Inerrancy of the Scriptures

trulytheone said:

Is the Bible inerrant according to the beliefs of the Eastern Orthodox? If yes, how do you explain the apparent contradictions between the gospels such as the different dates of the Last Supper? Another of the apparent contradictions is the destination of Jesus after His baptism (In the Gospel of John, the next day He was seen by John the baptist and his disciples while the Gospel of Mark states that immediately He went to the wilderness to fast). These are listed in one of Bart Ehrman's book "Jesus, interrupted". I apologize if this comes off as hostile, but I want to learn your thoughts.

Click to expand...

"It is the faith of the Orthodox Church that the Bible, as the divinely-inspired Word of God in the words of men, contains no formal errors or inner contradictions concerning the relationship between God and the world. There may be incidental inaccuracies of a non-essential character in the Bible. But the eternal spiritual and doctrinal message of God, presented in the Bible in many different ways, remains perfectly consistent, authentic, and true."

The Orthodox Faith - Volume I - Doctrine and Scripture - The Bible - Word of God

trulytheone said:

Is the Bible inerrant according to the beliefs of the Eastern Orthodox? If yes, how do you explain the apparent contradictions between the gospels such as the different dates of the Last Supper? Another of the apparent contradictions is the destination of Jesus after His baptism (In the Gospel of John, the next day He was seen by John the baptist and his disciples while the Gospel of Mark states that immediately He went to the wilderness to fast). These are listed in one of Bart Ehrman's book "Jesus, interrupted". I apologize if this comes off as hostile, but I want to learn your thoughts.

Click to expand...

the Orthodox understanding of the Scripture is inerrant. as an example from the baptism, it doesn't say exactly which "next day" it was, since John doesn't mention the act of Christ's baptism. the dialogue in John could have happened after the wilderness, as John's Gospel was written long after the other ones, so he assumes you already know some things.

and I would add, St John also writes following a chiastic structure, and not a chronological one.

The Bible in the original writing are the perfect revelation from God. What we have now are copies, which can and fall into the problem of translating into other languages. But the Bible we have is really 97,98,99% close to i believe the correct message.

An example is Genesis 4:1 in the original writing in Hebrew the verse is.
And the man knew Eve his wife, she conceived and bare Cain and said "I have gotton a man: Jehovah

"with the help of ", "from the" etc.. has been added

Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, “I have acquired a man from the Lord.”

Now the man had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain, and she said, “I have gotten a manchild with the help of the Lord.”

Adam made love to his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, “With the help of the Lord I have brought forth a man.”

Literally nothing to debate here. Orthodox are strong defenders of scripture. I dare say it's richer than Protestants, since it's integral to liturgical life as well. It's a perfect example of reverence for both scripture and tradition alike (and not an either/or). There is an occasional oddball in a seminary teaching modernistic views or teaching the "Bible as literature", but so far, it has thankfully been kept to a minimum.

I would say we do in accordance to what the Lord says:

Matthew 7:12 ( etc.)
Matthew 22:36-40 (etc.)
Luke 24:44-48 (etc.)

Note that what the Lord tells us is based on what we know as the Old Testament awaiting its fulfillment in Him ( Matthew 5:17-20). This is based on keeping His commandments as He tells us in the Gospels ( John 14:14-17 etc etc).

I think what we have to understand is that the commandments as laid out in the moral code via Deuteronomy 5, Deuteronomy 6, Leviticus 18, Leviticus 19, Leviticus 20 etc. is reformed from any theocratic severity by the Lord’s very commands & laid out in the Sermon on the Mount ( Matthew 5, Matthew 6, Matthew 7). Still, this moral code remains why else would the Lord affirm the preaching of the last Prophet: John the Baptist ( Matthew 4:12-17)?

There are many particulars that are hard to fathom but in light of the Lord’s summation of the law & keeping the commandments, I think is where the sense of innerancy is found. Also note ( Matthew 19:16-19, Romans 13:8-10).

d taylor said:

The Bible in the original writing are the perfect revelation from God. What we have now are copies, which can and fall into the problem of translating into other languages. But the Bible we have is really 97,98,99% close to i believe the correct message.

An example is Genesis 4:1 in the original writing in Hebrew the verse is.
And the man knew Eve his wife, she conceived and bare Cain and said "I have gotton a man: Jehovah

"with the help of ", "from the" etc.. has been added

Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, “I have acquired a man from the Lord.”

Now the man had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain, and she said, “I have gotten a manchild with the help of the Lord.”

Adam made love to his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, “With the help of the Lord I have brought forth a man.”

Click to expand...

gotta disagree here. the perfect revelation of God is His Incarnate Son and Word.

What would be the difference between Orthodox inerrancy and a Protestant one?

trulytheone said:

Ok...I admit that in the case of the baptism of Jesus in the Gospel of John, but is there an explanation of the different dates of the Last Supper?

Click to expand...

what are the dates in question?

trulytheone said:

Matthew 26:17-19, Mark 14:1-2, 12, and Luke 22:8 stated that the Last Supper happened during the Passover and when the lamb was slain. But the Gospel of John chapters 18:28 and 19:14 mentioned that the crucifixion was before the Passover.

Click to expand...

Matthew, Mark, and Luke wrote chronologically. John wrote chiastically. it's the same reason John has Christ clearing the Temple in the beginning of his Gospel, as opposed to later like the other authors.

David Cabrera said:

What would be the difference between Orthodox inerrancy and a Protestant one?

Click to expand...

Is there a difference?

trulytheone said:

If that is the case, wouldn't the crucifixion be in the beginning of John's Gospel? And this would seem to contradict the Eastern Orthodox belief that the Last Supper happened before the Passover.

Click to expand...

if this was asked of me, that would depend on what John was trying to parallel and what point he was making.