Biblical Statements About Infallibility/Inerrancy (A Theology / No Science Topic)

Some Christian organizations have tenets that state the Bible and God are both infallible. I'm interested in which verses and/or passages give credence to such tenets. How are these passages normally used in an argument for Biblical Infallibility and/or Inerrancy?What I'm basically wondering is if the Bible itself really makes statements that both it's text and God are completely without error. I've started some preliminary searches but have only found arguments based on fulfilled prophecies, historical and scientific accuracy, and divine inspiration.thanx
PM1K

Yes, I'd really like to keep this purely theological.I don't want this topic to be a debate about whether the Bible IS inerrant or infallible. I'd to discuss any statements made within the Bible about God's or it's own properties as related to inerrancy and infallibility.thanx
PM1K{Edited to increase text size of portion of message - Adminnemooseus}This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 10-21-2004 12:58 PM

I think the flood account would be a good place to start.My main question about the flood story is does it really demostrate an error by God? If so, then is the Bible is making a case for a fallible diety.thanx
PM1K

I agree with ya, Lam. You cannot use the Bible to specifically prove anything about the Bible. That certainly is circular reasoning.I'm interested in finding out if the Bible is truly declaring itself and the God it represents as completely perfect. If it does make such a claim then other means would have to be employed to prove that claim. I should not have used the word argument in my original post. I would have been better off asking for passages that make statements about infallibility and inerrancy.Thanx for pushing me toward clarification
PM1K

Can we be a little less strict for this topic? Possibly grant this topic the HUGE assumption that each of the books in the Bible were written to work as part of the whole collection (like chapters)?Pretty Please
PM1K

What could you use to compare which books should be in the Bible with which books aren't supposed to be in? It's not exactly like a jig saw puzzle where the decision makers on the Canon had a picture to go by.Can my topic even get by the issue of why this collection of writings truly belongs together in a book called the Bible? If not, then the Bible can't say anything about itself at all and my topic is dead. We'd have a situation akin to taking a collection of Shakespearean plays and wondering what comments the individual plays make about such a collection. Unless Shakespeare himself created this set of plays to be grouped together and work as a whole then each play would be completely autonomous. Any statements made by one play would not apply universally to the whole group.You made a very good point PaulK. So good, in fact, I thought it would derail my topic. Since I really didn't want that to happen, I selfishly asked to be granted a "grouping" assumption. Perhaps I requested too much...thanx
PM1K

Since, as you say, there are no specific verses that require literally interpretations of scripture, then all of the Bible is not literally true. Some of it could be be literally true while other parts of it would be symbolically or allegorically true. The author in one part scripture could intend to write an allegory and then deal in symbolism later on or even use symbolism in his allegory. These passages can be true when these intentions are known. So the Bible is inerrant as long as you account for these other kinds of truth, right?The story of Noah was mentioned earlier in this thread. If you have the time could you undertake using those passages as an example of when statements are literal, symbolic and allegory?thanx
PM1K

Thanks for the post Winston!

quote:

---

2 Timothy 3:14 - 17
14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

---

Which scripture is the author talking about here? Just the scripture before 2 Timothy was written?Also can we focus on "inspiration of God". Inspiration seems a far cry from direct infallible dictation.

quote:

---

2 Peter 1:17-21
17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.
19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
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.

---

These verses speak of prophecy only. As not all scripture is prophecy how do we logically connect non-prophecy?Curiously
PM1K

I know this was in response to Crashfrog's argument about judging authority against reality but wouldn't your response mean that the Bible's authority is beyond our ability to prove?Here is what I've gathered from the responses. Please correct this argument if it's not what you're trying to get at:1) We judge reality via our perceptions
2) Our perceptions only reveal part of reality
3) An absolute authority reflects the whole of reality
4) Thus we're never able to completely judge how well an absolute authority conforms to realityIf a document(the Bible for example) is an presented as an absolute authority and we can never prove it's absoluteness how can we ever be sure it's really an absolute authority?thanx
PM1K

Howdy SalineSage;

quote:

---

Hebrews 1:1
God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets

---

This may be a good verse to use for inerrancy but isn't it related to the following verse from 2 Peter mentioned by Winston previously?

quote:

---

2 Peter 1:21
For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

---

Prophecy is a subset of what's in the Bible. Can verses that refer to it's inerrancy be used for the whole of the Bible?thanx
PM1K

Hi Hangdawg,Could you go into when the Hebrew word for murder would be used and when the Hebrew word for killing would be used?thanx
PM1K