly, we say that the Bible is true because it is. I have faith in the Bible because the Bible corresponds with reality. Faith is not a blind faith -- it's a trusting faith -- trusting in the evidence. Abraham's faith in God to sacrifice Isaac was not a blind faith -- God had led Abraham through many things and already performed the miracle of giving Abraham Isaac as a son -- Abraham's faith was not blind -- it was trusting in the evidence that he had.

Even if you examine and believe that a piece of glass is bulletproof, faith is trusting in the evidence and being willing to stand behind the glass as someone else pulls the trigger. Me believing (or even "knowing") that the glass is bulletproof isn't enough to save me from death -- the glass itself must be true.

You could have meant something along those lines, but I just wanted to clarify.

I don't think that I would have quite the faith that I do if it weren't for apologetics to confirm the factual reality of scripture.

I don't think that looking for confirmation of faith with questions is necessarily bad -- Jesus honored Thomas's questions by giving him hard physical facts to bolster his faith. He didn't appear to Thomas and say, "You of little faith -- you should have just blindly believed!" -- not at all. Rather, He said "Here, put your hand here and feel that it is true."

I don't discount the value of facts in bolstering faith.

Even so, it's quite easy for me to want to be the forever skeptic. At some point, we have to just take the evidence that we have and trust in truth -- to do otherwise would leave us locked in a "paralysis of analysis." I don't feel that we should really go actively looking for doubt -- plenty will come to us at the appropriate times.

quote:

---

Originally posted by spade89:
by seeing what JESUS has done in my life i am able to believe his word the HOLY BIBLE as truth all the way...

---

--clint

[This message has been edited by HanClinto (edited September 18, 2007).]

our faith in GOD is a reality that cannot be changed and it can be proved to us by what GOD has done/will do/is doing in our lives.

the faith atheists have is a faith in their own intellect and a faith in their own foolish imaginations(the same goes more or less for believers of other religions).

quote:

---

We say that God exists because He does. Whether or not we believe it, it's still the way things are.

---

i didn't say anything about that but i agree.

quote:

---

Similarly, we say that the Bible is true because it is. I have faith in the Bible because the Bible corresponds with reality. Faith is not a blind faith -- it's a trusting faith -- trusting in the evidence. Abraham's faith in God to sacrifice Isaac was not a blind faith -- God had led Abraham through many things and already performed the miracle of giving Abraham Isaac as a son -- Abraham's faith was not blind -- it was trusting in the evidence that he had.

---

tht was what i meant in a way but what i was saying is the fact that the BIBLE is the true word of GOD does not change by any evidence/proof brought by any human.

quote:

---

I don't think that I would have quite the faith that I do if it weren't for apologetics to confirm the factual reality of scripture.

---

quote:

---

I don't think that looking for confirmation of faith with questions is necessarily bad -- Jesus honored Thomas's questions by giving him hard physical facts to bolster his faith. He didn't appear to Thomas and say, "You of little faith -- you should have just blindly believed!" -- not at all. Rather, He said "Here, put your hand here and feel that it is true."

---

from your statement you are saying that other than thomas all the other disciples were having blind faith and the doubting of thomas was real faith and i disagree with that.

you don't need evidences in faith because as hebrews 11:1 says "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for,the evidence for things not seen." so faith is evidence by itself.

and doubting is something JESUS never encouraged but believing.

------------------
John 14:6

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

quote:

---

Originally posted by spade89:

JESUS also said that a sign from heaven would not be shown to this generation only a sign like the time of jonas(if i am not wrong).
what thomas did by doubting is not a good example because JESUS said blessed are those who don't see but yet believe and as the apostle paul said(i think) hope that is seen is not hope at all.

---

But Jesus was referring to the generation of that time. And we must consider what are these signs such as the sign of Jonah.
Because even today miracles happen. People are healed and the speaking in tonguages is a sign in one sense.

quote:

---

Originally posted by spade89:

and doubting is something JESUS never encouraged but believing.

---

That's true.

Thanks to God for His word and how we can not only find it to be true, but also experience it as doers of the word. I believe Jesus instructed us to keep His commandments and build upon God's word because it builds our faith to a solid base that cannot be moved.

Faith comes from the word it self, it's living word and daily bread. And when we grow in spirit we may gain intelligence but we cannot measure spiritual growth in the same way.

From my personal experience I can say that I have found it to be fully God's word by reading.
Thanks to Lord for this! For giving the hunger to the word and for the understanding.

May God bless all with such hunger everyday, so that we may read and see the truth.

quote:

---

Originally posted by spade89:
our faith in GOD is a reality that cannot be changed and it can be proved to us by what GOD has done/will do/is doing in our lives.

---

quote:

---

Romans 8:16
The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God's children.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by spade89:
i don't really know what apologetics are but as far as i am concerned the faith i have did not come because anyone proved to me the BIBLE was true as the matter of fact i didn't even know about stuff like the septugaint and others and the origin of the BIBLE until recently .

---

I agree, you can't argue a skeptic into the Kingdom of God -- that's not the point of apologetics. The goal of apologetics is to fill something very similar to what this thread is asking for -- answers to honest questions (and doubts) about the Bible, and our traditional interpretations of it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by spade89:
JESUS also said that a sign from heaven would not be shown to this generation only a sign like the time of jonas(if i am not wrong).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by spade89:
what thomas did by doubting is not a good example because JESUS said blessed are those who don't see but yet believe and as the apostle paul said(i think) hope that is seen is not hope at all.

from your statement you are saying that other than thomas all the other disciples were having blind faith and the doubting of thomas was real faith and i disagree with that.

---

Jesus does indeed say there that "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." But that doesn't mean that we still don't have evidence. The very next verse contains "...these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ..." -- even though we don't see Jesus physically, He still gives us evidence. It is then up to us to trust in the evidence.

quote:

---

you don't need evidences in faith because as hebrews 11:1 says "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for,the evidence for things not seen." so faith is evidence by itself.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by spade89:
and doubting is something JESUS never encouraged but believing.

---

Thanks for the discussion!

Crazyish, I hope you're not feeling this is a derailed hijack of your thread? Are you okay with this discussion, or have you sortof tuned out for a bit?

--clint

[This message has been edited by HanClinto (edited September 19, 2007).]

quote:

---

Apologetics is essentially what people do when they show how well the Bible corresponds with reality. Basically, it's showing people proof that the Bible is what it says it is -- the trustworthy word of God.
I agree, you can't argue a skeptic into the Kingdom of God -- that's not the point of apologetics. The goal of apologetics is to fill something very similar to what this thread is asking for -- answers to honest questions (and doubts) about the Bible, and our traditional interpretations of it.

---

On this note, does anyone know of an Apologetics site that doesn't resort to 'copyist error' for everything they can't explain?

------------------
Sam Washburn

Check out my CCN SpeedGame 2 Blog

Any problems involving dates and/or numbers Carm throws the "copyist error" at it.

I've done some brief research (about an hour) regarding this problem of the "copyist's error" cop-out. I've looked through the carm.org website and while I haven't had enough time to parse each one, I've just grabbed a couple. As far as I can tell these really could be copyist's errors.

Here are the ones I used:

2 Samuel 8:4 and 1 Chronicles 18:4

1 Kings 4:26 and 2 Chron. 9:25

A Google search for copyist's error -bible" Turned up this: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=31007

A comment on that thread turned up this a broken link http://www.tektonics.org/copyisterrors.html that I was able to find: http://www.tektonics.org/af/copyisterrors.html
Which actually addresses one of these verses and also includes a quote that I thought was interesting; a rebuttal to a rather uneducated skeptic's comments.

quote:

---

Our subject makes several snide comments about those who resort to textual problems to harmonize conflicting texts. And the student must indeed be careful not to wash real problems in Scripture away by the plastic elastic "copyist's error" solution. Yet, skepticism of our subject's flavour might do itself a favour and investigate the reasonableness of the hypothesis that a transcriptional error has in fact occurred. It is easy in any field to throw questions around and it is quite easy to make one's opinions so forceful that the reader somehow excuses the one with the forceful opinion from having to investigate whether the opinion is actually well-founded. We students of these problems should not be rattled by emotional ejaculations that have no basis in facts. As there are good problems in Scripture to take our lifetimes up, we should realize that skeptical bluster will froth and foam in large quantities over other passages, even if this one gets solved eventually. Right now, as stated, there seem to be two somewhat reasonable conjectures for this difference in accounting, the oft-attacked "copyist error" being in my opinion the better of the two. The student can be reasonably satisfied [without further facts] at these conjectural solutions. But, if these solutions are not correct, I am personally at a loss to explain the difference.

--Eric Vestrup

---

So, while it is possible to use the "copyist's error" simply as a cop-out. It can be a valid reason in textual critism, even in ancient documents other than the Bible.

Perhaps a related question would be, how far does inerrancy go? Are copyist errors enough reason to invalidate the Bible?

My personal beliefs as stated about is that the bible is infallible at the point of delivery. I still find it amazing, given the size of the Bible, that there are only 10,000 textual variants and less than 40 places in the NT where we are really not certain which reading is original; given the number of books, authors, the time span, the varied languages, and that each was copied by hand.

Any other thoughts?

God Bless!

EDIT: I just realized I didn't answer your question. From what I can see the http://www.tektonics.org/ site, though it mentions copyist errors, seems to be well-rounded in their analysis of these type of passages.

------------------
Sam Washburn

Check out my CCN SpeedGame 2 Blog

[This message has been edited by samw3 (edited September 20, 2007).]

I call it a copout because I've looked at a couple of the copyist error ones and found them to be no such thing.

One example (can't remember references) is the age of man becoming king. One said 18 the other 32, I think.

Most places say copyist error. Another place looked further and found one to be physical age the other a dynasty age.

"2 Samuel 8:4 and 1 Chronicles 18:4"

http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/700or7000.html

This site gives a few suggestions.

"1 Kings 4:26 and 2 Chron. 9:25"

This one I know.

1 Kings 4:26 Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen. (NKJV)

2 Chronicles 9:25
Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen whom he stationed in the chariot cities and with the king at Jerusalem. (NKJV)

One says forty thousand stalls OF horses FOR chariots.
Other says four thousand stalls FOR horses AND chariots.

40'000 horses, 4'000 chariots, ten horses pull each chariot.

quote:

---

Perhaps a related question would be, how far does inerrancy go? Are copyist errors enough reason to invalidate the Bible?

My personal beliefs as stated about is that the bible is infallible at the point of delivery. I still find it amazing, given the size of the Bible, that there are only 10,000 textual variants and less than 40 places in the NT where we are really not certain which reading is original; given the number of books, authors, the time span, the varied languages, and that each was copied by hand.

---

My problem with this topic is that we do not have the originals. No matter how many versions and copies we have, we will never have the originals. Any attempt to make them 'close' to originals is guess work and estimations. There can never be certainty.

This leads me to a position where I can never be certain about the Bible's authenticity. I can never be sure what areas I can trust and what I cannot. So I am lead to one position, either it is all true, or it is all false.

quote:

---

My problem with this topic is that we do not have the originals. No matter how many versions and copies we have, we will never have the originals. Any attempt to make them 'close' to originals is guess work and estimations. There can never be certainty.

---

i think you are putting your trust in the people that canonized or the people who translated the BIBLE and that's wrong.
if you believe in JESUS CHRIST and you put your trust in him then he will guide you through his word.

quote:

---

This leads me to a position where I can never be certain about the Bible's authenticity. I can never be sure what areas I can trust and what I cannot. So I am lead to one position, either it is all true, or it is all false.

---

i believe the BIBLE is a 100% true and that the words JESUS spoke in the BIBLE are true and everlasting. it's up to you to believe what you want.
faith is a decision you make,not only that- where you spend eternity depends on whether you choose to accept the HOLY BILBLE as the true word of GOD or doubt it and criticize it.

if you have experienced the grace of the LORD JESUS CHRIST i don't think you would be asking a question like "either it is all true, or it is all false" are you fully saved or fully lost?

i think you are putting too much faith in your own wisdom and understanding and not in JESUS CHRIST .

don't forget that the fear of the LORD is the begining of wisdom . do you fear GOD? if you don't then i would have to say you don't have the neccesary wisdom to understand this issue,but if you do pray about it with sincerity and GOD will give you the answer.

------------------
John 14:6

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

[This message has been edited by spade89 (edited September 21, 2007).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by skynes:
@samw3

1 Kings 4:26 Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen. (NKJV)

2 Chronicles 9:25
Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen whom he stationed in the chariot cities and with the king at Jerusalem. (NKJV)

One says forty thousand stalls OF horses FOR chariots.
Other says four thousand stalls FOR horses AND chariots.

40'000 horses, 4'000 chariots, ten horses pull each chariot.

---

I think that the second version is most likely correct. At that period in history 970 BC most chariots only used two or four hourses. If you look at 2 Chronicles 1:14 it says:
"And Solomon gathered chariots and horsemen: and he had a thousand and four hundred chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen, which he placed in the chariot cities, and with the king at Jerusalem."

Which is essentially saying the same thing, but talking about the chariots directly. In either of those versions you posted there are only 40,000 stalls. From earlier we see that there are only 1,400 chariots. so that 5600 horses needed for chariots, 12,000 needed for horsemen. If you have a horse in reserve for each chariot horse and for each horseman's horse that is only 35,200 stalls needed for horses.
Even if it was 40,000 stalls of horses that doesn't strickly mean that every stall was full all the time. Likely there were close to 38,000 horses with the extra 2,000 stalls used for storage and chariots. It seems to me that both versions are essentially correct.
It should not be super critical to your faith that you know precisely if Soloman had 40,000 horses or only 38,800 horses.

------------------
Never Forget to Pray!

"...prayer itself is an art which only the Holy Ghost can teach us. He is the giver of all prayer. Pray for prayer---pray till you can pray; pray to be helped to pray, and give not up praying because you cannot pray, for it is when you think you cannot pray that you are most praying. Sometimes when you have no sort of comfort in your supplications, it is then that your heart---all broken and cast down---is really wrestling and truly prevailing with the Most High."
Charles Haddon Spurgeon, from the pamphlet, "Effective Prayer"

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the Bible ever claims to be inerrant. Several places in the Bible state that God doesn't change and that His words are true and steadfast, but that's talking about God, and not necessarily the hand-copied and sometimes twice translated (as in the KJV) transcription of God's words. And Revelation pronounces curses upon those who would meddle with it. Why have such a statement if God wanted to just force everything in his favor providentially?

Is God somehow required to keep every word spelled correctly to still be God?

One of the qualities of God that I often think about is his desire for faith. Hebrews 11:6 says that without faith it is *impossible* to please God. Faith is very important to God. Perhaps God would have it this way to boost people's faith instead of being proved existentially in a 100% accurate book. This is not to say that God requires totally blind faith or that the Bible has more holes than swiss cheese. The Bible has been archaeologically backed up in places with hard pots-in-the-sand type historical evidence. And it is the standard for a lot more secular historical reference than most people realize.

Still, I think the main purpose of the Bible is to reveal God so that we can worship him, not to prove God's existence by being inerrant.

Are there instances of scripture where there is a contradiction in the character of God? I think these would be far more earth shattering to a believer than how many horses solomon had, and whether a scribe (figuratively) missed a zero.

------------------
Sam Washburn

Check out my CCN SpeedGame 2 Blog

[This message has been edited by samw3 (edited September 21, 2007).]

Our OT was really the Torah (genesis to deuteronomy, the most sacred to the jews, believed to be the direct words of God), the Nevi'im (prophets), and Ketuvim (writings, like proverbs and psalms), which were compiled in the Tanakh, along with deuterocanonical books which canonized far later. and the NT were narratizations of Jesus's life along with letters written, most by Paul, to different churches of the time.

What if we were wrong about the Bible. What if Paul is shaking his head in heaven having his letters being considered as part of the scripture. What if God is disappointed that we spend so much time pouring over the book that we disregard our relationship with Him?

Now, I know the value of the Bible and I can feel it every time I read it and frankly, most of it just makes good sense. What if it isn't infallible. What if the bible isn't entirely the inspired word of God?

Can a couple guys over the past and a council of men towards the end of the roman empire really compile a book of pure inspiration from God?
What if we're missing the point by emphasizing so much on the book instead of going directly to God?

The strange part of this issue, is that there is a sort of peace in thinking the bible isn't infallible. In some sense, it becomes more real to me and I can read it looking for God's word instead of treating it as ultimate law of the land that can never be opposed.
Oh well, I guess proceed through all things in prayer.

------------------
Q.E.D.

quote:

---

i believe the BIBLE is a 100% true and that the words JESUS spoke in the BIBLE are true and everlasting. it's up to you to believe what you want.
faith is a decision you make,not only that- where you spend eternity depends on whether you choose to accept the HOLY BILBLE as the true word of GOD or doubt it and criticize it.

if you have experienced the grace of the LORD JESUS CHRIST i don't think you would be asking a question like "either it is all true, or it is all false" are you fully saved or fully lost?

---

It's kinda the opposite. It's because I do know God and do know who He is that this so important to me.

The Bible says it's impossible for God to lie (Hebrews 6), Psalm 119 says "The entirety of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous judgments endures forever. ", 2 Tim 3 says
16
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
17
that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

So if God cannot lie, if God is sovereign and in control. Would He allow lies in His Word? Would He allow taint and corruption there? We've seen in the OT and in Revelation what God thinks of corruption and falsehood in His people and church. Why would His Word be any different?

If I believe God is an interactive God who cannot lie, then I am compelled to also believe He will not allow lies in His Word. Unless of course it is NOT His Word. That is why I say all true or all false.

quote:

---

At that period in history 970 BC most chariots only used two or four hourses.

---

History confuses me. So it's hard for me to find that kind of information.
But even if they only used 2 or 3 horses, there would still be reserve packs, in-training packs, the horses for chariots and for horsemen. Having 40'000 stalls for horses (maybe some stalls were empty?) isn't that hard a stretch of the imagination.

Possible 4'000 stalls of active horses for chariots and the rest were for horsemen? 4'000 for horsemen and chariots and the rest training and reserves? Maybe they didn't have enough experienced fighters for chariots and horsemen so had more horses than they did men.

Many possibilities. I don't feel they've all been looked at before 'copyist error' gets slapped onto it.

quote:

---

It should not be super critical to your faith that you know precisely if Soloman had 40,000 horses or only 38,800 horses.

---

No but if I am to believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, then I must be able to trust the smallest detail. If I cannot trust the Bible to tell me the number of stalls of horses, how can I trust it for revealing God's Will and for teaching me doctrine and correction?

[quote=samw3]And Revelation pronounces curses upon those who would meddle with it. Why have such a statement if God wanted to just force everything in his favor providentially?[/quote]

To me that sounds like evidence that God takes the purity of His Word very seriously. On the warning though, there are Christian-style cults who have changed the Bible to suit their own ends. Could be a warning to Christians to take the Word of God seriously, don't throw it around but study it carefully.

Scary thought that...

quote:

---

Still, I think the main purpose of the Bible is to reveal God so that we can worship him, not to prove God's existence by being inerrant.

---

2 Timothy 3
16
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
17
that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

[quote=ArchAngel]What if God is disappointed that we spend so much time pouring over the book that we disregard our relationship with Him?[/quote]

I've noticed in myself and in others that the more we regard the relationship of God, the more we'll pour over His Word. Those Christians who disregard the relationship also seem to disregard His Word.

quote:

---

Can a couple guys over the past and a council of men towards the end of the roman empire really compile a book of pure inspiration from God?

---

*shrug* this is God. He can do what He wants. He made a tentmaker and a fisherman into Apostles. He's turned farmers into Prophets and shepherds into Kings. He'll get glory from us one way or another. Could be His way of getting it from the Roman Empire.

(w00t for long posts)

[This message has been edited by skynes (edited September 22, 2007).]

quote:

---

I've noticed in myself and in others that the more we regard the relationship of God, the more we'll pour over His Word. Those Christians who disregard the relationship also seem to disregard His Word.

---

I'm not disagreeing with your statement in itself, a person with a growing relationship with God will read the Word and a person who doesn't won't. But that is not all inclusive.
What about the people who read the book to in replacement of a relationship?
Churches are full of them.

but the mainpoint of that question wasn't in anyway to imply that the bible doesn't hold value for a believer, but musing whether we place an undue amount of emphasis upon it.

We're taught early on the amount of bible verses we read or how many times we read it makes a better christians. What if we're like the pharisees, wearing the scripture on our head but missing the point entirely?

------------------
Q.E.D.

[This message has been edited by ArchAngel (edited September 22, 2007).]

quote:

---

2 Timothy 3
16
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
17
that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

---

Great verse! Notice it doesn't say "to prove God's existence". Not to say *you* believe that, but many do think that proving God's existence is the/a purpose of the Bible.

quote:

---

So if God cannot lie, if God is sovereign and in control. Would He allow lies in His Word? Would He allow taint and corruption there? We've seen in the OT and in Revelation what God thinks of corruption and falsehood in His people and church. Why would His Word be any different?

---

I think yes. He *has* allowed corruption into the "church", and has allowed corruption even in "his people". God allows corruption. It happens all the time around us. However, from the scripture you pointed out we conclude, God did not deliver it tainted. Right?

Frankly I don't see why God has to prevent all evil from occurring to be considered righteous. He has decreed that our own actions determine the repercussions of life. (What you sow you will reap.) I believe whole-heartedly in miracles but I also know that God prefers more often than not to work through his people as they act according to his will.

From what I know of God, he would rather deal one-on-one with a person explaining the scriptures that mankind has mildly mangled than just slapping a perfect rule book down and saying, "here. follow it."

quote:

---

Then how come so many "spiritual" people in the church ending up to be such hypocrites? I'm seeing so many people get caught up in the letter of the Word and missing the point entirely.

---

Some have the word and no spiritual connection with God.
Some have a level spiritual connection with God but ignore the word.
I'm sure you'd agree a relationship is bidirectional. We need both prayer and reading the scriptures, each fuels the other. Just like any other relationship we have, it won't work for long if only one person is communicating.

So, be encouraged brothers, the Holy Scriptures of God were completely accurate and are currently mostly accurate and God himself wants to guide us through it on a personalize journey through life and eternity.

God Bless!

------------------
Sam Washburn

Check out my CCN SpeedGame 2 Blog

[This message has been edited by samw3 (edited September 22, 2007).]

***

It's one thing to search out the truth, like an adventure, allowing curiosity to propel us into the Word. In this case, when we discover what seems to be a contradiction, we scrutinize the Word even more, to find out the truth. It seems that between two opposing scriptures is a higher truth--a revelation for the seeker of truth.

But there is another camp which, when it finds an error in the Bible, turns their head and uses the seemingly contradictory scriptures to say "The Bible is not true."

In both cases, the events are identical, but each with completely different results.

God says he closes the eyes and ears of those who don't believe. Spooky. It's advisable to firmly root yourself in believing that the Word is true...

...realizing that you will come upon scriptural contradictions. It is a type of faith to believe in what you do not yet understand.

Perhaps it is a good thing in this thread to differentiate between "complete doubt" and having "moments of doubt" in expectation that the truth will eventually emerge.

***

Good reminders, guys, on the character of the Lord, and the guidance of the Holy Spirit being more important than the answers to conundrums. It's really good to be reminded of these priorities. Thank you!

***

Somebody said that the NT letters aren't scripture. But they are, according to Galatians 3:22 "But the scripture [has] concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus might be given to them that believe:" It's referring to Romans, written by Paul.

***

If a person goes to God in prayer, but doesn't have scripture in his heart, then he doesn't know God's voice. He can't hear the answers to his questions, nor does he know what to say to please God. He might then think that God is not talking, or not listening. The breakdown in communication is blamed on God. The prayers become non-relational, like mantras, or long-winded prayers of religiosity ( a clanging cymbal in 1 Corinthians 13:1). There are many people who just beg when they pray. It's really sad. If I read the Word, it teaches my soul what God's voice sounds like. Every once in a while, I can really hear what he says during prayer. The Word teaches me character--how not to be foolish and wrathful. The word teaches to boldly come to the throne of God and have a conversation between the All-Loving King of the Universe, and his joint-heir to the throne. That's a conversation worth reading the Bible for. And with time, a person's life improves and they have harvests of miracles here on the earth because of reading the word and praying.

***

Earlier in the thread, someone wondered about the OT's pertinence.
The OT is incredibly valuable to those looking for more. The NT references the OT lots of times. Tons of things that Jesus says are quotes from Psalms and the law. A study of Genesis and the prophets brings understanding in Revelation.

If a person has read the NT, they surely ought to start anew with Genesis.

***

Jesus answered the Sadducees according to their folly. They believed in only the first five books of the Bible, and consequently, did not believe in the resurrection. (You could say that they doubted the authenticity of the prophets' writings, like we're struggling with here in this thread.) But Jesus answered them according to the first five books, saying (Matt. 22:29) "...[you] do [wander], not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God... But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have [you] not read that which was spoken [to] you by God, saying, 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?' God is not the God of the dead, but of the living." So he disproved them according to their own terms. The answer was there for them for centuries, but they couldn't see it because they doubted it whole-heartedly.

We can imagine that God will have such an answer for every doubting mind, (and I mean doubting as in "completely doubting, and unfaithful"). I'd rather be joyfully surprised by receiving the answers I've been waiting for all my life, than to be nightmarishly jolted by the realization that I've clung to fear and lies my whole life. Remember that non of the men in the hall of faith mentioned in Hebrews saw the proof of that which they believed. So if you have a contradiction in scripture and you just can't find the answer, stay faithful that there is truth in there somewhere and you'll be in good company.

***

skynes - way to go on a great example of dividing the word correctly. It took me awhile to understand it. Although it's just horses, this is one of those questions I'd see myself going to Jesus with and joyfully receiving simple answer: Ten horses to a chariot.

***

Spade89 - I agree with a lot of your word choices. Except, wouldn't you agree that where a person spends eternity depends not on choosing to accept the Bible, but on accepting Jesus, and as a by-product, accepting the Bible. Cause, even the devil quotes scripture.

***

On changing the Word of God: The Mormons added their book of Mormon to the end of the Bible. A plague of locusts befell them as God warned in Revelation. It is ironic that they admit to having a plague of locusts come down upon them, but they did not take the book of Mormon out of the Bible. Instead, the Mormons focused (and still do) on the seagulls that ate the locusts, saying "See, God rescued us." The fact that the plague was a punishment has totally eluded them.

***

I don't see why God has to prevent all evil from occurring to be considered righteous. -- That's one of the best quotes I've ever heard, SamW3
***
The "all or nothing" train of thought should be qualified by faith of belief. We believe "by faith" that the Bible is 100% true, and inerrant. If we don't qualify as such, then we're telling ourselves that we're only Christian until we find a contradiction in the Bible, and then we're not Christian until the problem with it is solved. I've never seen a guy walk on the water, but I believe it's true "by faith." One day, it will be proven to me. And we should have a spirit of truth to us, that gets us past the times we are confronted with scriptural contradictions, be they temporary or long-lasting.
If I say "The Bible is perfect but the translations are imperfect" then at the heart of the matter, I am making it easy for myself not to have to deal with sin. ...Because sin is exposed by the Word. I would be committing a big whopper of a hypocrisy. No doubt that I would then see hypocrisy in others and point fingers at church-goers and Bible-readers. Romans says that where I judge others, I judge myself. But I couldn't know this, because I don't read the Bible. The only avenue of communication I've allowed myself to have with God is for him to be-plague me with hypocrites which are just like me.
***
Looking at the sciences, you will find many in-errancies. Engineering is full of magic numbers, math has been mathematically disproved by Godel, all of physics are built on a set of assumptions... just to name a few. It's unfaithful to throw the Bible out the window because of a yet-resolved conflict in scripture, but yet cling to science. Instead, be faithful and cling to the Word. Resolve in your mind that the Bible is what it says it is: the Word of God. And then enter into the joy of discovery and life-changing revelation.