Why do some believers of Christ feel the bible is withou error?

Why are these posts absent of facts?

If what you say is indeed true, you must realize that your opinion does not suffice as proof and evidence.

Is this a 'real' conversation or not?

smaneck said:

there is no historical evidence other than Matthew's own account that Herod ever slaughtered babies

Click to expand...

Makes me wonder if the account was borrowed from the
incident in the (older) Bhagavata Purana. When Kamsa gets
wind of the birth of Lord Krishna (a previous incarnation
of God), Kamsa is said to have ordered all male and
female babies in the land killed to (unsuccessfully)
prevent that from happening.




-

fatboys said:

Mark was a companion to Paul. Luke wasn't an apostle either but he didn't write Luke. He was a companion peter. It was two hundred years after the fact that church leaders attributed Matthew and Luke to them as writing them.

Click to expand...

I think what confuses a lot of Christians is they think the Disciples brought parchment and quills on their walk with Jesus and took notes.
The apostles were largely illiterate. If not completely so.
The gospels were written as much as 50 years, probably the minimum period of time, after Jesus death.
And Paul, who's letters comprise most of the new testament, did not witness Jesus' ministry. Being a Pharisee he was the only sure literate one calling himself an Apostle. Though the Christian Gnostics called him, The Imposter.

The point is, the NT was not compiled nor written by Jesus or his Disciples.

The “Strange” Ending of the Gospel of Mark and Why It Makes All the Difference
James Tabor presents a new look at the original text of the earliest Gospel

ToBeLoved said:

Back then there were not many historians writing about Jesus life, so I am not really surprised no one documented it but Matthew, but that doesn't make it false as I'm sure you agree

Click to expand...

There were plenty of historians at that time writing about other events during that time, but very little to nothing about Jesus.

I wonder why that is?

I see there are not facts forthcoming, only more opinion.

lol. It is what I expected. The Word of God stands as none of you can present any facts to say it is in error.

This has been fun. I'll leave you to your opinions now. lol.

bhsmte said:

There were plenty of historians at that time writing about other events during that time, but very little to nothing about Jesus.

I wonder why that is?

Click to expand...

If Jesus was not considered God by the historians, why would they write about him?

I think that makes so much sense.

ToBeLoved said:

If Jesus was not considered God by the historians, why would they write about him?

I think that makes so much sense.

Click to expand...

Can you list the contemporary writings about Jesus outside the gospels and what they stated about him?

Furthermore, anyone who has seriously dove into the work of well credentialed NT historians, will discover, the majority can only come to a consensus about the likely historical reliability of the following:

-Jesus was a real person
-Jesus was baptized
-Jesus had followers
-Jesus was crucified

Beyond that, they will also admit, the NT is much more a work of theology, than it is a work of credible history.

ToBeLoved said:

If Jesus was not considered God by the historians, why would they write about him?

I think that makes so much sense.

Click to expand...

Do you actually think contemporary historians at that time only wrote about figures they thought were Gods?

fatboys said:

Because Jesus was nothing at the time historically. He traveled in a small area and although he had followers it was not news worthy.

Click to expand...

Correct. It seems John the Baptist got more attention.

bhsmte said:

Do you actually think contemporary historians at that time only wrote about figures they thought were Gods?

Click to expand...

No, but they had to be seen as significant for some other reason. A preacher from back-woods Nazareth wouldn't attract that much attention.

kit said:

It is a method of elevating one's self to the level of divinity. If Bible is infallible and I can read it (and interpret it to my liking) I am on par with God!

Click to expand...

This sounds familiar. Wasn't there one who strove to be as God?

Who was that?

Blank Stair said:

Do you think a Jewish apostle was named Mark?

The Gospel of Mark does not name its author.

Click to expand...

Tradition has it that Mark was a student of Peter. But you are correct that there is nothing in the Gospel itself to indicate who wrote it.

Blank Stair said:

The thread was opened August 6th. I don't know about the member being forbidden in Christians Only Forum however, this isn't the COF. Are Mormon's not considered Christian here?

Click to expand...

Recently the mods decided that Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses would not be considered Christian because they reject the Nicaean Creed. So they were banished here.

Does this mean that the question is not valid?

Click to expand...

Why would asking why some Christians think the Bible is inerrant be an invalid question? Or did you have some other question in mind?

ToBeLoved said:

Why are these posts absent of facts?

If what you say is indeed true, you must realize that your opinion does not suffice as proof and evidence.

Is this a 'real' conversation or not?

Click to expand...

You realize that it is up to the person who claims a text is inerrant to prove their case. It is not at all hard to find mistakes in Matthew's Gospel, but that is not really what this thread is about. But if you want to start another thread asking why we don't think the Bible is inerrant, you can certainly do that but I don't think you will be happy with the results.

ToBeLoved said:

If Jesus was not considered God by the historians, why would they write about him?

Click to expand...

They would, however, write about a massacre of babies by a king who was universally despised. That is, if it had actually happened.

ToBeLoved said:

lol. It is what I expected. The Word of God stands as none of you can present any facts to say it is in error.

Click to expand...

Actually one person already did, by pointing out that the Gospel of Matthew completely misinterpreted Jeremiah 31. We can find more incidents of this if that is really what you want us to do but I would advise you to be careful what you wish for.