Is the Bible Without Error?

[Galilee63]

Trust in Jesus Holy Spirit God and Mother Mary from hearts as opposed to minds forget the earthly knowledge that is what blocks from receiving The Holy Spirit within us at all times to be illuminated by us sacrificing the earthly things and the earthly time

 

[redleghunter]

The doctrine of the inspiration of scripture is a false doctrine. Its the kind of thing that was used to reject Jesus.

The above statement makes the apostles false prophets. Is that your position?

Paul in writing to Timothy called the Scriptures (TaNaKh as the NT was not complete then):

"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

Peter said the Scriptures (TaNaKh) said no prophecy was the will of men but of those moved by the Holy Spirit:

"for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." (2 Peter 1:21)

The Documentary Hypothesis is widely accepted outside of the Bible worship Bubble wherein adherents are just not honest people.

JEDP is widely accepted among agnostic/atheist Biblical skeptics. It would be as agnostics and skeptics dismiss miracles and dismiss even the NT eyewitness testimony of the miracles of Jesus Christ. JEDP attempts to redefine God in the image of man's mind.

The Father revealed in the life of Christ was very different than the OT God created largely in the image of those who wrote the OT.

Interesting as Jesus told His disciples how they could find Him in the OT (TaNaKh) and opened their minds to the Scriptures:

Luke 24: NKJV

44 Then He said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.” 45 And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.

46 Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, 47 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 And you are witnesses of these things. 49 Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high.”

If the OT was made up by man, then your position would no doubt include the messianic prophecies were fabricated? See Isaiah 53.

The Father revealed in the life of Christ was very different than the OT God created largely in the image of those who wrote the OT.

If you deny the Scriptures are inspired then how do you come to this conclusion?

Yes, I believe the Son of God came to earth, revealed the Father and taught the original, pre-cross gospel that ALL men and women of earth are in fact the sons and daughters of the Living God. Not just an arrogant, self proclaimed "chosen people". He laid down his life and took it up again, returning in a new form. He then went back to his place on high.

What is the 'pre-cross' gospel?

What was the 'new form' of Jesus Christ at His resurrection? Was it Bodily or just spirit form? Regardless of your view on the nature of the resurrection, do you consider the resurrection of Jesus Christ as a miracle and if not what was it then? And if you believe it was a miracle, then why would you deny other miracles recorded in Holy Scriptures?

 

[Steve Petersen]

Just not the Greek manuscripts.

To date, over 5800 Greek New Testament fragments have been found (Taylor, 2012). Over 10,000 Latin New Testament manuscripts dating from the 2nd to 16th century have been located. The earliest are in fragments that cover a substantial amount of the New Testament. Some manuscripts have also been found in a number of other languages, including Coptic, Syriac, Gothic, and Arabic. Taking all languages together, over 25,000 handwritten copies of the New Testament have been recovered. But there is more. Almost the entire New Testament could be reproduced by quotes from the ancient church fathers. “So extensive are these citations that if all other sources for our knowledge of the text of the New Testament were destroyed, they would be sufficient alone for the reconstruction of practically the entire New Testament” (Metzger & Ehrman, 2005).

The Earliest New Testament Manuscripts

There are more textual variants in the NT than there are words:

The Number of Textual Variants: An Evangelical Miscalculation

 

[brinny]

To be clear, I'm one of those pesky evangelicals who question the Bible's inerrancy. (I've never heard of any evangelical claiming that the Bible is infallible, but that's cool too!)

What part of the Bible is fallible?

 

[redleghunter]

There are more textual variants in the NT than there are words:

The Number of Textual Variants: An Evangelical Miscalculation

Wallace vs. Lightfoot and Geisler. Not a hard comparison.

Edit: seems Wallace is appealing to other scholars to refine what constitutes a 'variant.' An interesting article. Would like to see what Geisler (the foremost expert in the field) responds to this. The end of the article says Wallace contacted him.

 

[Colter]

The above statement makes the apostles false prophets. Is that your position?

Paul in writing to Timothy called the Scriptures (TaNaKh as the NT was not complete then):

"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

Peter said the Scriptures (TaNaKh) said no prophecy was the will of men but of those moved by the Holy Spirit:

"for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." (2 Peter 1:21)




JEDP is widely accepted among agnostic/atheist Biblical skeptics. It would be as agnostics and skeptics dismiss miracles and dismiss even the NT eyewitness testimony of the miracles of Jesus Christ. JEDP attempts to redefine God in the image of man's mind.



Interesting as Jesus told His disciples how they could find Him in the OT (TaNaKh) and opened their minds to the Scriptures:

Luke 24: NKJV

44 Then He said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.” 45 And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.

46 Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, 47 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 And you are witnesses of these things. 49 Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high.”

If the OT was made up by man, then your position would no doubt include the messianic prophecies were fabricated? See Isaiah 53.


If you deny the Scriptures are inspired then how do you come to this conclusion?




What is the 'pre-cross' gospel?

What was the 'new form' of Jesus Christ at His resurrection? Was it Bodily or just spirit form? Regardless of your view on the nature of the resurrection, do you consider the resurrection of Jesus Christ as a miracle and if not what was it then? And if you believe it was a miracle, then why would you deny other miracles recorded in Holy Scriptures?

* It was the general opinion among the apostles that Jesus would "soon return" to presumably fulfill the (erroneous expectations) of a Jewish Messiah. He didn't, that was just their sincere opinion. I don't consider them false prophets, they didn't claim to be "prophets" to begin with. They were imperfect men preaching according to their understanding.

* I didn't say that the OT was entirely made up, some of it is true. Your "all or nothing" thinking produces such erroneous conclusions.

* The newspaper can give us some understanding of the news, but I also know it's bias and not always accurate.

* All of the gospels were written long after Jesus left and the Christian religion began to evolve. There are understandable mistakes in the gospels.

* I can see spiritual truth in the scripture even though I know some of it is exaggerated nonsense.

* The original gospel, salvation by the faith based realization that all men and women of the earth are sons and daughters of the Living God (not just an especially chosen few) is what Jesus preached, lived and taught all around Israel before he was apprehended and killed. Its what the Jews would be teaching today if they had accepted it.


* To God nothing is a miracle because he knows how to do it. To us the resurrection is supernatural.

 

[redleghunter]

* It was the general opinion among the apostles that Jesus would "soon return" to presumably fulfill the (erroneous expectations) of a Jewish Messiah. He didn't, that was just their sincere opinion. I don't consider them false prophets, they didn't claim to be "prophets" to begin with. They were imperfect men preaching according to their understanding.

The above has nothing to do with what we were discussing. You said the OT books are unreliable and contain fantasy and exaggeration. I pointed out, the apostles quoted from the OT and upheld them as Holy Spirit inspired writings.

* I didn't say that the OT was entirely made up, some of it is true. Your "all or nothing" thinking produces such erroneous conclusions.

You were the one who proposed the 'all or nothing.' If this is truly your view, then what is reliable from the OT and what is your premise for believing so? JEDP is not an answer.

* The newspaper can give us some understanding of the news, but I also know it's bias and not always accurate.

Then you don't believe any of what we call the Bible today is inspired by the Holy Spirit. You could have saved us a lot of time by saying so.

* All of the gospels were written long after Jesus left and the Christian religion began to evolve. There are understandable mistakes in the gospels.

Mistakes? What mistakes are you speaking of? The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, which is a miracle, or all of Christ's miracles?

* I can see spiritual truth in the scripture even though I know some of it is exaggerated nonsense.

Is the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ part of what you consider "exaggerated nonsense?"

* The original gospel, salvation by the faith based realization that all men and women of the earth are sons and daughters of the Living God (not just an especially chosen few) is what Jesus preached, lived and taught all around Israel before he was apprehended and killed. Its what the Jews would be teaching today if they had accepted it.

You mean Jesus did not speak of sin, judgment, forgiveness in His Name, that He must be delivered, die and rise again?

Perhaps it would help if you could quote your extra-biblical sources so I can better understand what you mean by 'gospel.'

* To God nothing is a miracle because he knows how to do it. To us the resurrection is supernatural.

 

[1213]

OK. Peter denied Jesus three times before the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] crowed the first time . . .
...

Firstly, Bible is collection of what some people have said. For example, Matthew tells the story as Matthew knows it. Bible is correct, if it reports accurately without mistakes what is the view of Matthew, about the Biblical matters. If Matthew remembers something differently than Mark, there may be contradiction between those two. But it doesn’t mean there is error in the Bible, it just has different testimonies, that may have contradictory ideas. If Bible would not report those accurately, there would be mistake or error.

Secondly, roster crow is usually longer than just the first sounds. Matthew could have meant rosters whole morning repertoire, when it speaks rosters crow. Usually rosters don’t crow so that they only express one “[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] a doodle doo”. When rooster crows at the morning, there are several of those “[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] a doodle doo “s. Mark is more specific and speaks about the exact phase of that, while Matthew is speaking about the whole morning crowing. That is why I think there is not error in that. I think they are both correct, Mark is just more accurate.

 

[Colter]

The above has nothing to do with what we were discussing. You said the OT books are unreliable and contain fantasy and exaggeration. I pointed out, the apostles quoted from the OT and upheld them as Holy Spirit inspired writings.



You were the one who proposed the 'all or nothing.' If this is truly your view, then what is reliable from the OT and what is your premise for believing so? JEDP is not an answer.



Then you don't believe any of what we call the Bible today is inspired by the Holy Spirit. You could have saved us a lot of time by saying so.



Mistakes? What mistakes are you speaking of? The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, which is a miracle, or all of Christ's miracles?



Is the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ part of what you consider "exaggerated nonsense?"



You mean Jesus did not speak of sin, judgment, forgiveness in His Name, that He must be delivered, die and rise again?

Perhaps it would help if you could quote your extra-biblical sources so I can better understand what you mean by 'gospel.'

As with other Book worshippers you aren't being intellectually honest.

The above has nothing to do with what we were discussing. You said the OT books are unreliable and contain fantasy and exaggeration. I pointed out, the apostles quoted from the OT and upheld them as Holy Spirit inspired writings.



You were the one who proposed the 'all or nothing.' If this is truly your view, then what is reliable from the OT and what is your premise for believing so? JEDP is not an answer.



Then you don't believe any of what we call the Bible today is inspired by the Holy Spirit. You could have saved us a lot of time by saying so.



Mistakes? What mistakes are you speaking of? The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, which is a miracle, or all of Christ's miracles?



Is the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ part of what you consider "exaggerated nonsense?"



You mean Jesus did not speak of sin, judgment, forgiveness in His Name, that He must be delivered, die and rise again?

Perhaps it would help if you could quote your extra-biblical sources so I can better understand what you mean by 'gospel.'

The belief by the apostles thought that Jesus would "soon return" has everything to do with the false claim that God wrote the Bible and that it is inerrant.


JESUS SAID HE WOULD RETURN IN THEIR LIFETIME:

“For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.” – Mt. 16:27,28

“Tell us, when will these things be (the destruction of the temple), and what will be the sign of your coming, and of the end of the age? . . . This generation will not pass away until all of these things take place.” – Mt. 24:3,34

“Behold, I am coming soon! (tachu – quickly, speedily (without delay)) Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy in this book.” – Rev. 22:7,12,20

“You (Chief Priests and Sanhedrin) shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven.” – Mt. 26:64

“If I want him (John) to remain until I come, what is that to you. You follow me!” – Jn. 21:21-23 (According to church tradition, all the apostles except John died before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.)

“All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes.” – Mt. 10:22-23

JOHN WROTE THAT JESUS IS COMING SOON

“The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to make known to his servants the things which must shortly (en tachos – lit.: in speed, usages: quickly, shortly, soon, speedily) come to pass.” – Rev. 1:1

“Blessed is he that reads . . . hears . . . and keeps the things written (in this prophecy), for the time is at hand.” (eggus – near, of place or position). – Rev. 1:3

“The world is passing away . . . it is the last hour (eschatos ) . . . Even now many antichrists have arisen; from this we know that it is the last hour.” – 1 Jn. 2:17-18

THE ANGEL WHO SPOKE TO JOHN SHOWED HIM WHAT WOULD HAPPEN SOON

“The angel said to me, “These words are trustworthy and true. The Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent his angel to show his servants the things that must soon take place.” (en tachos – quickly) – Rev. 22:6

PAUL EXORTED THEM TO GODLY LIVING BECAUSE THEIR TIME WAS SHORT

“The time is short (sustello – to draw together, hence, to wrap up), from now on it would be wise for those who have wives to be as if they had them not.” – 1 Cor. 7:29

“And do this, understanding the present time. The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light.” – Rom. 13:11-12

“The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet.” – Rom. 16:20

“These things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the fulfillment of the ages has come.” – 1 Cor. 10:11

THE WRITER OF HEBREWS ENCOURAGED PERSEVERANCE BECAUSE JESUS WOULD NOT DELAY HIS COMING

“Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another– and all the more as you see the Day approaching. . . . You need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God, you will receive what he has promised. For in just a very little while, “He who is coming will come and will not delay.”” – Heb. 10:25,36-37

JAMES WROTE THE SECOND COMING WAS IMMINENT

“The coming of the Lord is at hand . . . the Judge is standing right at the door” – 5:8,9

PETER WROTE THAT THEY WERE IN THE LAST DAYS AND IT WAS TIME FOR JUDGMENT TO BEGIN

“Christ was manifest in these last times.” (eschatos – extreme, last in time, place, or space) – 1 Pet. 1:20

“The end of all things is at hand.” (eggizo – to come or bring near, to join one thing to another, to approach) – 1 Pet. 4:7

“It is time for judgment to begin.” – 1 Pet. 4:17

 

[Colter]

The above has nothing to do with what we were discussing. You said the OT books are unreliable and contain fantasy and exaggeration. I pointed out, the apostles quoted from the OT and upheld them as Holy Spirit inspired writings.



You were the one who proposed the 'all or nothing.' If this is truly your view, then what is reliable from the OT and what is your premise for believing so? JEDP is not an answer.



Then you don't believe any of what we call the Bible today is inspired by the Holy Spirit. You could have saved us a lot of time by saying so.



Mistakes? What mistakes are you speaking of? The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, which is a miracle, or all of Christ's miracles?



Is the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ part of what you consider "exaggerated nonsense?"



You mean Jesus did not speak of sin, judgment, forgiveness in His Name, that He must be delivered, die and rise again?

Perhaps it would help if you could quote your extra-biblical sources so I can better understand what you mean by 'gospel.'

I believe that the Bible is 66 books (there were more that the church de-inspired) that were written by men about the doings of God as they understood them. I believe the Jews completely recast there secular history into a miraculous fiction in Babylon when the OT was finalized. They remain stuck there with an ill-conceived concept of their place in the world and an ill-conceived Jewish Messiah.

Jesus taught the Gospel of The Kingdom of Heaven, not "Christ and him crucified". His gospel was largely lost and failed, the institutional Christian church replaced it.

Ridiculous means stuff like claiming God was disappointed in something he did, drown the whole world to start over, all except of coarse a n ancestor of the people who wrote such a silly story. Other atrocities as well.

 

[redleghunter]

As with other Book worshippers you aren't being intellectually honest.


The belief by the apostles thought that Jesus would "soon return" has everything to do with the false claim that God wrote the Bible and that it is inerrant.

This was my response:

You said the OT books are unreliable and contain fantasy and exaggeration. I pointed out, the apostles quoted from the OT and upheld them as Holy Spirit inspired writings.

Yet you responded I somehow made a false claim "God wrote the Bible." That is a complete misrepresentation of what I wrote. I wrote the apostles themselves said the Scriptures were inspired of the Holy Spirit. Post #20 should shed some light on this. And frankly, I don't know what you mean by "book worshippers."

JESUS SAID HE WOULD RETURN IN THEIR LIFETIME:

“For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.” – Mt. 16:27,28

This verse does not support your claim "Jesus said he would 'return' in their lifetime."

Jesus said His Kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36). However, many did see the Son of Man coming in His Kingdom: Acts 1:4-8 and Luke 24:50-53

“Tell us, when will these things be (the destruction of the temple), and what will be the sign of your coming, and of the end of the age? . . . This generation will not pass away until all of these things take place.” – Mt. 24:3,34

Your reference left out the context to the statement above.

Matthew 24: NKJV

32 “Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. 33 So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near—at the doors! 34 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.

“Behold, I am coming soon! (tachu – quickly, speedily (without delay)) Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy in this book.” – Rev. 22:7,12,20

I'm sure glad we define when Christ should return and what is considered by God as 'quickly.' Peter has some insight.

2 Peter 3: NKJV

3 Beloved, I now write to you this second epistle (in both of which I stir up your pure minds by way of reminder), 2 that you may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us, the apostles of the Lord and Savior, 3 knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, 4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.” 5 For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, 6 by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. 7 But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

“You (Chief Priests and Sanhedrin) shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven.” – Mt. 26:64

They sure will on judgment day.

“If I want him (John) to remain until I come, what is that to you. You follow me!” – Jn. 21:21-23 (According to church tradition, all the apostles except John died before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.)

According to the English language "If" means "if."

This is about as far as I will go with your asserted references without exegesis applied.[/QUOTE]

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

What you are pointing out is not even an inerrancy issue. None of the accounts are wrong or contradict information in the other accounts.

There would be a conflict in the narrative if one or another account had the third denial after the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] crowed. There is no evidence in any of the accounts this occurred.

Actually, in Mark it clearly states there was a rooster crowing before the third denial.

Mark 14:66-72 As Peter was below in the courtyard, one of the servant-girls of the high priest came, and seeing Peter warming himself, she looked at him and said, "You also were with Jesus the Nazarene." But he denied it, saying, "I neither know nor understand what you are talking about." And he went out onto the porch, and a rooster crowed. The servant-girl saw him, and began once more to say to the bystanders, "This is one of them!" But again he denied it. And after a little while the bystanders were again saying to Peter, "Surely you are one of them, for you are a Galilean too."
But he began to curse and swear, "I do not know this man you are talking about!" Immediately a rooster crowed a second time. And Peter remembered how Jesus had made the remark to him, "Before a rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times." And he began to weep.

 

[redleghunter]

Jesus taught the Gospel of The Kingdom of Heaven, not "Christ and him crucified". His gospel was largely lost and failed, the institutional Christian church replaced it.

How did you come to this conclusion ?

 

[redleghunter]

Actually, in Mark it clearly states there was a rooster crowing before the third denial.

My point was none of the accounts have the three predicted denials happening after the rooster crowed.

Again, Mark added a more detailed account.

Unless either one of us has some exhaustive knowledge of 1st AD rooster crowing habits, all Gospel accounts have a rooster crowing near or at dawn after the third denial.

Back to both of us being forward observers. We are both sending reports of tanks in the valley. You saw 100 and I saw 50. Who is right and who is wrong? Neither as we are reporting what we see. Consider then the enemy commander is captured and tells us he actually had 175 tanks in his unit. Is he wrong? No. Neither are we.

 

[rjs330]

That depends on your epistemology. We Westerners are steeped in Greek epistemology that dotes on physical details.

Middle easterners, from ancient times until even today use a different epistemology--they have a basically different way of determining "truth" (which I put into quotes deliberately). South Asians and East Asians (Chinese and Japanese, for instance) yet have their own epistemologies--different ways of discerning "truth."

Here is a fairly recent example: A few years ago, Hezbollah fired four missiles from Gaza into Israel. Witnesses testified uniformly: Four missiles, all visible in the air at the same time; three missiles were fired nearly simultaneously, the fourth followed a split second later, but all four were visible in the air at the same time. There was an Arab news photographer who caught the event, but in the cycling of his motorized shutter releases, three missiles were in one frame and the fourth missile was in a subsequent frame.

But since he had seen "four missiles in the air," and everyone testified "four missiles in the air," he Photoshopped his image so that it showed three missiles and then a trailing missile in the same picture. It showed what everyone actually saw. When this was discovered, he was uniformly criticized...in the West. But not in the Middle East or in the Far East. This is an illustration of what in Greek epistemology is a "discrepancy" that is not at all a discrepancy in Eastern epistemology.

Scripture is not Western epistemology. For that matter, God's own viewpoint certainly is not Greek epistemology.

If you were to ask God "how did Judas die?" God's eternal viewpoint would consider Judas' death in spiritual terms: Judas died in his sin...and both scriptural references are in agreement that he died in his sin.

God would also say he died by hanging himself. God sees both things you know. He sees historical events and sees the spiritual results or aspects of those events. This is a physical world he created with a spiritual aspect.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

My point was none of the accounts have the three predicted denials happening after the rooster crowed.

Again, Mark added a more detailed account.

Unless either one of us has some exhaustive knowledge of 1st AD rooster crowing habits, all Gospel accounts have a rooster crowing near or at dawn after the third denial.

Back to both of us being forward observers. We are both sending reports of tanks in the valley. You saw 100 and I saw 50. Who is right and who is wrong? Neither as we are reporting what we see. Consider then the enemy commander is captured and tells us he actually had 175 tanks in his unit. Is he wrong? No. Neither are we.

Mark says the third denial happened after the rooster crowed the first time.
Matthew says the prediction was that there would be three denials before there was a rooster crow.
This is not inerrancy.

If we reported tanks as per your scenario . . nobody would say we were lying, nobody would deny there were tanks. BUT NOBODY WOULD SAY WE WERE INERRANT and that is my point.

 

[redleghunter]

Mark says the third denial happened after the rooster crowed the first time.
Matthew says the prediction was that there would be three denials before there was a rooster crow.
This is not inerrancy.

No Mark says the third denial happened after the second crow.

“Immediately the rooster crowed a second time. And Peter remembered how Jesus had said to him, ‘Before the rooster crows twice, you will deny me three times.’ And he broke down and wept” (v. 72).

- Mark 14:66–72

All of the accounts have a rooster crowing after three denials.

As inerrancy is defined (see post #20), the only issue would arise if we have some manuscripts of Mark omitting mention of two rooster crows. This is possible given I have not researched such. Then we would have to determine which manuscript is viewed by the majority of scholars as the base manuscript.

Inerrancy as you are using it elicits the thought someone made an error or willfully mislead. That is actually questioning the infallibility of the information provided. If this is truly your approach then you would have to call into question every eyewitness account which did not match up 100% in every detail.

Basically you would have to question every account in the Bible as being in error because X amount of witnesses did not "get their stories straight." I mentioned earlier I myself would question any account where the eyewitnesses saw the same exact thing from the same exact perspective.

The Scriptures are Inspired but the Holy Spirit used human beings who back then did not have drones in the air with video downlink nor multiple camera angles.

In the case we are discussing none of the accounts are contradictory. Three sources state 3 denials and a rooster crow. The one in Mark records three denials and a rooster crowing. The witnesses are consistent. We have one with more detail.

By the rules of witness testimony, all of the Gospel accounts would be admitted as evidence.

Simon Greenleaf (principal founder of the Harvard Law School) wrote a book on this. Summary of his work

Testimony of the Evangelists - Wikipedia

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

No Mark says the third denial happened after the second crow.

“Immediately the rooster crowed a second time. And Peter remembered how Jesus had said to him, ‘Before the rooster crows twice, you will deny me three times.’ And he broke down and wept” (v. 72).

- Mark 14:66–72

All of the accounts have a rooster crowing after three denials.

As inerrancy is defined (see post #20), the only issue would arise if we have some manuscripts of Mark omitting mention of two rooster crows. This is possible given I have not researched such. Then we would have to determine which manuscript is viewed by the majority of scholars as the base manuscript.

There's no manuscript evidence of variation in the Mark narrative.

Inerrancy as you are using it elicits the thought someone made an error or willfully mislead. That is actually questioning the infallibility of the information provided. If this is truly your approach then you would have to call into question every eyewitness account which did not match up 100% in every detail.

Eye witness accounts are regularly found to be in error on minor points. You use the word "infallibility" . . . it is true infallibility is questioned by the contradiction. But of course in the Rooster story the little detail of whether there was one or two crowings doesn't really matter to us today . . . except to show we should be careful to not say "inerrant" or "infallible", since slight error and slight failing is demonstrated.

Basically you would have to question every account in the Bible as being in error because X amount of witnesses did not "get their stories straight." I mentioned earlier I myself would question any account where the eyewitnesses saw the same exact thing from the same exact perspective.

So you admit a witness can be credible while not being inerrant or infallible? Perhaps that's progress.

The Scriptures are Inspired but the Holy Spirit used human beings who back then did not have drones in the air with video downlink nor multiple camera angles.

Exactly.

In the case we are discussing none of the accounts are contradictory. Three sources state 3 denials and a rooster crow. The one in Mark records three denials and a rooster crowing. The witnesses are consistent. We have one with more detail.

By the rules of witness testimony, all of the Gospel accounts would be admitted as evidence.

I have no problem accepting them as evidence; only with claiming they are inerrant or infallible.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

It's telling that the same people who don't accept innerancy are the same people who do accept and even promote homosexuality, illegal immigration, and false gods, such as Allah.

When trust in God's word is eroded, human reason is all that's left. The "knowledge of good and evil", which is nothing less than the desire to self-govern, leaves one's skills of reason damaged (see Romans 1) which is why they fall of the wrong side of every argument.

 

[Colter]

How did you come to this conclusion ?

The Bible has Jesus preaching the gospel of The Kingdom of Heaven for 3 years before he was crucified. The religion of Jesus came into conflict with the religion of Judaism. So they finally had enough and tried to stop him. After Jesus left, the religion OF Jesus became a religion ABOUT Jesus as the original gospel was forgotten in the dust of the spectacular resurrection. Peter and others interpreted the meaning of the cross and the purpose of the incarnation selfishly through the lens of his old religious beliefs about blood sacrifices to theoretically please a national deity. Paul took the baton and ran with it making compromises to the Pagan world for the sake of numbers.