Some basic errors in the inerrant Bible

[OllieFranz]

I didnt know we were debating fabrics and food. I mustve got turned around...

The point is some Gentiles say that God made them that way, while Moses(the man that spoke to God face to face) wrote from his own account of what the Lord told him about fabrics and food*... either you believe what Moses wrote, or you don't.


* And Moses wrote it down in the same book (Leviticus) that he wrote the two lines about "man-lying." He even called it the same thing in all three cases toevah (taboo -- usually translated abomination).

 

[OllieFranz]

I personally love the way that translation errors are brought up constantly... as if there has not been a million people studying the translations now... they might can argue 1 Cor 6:9 because the whole sentence is based on the one word, but Lev 18:22 spells it out nice and clear for those that want to see it

To lie in one's wife's bed with a male is ritually taboo.

Yup, really clear.

It helps knowing that the ancient Jews understood it to mean being the "active" partner in a specific sexual act with another man. It also helps knowing that it was a part of the Holiness Code or Separateness Code of Leviticus, which was never binding on non-Jews and from which the Council of Jerusalem officially exempted Christians (Acts 15)

 

[shepsgirl]

Why are you so desperately trying to prove that parts of the Bible are false? If you believe parts are false, why do you even read the Bible? Another poster said something like this in a different thread: If God is almighty and could raise Jesus from the dead, how hard would it be for Him to guard His Word when it was being translated? It makes no sense that God would send His Holy Spirit to inspire the authors of the books of the Bible, bring the books together to make the Bible- the book that holds the most important information in the world, and then let the translators come along and mess them up. Why would He allow that?

 

[Brieuse]

As does the whole of God's Word. Anybody who was really seeking the truth could not sit down with God's Word and all it does say about man and woman, and marriage, and producing Godly offspring, and the Church being the Bride and Christ being the Bridegroom, and any number of other things and think for a second that God in any way condones homosexual fornication.

Christ being the Bridegroom? I thought he was the SON of God.

Just to highlight that I don't believe that sexuality makes a difference to the definition of marriage.

 

[Brieuse]

I didnt know we were debating fabrics and food. I mustve got turned around...

The point is some homosexuals say that God made them that way, while Moses(the man that spoke to God face to face) wrote from his own account of what the Lord told him about homosexuality... either you believe what Moses wrote, or you dont.

Read the whole Bible, don't cherry pick.

God is opening my eyes more and more each day.

 

[Brieuse]

I didnt know we were debating fabrics and food. I mustve got turned around...

The point is some homosexuals say that God made them that way, while Moses(the man that spoke to God face to face) wrote from his own account of what the Lord told him about homosexuality... either you believe what Moses wrote, or you dont.

See, I get accused of picking and choosing out of the Bible, but you guys do the same :-s

During my quiet time last night I really enjoyed reading my Bible with God as my guide through the passages. It's been a bit hectic lately so my quiet times haven't really been so quiet.

He teaches me the Word, not man.

 

[lincolngreen50]

See, I get accused of picking and choosing out of the Bible, but you guys do the same :-s

During my quiet time last night I really enjoyed reading my Bible with God as my guide through the passages. It's been a bit hectic lately so my quiet times haven't really been so quiet.

He teaches me the Word, not man.

The Word of God is perfect because He is perfect.

 

[notmyown123]

How did I "cherry-pick" They aksed for a verse that says homosexuality was a sin and I gave it to them. The fact that we dont follow the others today (as if I have a choice what fields my clothers are grown in) does not change the fact that God said they were detestable. Your argument sounds alot like "we do some things that God told moses were wrong so why not do it all"

 

[Ohioprof]

Why are you so desperately trying to prove that parts of the Bible are false? If you believe parts are false, why do you even read the Bible? Another poster said something like this in a different thread: If God is almighty and could raise Jesus from the dead, how hard would it be for Him to guard His Word when it was being translated? It makes no sense that God would send His Holy Spirit to inspire the authors of the books of the Bible, bring the books together to make the Bible- the book that holds the most important information in the world, and then let the translators come along and mess them up. Why would He allow that?

Because the Bible was never inspired by God or the Holy Spirit, and Jesus never literally rose from the dead. The books of the Bible were written by fallible human beings seeking to understand God. The Bible was assembled by men who sought to exclude the various forms of Christian doctrine that they disliked. Some Gospels were excluded from the Bible for this reason. Fortunately, we have some of them as alternative sources about early Christianity.

 

[Ohioprof]

How did I "cherry-pick" They aksed for a verse that says homosexuality was a sin and I gave it to them. The fact that we dont follow the others today (as if I have a choice what fields my clothers are grown in) does not change the fact that God said they were detestable. Your argument sounds alot like "we do some things that God told moses were wrong so why not do it all"

I think the point is that if Christians ignore some verses of the Bible, while holding up another verse to denounce gay people's love, that's not fair to gay people, and it's not consistent Biblical interpretation. It's picking out verses that confirm people's anti-gay prejudices and raising those up, while ignoring other verses that people find inconvenient in their lives.

 

[RMDY]

What's odd is some of the posters claim the Bible they hold in their hand is inerrant. They then deduce that there could not have been translation errors. Now they are silent.

The original rolls of the new testament was how God intended it to be, but unfortunantly, we can only work with whatever resources we have available today. I myself am unhappy with the KJV and believe it has errors, especially in translations involving the usage of the word "pray."

 

[onemessiah]

The original rolls of the new testament was how God intended it to be, but unfortunantly, we can only work with whatever resources we have available today. I myself am unhappy with the KJV and believe it has errors, especially in translations involving the usage of the word "pray."

Surely an omnipotent god would find a way to preserve the accuracy of his message, especially given the seriousness of the matter? I mean, billions of eternal souls are at stake here.

"With god, all things are possible....."

 

[RMDY]

Surely an omnipotent god would find a way to preserve the accuracy of his message, especially given the seriousness of the matter? I mean, billions of eternal souls are at stake here.

"With god, all things are possible....."

Your not taking the whole Chapter 19 into consideration. About that line, Jesus is talking about a rich man who cannot give up his love of the world to follow God.

Mat 19:26 - Clark's commentary
With men this is impossible - God alone can take the love of the world out of the human heart. Therefore the salvation of the rich is represented as possible only to him: and indeed the words seem to intimate, that it requires more than common exertions of Omnipotence to save a rich man.

Mat 19:26 - John Wesley's commentary
Jesus looking upon them - To compose their hurried spirits. O what a speaking look was there! Said to them - With the utmost sweetness: With men this is impossible - It is observable, he does not retract what he had said: no, nor soften it in the least degree, but rather strengthens it, by representing the salvation of a rich man as the utmost effort of Omnipotence.



Concerning the Scriptures, have you read them? Before you disagree with its accuracy, have you made an attempt to read them in the Greek language and understand actual greek. I believe the scriptures have been preserved, especially in the oldest manuscripts available and in the greek and hebrew languages. But unfortunantly, people tend to misunderstand greek words and translate them improperly on minor things, which tend to become bigger problems than intended.

The whole message of the gospel has not changed: Repent and believe in the Son of God and confess that he is the Lord and Saviour of your life. Love others as you would love yourself and love God. Keep the commandments of Jesus Christ and live according to the Spirit. Become baptised in the name of the Son, the Father, and the Holy Spirit.

Do not blasphame the Holy Spirit. That is the only unforgivable sin.


Christianity at the core is accepting God as your father and having a relationship with him through Jesus Christ.

Our righteousness is not based on works but on mercy, because our own righteousness is like filthy rags.

By the way, I am not looking for a debate. If your looking for one, you will be disappointed.

In Love,

Rob Dynneson

 

[Ohioprof]

Your not taking the whole Chapter 19 into consideration. About that line, Jesus is talking about a rich man who cannot give up his love of the world to follow God.

Mat 19:26 - Clark's commentary
With men this is impossible - God alone can take the love of the world out of the human heart. Therefore the salvation of the rich is represented as possible only to him: and indeed the words seem to intimate, that it requires more than common exertions of Omnipotence to save a rich man.

Mat 19:26 - John Wesley's commentary
Jesus looking upon them - To compose their hurried spirits. O what a speaking look was there! Said to them - With the utmost sweetness: With men this is impossible - It is observable, he does not retract what he had said: no, nor soften it in the least degree, but rather strengthens it, by representing the salvation of a rich man as the utmost effort of Omnipotence.



Concerning the Scriptures, have you read them? Before you disagree with its accuracy, have you made an attempt to read them in the Greek language and understand actual greek. I believe the scriptures have been preserved, especially in the oldest manuscripts available and in the greek and hebrew languages. But unfortunantly, people tend to misunderstand greek words and translate them improperly on minor things, which tend to become bigger problems than intended.

The whole message of the gospel has not changed: Repent and believe in the Son of God and confess that he is the Lord and Saviour of your life. Love others as you would love yourself and love God. Keep the commandments of Jesus Christ and live according to the Spirit. Become baptised in the name of the Son, the Father, and the Holy Spirit.

Do not blasphame the Holy Spirit. That is the only unforgivable sin.


Christianity at the core is accepting God as your father and having a relationship with him through Jesus Christ.

Our righteousness is not based on works but on mercy, because our own righteousness is like filthy rags.

By the way, I am not looking for a debate. If your looking for one, you will be disappointed.

In Love,

Rob Dynneson

Since this is a debate forum, it is odd to say that you are not looking for a debate. Debate is what this particular forum is for.

 

[Brieuse]

How did I "cherry-pick" They aksed for a verse that says homosexuality was a sin and I gave it to them. The fact that we dont follow the others today (as if I have a choice what fields my clothers are grown in) does not change the fact that God said they were detestable. Your argument sounds alot like "we do some things that God told moses were wrong so why not do it all"

To use the old Leviticus laws to define sin is to reject the purpose of the return of the Messiah. Further, if you wish to define sin by the Levitical Laws you cannot cherry pick the Levital Laws and should accept them all.

 

[artybloke]

Because the Bible was never inspired by God or the Holy Spirit, and Jesus never literally rose from the dead.

I might possibly disagree with both halves of this statement; though I agree that the Bible is not verbally inspired, and I'm not sure what I really mean yet by Jesus rising from the dead.

The Bible was assembled by men who sought to exclude the various forms of Christian doctrine that they disliked.

The first half is definitely true; but I personally am pretty pleased we didn't go with gnosticism. I can see Athanasius reading Gnostic texts and thinking, "I'm not believing that, it's silly."

 

[notmyown123]

...I think I'm confused. You started this thread ,brieuse, to show what you thought to be obvious errors in the Bible. And your saying I cherry-pick???? This entire thread was dedicated to showing everyone how you dont believe in the entire bible and simply choose what you like.That is what we call "cherry-picking" my friend.

 

[Brieuse]

...I think I'm confused. You started this thread ,brieuse, to show what you thought to be obvious errors in the Bible. And your saying I cherry-pick???? This entire thread was dedicated to showing everyone how you dont believe in the entire bible and simply choose what you like.That is what we call "cherry-picking" my friend.

I'm not sure how your accusations apply?

I'm highlighting various errors in the Bible. I haven't cherrypicked these errors. You on the other hand chose to condemn me on being gay but ignored many other levitical laws which I am willing to wager you are breaking without a second thought.

 

[Ohioprof]

I might possibly disagree with both halves of this statement; though I agree that the Bible is not verbally inspired, and I'm not sure what I really mean yet by Jesus rising from the dead.



The first half is definitely true; but I personally am pretty pleased we didn't go with gnosticism. I can see Athanasius reading Gnostic texts and thinking, "I'm not believing that, it's silly."

I mean that I do not believe there was a literal resurrection of Jesus, no bodily resurrection. I think Jesus died, and that was it. He died, the same as everyone else dies. To me the resurrection is a metaphor.

It's fine if you disagree with me. We can disagree agreeably.

 

[OllieFranz]

How did I "cherry-pick" They aksed for a verse that says homosexuality was a sin and I gave it to them. The fact that we dont follow the others today (as if I have a choice what fields my clothers are grown in) does not change the fact that God said they were detestable. Your argument sounds alot like "we do some things that God told moses were wrong so why not do it all"

I don't dispute that some of the things that God called "detestable" in Leviticus are not binding on Christians (see Acts 15) while others are. I asked how you determine which is which? What I asked was: Why, exactly, do you include "man-lying" in the "still wrong" category, when eating pork or shellfish, or wearing blended fabrics are not?