Some basic errors in the inerrant Bible

[Brieuse]

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.

Do you agree that Jesus purpose was fulfilled as prophesied in the Old Testament?

 

[notmyown123]

I do not plant my own gardens... I do not weave my own clothing... and me personally, I dont eat shellfish or any fish(besides bass) but that is purely preferance, and all food is now to be considered clean anyway... and as far as me condemning you, that is surely not the case. I believe you can turn away from your sins as I struggle to do... you assume that because I speak against homosexuality that I condemn homosexuals as if they were worse than others... well theyre not worse, theyre exactly the same... sinners in need of a savior, who only asks for repentance and faith.

The only time I open my mouth against homosexuals is when they begin to preach that it is ok to be a christian and gay, I am called by God to judge those who call themselves brothers and sisters in Christ, and they are called to judge me... not to put each other down but to help each other remain in the truth, but I am sorry my friend what you preach is no such truth...

 

[Brieuse]

I do not plant my own gardens... I do not weave my own clothing... and me personally, I dont eat shellfish or any fish(besides bass) but that is purely preferance, and all food is now to be considered clean anyway... and as far as me condemning you, that is surely not the case. I believe you can turn away from your sins as I struggle to do... you assume that because I speak against homosexuality that I condemn homosexuals as if they were worse than others... well theyre not worse, theyre exactly the same... sinners in need of a savior, who only asks for repentance and faith.

The only time I open my mouth against homosexuals is when they begin to preach that it is ok to be a christian and gay, I am called by God to judge those who call themselves brothers and sisters in Christ, and they are called to judge me... not to put each other down but to help each other remain in the truth, but I am sorry my friend what you preach is no such truth...

It is ok to be a Christian and gay.

 

[savedandhappy1]

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.

So you don't believe you will be raised from the dead either?

You don't believe that Jesus was seen by over 500 people after His resurrection?

You believe in the ascension?

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

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.

I think that there is a misconception of the term. I believe in its inerrancy, in regards to the message of salvation and God's purpose for us, how to live, etc. Theres no way it can be textually perfect, as there are many translations and modern languages in which it's translated to. That being said, I still don't feel it in any way compromises the validity of the bible as a source of revelation from God.

 

[onemessiah]

So you don't believe you will be raised from the dead either?

You don't believe that Jesus was seen by over 500 people after His resurrection?

You believe in the ascension?

Why should she?

There is not a smidge of proof that any of that happened.

I mean think about it. God is here walking among us, resurrected himself after a public death, and his resurrected body walks around talking to people and ascends to heaven and yet NO ONE without a christian disposition found it significant enough to record these things??

I think it's easier to just admit it never happened.

 

[GenemZ]

Why should she?

There is not a smidge of proof that any of that happened.

I mean think about it. God is here walking among us, resurrected himself after a public death, and his resurrected body walks around talking to people and ascends to heaven and yet NO ONE without a christian disposition found it significant enough to record these things??

I think it's easier to just admit it never happened.

I always find it amazing how God always allows for a way out of believing. If God made it impossible not to believe? There would be no volition in man.

The Lord did not reveal himself to everyone after the resurrection. That would cause those who do not want to believe, to be forced to believe. The result would be belief for a wrong reason. He only revealed himself to those who already believed in him.


What we all believe is only symptomatic of the outcome of God drawing us invisibly. If he was able to draw us? We end up revealing belief in Jesus Christ.

That is why those who do not believe are said to be already condemned. For they are condemned as a result of rejecting the drawing of the invisible God. They will not believe in Christ. They are condemned because of not believing in the personal drawing of the Father. Not believing in Christ makes it known they have already rejected God the Father. Unbelievers do not find themselves able to believe because they have already been condemned. Its not been granted to them to find belief in Christ.

John 6:44 (New International Version
"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day."
​

Belief in Christ is an outward sign that we believed the invisible God in his drawing us to himself.

Matthew 16:16-17 (New International Version)
"Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."

Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven."​

Rejection of Christ is a sign of having rejected the Father's drawing. Rejection of Christ does not condemn us. Its a sign that we have already been condemned.

John 3:18 (New International Version)
"Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son."
​

We are not - not condemned because we believed in Christ. We believed in Christ because we were not condemned. The Father gave us to Christ after we received the Father's approval.

John 6:37 (New International Version)
"All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away."
​

Anyone getting this?



Grace and peace, GeneZ

 

[lincolngreen50]

Why should she?

There is not a smidge of proof that any of that happened.

I mean think about it. God is here walking among us, resurrected himself after a public death, and his resurrected body walks around talking to people and ascends to heaven and yet NO ONE without a christian disposition found it significant enough to record these things??

I think it's easier to just admit it never happened.

Onemessiah.
One who does not believe will never understand the Word of God.
One who does not have faith and trust in God will always be confused by Holy scripture,the Word of God.
Open your heart to the Lord your God and repent of your sins.
Time is running short.

 

[RMDY]

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.

Foru.ms is a forum for discussion or debate. I choose discussion, not debate.

 

[Ohioprof]

So you don't believe you will be raised from the dead either?

You don't believe that Jesus was seen by over 500 people after His resurrection?

You believe in the ascension?

No. I don't.

 

[Ohioprof]

Foru.ms is a forum for discussion or debate. I choose discussion, not debate.

Okay, that seems fine. But this particular forum section is entitled "Debates on homosexuality." You are certainly free not to debate if you don't wish to. Others are going to debate, since this is specifically a debate forum.

 

[Ohioprof]

Do you agree that Jesus purpose was fulfilled as prophesied in the Old Testament?

No.

 

[Ohioprof]

I do not plant my own gardens... I do not weave my own clothing... and me personally, I dont eat shellfish or any fish(besides bass) but that is purely preferance, and all food is now to be considered clean anyway... and as far as me condemning you, that is surely not the case. I believe you can turn away from your sins as I struggle to do... you assume that because I speak against homosexuality that I condemn homosexuals as if they were worse than others... well theyre not worse, theyre exactly the same... sinners in need of a savior, who only asks for repentance and faith.

The only time I open my mouth against homosexuals is when they begin to preach that it is ok to be a christian and gay, I am called by God to judge those who call themselves brothers and sisters in Christ, and they are called to judge me... not to put each other down but to help each other remain in the truth, but I am sorry my friend what you preach is no such truth...

It is okay to be Christian and be gay. You want to drive gay people out of the church? When did Jesus ever call for that?

 

[RMDY]

Originally Posted by Brieuse
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.


Originally Posted by Onemessiah
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....."

I had to make another comment on both your posts.

The original rolls of the new testament---NT Scriptures----are inspired by God.
Nonetheless, the english versions are just translations. Have any of you taken the time to read them in greek rather than english?

In the words of The Lockman Foundation:

"The New American Standard Bible has been produced with the conviction that the words of Scripture as originally penned in the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek were inspired by God. Since they are the eternal Word of God, the Holy Scriptures speak with fresh power to each generation, to give wisdom that leads to salvation, that men may serve Christ to the glory of God."

I see a lot of bickering over the english translations, but nonetheless, I see no one claiming the greek texts are mistranslated. Yet, people bicker over the definitions of the greek.

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.

From the English Standard Version:

So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe."

Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you."


Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe."



Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!"



Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
John 20:25-29

 

[Brieuse]

For somebody who has a Greek signature, I'm really surprised that you don't know that the Greek language we get the New Testament from doesn't have punctuation like the English language has.

So, assuming that these punctuation problems really did exist, that tells us that the problem isn't with the Bible, but with the translation.

The second problem is that you've taken a perceived problem in one verse and run with it, not bothering to look into the subject at all.

In Bible study, there is a principle called "the analogy of scripture" (also sometimes called the "harmony of scripture"), which means simply that scripture interprets scripture and that the Bible should be taken as a whole, not just using prooftexts here and there to back up what you already believe.

In this case, rather than taking one verse with an apparent problem and choosing to make a doctrine around it, you should have grabbed a concordance and looked up all of the references to the resurrection.

You would have seen it stated over and over that the resurrection was, indeed, on the first day.

You would have seen that the disciples met on the first day because they knew (and remember, they're the ones who were with Jesus) that this was the day that Jesus rose.

Well, yes, we're debating translations of the Bible, and as you saw from the link, those are some of the errors.

 

[WarEagle]

Well, yes, we're debating translations of the Bible, and as you saw from the link, those are some of the errors.

The problem is that you haven't really demonstrated any errors. So far, all you've shown is that you don't get basic hermeneutic principles.

 

[GenemZ]

It is ok to be a Christian and gay.

But not to be actively gay....


God saves anyone who accepts Christ. But,


God does not accept the sin.


To say that God approves homosexuality is an extra slap in the face of Christ as he hung on the cross to die for that sin.