Why is it necessary for a Christian to believe that the Bible has no errors?

[OzSpen]

They can't keep abreast with all research - therefor one Bible translation for everything is not the best solution. Sometimes You have to track down the best translation of a verse, a chapter or a Biblical book. The teams also set limits for themselves, some of the limits made up for stylistic reasons, other reasons having more to do with that there are several copyrighted Bible version in English out already and You can't imitate any of them. We should wait for those who can choose between versions and for example translations in commentaries on Biblical books, Biblical section by Biblical section or a verse or a chapter at a time, not wait for more English versions:

Unix,

The people in the pew don't know how 'to track down the best translation of a verse, a chapter or a Biblical book' as that is a field for specialists.

Then one has to determine whether one goes with a meaning-for-meaning translation (dynamic equivalence) such as the NIV or NLT or word-for-word translation (formal equivalence) as in RSV, ESV, NRSV, KJV, NKJV, NASB - that is difficult to do with Greek as some variation is needed to make sense in English.

But this is getting away from the OP, whether it is important to have a Bible without error - inerrant. I happen to affirm the inerrancy of Scripture because I find that is what the Bible teaches. I want to obtain my doctrine of Scripture from Scripture. I consider that the Scriptures give us an understanding of the nature of inspiration and that is - to put it simply - that all Scripture is breathed out by the perfect God (in the original documents), according to 2 Tim 3:16. This means that the perfect God creates inerrant Scripture in the autographa, which is consistent with God's nature and attribute of perfection (Matt 5:48; Deut 32:4; Ps 18:30).

Oz

 

[Reformed Lutheran]

Reformed,

Please refer me to where I can find 'the original Greek text' (your language) so that I can confirm that the NIV translators left out melo, 'about to' in relation to Christ's second coming.

Oz

You can get a copy of the Greek New Testament , if you don't know Greek that won't help you much though,, you can get an interlienier Greek/NIV translation along with a Greek word study guide,, that way you can look at the Greek right up against the NIV and see where the NIV departed .. Or, you can try an English Greek literal translation,, that translates more literally word for word, like a Youngs Literal Translation

 

[grandvizier1006]

It's not the Bible or its doctrines that are in error, it's the people. Humans are fallible and biased so we'll inevitably interpret things differently as we read the Bible, even if it should be very obvious. Muslims, for example, think that when Jesus refers to "The Advocate" He's referring to...Mohammed. (Those who live by the sword die by the sword, btw). we Christians--all denominations--know that Jesus was referring to the Holy Spirit. There's stuff like Genesis, where some people think it's literal and others think it's symbolic, and a whole slew of doctrines, ideas, etc.

I personally believe that the Bible doesn't err in that the original writers and basic theology and doctrines are not "outdated" or "incorrect" just because we live in a different time and place from when the Bible was written. But there are always translating issues, and more importantly, people misinterpreting Scripture. So if you ever come across a Bible verse that challenges you, ask other Chrisitans for multiple interpretations, not just what you would want to hear.

finally, don't worry about being punished for "getting something wrong". If you believe that Scripture says this one thing but it's actually the exact opposite, it usually isn't a big deal if you made an honest mistake and your "error" isn't related to a core Christian belief (Trinity, salvation, etc.). If an "error" leads you to sin, I don't know, but my point is that it's not so,ething to be too concerned about.

 

[hedrick]

You can get a copy of the Greek New Testament , if you don't know Greek that won't help you much though,, you can get an interlienier Greek/NIV translation along with a Greek word study guide,, that way you can look at the Greek right up against the NIV and see where the NIV departed .. Or, you can try an English Greek literal translation,, that translates more literally word for word, like a Youngs Literal Translation

I know a bit of Biblical Greek, but I've also looked at detailed commentaries on the Greek text to get a sense of just what scholars actually look at when trying to understand a passage. Using an interlinear can be useful, in several ways, but you definitely shouldn't look at an interlinear and assume that based on that you know more than the NIV translators. To do a translation, you don't just look at the words, you need to understand the grammar and the way in which words were used in the 1st Cent. Without that, an interlinear is likely to be mislead you.

That's not to say that the NIV is perfect. In fact I think it's one of the more biased major translations. But most popular criticisms of it are wrong.

 

[hedrick]

[duplicate]

 

[Deidre32]

Deidre,

This is an excellent point that there might be errors and corruption in the Bible. If the Bible is not inerrant, how do you know it is true to believe what you state here: the overall message, God's grace for a relationship with Christ, and experiencing the Holy Spirit. How do you know this is true information if the Bible cannot be trusted?


Oz

Because I had an experience of faith by the Holy Spirit. I don't know if anyone believes me, but I know it happened.

 

[SarahsKnight]

Because I had an experience of faith by the Holy Spirit. I don't know if anyone believes me, but I know it happened.

I am willing to believe it, Deidre. Why? Because of the fact that you question and want to know things, because you are willing to concede (at least this is what it sounds like) that you don't have all the answers but are willing to seek and listen, rather than behaving narrow-minded or dogmatically to a point of being toxic to the Gospel message rather than helping spread it.

 

[Deidre32]

I am willing to believe it, Deidre. Why? Because of the fact that you question and want to know things, because you are willing to concede (at least this is what it sounds like) that you don't have all the answers but are willing to seek and listen, rather than behaving narrow-minded or dogmatically to a point of being toxic to the Gospel message rather than helping spread it.

Aw, thank you for this, wow...what a nice message.

 

[OzSpen]

You can get a copy of the Greek New Testament , if you don't know Greek that won't help you much though,, you can get an interlienier Greek/NIV translation along with a Greek word study guide,, that way you can look at the Greek right up against the NIV and see where the NIV departed .. Or, you can try an English Greek literal translation,, that translates more literally word for word, like a Youngs Literal Translation

I read and teach NT Greek. The NIV does not depart from my second edition of the Greek NT. The NIV provides a dynamic equivalence (meaning-for-meaning) translation. To understand the meaning of the text, one needs to understand the grammar, context and culture of the text. There are other factors to consider as well.

I use the ESV - so I'm not defending the NIV - but even the ESV (which updates and changes the RSV) cannot do a literal word-for-word and get a meaningful translation into English. Let's look at one example from a Bible study I'm teaching tomorrow. I speak of 1 Cor 6:1,

• KJV: ‘Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?’
• NKJV: ‘Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints?’
• ASV: ‘Dare any of you, having a matter against his neighbor, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints?
• ESV: 'When one of you has a grievance against another, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints?'
• NIV: 'If any of you has a dispute with another, do you dare to take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the Lord's people?'
• NRSV: 'When one of you has a grievance against a brother, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints?
• NASB: 'Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints?'
• Interlinear Greek New Testament: τολμα DARE τις ANYONE υμων OF YOU, πραγμα A MATTER εχων HAVING προς AGAINST τον THE ετερον OTHER, κρινεσθαι GO TO LAW επι BEFORE των THE αδικων UNRIGHTEOUS, και AND ουχι NOT επι BEFORE των THE αγιων SAINTS?

Which one of these translations sticks rigidly to a word-for-word translation? Which translation conveys the meaning most accurately?

From these various translations, we can see that translating from the Greek text to get meaning that is understandable to us is a challenging task. Before writing off the NIV, I suggest that there be a careful understanding of the issues in translating foreign languages from Greek to English. This is especially challenging when we are at a distance of about 2,000 years for the NT in understanding meaning and culture.

Oz

 

[SarahsKnight]

Aw, thank you for this, wow...what a nice message.

You are welcome. I meant it.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Asked this on another forum, and thought I'd ask it here, too.

Just curious on this point. If men were responsible for taking 'God's word' and putting it to paper, could it be that somewhere along the way, there were errors? That parts of the Bible might not be free from corruption? It requires faith to believe in the overall message of the Bible, and it requires the belief in God's grace to have a relationship with Christ...and to me, experiencing the Holy Spirit is all we truly 'need,' so why is it necessary to believe that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God?

I ask this because as I'm exploring churches, their 'mission statement' is wrapped up in believing that the Bible has no errors. (errors of man)

What do you think?

Hi Deidre. On this issue, I really don't think it's necessary for us to label the Word of God as "inerrant," and I personally don't find this situation very worrisome, although I can understand how it may be disconcerting to some people who hold to more literal expectations. Be that as it may, and without breaking into all of the various academic aspects that can be explored, I think it's probably sufficient to leave the Bible under the category of "Inspired, but humanly written."

Of course, various denominations approach this issue from different angles, leaving us without a consensus to fall back on. But, if you genuinely like a church you find, and even if they teach a 'firmer' view, just hang with it if you feel comfortable with the people there. If not, look around a little... You've got nothing to be ashamed of in doing so.

In Christ,
2PhiloVoid

 

[OzSpen]

Hi Deidre. On this issue, I really don't think it's necessary for us to label the Word of God as "inerrant," and I personally don't find this situation very worrisome, although I can understand how it may be disconcerting to some people who hold to more literal expectations. Be that as it may, and without breaking into all of the various academic aspects that can be explored, I think it's probably sufficient to leave the Bible under the category of "Inspired, but humanly written."

Of course, various denominations approach this issue from different angles, leaving us without a consensus to fall back on. But, if you genuinely like a church you find, and even if they teach a 'firmer' view, just hang with it if you feel comfortable with the people there. If not, look around a little... You've got nothing to be ashamed of in doing so.

In Christ,
2PhiloVoid

2PV,

However, what do you mean when you say the Bible is 'inspired'?

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

The message by the Spirit is altered by the way men reveal it. There is an obvious bias which books show of the writer, and different styles as well. Isaiah was a poet for example, and so the book is poetic. It's shrewd because he figured he'd be marked for death writing it.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

2PV,

However, what do you mean when you say the Bible is 'inspired'?

Hi Oz,

Basically, my perspective is that the Bible is 'God-breathed,' but when I say this, I mean that the Lord's Inspiration does not remove the usual limitations present in the human mind. So, in essence, our Bible does not reflect in all cases direct dictation made by the 'Voice of God' to the writers, but it is one in which, at the least, all the writers were moved by God's Spirit to express His message(s) as honestly, accurately, and prophetically as they possibly could.

Let me be clear that I'm not saying the Holy Spirit didn't "add" information to some of the writer's minds at certain times. What I am saying is that any information the writers might not have ordinarily known was also allowed (by God) to be tempered by any limitations or mental patterns particular to each writer.

My articulation shouldn't pose much of a problem to our maintaining that the Bible expresses God's Authority; it will pose a problem for those persons who require that God speak to us by overriding the typical thought processes of the human mind and enable a 'flawless' message to come about each and every time. It should be sufficient to simply say that the Bible is God's Revelation to mankind, wrapped in the human, cultural thought of it's times and left prone to the ongoing care-taking of the rest of the people of God through time.

But sure...I welcome anyone to disagree with me. It's no skin off of my back if they do.

[Now, before anyone jumps in to begin a "parlay," let's keep in mind that this OP thread is directed to the benefit of Deidre, and it isn't primarily for our own 'manly' jibes we might want to get in on one another in attempting to defend the idea of 'inerrancy.']

In Christ,
2PhiloVoid

 

[OzSpen]

Hi Oz,

Basically, my perspective is that the Bible is 'God-breathed,' but when I say this, I mean that the Lord's Inspiration does not remove the usual limitations present in the human mind. So, in essence, our Bible does not reflect in all cases direct dictation made by the 'Voice of God' to the writers, but it is one in which, at the least, all the writers were moved by God's Spirit to express His message(s) as honestly, accurately, and prophetically as they possibly could.

Let me be clear that I'm not saying the Holy Spirit didn't "add" information to some of the writer's minds at certain times. What I am saying is that any information the writers might not have ordinarily known was also allowed (by God) to be tempered by any limitations or mental patterns particular to each writer.

My articulation shouldn't pose much of a problem to our maintaining that the Bible expresses God's Authority; it will pose a problem for those persons who require that God speak to us by overriding the typical thought processes of the human mind and enable a 'flawless' message to come about each and every time. It should be sufficient to simply say that the Bible is God's Revelation to mankind, wrapped in the human, cultural thought of it's times and left prone to the ongoing care-taking of the rest of the people of God through time.

But sure...I welcome anyone to disagree with me. It's no skin off of my back if they do.

[Now, before anyone jumps in to begin a "parlay," let's keep in mind that this OP thread is directed to the benefit of Deidre, and it isn't primarily for our own 'manly' jibes we might want to get in on one another in attempting to defend the idea of 'inerrancy.']

In Christ,
2PhiloVoid

2PV,

That's essentially my understanding of the biblical view of 'inspiration'. The Scripture is theopneustos = God-breathed (2 Tim 3:16) and with regard to the 'prophecy of Scripture ... men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit' (2 Pet 1:20-21).

This is not God dictating to men so that they wrote Scripture, but God-breathed (inspired) Scripture coming through the use of human beings who were moved ('carried along' by the Holy Spirit to write.

Theological liberals - whether modernist or postmodernist - do not like that explanation because of presuppositions that assume a non-authoritative Scripture.

Why is it necessary to believe that the Bible has no error, to address Deidre's issue? That's the flow-on effect of Scripture that has the perfect God as its source. Since it comes through the instrumentality of human beings who were carried along by the Holy Spirit, this does not make the Scripture any less infallible. God the Holy Spirit who superintends Scripture makes sure that it is infallible/inerrant in all that it affirms in the original documents.

This does not make the Wycliffe Bible, KJV, ASV, NIV or ESV infallible.

Oz

 

[klutedavid]

A very tough topic.

The scripture contains the revelation of the Christ, fact.

This revelation of the Christ is profound and strongly supported by the
messianic prophecies. As far as predicting and narrating the life and
role of the Christ in salvation, the Bible is a perfect text. In this aspect
the scripture is faultless.

If you want to understand mankind, there is no better instruction manual.

Then is the scripture overall a perfect text, certainly not.

Did God allow the scripture to be distorted in certain places?

I am suspicious that God may have allowed some errors, so that we do
not hold the scripture to highly. After all the Christ Himself, should be
our primary preoccupation, not the Bible.

 

[OzSpen]

A very tough topic.

The scripture contains the revelation of the Christ, fact.

This revelation of the Christ is profound and strongly supported by the
messianic prophecies. As far as predicting and narrating the life and
role of the Christ in salvation, the Bible is a perfect text. In this aspect
the scripture is faultless.

If you want to understand mankind, there is no better instruction manual.

Then is the scripture overall a perfect text, certainly not.

Did God allow the scripture to be distorted in certain places?

I am suspicious that God may have allowed some errors, so that we do
not hold the scripture to highly. After all the Christ Himself, should be
our primary preoccupation, not the Bible.

David,

To whom are you replying? I urge you to learn to back quote so that we know which post you are addressing.

The Bible is more than a revelation of Christ Himself. It includes a revelation of history and culture in OT and NT.

What causes you to pose the question that God would allow Scripture to be distorted in certain places? What evidence do you have to suggest such a question?

Oz

 

[hedrick]

Theological liberals - whether modernist or postmodernist - do not like that explanation because of presuppositions that assume a non-authoritative Scripture.

Huh? You can just as well say that most people who believe in inerrancy like it because they want to have guaranteed answers that don't require any thought. These are both ad hominem attacks, explaining away a view because of assumed personal motivations. In fact most liberals believe what they do because the nature of Scripture is most consistent with it being a human witness to God's actions in history.

Inerrancy requires us to dismiss parts of science, archaeology, and history, and to ignore development of people's understanding of God.

It's obvious, for example, that in the early history of Israel God is seen as mandating large-scale slaughter. Yet the prophets teach that God expects his people to be a light to the Gentiles, an understanding that is picked up by Jesus. Aside from special Christian archaeologists, people today will tell you that the Biblical history up to about the kings is largely if not entirely legendary. There's nothing wrong with that. The people who put together the OT included their people's legends about how they came to be. While not literally true historically, their concept of God being responsible for creation, of establishing a covenant, of giving laws, of hold people accountable, are all key to our concept of God and how he works.

The Bible is not a theology textbook. God chose not to dictate a textbook, but to work in history, and to leave us the job of being his witnesses. Jesus' whole method of teaching uses stories and literary features such as irony and hyperbole. He seems to have been interested in making people think, and having personal reactions. The Bible uses a variety of images and concepts about the significance of Jesus death and resurrection. A lot of theology seems to be an exercise in misunderstanding poetry as prose. This is simply not consistent with the inerrancy viewpoint, which sees the Bible as a source of "propositional truth." Of course there are plenty of propositions. God is one. He call us to follow him, etc. But inerrancy misunderstands the basic intention and literary form of the Bible.

 

[NewCreation17]

Simply this,

Psalm 18:30 As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him.

2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

2 Corinthians 3:3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.

1 Peter 1:25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.

Having been filled with the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ and working and witnessing gifts of the Holy Spirit of GOD, i can say that GOD's word is truth, and GOD Himself has made sure His word endures forever. With this said, faith is something that comes from GOD, and Jesus Christ is the author and finisher of our faith. It sounds to me like you need a spiritual experience.
Seek GOD with all your heart and he will reveal Himself to you, as He did me and many others. I can tell you of a truth, the KJV bible i have is the word of GOD and GOD alone has made sure His word has endured. The Spirit also bears witness of the truth... You really need the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ John 16:13 "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come."

If you want to know how to be filled with the Holy Spirit and experience a relationship with GOD that only his Children have in Christ Jesus simply read this.

John 7:38-39 "He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)"

Ask GOD to fill you, seek Him with all your heart, and be willing to let go of all sin.

Luke 11:9-13
And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.

10 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

11 If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?

12 Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?

13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?




Not only is it a personal spiritual experience to be filled, GOD will give you gifts of the Spirit for the perfecting of the saints and His good pleasure. gifts of tongues, prophecy, healing, miracles, word of wisdom, word of knowledge. Etc..

1 Corinthians 12:4-13
4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.

5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.

6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.

7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.

8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;

9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;

10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:

11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.

13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Simply put, if you have the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ and believe on Him as the scriptures hath said, you will know that GOD Himself has taken the guesswork out, no need to try and grab a Hebrew lexicon or search for all these different versions of the bible. GOD has made sure His word endures forever, and has NOT made it difficult to find His word. I just simply choose KJV bible because that is the Bible i was filled with Holy Spirit of GOD with, after which i endured a lot of afflictions and visions and spiritual warfare. Its time to stop questioning and trust in GOD that he has kept His own word free from error, and start reading and growing closer to GOD. And you would know that GOD has kept his word free from error if you would seek Him with your whole heart.

 

[Job8]

What do you think?

INSPIRED = INERRANT = INFALLIBLE

Why is it necessary to believe this? Because if God is God, then His inspired written Word must be inerrant, therefore infallible.

This has nothing to do with translational issues, which is a separate matter.