Are There Errors in the Bible?

RaptureReady · Jul 13, 2004

Craig, reading your post above, are you an evolutionist? Do you really believe the earth is billions of years old? COuld you please clarify for me where you stand on these issues.

RaptureReady · Jul 13, 2004

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
Whether or not there are errors in the Bible is partially a matter of perspective, but there can be NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER that there are errors in understanding the Bible. There are many people who post to this message board who have never bothered to use so much as a basic Bible dictionary. If you really believe that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, why don’t you bother to study it as such? Why do you sit in front of your TV and watch trash when you could be learning the languages in which God gave the Bible to us? DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE THAT THE BIBLE IS THE INERRANT WORD OF GOD? If you did, your life would surely show it.

Amen!

KeithS · Jul 13, 2004

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />We have an inerrant message and inerrant autographs. You surely haven't proven otherwise.

This is nothing more than your personal opinion, and a very stifling opinion at that. WE DO NOT HAVE THE AUTOGRAPHS AND WE DO NOT KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THEY WERE ERROR FREE!!! [/QUOTE]Craig,

We obviously do not have the original autographs, but to question whether the original autographs were free of error is pushing the envelope. If the original autographs were not error-free, then we are forced to question the integrity of God. How can we say those suppossed errors are accidental verses intentional? How can we ever identify them? Perhaps I misunderstood your statement and it's context.

KeithS · Jul 13, 2004

Originally posted by Charles Meadows:
Craig,

"The Bible is not a text-book on the origin of man, and Christians, unless they are genuine biologists, need to concern themselves with the origin of sin and the atonement for sin rather than with physical anthropology..."

Very nicely said!

Seems you both failed to read, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth...." God certainly does not expect me to become a biologist, or an anthropologist, or an astrophysicist, but he expects me to understand some measure of these things to "rightly divide the word of truth". As soon as biologists declare man evolved from animals, God expects the uneducated fishermen to declare "thus saith the Lord".

I don't have the background of either of you educationally, but I am not stupid. I may be uninformed and in need of enlightenment in some areas, but that does not disqualify me from forming opinions.

By the way, if we listened to "scientists" we would have believed them when they said Sodom and Gomorrah never existed. That the tale was a myth created for some spiritual purpose. My only point is that science often works with incomplete evidence and purports theories based on this incomplete evidence. The problem is that they report the theories a bit too "factually" then act surprised when they are disproven or when new evidence supercedes the old - like with the formation of galaxies.

Pastor Larry · Jul 13, 2004

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
<blockquote>quote:<hr /> There is simply no reason to posit errors in the text of Scripture. And we certainly cannot separate our faith from this issue. If the Bible came from God, then it can have no errors, since God cannot lie. If there are errors (lies) in teh Bible, then it did not come from God, and we are left up to our own minds to determine what is "truth" and what is not. That is a philosophically and theologically indefensible position.

I can not help but get highly offended when I read stuff like this on a Christian message board. God is not an action figure that one can purchase at K-Mart and play with in the sandbox. It staggers my mind how anyone could speak so presumptuously about God. [/QUOTE]Craig, It staggers my mind as to how you can say something like this. I said nothing presumptuous at all. I have simply believed God's word. He is the one who said it was "God-breathed" (all of it), and he is the one who said it was impossible for him to lie. I have no problems believing either. The doctrine of Scripture is more fundamental to Christianity than most allow. We tend to have a very weak doctrine of Scripture. We do not hold the word of God in very high esteem. And thus we end up with bad argumentation, artful dodging, etc.

You decry the methods of Josh McDowell (whom I haven't read) as intellectually dishonest, but when someone says that a day, morning and evening, equal millions of years you think they are being truthful. Now, can you honestly say that you gave that serious thought??? How can one be intellectually dishonest and not the other??? Surely you can see through that.

The fact remains that evolutionary biology is not proven. It is asserted without proof and indeed contrary to the actual proof that we have.

Charles says he doesn't believe YEC because of the great improbability of it. But have you guys ever stopped to consider the astronomical odds stacked against OEC or evolutionary biology? They are statistically non-existent. There is no chance at all that evolutionists are right, based on the mere probability, not to mention the science involved. We need a healthy return to critical thinking skills to teach young people to think through teh evidence rather than just buying what Dr. So and So says ...

Pastor Larry · Jul 13, 2004

He doesn't have to. Any university worthy of the designation has thousands of volumes in its library that document that the earth is billions of years old. And besides the biology, geology, astrophyics, astronomy, molecular chemisty, etc., who wants to believe that God created the earth with trillions of fossils to fool us! [Big Grin]

In that same library you will find all kinds of books that document that God doesn't exist, that all religions lead to the same God, the Christ was not God, etc. Do you really think we should base our trust on the number of volumes that will claim a particular thing?

It is not necessary to believe in millions of years to have a fossil record. Nor is it absurd to think that God created the earth with the appearance of age. He most certainly did.

The Bible is not a text-book on the origin of man, and Christians, unless they are genuine biologists, need to concern themselves with the origin of sin and the atonement for sin rather than with physical anthropology...

Interestingly enough, the Bible ties these two things together in Gen 3 and Rom 5. The problem of death in the world is the direct result of sin. Prior to sin, there was no death for living creatures ... those with a nephesh. The biologist that does not take this into account cannot possibly come to a correct conclusion on physical anthropology.

Charles Meadows · Jul 13, 2004

Larry,

" But have you guys ever stopped to consider the astronomical odds stacked against OEC or evolutionary biology? They are statistically non-existent. There is no chance at all that evolutionists are right, based on the mere probability, not to mention the science involved."

Where do you get this kind of thing?????

"We need a healthy return to critical thinking skills to teach young people ."

Yes we do!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think you missed a few things -

1. Few would imply that a day is symbolic of a million years or something like that. My argument is that the creation account is NOT symbolic at all. It is theological and not meant to biologically describe creation at all.

2. OEC does not equal evolution.

3. I still think you are not enough familiar with the "science" side to the issue if you insist that the facts are all in favor of YEC!!

Charles Meadows · Jul 13, 2004

Larry,

"In that same library you will find all kinds of books that document that God doesn't exist, that all religions lead to the same God, the Christ was not God, etc. Do you really think we should base our trust on the number of volumes that will claim a particular thing?"

Why is it that so many conclude that God doesn't exist?? Ps 14 would tell us that the fool says such things - and certainly these are to blame for their follies!

But I think a number of people see that Christian leaders make YEC literalism a necessary facet of Christianity and thus automatically believe that it must all be just the stuff of myth, like all the other "religions".

Jason Gastrich · Jul 13, 2004

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
<blockquote>quote:<hr /> What is your Ph.D. in? Where did you get it?

Are you not the guy who accused me in another thread of derailing the thread by asking you a very similar question? Yes, you are the man! [/QUOTE]If you were concerned about derailing this thread, you wouldn't hypocritically post 11 messages in a row; like you just did.

Feel free to email me my answers, so we can maintain the integrity of this topic. However, I'm sure we'll all forgive you if you want to publicly admit your answers. Remember, in the other thread, I provided you with a link to my resume; where you received my answer.

Jason

Marcia · Jul 13, 2004

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> God said he cannot lie.

I suppose that this is one possible, but far-reaching, interpretation.
[/QUOTE]This goes to God's character and attributes. If God lies, he is not all good. If he is not all good, he is not God, or at least not the God of the Bible. Maybe I misunderstood you, but it looked like you were saying that the Bible does not say God cannot lie.

God is not man, that he should lie,
or a son of man, that he should change his mind.
Has he said, and will he not do it?
Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?
Num 23.19

So when God desired to show more convincingly to the heirs of the promise the unchangeable character of his purpose, he guaranteed it with an oath, so that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us. Heb 6.17, 18

Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the sake of the faith of God's elect and their knowledge of the truth, which accords with godliness, in hope of eternal life, which God, who never lies, promised before the ages began and at the proper time manifested in his word through the preaching with which I have been entrusted by the command of God our Savior. Titus 1.1-3

As far as believing the original autographs are error free, this is a natural conclusion based on the words coming directly from God.

Jason Gastrich · Jul 13, 2004

Craig, It staggers my mind as to how you can say something like this. I said nothing presumptuous at all. I have simply believed God's word. He is the one who said it was "God-breathed" (all of it), and he is the one who said it was impossible for him to lie. I have no problems believing either. The doctrine of Scripture is more fundamental to Christianity than most allow. We tend to have a very weak doctrine of Scripture. We do not hold the word of God in very high esteem. And thus we end up with bad argumentation, artful dodging, etc.

You decry the methods of Josh McDowell (whom I haven't read) as intellectually dishonest, but when someone says that a day, morning and evening, equal millions of years you think they are being truthful. Now, can you honestly say that you gave that serious thought??? How can one be intellectually dishonest and not the other??? Surely you can see through that.

Excellent point. Nobody reading the Bible alone would ever consider billions of years. Only those who have been FIRST influenced by secular science would insert billions of years into the scriptures.

Don't forget Exodus 20:11. "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it."

The fact remains that evolutionary biology is not proven. It is asserted without proof and indeed contrary to the actual proof that we have.

You're absolutely right. It's good to have a wise, honest brother like you in here.

Charles says he doesn't believe YEC because of the great improbability of it. But have you guys ever stopped to consider the astronomical odds stacked against OEC or evolutionary biology? They are statistically non-existent. There is no chance at all that evolutionists are right, based on the mere probability, not to mention the science involved. We need a healthy return to critical thinking skills to teach young people to think through teh evidence rather than just buying what Dr. So and So says ... [/QB]

You're absolutely right, again! The odds of biological evolution happening are astronomical. They are statistically impossible. If it were a bet, you'd NEVER take the best because the odds would be so extraordinary.

God bless,
Jason

Dr. Bob · Jul 13, 2004

This is NOT a thread on evolution.

Nor is it a place for 13 posts in a row. That seems obsessive.

Jason Gastrich · Jul 13, 2004

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
<blockquote>quote:<hr /> This is your opinion. So far, you haven't given any proof that the earth is old.

He doesn't have to. [/QUOTE]Yes he does. Asking us to assume or take his word for it is silly. Without evidence, you are giving opinion.

Any university worthy of the designation has thousands of volumes in its library that document that the earth is billions of years old.

Click to expand...

You have committed a couple of logical fallacies. First, you're arguing by assertion. You say something without evidence and expect us to believe you. Next, you are appealing to authority. "Lots of secular scientists agree, so it must be so." This is another logical fallacy. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority

And besides the biology, geology, astrophyics, astronomy, molecular chemisty, etc., who wants to believe that God created the earth with trillions of fossils to fool us!

Click to expand...

Do you like those fields of science? Without Christian creationists, you would not even have them as we know them, today. See here: http://www.jcsm.org/Contents/Famous.htm (Famous Scientists Who Believed In Creation . . . and their discoveries).

God bless,
Jason

Deacon · Jul 13, 2004

Can Christians hold an old earth view while still maintaining biblical inerrrancy?

“Inerrancy means that when all facts are known, the Scriptures in their original autographs and properly interpreted will be shown to be wholly true in everything that they affirm whether that has to do with doctrine or morality or with the social, physical or life sciences.”

I urge you to look over the “Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy”; The quoted sentence above comes from the book, “Inerrancy” (edited by Norman Geisler, Zondervan, 1980, sponsored by the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy). [I’m pretty sure Geisler is an OEC].

Scholars have developed rules to interpret Scriptures that aid immensely us in our search for truth; these same rules also help us to avoid pitfalls that could lead us into err. But these methodologies have evolved into almost legalistic standards.

Consider the NT uses of various prophetic passages. We observe a lot of questionable interpretational issues that would never pass the the scholarly standards of today (e.g. Psalm 69:4/John 15:25 and Jeremiah 31:15/Matt. 2:16-18 among many others).

So what leads some of us to question the simple reading of Genesis 1 and 2?
The observed universe around us! God’s own general revelation! As said elsewhere on this thread there are a myriad of scientific proofs that support an ancient earth. Personally, I believe that many of the scientific theories offered in YEC literature today represent our current cultural decadence, knowledge gone wild, factual relativity.

What are some other seemly biblical beliefs that have been held as a standard and later have been set aside?

Ethnocentrism (an earth center cosmology)-Copernicus (1500’s)

The 360-day year (now called a “prophetic year”)

Shape of the earth

A thinking heart or liver or bowel

and we still maintained the doctrine of inerrancy. There were not Biblical errors, they were errors of interpretation.

Rob

[ July 13, 2004, 08:09 PM: Message edited by: Deacon ]

Craigbythesea · Jul 14, 2004

You have committed a couple of logical fallacies. First, you're arguing by assertion. You say something without evidence and expect us to believe you. Next, you ae appealing to authority. "Lots of secular scientists agree, so it must be so." This is another logical fallacy.

Jason,

Not surprising in the least, you have radically misread my posts. My argument was that there is no sense in posting data when an almost infinite supply of it is readily at hand. And no, I do not expect you to believe anything that I say that might honestly be considered questionable. It would be foolish of you to do so. But, of course, if you were to check out the things that I post, you would find them to be true. And no, just because a lot of 'secular scientists’ agree with my view does not make it true.

But, Jason, someone here is seriously distorting facts: a phony Th.D. from a phony school and "Lots of secular scientists agree.” Paper mill degrees from dishonest paper mills can only hurt ones testimony for the truthfulness of the Bible. That "Lots of secular scientists” is in reality well over 99% of scientists in the fields of biology, genetics, chemistry, physics, geology, and physical anthropology who have EARNED a REAL Ph.D. from a Real, NATIONALLY ACREDITED COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY.

Does any of this mean that there are errors in the Bible? No, it does not, but certain individuals, through their own lack of integrity, bring into question the veracity of the Bible itself. In my personal opinion, the accuracy of the Bible would be questioned a whole lot less if those who teach and preach it were not themselves very questionable.

My personal suggestion is that those who defend the Bible should get their own house in order so that they do not discredit the Bible through the lives that they live.

Precious brothers and sisters in Christ,

Yes, I believe that the data presently available indicates beyond a reasonable doubt that the earth is billions of years old. No, I am not an evolutionist. No, the creation accounts in Genesis are not untruthful.

Jason Gastrich · Jul 14, 2004

Not surprising in the least, you have radically misread my posts. My argument was that there is no sense in posting data when an almost infinite supply of it is readily at hand.

I disagree. Present your case.

And no, I do not expect you to believe anything that I say that might honestly be considered questionable. It would be foolish of you to do so. But, of course, if you were to check out the things that I post, you would find them to be true. And no, just because a lot of 'secular scientists’ agree with my view does not make it true.

This is an invalid argument. In essence, you want me to make your argument for you. As I said, present your case.

That "Lots of secular scientists” is in reality well over 99% of scientists in the fields of biology, genetics, chemistry, physics, geology, and physical anthropology who have EARNED a REAL Ph.D. from a Real, NATIONALLY ACREDITED COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY.

I still haven't received an email or PM about your Ph.D. Why don't you send me a resume as I did for you?

What is the biggest religion in the world? Islam. With your logic regarding secular scientists, Islam must be correct because the majority of Earth's citizens are Muslims. As I was saying, you haven't presented your case and the small amount of logic you are trying to use is failing.

Sincerely,
Jason

Jason Gastrich · Jul 14, 2004

P.S. You wrote: ". . . NATIONALLY ACREDITED COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY."

You spelled accredited incorrectly. Plus, the REGIONAL accreditations are best in the secular world; not national accreditations. Tech schools are usually the ones that hold national accreditation.

john6:63 · Jul 14, 2004

Jason

Your website has a wealth of information and it has aided me in my witness many, many times and I’ve listened to many of your debates on Audio sermon.com. I’ve also followed numerous debates of yours on various message boards. You did a fantastic job debating Francois Tremblay by the way.

May God bless you and your ministry and welcome to the board!

Charles Meadows · Jul 14, 2004

Jason,

A little twist on Craig's 99% of scientists comment...

I would posit (based on my own experience and the experience of my college and med school classmates) that the average bright young science student with an analytical nature will find the facts surrrounding the age of the earth to be overwhelmingly in favor of OEC. Such a student will likely find the creation science argument quite unconvincing. As such the average physical or natural scientist will feel the same. All of my biology, chemistry, genetics, physics, and mathematics professors at the University of Virginia shared this view.

Now the average conservative MDiv student may feel much differently.

My (perhaps biased) opinion is that anyone with significant training in the sciences, as taught in college and graduate level science (not apologetics) courses will find the YEC argument weak.

Jason Gastrich · Jul 14, 2004

Originally posted by john6:63:
Jason

Your website has a wealth of information and it has aided me in my witness many, many times and I’ve listened to many of your debates on Audio sermon.com. I’ve also followed numerous debates of yours on various message boards. You did a fantastic job debating Francois Tremblay by the way.

May God bless you and your ministry and welcome to the board!

Hi John 6:63,

Thanks for your encouragement. Praise the Lord. It's great to hear that my hard work is blessing others. Our Lord is definitely worthy of our time and devotion.

I enjoyed debating Francois. If anyone would like to read that debate, they can go to IIDB at http://iidebate3.jcsm.org .

I'm also glad you found Sermon Audio! They have an awesome ministry of FREE MP3 downloads. Our MP3 ministry (e.g. the whole Bible on MP3, debates with atheists, interviews, sermons, etc.) is located at http://sa.jcsm.org .

Thanks again, brother. To God be the glory.

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich

P.S. Right now, I'm starting a debate with Jon Promnitz over Jesus' return. It's in the first round at IIDB and you can see it here: http://iidebate4.jcsm.org . IIDB is the biggest atheist message board on the internet. Let's pray that many atheists get saved!

Are There Errors in the Bible?

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

<b>Moderator</b>

<b>Moderator</b>

New Member

New Member

New Member

Active Member

New Member

Administrator

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member