Infallibility of the Bible?

[SayWhat???]

Hi everyone!

It's been a while since I posted in the forum. I get addicted and don't get much else done when I do. But I ran across an interesting article in the London Times this week, and would like to know what you think about it. Apparently some Catholic Bishops from the UK wrote a booklet in which they state that the Bible is not infallible. Among other things, they stated:

“We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision,” and say that some passages are not correct, but "may contain historical traces."

The link is: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1811332,00.html

Of course, any LDS would tell you that Joseph Smith said that almost 200 years ago. What do you think?

SW

 

[AMMON]

I thinks that those British Catholic Bishops may have had an epiphany. Good show, lads!

 

[LittleNipper]

I thinks that those British Catholic Bishops may have had an epiphany. Good show, lads!

The British Catholic church is not noted for its steadfast perseverance. What they may have had is too much to drink and a "significant other" to boot...

 

[SayWhat???]

The British Catholic church is not noted for its steadfast perseverance. What they may have had is too much to drink and a "significant other" to boot...

Maybe so, but I have to agree with them. Every time I read the Bible I come across verses that make me scratch my head and exclaim, "Say What?!?!?!"

One of my favorites is Leviticus 11:6. Check it out!

SW

 

[elman]

Hi everyone!

It's been a while since I posted in the forum. I get addicted and don't get much else done when I do. But I ran across an interesting article in the London Times this week, and would like to know what you think about it. Apparently some Catholic Bishops from the UK wrote a booklet in which they state that the Bible is not infallible. Among other things, they stated:

“We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision,” and say that some passages are not correct, but "may contain historical traces."

The link is: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1811332,00.html

Of course, any LDS would tell you that Joseph Smith said that almost 200 years ago. What do you think?

SW

I think the Bible is not infallible and neither was Joseph Smith.

 

[SayWhat???]

I think the Bible is not infallible and neither was Joseph Smith.

Thank you for your comments, and I agree wholeheartedly. The only person on this earth who was, in fact, infallible, was Christ. None of the prophets were.

SW

 

[A New Dawn]

I believe the Bible to be God-breathed, and therefore, infallible.

 

[AMMON]

Thank you for your comments, and I agree wholeheartedly. The only person on this earth who was, in fact, infallible, was Christ. None of the prophets were.

SW

Agreed.

 

[AMMON]

I believe the Bible to be God-breathed, and therefore, infallible.

You need to research the history of how the Bible we have, in its many, many, many current versions, came to be -- via the hands, arguments, compromises, and workings of men without authority from God.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

You need to research the history of how the Bible we have, in its many, many, many current versions, came to be -- via the hands, arguments, compromises, and workings of men without authority from God.

And you need to research how JS came to write the BOM, entirely in King James English, and how many of its stories are based on a contemporary novel of JS's time.

 

[RufustheRed]

Maybe so, but I have to agree with them. Every time I read the Bible I come across verses that make me scratch my head and exclaim, "Say What?!?!?!"

Then I would have to say that perhaps it is you and not the Bible that has the problem(s).

One of my favorites is Leviticus 11:6. Check it out!

SW

What is your problem with "the rabbit also, for though it chews cud, it does not divide the hoof, it is unclean to you?"

Sven

 

[AMMON]

And you need to research how JS came to write the BOM, entirely in King James English, and how many of its stories are based on a contemporary novel of JS's time.

Been there; done that.

 

[RufustheRed]

I thinks that those British Catholic Bishops may have had an epiphany. Good show, lads!

I think that proves that celibacy is unhealthy. There's too much back pressure in their system and it resricts the flow of ideas in the brain.


Sven

 

[SayWhat???]

Then I would have to say that perhaps it is you and not the Bible that has the problem(s).



What is your problem with "the rabbit also, for though it chews cud, it does not divide the hoof, it is unclean to you?"

Sven

Have you ever seen a rabbit chew cud? They don't.

 

[RufustheRed]

Have you ever seen a rabbit chew cud? They don't.

Sure. Haven't you?

Actually, the scholars aren't sure what the animal was "A feminine noun indicating a rabbit or unknown species of animal. It indicates an unclean animal not to be eaten by Israelites" or according to Strong, probably an extinct animal because no known hare chews its cud, exact meaning is unknown, and best left untranslated as “arnebeth”

Sven

 

[Rescued One]

And since the BoM, PoGP, and D & C aren't reliable, people leave the LDS and turn their backs on religion and Christ. But I love my Savior and I'll stick with Him and the Bible.

"I am a Bible Christian and if an archangel with a wingspread as broad as a constellation shining like the sun were to come and offer me some new truth, I'd ask him for a reference. If he could not show me where it is found in the Bible, I would bow out and say, I'm awfully sorry, you didn't bring any references with you." - A. W. Tozer

 

[AMMON]

And since the BoM, PoGP, and D & C aren't reliable, people leave the LDS and turn their backs on religion and Christ. But I love my Savior and I'll stick with Him and the Bible.

And that is better than most!

 

[buddy mack]

Hi everyone!

It's been a while since I posted in the forum. I get addicted and don't get much else done when I do. But I ran across an interesting article in the London Times this week, and would like to know what you think about it. Apparently some Catholic Bishops from the UK wrote a booklet in which they state that the Bible is not infallible. Among other things, they stated:

“We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision,” and say that some passages are not correct, but "may contain historical traces."

The link is: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1811332,00.html

Of course, any LDS would tell you that Joseph Smith said that almost 200 years ago. What do you think?

SW

it has been almost 200 years sence the founder of mormonism was born and it's about time TBM come to the understanding the Book of Mormon isnt scientific accurate. Book of Mormon has a base for Hstorical traces, thats a joke. Passages from the KJB are plagiarized into the Book of Mormon.
Yes, after 200 years i think we can say the founder of the LDS and his Book of Mormon is and was Fallible to the max.

 

[buddy mack]

I think that proves that celibacy is unhealthy. There's too much back pressure in their system and it resricts the flow of ideas in the brain.


Sven

but my brain is still restrict.

 

[SayWhat???]

Sure. Haven't you?

On a more serious note, when I read, I wonder why God would "harden Pharoah's heart" as stated so many times in the Exodus story (see Ex. 9:12, for example). I wonder why the New Testament states that no-one had ever seen God (John 1:18), and at the same time the Bible has many examples of people who have, in fact, seen God (Gen 32:30; Exo. 19:11, 33:11; Deut 34:10; Judg. 13:22; Isa. 6:5; Acts 7:56; Rev. 1:17 etc.). There are so many other cases that I really do not want to get into now, but in historical terms there are many contradicions, and there are, to put it nicely, some doctinally questionable passages in the Bible.