• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Who are the good examples?

Scarlett O.

Moderator
Moderator
Speaking of inerrancy, perhaps it should be noted that nowhere in the Scriptures do we find the doctrine that Jesus was inerrant—but precisely the opposite.
Craig,

The word inerrant and inerrancy means that a document or a person contains no error in content, character, doctrine, or person.

We believe that Jesus was inerrant - or without sin. You say that the Bible teaches the opposite of Jesus - that he WAS a sinner.

I, having seen you around here for 23 years, I am going to assume that you had the wrong definition of inerrant.

I am hiding your post. Let us know one way or another. Did you have the wrong definition of inerrant or do you believe that Jesus was a sinner?
 

Craigbythesea

Well-Known Member
Craig,

The word inerrant and inerrancy means that a document or a person contains no error in content, character, doctrine, or person.

We believe that Jesus was inerrant - or without sin. You say that the Bible teaches the opposite of Jesus - that he WAS a sinner.

I, having seen you around here for 23 years, I am going to assume that you had the wrong definition of inerrant.

I am hiding your post. Let us know one way or another. Did you have the wrong definition of inerrant or do you believe that Jesus was a sinner?
I have no idea from where you got your definition of the word “inerrant” but it is most certainly an errant definition. Merriam Webster and Oxford dictionaries are very clear in the meaning of the word “inerrant.” It means, “Free from error.” Moreover, the words error and sin are NOT synonyms and express very different concepts.

The Bible expressly states that Jesus was “without sin.” (Hebrews 4:15) and I have never wavered in my belief or teaching that Jesus lived a life that was completely free from sin. The Bible does not state, nor imply, that Jesus lived a life that was completely free from error—but it does clearly teach that Jesus taught historical error.

Matt. 24:36. “But about that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son, {Other ancient authorities lack [nor the Son]} but only the Father.
37. For as the days of Noah were, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.
38. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day Noah entered the ark,
39. and they knew nothing until the flood came and swept them all away, so too will be the coming of the Son of Man.” (RSV)

At least as early as the third century Christians were observing and writing that what they could see with their eyes and touch with their hands did not agree with what they were reading in Genesis 1-11. Indeed, Andrew Louth has given to us a full volume of selected quotes from the writings of the Fathers of the Church on Genesis 1-11 beginning with Clement of Rome late in the first century up through Theophylact of Ohrid in 1100. St. Augustine spent much of his adult life attempting to reconcile the first three chapters of Genesis with what he could plainly see to be the reality in which he lived. Late in his life (415 A.D.), he published a 400-page unfinished work entitled De Genesi ad litteram (The Literal Meaning of Genesis) in which he strenuously attempted to do but failed to do that which is, in fact, impossible.

The biodiversity that we have today in land animals would necessarily have been aboard the ark in order for us to have it today. This biodiversity is so immense that the ark as described in Genesis would have been only a tiny fraction of the required size. Then there are all the marine and fresh water animals that would have perished in such a flood—not to mention the 369,054 species of vascular plants (tracheophytes) and the 17,000 species of bryophytes—most of which that would have perished in such a flood. Did I mention the dinosaurs, mammoths, ground sloths, and saber toothed cats?

Jesus honestly taught what he believed to be true—but He was in error. I am a conservative evangelical Christian and I believe what conservative evangelical Christian scholars of Genesis have been teaching for more than 150 years regarding Genesis 6-8.
 

Ben1445

Well-Known Member
Dumb it down for me, brother.

How was the supernatural and divine Creator wrong about the creation? What PRECISELY did he say that was wrong? I'm not getting you.
He doesn’t believe that the first 11 chapters of Genesis are literally true.
He does recognize that Jesus taught them as being true.
He somehow sees that as Jesus, the Creator of all things as being confused and earnestly wrong about the beginning of the universe.
In my books, that would make Jesus a pathological liar by reporting creation to have come about one way but not having actually created that way or having actually sent the worldwide flood that Noah was saved from.

That is my take. My take is that he doesn’t understand or possibly believe in the deity of Jesus Christ.
 

Scarlett O.

Moderator
Moderator
He doesn’t believe that the first 11 chapters of Genesis are literally true.Than
He does recognize that Jesus taught them as being true.
He somehow sees that as Jesus, the Creator of all things as being confused and earnestly wrong about the beginning of the universe.
In my books, that would make Jesus a pathological liar by reporting creation to have come about one way but not having actually created that way or having actually sent the worldwide flood that Noah was saved from.

That is my take. My take is that he doesn’t understand or possibly believe in the deity of Jesus Christ.
Thank you, that helps.

Is that it, Craig?
 

Craigbythesea

Well-Known Member
Thank you, that helps.

Is that it, Craig?
No, that is not it! Being a conservative evangelical Christian, I believe in the truth of the Nicene Creed, which reads in part,

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered death and was buried,
and rose again on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures.

The man Jesus was NOT the Creator of all things nor was he inerrant. He had no formal education but was taught by his parents and the men in the community where he was raised. Therefore, he understood the first eleven chapters of Genesis to be an accurate, literal account of actual events. However, we know today a whole lot more about those eleven chapters than did Jesus the man. For example, we know today that those eleven chapters were written in a genre of literature hugely different from Genesis 12-50. Indeed, those eleven chapters were written in a genre of literature that is not found anywhere else in the Bible—but is found in epic tales, sagas, myths, and legends. That genre of literature never uses metaphorical language but exclusively literal language. Genesis 1-11 is a literal account of non-historical events—that is, events that never occurred. Indeed, the “windows of heaven” in Gen. 7:11 and 8:2 are to be understood as real windows rather than metaphorical or poetical expressions as young earth creationists claim. The “dome” in Genesis 1:6-8 is to be understood as a real solid dome rather than a poetical expression or mistranslation as young earth creationists claim.

Gen. 1:6. And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. (KJV)

The Hebrew Masoretic text of Genesis 1:6-8 (from which the Old Testament in the KJV is translated) expressly describes the creation of a flat earth covered with a dome that “separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome.”

1:6 ויאמר אלהים יהי רקיע בתוך המים ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים׃

1:7 ויעשׂ אלהים את־הרקיע ויבדל בין המים אשׁר מתחת לרקיע ובין המים אשׁר מעל לרקיע ויהי־כן׃

1:8 ויקרא אלהים לרקיע שׁמים ויהי־ערב ויהי־בקר יום שׁני׃

1:9 ויאמר אלהים יקוו המים מתחת השׁמים אל־מקום אחד ותראה היבשׁה ויהי־כן׃

The Septuagint also expressly describes the creation of a flat earth covered with a dome that “separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome.”

Gen 1:6 Καὶ εἶπεν ὁ θεός Γενηθήτω στερέωμα ἐν μέσῳ τοῦ ὕδατος καὶ ἔστω διαχωρίζον ἀνὰ μέσον ὕδατος καὶ ὕδατος. καὶ ἐγένετο οὕτως.
Gen 1:7 καὶ ἐποίησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸ στερέωμα, καὶ διεχώρισεν ὁ θεὸς ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ ὕδατος, ὃ ἦν ὑποκάτω τοῦ στερεώματος, καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ ὕδατος τοῦ ἐπάνω τοῦ στερεώματος.
Gen 1:8 καὶ ἐκάλεσεν ὁ θεὸς τὸ στερέωμα οὐρανόν. καὶ εἶδεν ὁ θεὸς ὅτι καλόν. καὶ ἐγένετο ἑσπέρα καὶ ἐγένετο πρωί, ἡμέρα δευτέρα.

The Latin Vulgate also expressly describes the creation of a flat earth covered with a dome that “separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome.”

6. dixit quoque Deus fiat firmamentum in medio aquarum et dividat aquas ab aquis
7. et fecit Deus firmamentum divisitque aquas quae erant sub firmamento ab his quae erant super firmamentum et factum est ita
8. vocavitque Deus firmamentum caelum et factum est vespere et mane dies secundus

The Wycliffe Bible also expressly describes the creation of a flat earth covered with a dome that “separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome.”

6 And God seide, The firmament be maad in the myddis of watris, and departe watrisfro watris.
7And God made the firmament, and departide the watristhat weren vndurthe firmament fro these watris that weren on the firmament; and it was don so.
8 And God clepide the firmament, heuene. And the euentid and morwetid was maad, the secounde dai.

The Wycliffe Bible was translated from the Latin Vulgate and hence used the word ‘firmament’. This word comes to us from the Latin word firmamentum which literally express the concept “that which strengthens or supports”. In Genesis 1:6-8, the word expresses the concept of the strong, solid dome that supported the water above the dome.

The NRSV correctly translates the Hebrew word רָקִיעַ (râqı̂ya‛) as “dome.” The evidence for the correctness of this translation is found in the use of this word in ancient Hebrew literature. Based upon this usage, the Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament by Brown, Driver, and Briggs published by Oxford University gives us the following meaning of it in Gen. 1:6, 7, and 8, “the vault of heaven, or ‘firmament,’ regarded by Hebrews as solid, and supporting ‘waters’ above it.” (p. 956). John Skinner, Principal and Professor of Old Testament Language and Literature, Westminster College, Cambridge (in his commentary on Genesis, page 21), writes,

6-8 Second Work: The Firmament.—The second fiat calls into existence a firmament, whose function is to divide the primeval waters into an upper and lower ocean, leaving a space between as the theater of further creative developments. The “firmament” is the dome of heaven, which to the ancients was no optical illusion, but a material structure, sometimes compared to an “upper chamber” (Ps. 104:12, Am 9:6) supported by “pillars” (Jb 26:11), and resembling in its surface a “molten mirror” (Jb 37:18). Above this are the heavenly waters, from which the rain descends through “windows” or “doors” (Gn 7:11, 8:2, 2 Ki 7:2, 19) opened and shut by God at His pleasure (Ps 78:23).

The KJV correctly translates the Hebrew word רָקִיעַ as “firmament”, but most modern readers of the KJV are unaware of the meaning of the word and do not realize that it came down to us from the Latin present active infinitive (firmāre) of the verb firmō, meaning “I make firm, strengthen, harden, or fortify.”

I am not professing to be wise or well learned; I am simply believing the data before me and sharing it with you.
 

Ben1445

Well-Known Member
The man Jesus was NOT the Creator of all things nor was he inerrant.
…his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.


A careful look at Colossians chapter one will tell you very easily that you are wrong. You are guilty of the error you claim Jesus is.
You say that Jesus was just repeating the fables that He had been taught. That is exactly where you are.
 

Scarlett O.

Moderator
Moderator
The man Jesus was NOT the Creator of all things nor was he inerrant. He had no formal education but was taught by his parents and the men in the community where he was raised. Therefore, he understood the first eleven chapters of Genesis to be an accurate, literal account of actual events. However, we know today a whole lot more about those eleven chapters than did Jesus the man.

The Bible says that through Jesus ALL things were created [in several passages].

So are you saying that while he was here on earth, Jesus was ONLY a faulty-thinking, educationally ignorant, and mortal man and knew NOTHING of the "truth" of Genesis 11 and taught it ALL wrong?

If Jesus' teachings of Genesis 1-11 are all wrong, then it would stand to reason that the Sermon on the Mount is not to be taken 100% seriously. His priestly prayer in John 17 is just as pathetic and filled with as much mortal error as our prayers. And so on.

And if JESUS CHRIST'S teachings are faulty and containing 11 chapters of ERROR, then there is NO WAY that Moses, Paul, Peter, Isaiah and ALL the rest of the genuinely mortal and faulty men's writings are 100% free of error. If the Son of God is wrong, then they all must teach some error.

The whole Bible is faulty, then, right? It would have to stand to reason. You DO see that?

If Jesus Christ was a MERE mortal only while living on earth, then there is no way under God's commands that Jesus's death on the cross would have meant anything. It would be like you and me dying for the world. It wouldn't work. How did his death pay for our sins, if Jesus taught wrong things and had no knowledge of the truth?

When do you believe that Jesus "turned back into" a divine Son of God? The resurrection? Too late. His death would have meant nothing as a faulty and ignorant mortal.

I taught science for many many years, but discussing the science of Genesis 1-11 with you now does not mean anything to me right now. What does is that you purport to believe that Jesus, on earth, was flawed and his teachings were flawed and he, during that time, had no divinity in him.

If that's true, Craig, then there is no truth to be found in the Bible and we should just pitch it in the trash.
 
Top