Re: to GDR: Word of God is both Christ and Scripture
I'm going with the statement on inerrancy which declares that the Bible is true on every subject it addresses
According to the title of your topic, Bible inerrancy stands against all objections. But what does it stand on? A statement? People can write whatever they want.
I could, for the sake of the discussion, grant you that all the biblical claims that go against science are right. For example the entire universe being around 6,000 years old, the global flood or Jesus's resurrection. But even then, you have the immense task of addressing every single of the many contradictions in the Bible. For example you have two stories of Paul's conversion; one where the people that were with him saw the light but couldn't hear anything, and the other where they did hear voices but couldn't see anything. In the best case scenario, only one can be correct because they are mutually contradictory. This already shows that at least one single statement in the Bible is incorrect. But is worse; we know the Bible is full of such examples.
Wherever there are some claims that do appear to contradict the Bible, such as the tree rings, as the Statement on Inerrancy says, we trust that they will eventually be explained in accordance with the scripture.
I don't see how could that ever happen, but maybe the time to believe such biblical claims is when they are satisfactorily explained, not when we only have some statement saying that the Bible is free from error.
Re: to GDR: Word of God is both Christ and Scripture
Discussing about the two versions of Paul’s conversion…
The usual resolution of the incident you mention has to do with "hearing" meaning "understanding" and when it says they saw no man nothing contradicts that since in the other cases all they saw was light, not a person.
Let’s have a look at the verses themselves:
First, look at the NIV version:
quote: AC 9:7 (NIV). “The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone.” AC 22:9 (NIV). “My companions saw the light, but did not understand the voice of him who was speaking to me”.
If we try to make a single verse out of these two, we could arrive at something like this:
quote: The men traveling with Saul stood speechless; they heard the voice but did not understand it. They saw the light but did not see anyone.
At least when it comes to NIV I can’t really say it is contradictory. Now let’s look at the NKJV:
quote: AC 9:7 (NKJV). “And the men who journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice but seeing no one.” AC 22:9 (NKJV). “And those who were with me indeed saw the light and were afraid, but they did not hear the voice of Him who spoke to me”.
A single verse out of those would look something like this:
quote: And the men who journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice but did not hear the voice of Him who spoke to Paul. They saw the light and were afraid but did not see anyone.
Does it mean they heard some other voice but not that of Jesus? If that is the case I do note that while in the NIV version they hear Jesus's voice and don't understand it, in NKJV they don't hear it at all.
It is rather ambiguous, but I guess is not the best verse to argue for biblical contradictions. But there are other verses that I will present to you to argue against your idea that the Bible is inerrant. But before that I want to ask you if there’s any particular version of the Bible that you hold as inerrant or any version will do for you to support your case.
Discussing Bible contradictions to examine Bible Inerrancy
Ok, So KJV it is. Perhaps you should argue then that the KJV Inerrancy stands against all objections.
For what I think is a harder challenge than the one I proposed to you before, let’s look now at the two versions of Judas’s death:
quote: MT 27:3-8 (KJV). “3 Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, 4 Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that. 5 And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself. 6 And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood. 7 And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in. 8 Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day.”
AC 1:16-19 (KJV). “16 Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus. 17 For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry. 18 Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. 19 And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.”
I went through an article from Answers in Genesis where they offer explanations to “supposed contradictions”. The way they tried to get away with the contradiction is that Judas hanged himself, then his body decayed with time and eventually the tree branch or the rope gave in and broke off. Judas’s body fell down, burst open on impact and the entrails spilled out. They explain that the process of decaying would have taken the body to a point where it would have easily burst open on impact; which would not happen to a body that had just died or to someone dying from the fall. One may bend over backwards big time and give this far-fetched explanation the benefit of the doubt, but they are completely ignoring other contradictions present in the stories:
• In MT Judas repented of betraying Jesus; in AC he did not. • In MT Judas threw the silver he was paid in the temple; in AC he kept it. • In MT the priests used the silver to buy the field; in AC Judas himself bought the field with the silver.
• In AC it is said that Judas bought the field and fall headlong. Isn’t it rather suspicious that the story failed to mention the really unimportant detail that Judas hanged himself before falling?
I really don’t see how this contradiction could be explained away. In the article I mentioned from Answers in Genesis, the author speaks volumes of their bias when they start with this statement:
quote: “Since the Bible is inerrant Judas cannot have died by hanging and died by falling and bursting open. Rather, they are two different viewpoints of the same event”.
What do you make of this, Faith. Can you do a better job than them at explaining away this contradiction?
Re: Discussing Bible contradictions to examine Bible Inerrancy
I don't say the KJV is inerrant, it's a translation, translations aren't inerrant. I thought you wanted to know what translation I use.
This is what I asked you:
I want to ask you if there’s any particular version of the Bible that you hold as inerrant or any version will do for you to support your case.
And this was your response:
So it did seem like you were saying that the KJV was inerrant. But now I realize you are saying that translations are not inerrant. So which Bible are you arguing for when you say the Bible inerrancy stands against all objections? Are you saying that only the original manuscripts are inerrant?
If that is the case, that is something we cannot test. We have no original manuscripts. All we have are copies and translations, which as you and the Chicago Statement acknowledge, are not inerrant.
But no Bible is made up of original manuscripts. When the first canon was put together, as late as the 4th century, all they had were copies from the copies from the copies, etc. And when it comes to OT they had translations from the original language, which made it worse. So which document are you exactly talking about when you say the Bible is inerrant?
I guess, since we both agree that the KJV, and any translation for that matter are not free from error, you won’t be responding to my challenge about the two versions of Judas’s death.
As for Science I'll just say again, God blessed the West with true science among many other blessings, because of the West's adherence to Biblical Christianity. It doesn't matter whether the scientist is an atheist or a believer, the science is a gift from God to the Christian west.
And Allah blessed the Middle East with Maths, because of the Middle East's adherence to Islam. Funny thing, both Science and Maths, have helped us to better understand reality and realise these gods are nowhere part of the equation.
I could not have become a believer without what I took to be solid evidence, though I'd say that it was just about all witness evidence. I believed what many believable honest people said. And then I had some supernatural experiences of my own, and God answered my prayers and that too is evidence.
I understand this paragraph as you saying that you were already convinced and then had some supernatural experiences that confirmed your belief. But what were those experiences and what about it led you to the conclusions you arrived at?
I was arguing for a (very real) possibility that Paul actually felt Adam was created, from the beginning, as mortal.
The book of Genesis agrees with you. If you look at the story of Adam and Eve, when they ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil they didn't die nor became mortal. What happened to them was the exact thing the snake said. God kicked them off Eden so that they wouldn't eat from the Tree of Life and live forever. This means they weren't immortal, but if they had eaten from the Tree of Life they would have become. Hence, they were created mortal.
Maybe that's how Paul and the people of his time saw this story, but as time went on the meaning was altered to suit a different audience.