Are There Errors in the Bible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jason_Gastrich
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
[url="http://jcsm.org/Education/hermeneutics.htm":
http://jcsm.org/Education/hermeneutics.htm
Click to expand...
]
  1. Interpret the scriptures with the scriptures. Since the Bible doesn’t contradict itself, your interpretation of a scripture should be consistent with its revelation in other passages of scripture.
So you use a methodology that presupposes, that the bible is error-free, to show, that the bible is error-free. :whistle:

Well, I prefer a scientific approach, look at what is actually said without presupposing anything and then draw conclusions.
 
40.png
AnAtheist:
So you use a methodology that presupposes, that the bible is error-free, to show, that the bible is error-free. :whistle:
Click to expand...
You obviously didn’t read my page on hermeneutics because you do not understand my approach.
Well, I prefer a scientific approach, look at what is actually said without presupposing anything and then draw conclusions.
Click to expand...
I should have guessed that you could elaborate on and articulate your hermeneutical guidelines and exegetical approach in one sentence. Your ad hoc exegesis is far from scientific, though.

If you rely so heavily on a scientific approach to evidence, then how can you be an atheist? Are you a strong or weak atheist?

You SURELY don’t have enough evidence and knowledge to conclude that God doesn’t exist. What if He is living on the other side of the world? What if He lives behind the Moon?

You have presupposed that He doesn’t live in those places and you’ve presupposed that you have enough information to conclude that God doesn’t exist. With all due respect, your presuppositions are awfully arrogant and foolish.

The Bible is true in every verifiable way. If I have any presupposition regarding the unverifiable scriptures - which is absent from my hermeneutical guidelines - my presupposition is warranted due to my long term relationship with the biblical God. I’ve known Him for over 20 years, done miracles in Jesus’ name, spoken and listened to Him, fasted for 40 days, etc. My faith in God is far more informed than your belief system.

God bless,
Jason
 
Jason Gastrich:
If you rely so heavily on a scientific approach to evidence, then how can you be an atheist? Are you a strong or weak atheist?

You SURELY don’t have enough evidence and knowledge to conclude that God doesn’t exist
Click to expand...
Although this has been said a billion times, I gladly repeat it: One cannot empirically proove the non-existence of a non-existing thing. That’s like squaring a circle - impossible. To believe something exists, just because you cannot proove that it does not exist is ridiculous. And before you protest, that that doesn’t apply to you, I acknowledge that.

You cannot proove the non-existence of Allah, so why not believe in him? (after all, the muslim heaven is far better than the christian one)
You cannot proove the non-existence of Thor, so why not believe in him? (after all, Walhalla is a far better place than the christian heaven)

That argument leads to nowhere.

After years of studying this universe, I have concluded that this universe works pretty well without gods. There is not a shred of convincing evidence for any god (well, convincing to you maybe, but not to me), therefore gods do not exist. That notion makes me the strong type, I guess.
 
We are beginning to drift from the main topic, so I’ll respond to your latest post, then we should either discuss alleged Bible errors or I can wait for those that are willing to adhere to the topic.
40.png
AnAtheist:
Although this has been said a billion times, I gladly repeat it: One cannot empirically proove the non-existence of a non-existing thing. That’s like squaring a circle - impossible. To believe something exists, just because you cannot proove that it does not exist is ridiculous. And before you protest, that that doesn’t apply to you, I acknowledge that.
Click to expand...
First, the word “prove” has only one “o.” Prove.
You cannot proove the non-existence of Allah, so why not believe in him? (after all, the muslim heaven is far better than the christian one)
You cannot proove the non-existence of Thor, so why not believe in him? (after all, Walhalla is a far better place than the christian heaven)

That argument leads to nowhere.

After years of studying this universe, I have concluded that this universe works pretty well without gods. There is not a shred of convincing evidence for any god (well, convincing to you maybe, but not to me), therefore gods do not exist. That notion makes me the strong type, I guess.
Click to expand...
You have given an incongruent argument. Plus, you obviously aren’t a strong atheist. You’re a weak one.

The strong atheist claims that they believe or they know that God does not exist. I contend that this position is untenable and you seem to agree with me; until you called yourself a strong atheist. We simply don’t have enough information to prove that God does not exist. I’m not talking about scientifically proving something, but I am talking about making an informed decision like a judge in a courtroom would make.

Your “conclusion” above is based on the presupposition that God does not exist. Read what you wrote. You said that this universe works pretty well without the influence of gods.

There is plenty of evidence for God. If you don’t see it, then you are being willfully ignorant. The Bible gives us prophecies that could come from nobody except God. Have you studied the prophecy in Daniel 9? It prophesied the exact day that Jesus would ride into Jerusalem on a donkey. You can see my research here: daniel9.jcsm.org.

Have you seen the prophecies in Isaiah 53? They describe the crucifixion of Jesus Christ hundreds of years before crucifixion was even used. You can see my research here: jcsm.org/biblelessons/Isaiah53.htm.

To deny supernatural miracles is foolishness. One must live in a dark cave to believe that miracles do not happen. Have you ever met someone that you trust that has done a miracle in Jesus’ name? When you do, you’ll have to re-evaluate your “conclusions.”

Lastly, it is the humble person who admits they are a sinner in need of redemption that gets saved. Until a person is honest about their sins and their imperfections, they will remain a prideful unbeliever. Different things cause different people to become humbled and honest. You can see the gospel message here: gospel.jcsm.org.

God bless,
Jason
 
Gods peace be with you Jason,

I gave some cooloing down time of several months and I visited your web site often. It seems to be very anti-Catholic and leans towards chick.com, jesus-is-lord.com, mtc.com, bible.ca, etc… Since you are here preaching to Catholics I was curious on what you believe based on your web site. This is good background to know of anyone trying to preach Gods Word so that all of us Christians here (i.e. Catholics) will know what you are preaching.

Your web site seems to belittle Catholics and ranks us Christians (i.e. Catholics) in with the cults like branch davidians and non-Christian sects. Why? Are we not Christian too? What is your definition of Christian that seems to exclude Catholics?

Do you believe the Catholic Church is Christian? Why not?

You may start a new thread if this topic seems to be too difficult to answer quickly here. I know you run a tight thread. I just want to know if the person preaching is calling me a non-Christian cultist or a Christian and why? How did you come by this special insight? Did your opinios on Sacred Scripture come from the same insight?

I hope to see you back here on this forum more often, I enjoyed reading your posts.

A prisoner of Christ,

PS, I know God knows who is Christian but how can we on earth judge others who believe in Jesus Christ as their personnal Lord and savior (like Catholics do) as not Christian? Why can protestant Christians believe whatever they want but Catholic Christians are evil for following the Church Christ founded?

I hope you use this moment to show your faith to us and answer this honestly.
 

It’s a shame this thread can’t be joined to the other Bible error thread…​

 
Jason,
Here are two huge, major Bible erors
  1. “Lead us not into temptation”…Other parts of the Bible tell us that God does not temp us nor lead us into temptation. The Catholic Bible has been changed to the true translation “put us not to the test”. (Don’t try to wiggle out of this one, temptation and test are two completely different things.)
  2. “…unless you hate your father and mother…” This contradicts one of the 10 Commandments to “honor your Father and Mother”.
PS. Your list of the 1000 best Christian sites is horrible. Not a Pro Life site in the first 40. I quit after 40 because it was so bad.
 
40.png
chrisg93:
Jason,
Here are two huge, major Bible erors
  1. “Lead us not into temptation”…Other parts of the Bible tell us that God does not temp us nor lead us into temptation. The Catholic Bible has been changed to the true translation “put us not to the test”. (Don’t try to wiggle out of this one, temptation and test are two completely different things.)
Click to expand...

The word translated is peirasmos - “trial, test”. Which Catholic Bible have you in mind ? All tests are not temptations - however, at least some temptations can under one aspect be considered tests.​

  1. “…unless you hate your father and mother…” This contradicts one of the 10 Commandments to “honor your Father and Mother”.
Click to expand...

Actually, “hate” is used because there is no word for “prefer” - things were seen not in shades of grey, but in black and white. To prefer God with a love that therefore prized God above parents, amounted to loving God more than parents, therefore, to “loving” God and “hating” parents.​

God’s “jealous” Love, is a passionate Love, which will allow of no rivals or competitors - that is why idolatry is so hateful to Him, and why the Prophets pull out all the stops in denouncing it. And this total, committed, passionate, overflowing Love is to be met with the same sort of love from His People: hence their election by Him, and Jesus’ call for the same sort of total, whole-hearted, unashamed, faithful, undivided commitment. ##
PS. Your list of the 1000 best Christian sites is horrible. Not a Pro Life site in the first 40. I quit after 40 because it was so bad.
Click to expand...
 
Gottle of Geer,

You make some interesting points! Keep posting!

I think now I’ll go have another Bottle of Beer and toast to your future success!👍

Sorry, couldn’t help that one.😉
 
Hello? Jason are you still here?

Please don’t give up on us Catholics just yet! I know your web site leans to the anti-Catholic but please come back and tell us more of your opinions about Sacred Scripture.:yup: If nothing else then at least tell us which of the Bibles out there is inerrant and why?

I noticed I could not find the forums at your web site, did you stop your fourms for lack of participation?

Please come home Jason!

A prisoner of Christ,:bowdown2:
 
Here is a probable contradiction: In Acts 9:7 Luke (the author of Acts) says that when Paul was struck off his horse by the light from God…

7 The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, for they heard the voice but could see no one. Acts 9:7.

But then, later, here is what Paul says…

9 My companions saw the light but did not hear the voice of the one who spoke to me. Acts 22:9.

Listen, the problem with fundamentalism’s insistence that the Bible has no errors at all is that it is looking at the Bible in the wrong way.

Whether or not Paul got his facts right in recounting the events of his conversion is not relevant to faith or morals.

It is in those two departments in which the Bible is inerrant.

And my experience is that those who insist that the Bible is “inerrant” are usually severe literalists – they refuse to see the typological level, where most of the faith and morals are taught.

Result: They end up spending their lives defending the not-extremely-relevant literal level, and missing the beautiful, wonderful typological-level teaching of the Bible.
 
One would need to define “errors”. the Bible is not a history book, it is not a science book, it is not a chronicle.It is the account of God’s relationship with people, and His teachings. If people would remember that, they would not get into a tizz over evolution, genealogy, and many other peripherals.
 
Jason Gastrich:
Dear Readers,

I hope you are well, today.

Do you think you’ve found an error in the Bible? Have you heard an argument against the Bible’s inerrancy that you couldn’t answer?
Click to expand...

The strongest one is, that it is not inerrant 🙂 - it has no need to be. It’s a book, not Christ - and there is nothing short of Christ which cannot become a false god; the Bible, and our ideas about God and His works, included.​

I’ve studied the Word for thousands of hours and I’ve found answers to all of the alleged, Bible errors. Therefore, I can conclude that the Word of God is inerrant. Glory to Him.

If you think you have found an error, then please post it. I’d be happy to read your post and respond. If I don’t know the answer, then I’ll do some research and post what I find.

May God bless you richly.

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich
Click to expand...

If you have no objection to dashing out the brains of Babylonian babies (Psalm 137.9) I can’t follow you.​

Some of the morality of the OT is barbaric and (from a Christian POV) wicked. The massacre by Jehu son of Nimshi of the male descendants of Ahab is a case in point - happily for us, the OT shows a change in the moral evaluation of it, from ascribing it to God’s Will, to seeing it as judged to be wrong by God:

1Ki 19:13 And when Eli’jah heard it, he wrapped his face in his mantle and went out and stood at the entrance of the cave. And behold, there came a voice to him, and said, “What are you doing here, Eli’jah?”
1Ki 19:14 He said, “I have been very jealous for the LORD, the God of hosts; for the people of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thy altars, and slain thy prophets with the sword; and I, even I only, am left; and they seek my life, to take it away.”
1Ki 19:15 And the LORD said to him, "Go, return on your way to the wilderness of Damascus; and when you arrive, you shall anoint Haz’ael to be king over Syria;
1Ki 19:16 and Jehu the son of Nimshi you shall anoint to be king over Israel; and Eli’sha the son of Shaphat of A’bel-meho’lah you shall anoint to be prophet in your place.
1Ki 19:17 And him who escapes from the sword of Haz’ael shall Jehu slay; and him who escapes from the sword of Jehu shall Eli’sha slay.

2Ki 10:11 So Jehu slew all that remained of the house of Ahab in Jezreel, and all his great men, and his kinsfolks, and his priests, until he left him none remaining.

Hosea 1:1 The word of the LORD that came to Hose’a the son of Be-e’ri, in the days of Uzzi’ah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezeki’ah, kings of Judah, and in the days of Jerobo’am the son of Jo’ash, king of Israel.
Hsa 1:2 When the LORD first spoke through Hose’a, the LORD said to Hose’a, “Go, take to yourself a wife of harlotry and have children of harlotry, for the land commits great harlotry by forsaking the LORD.”
Hsa 1:3 So he went and took Gomer the daughter of Dibla’im, and she conceived and bore him a son.
Hsa 1:4 And the LORD said to him, “Call his name Jezreel; for yet a little while, and I will punish the house of Jehu for the blood of Jezreel, and I will put an end to the kingdom of the house of Israel.
Hsa 1:5 And on that day, I will break the bow of Israel in the valley of Jezreel.”

It is hopeless to try to reconcile the cruelty of Jehu - or of Joshua or David or Samuel - with the teaching and example of Christ. They were not Christians - they were before Christ, so they lacked His teaching and example. It is no fault of the OT characters or the composers of the OT that this is so - but it would be entirely wrong to suggest that the Samuel’s rebuke of King Saul for failing to exterminate all the Amalekites breathes the same spirit as Christ; it would be monstrous. There are things in the Bible which are outworn - and thanks be to God for it - unless slavery, for instance, is eternally valid. Hosea is far closer to the Spirit of Christ than the earlier tradition which ascribed the massacre to a Divine command. ##
 
Gottle of Geer:
Some of the morality of the OT is barbaric and (from a Christian POV) wicked.
Click to expand...
That’s why I use the Historical-Critical method of Biblical interpretation. God did not change, but the Jewish faith slowly developed into a fuller understanding of God’s nature. This is seen even at the time of Jesus (pharisees, sadducees, etc.).

Perhaps you may even try to worm your way out of admitting this, well done if so. But you can’t get around Matthew 1:17 “Thus the total number of generations from Abraham to David is fourteen generations; from David to the Babylonian exile, fourteen generations; from the Babylonian exile to the Messiah, fourteen generations.” WRONG! Seriously, add it up yourself. This isn’t some crazy philosophy, it’s simply addition.

That is all.
 
It does seem that the list of generations ending with Matthew 1:17 is historically inaccurate. Actually, however, the Greek word used here, “egennesen”, can mean "“was the ancestor of” and not only “was the father of” (as “A New Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture” points out on page 906)
Personally, when such questions come up, I always keep in mind the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, in Die Verbum #19, that the Gospels are historical.
Aaron I.:
That’s why I use the
Perhaps you may even try to worm your way out of admitting this, well done if so. But you can’t get around Matthew 1:17 “Thus the total number of generations from Abraham to David is fourteen generations; from David to the Babylonian exile, fourteen generations; from the Babylonian exile to the Messiah, fourteen generations.” WRONG! Seriously, add it up yourself. This isn’t some crazy philosophy, it’s simply addition.

That is all.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top