Is the Bible Infallible or Inerrant

[Brian_Culliton]

From the [CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Easter Controversy](Catholic Encyclopedia):

Here we have the Pope judging whether Tradition X is of apostolic origin.

There’s your evidence. And if you would actually care to read the acts that come from the Holy See, you would find them to be studded with Scripture and early apostolic teaching.

No one is drinking Kool-aid.

So you think that Anicetus, the eleventh bishop of Rome overruled Polycarp the disciple of the Apostle John? Polycarp claimed that the tradition he learned from the Apostle John was to observe the feast according to the ancient Jewish tradition.

Unless you believe Polycarp was lying, you must admit that the church had no authority to demand that the faithful keep the feast on Sunday rather than on whatever day it landed.

So which is it? Do you believe the church has the authority to override apostolic teaching, or was the church in error with regard to demanding obedience to Rome’s custom?

 

[Cat_Herder]

So you think that Anicetus, the eleventh bishop of Rome overruled Polycarp the disciple of the Apostle John? Polycarp claimed that the tradition he learned from the Apostle John was to observe the feast according to the ancient Jewish tradition.

Unless you believe Polycarp was lying…

We don’t know that he was lying. We do know that he was mistaken. The tradition he had came from the Jewish observance, not from John.

And why do you call Polycarp a disciple of the Apostle John if said apostle has been sleeping for about 100 years? Did John rise from his grave, go to Polycarp and tell him to go make trouble in Rome about the Easter observance? Come on.

So which is it? Do you believe the church has the authority to override apostolic teaching, or was the church in error with regard to demanding obedience to Rome’s custom?

Neither. It is for the Church to determine what is an apostolic teaching and what is a tradition of men.

 

[chase200mph]

Catholic Christianity did not destroy the educational system of the Roman Empire. Arianism did. The barbarians who sacked Rome were Arians. The Roman educational system was preserved by the Catholic Church.

You are also completely ignoring the Eastern Roman Empire, founded by Constantine (after his conversion to Christianity) and which continued in existence and prosperity for 1,000 years AFTER the fall of Rome. The existence of this Christian empire, also called the Byzantine Empire, is completely fatal to everything you assert.

Go to Brittannica, search for “BYZANTINE EMPIRE” and educate yourself.

QUOTE=Cat Herder;7104820]Catholic Christianity did not destroy the educational system of the Roman Empire. Arianism did. The barbarians who sacked Rome were Arians. The Roman educational system was preserved by the Catholic Church.

Response, your straw man is once again denied….

You are also completely ignoring the Eastern Roman Empire, founded by Constantine (after his conversion to Christianity) and which continued in existence and prosperity for 1,000 years AFTER the fall of Rome. The existence of this Christian empire, also called the Byzantine Empire, is completely fatal to everything you assert.

Response, and in light of all that has been presented to you, if I conceded to this one instance that your so upset about, would in change the truth…… the answer is of course NOT.

Go to Brittannica, search for “BYZANTINE EMPIRE” and educate yourself.

 

[chase200mph]

Catholic Christianity did not destroy the educational system of the Roman Empire. Arianism did. The barbarians who sacked Rome were Arians. The Roman educational system was preserved by the Catholic Church.

You are also completely ignoring the Eastern Roman Empire, founded by Constantine (after his conversion to Christianity) and which continued in existence and prosperity for 1,000 years AFTER the fall of Rome. The existence of this Christian empire, also called the Byzantine Empire, is completely fatal to everything you assert.

Go to Brittannica, search for “BYZANTINE EMPIRE” and educate yourself.

QUOTE=Cat Herder;7104820]Catholic Christianity did not destroy the educational system of the Roman Empire. Arianism did. The barbarians who sacked Rome were Arians. The Roman educational system was preserved by the Catholic Church.

Response, your straw man is once again denied….

You are also completely ignoring the Eastern Roman Empire, founded by Constantine (after his conversion to Christianity) and which continued in existence and prosperity for 1,000 years AFTER the fall of Rome. The existence of this Christian empire, also called the Byzantine Empire, is completely fatal to everything you assert.

Response, and in light of all that has been presented to you, if I conceded to this one instance that your so upset about, would in change the truth…… the answer is of course NOT.

Go to Brittannica, search for “BYZANTINE EMPIRE” and educate yourself.

QUOTE=Cat Herder;7104820]Catholic Christianity did not destroy the educational system of the Roman Empire. Arianism did. The barbarians who sacked Rome were Arians. The Roman educational system was preserved by the Catholic Church.

Response, your straw man is once again denied….

You are also completely ignoring the Eastern Roman Empire, founded by Constantine (after his conversion to Christianity) and which continued in existence and prosperity for 1,000 years AFTER the fall of Rome. The existence of this Christian empire, also called the Byzantine Empire, is completely fatal to everything you assert.

Response, and in light of all that has been presented to you, if I conceded to this one instance that your so upset about, would in change the truth…… the answer is of course NOT.

Go to Brittannica, search for “BYZANTINE EMPIRE” and educate yourself.

Response, really? You first…The Lies And Fallacies Of The Encyclopedia Britanica
How Powerful And Shameless Clerical Forces Castrated A Famous Work Of Reference
by Joseph McCabe

 

[Cat_Herder]

chase200mph:

Response, really? You first…The Lies And Fallacies Of The Encyclopedia Britanica
How Powerful And Shameless Clerical Forces Castrated A Famous Work Of Reference
by Joseph McCabe

Harvard University Press:

(link)
The eastern Roman empire we know as Byzantine, which lasted more than twice as long as the more familiar western Roman empire, eight hundred years by the shortest definition. This extraordinary endurance is all the more remarkable because the Byzantine empire was favored neither by geography nor by military preponderance. Yet it was the western empire that dissolved during the fifth century. The Byzantine empire so greatly outlasted its western counterpart because its rulers were able to adapt strategically to diminished circumstances, by devising new ways of coping with successive enemies.

Next you’ll tell me that Harvard University is not a qualified institution of higher institution.

 

[Cat_Herder]

So you think that Anicetus, the eleventh bishop of Rome overruled Polycarp the disciple of the Apostle John? Polycarp claimed that the tradition he learned from the Apostle John was to observe the feast according to the ancient Jewish tradition.

Unless you believe Polycarp was lying, you must admit that the church had no authority to demand that the faithful keep the feast on Sunday rather than on whatever day it landed.

So which is it? Do you believe the church has the authority to override apostolic teaching, or was the church in error with regard to demanding obedience to Rome’s custom?

[SIGN1]IT’S A TRAP![/SIGN1]

You face a Catch-22 because Polycarp did two things.

1. He wanted the Pope to adopt a Quartodeciman observance of Easter.
2. He also demanded that “with this Church [of Rome] on account of its potior principalitas the whole Church, that is, the faithful from every quarter, must needs agree.”

Now, you have three choices:

1. Admit that Polycarp is authoritative as to all that he taught (i.e. that he taught with John’s infallible authority) and submit to the authority of the Bishop of Rome, currently Pope Benedict XVI, as Polycarp did after the Pope rejected Quartodecimanism.
2. Deny that Polycarp is authoritative as to anything that he taught, and abandon your argument against the Bishop of Rome.
3. Selectively admit Polycarp’s arguments (admitting the Quartodeciman observance and denying the papacy) and admit that have no authority over any other man in this manner. (And then deal with the fact that your own church does not follow the Quartodeciman observance…)

 

[chase200mph]

---

---

My misguided friend, Christ has the absolute and claimed victory, not I. Christ founded His Church on His teachings, not I, and He did not speak double talk or offer two sets of opposing teachings. only misinterpretation of scripture would leave one to believe they “can level verses that contradict every verse you posted”. To proclaim as you have here that you can use scripture against scripture appears to be foolish pride without consideration to the fact Scripture is the Inspired Word of God and your claim insinuates God contradicted himself throughout scripture. Reflect on your own position. Scripture does not conflict with itself, all scripture serves to teach in unison and the teachings are relative, not divided.

When one verse contradicts another, it is not the verse that contradicts, but the interpretation the person is applying to it. The fact you believe you can produce scriptural verses to contradict other scriptural verses is proof of distorted or misguided interpretation, probably self determined. Find the unison between scriptural verses and you will find they all work together in one teaching and you will then find the truth in the teachings of Christ. Otherwise, you are misleading yourself.

**Scripture can not be used against scripture as it is the Inspired Word of God and that should make it clear to you in itself. If one verse does not fit with another verse you are using to prove your point, your interpretation is wrong as is your point. **

My misguided friend, Christ has the absolute and claimed victory, not I. Christ founded His Church on His teachings, not I, and He did not speak double talk or offer two sets of opposing teachings.
Response, wrong, Christ never did any such thing, Jesus never published and the only remnets you have are hearsay seconded hand claims (third or fourth hand really).

only misinterpretation of scripture would leave one to believe they “can level verses that contradict every verse you posted”.
Response, and visa-versa, so who is right then…. Like I said earlier, this paradox is yours and you are welcome to it.

To proclaim as you have here that you can use scripture against scripture appears to be foolish pride without consideration to the fact Scripture is the Inspired Word of God and your claim insinuates God contradicted himself throughout scripture. Reflect on your own position. Scripture does not conflict with itself, all scripture serves to teach in unison and the teachings are relative, not divided.
Response, what YOU proclaim here is that you can use scripture against scripture appears to be foolish pride without consideration to the fact Scripture is the Inspired Word of God and your claim insinuates God contradicted himself throughout scripture…… if not then why post otherwise?

When one verse contradicts another, it is not the verse that contradicts, but the interpretation the person is applying to it.
Response, let the apologies commence……

The fact you believe you can produce scriptural verses to contradict other scriptural verses is proof of distorted or misguided interpretation, probably self determined.
Response, how in the Hell did you come up with this deceit? Only a deceitful misguided heart makes such a claim without hearing what I can produce ……

Find the unison between scriptural verses and you will find they all work together in one teaching and you will then find the truth in the teachings of Christ. Otherwise, you are misleading yourself.

Response, after 2000 years of the worst and greatest atrocities caused by the Christian hand, history defeats your/this nonsense.

Scripture can not be used against scripture as it is the Inspired Word of God and that should make it clear to you in itself.
Response, then this is proven by the unity and conformity of identical Christian doctrine including all of Catholicism, right……?
If one verse does not fit with another verse you are using to prove your point, your interpretation is wrong as is your point.

Response, right, sure because there is only one interpretation and you have it…. Right? Pride goeth before destruction ehh? Funny that you dispel what hasn’t yet been stated, your pride and sin is the profession of speaking for all of Christendom, and when I do support my claim, your next more will be to dispel the rest of Christendom as not really being Christian…. You are so transparent I can warn you openly of your next move and you will still fall prey to it.

So far from the OP, the bible is NOT the Bible Infallible or Inerrant…

 

[chase200mph]

Originally Posted by chase200mph
Response, really? You first…The Lies And Fallacies Of The Encyclopedia Britanica
How Powerful And Shameless Clerical Forces Castrated A Famous Work Of Reference
by Joseph McCabe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvard University Press
(link)
The eastern Roman empire we know as Byzantine, which lasted more than twice as long as the more familiar western Roman empire, eight hundred years by the shortest definition. This extraordinary endurance is all the more remarkable because the Byzantine empire was favored neither by geography nor by military preponderance. Yet it was the western empire that dissolved during the fifth century. The Byzantine empire so greatly outlasted its western counterpart because its rulers were able to adapt strategically to diminished circumstances, by devising new ways of coping with successive enemies.

Next you’ll tell me that Harvard University is not a qualified institution of higher institution.

Next you’ll tell me that Harvard University is not a qualified institution of higher institution.

The media is making these claim as we speak, I assure you I have nothing to do with it…… the claim is that ivy league institutions provide less than quality graduates, that money is a greater deciding factor in GPAs…. Again, not my claim: and how does this change or even affect my post?

 

[Cat_Herder]

The media is making these claim as we speak, I assure you I have nothing to do with it…… the claim is that ivy league institutions provide less than quality graduates, that money is a greater deciding factor in GPAs….

nefsc.noaa.gov/sos/spsyn/pg/redfish/images/fish.jpg

Again, not my claim: and how does this change or even affect my post?

You have yet to explain how Christianity supposedly wrecked the Western Roman Empire while the Eastern Roman Empire flourished for a thousand years under the same religion.

 

[jmcrae]

Originally Posted by chase200mph
Response, really? You first…The Lies And Fallacies Of The Encyclopedia Britanica
How Powerful And Shameless Clerical Forces Castrated A Famous Work Of Reference
by Joseph McCabe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvard University Press
(link)
The eastern Roman empire we know as Byzantine, which lasted more than twice as long as the more familiar western Roman empire, eight hundred years by the shortest definition. This extraordinary endurance is all the more remarkable because the Byzantine empire was favored neither by geography nor by military preponderance. Yet it was the western empire that dissolved during the fifth century. The Byzantine empire so greatly outlasted its western counterpart because its rulers were able to adapt strategically to diminished circumstances, by devising new ways of coping with successive enemies.

Next you’ll tell me that Harvard University is not a qualified institution of higher institution.

The media is making these claim as we speak, I assure you I have nothing to do with it…… the claim is that ivy league institutions provide less than quality graduates, that money is a greater deciding factor in GPAs…. Again, not my claim: and how does this change or even affect my post?

Just FYI, your posts are extremely difficult to understand.

Please leave the quoted material inside the quote boxes, and keep your own material outside of the quote boxes, to make it more clear who is saying what.

 

[chase200mph]

nefsc.noaa.gov/sos/spsyn/pg/redfish/images/fish.jpg

You have yet to explain how Christianity supposedly wrecked the Western Roman Empire while the Eastern Roman Empire flourished for a thousand years under the same religion.

You have yet to explain how Christianity supposedly wrecked the Western Roman Empire while the Eastern Roman Empire flourished for a thousand years under the same religion.

Response, why should I do that? This is your straw man so you run with it; I’ll stand by my post instead. You are welcome to repost it if you feel I am in error?

 

[chase200mph]

Just FYI, your posts are extremely difficult to understand.

Please leave the quoted material inside the quote boxes, and keep your own material outside of the quote boxes, to make it more clear who is saying what.

[SIGN]I apologize, I will try, I am still trying to figure this site out so please be assured I am working on it; I’ll try and remember to respond in red until I get things worked out. : ) [/SIGN]

 

[Cat_Herder]

Response, why should I do that? This is your straw man so you run with it; I’ll stand by my post instead. You are welcome to repost it if you feel I am in error?

Since you cannot reconcile the Byzantine Empire’s golden age with your anti-Christian viewpoint, the only conclusion is that all of your sources (and you) are incorrect.

Now, the topic of this thread is “Is the Bible Infallible or Inerrant?” Have you even said one thing to address the actual topic of this thread, other than demanding that I produce a list of contradictions in the Bible when there are none?

 

[chase200mph]

Since you cannot reconcile the Byzantine Empire’s golden age with your anti-Christian viewpoint, the only conclusion is that all of your sources (and you) are incorrect.

Now, the topic of this thread is “Is the Bible Infallible or Inerrant?” Have you even said one thing to address the actual topic of this thread, other than demanding that I produce a list of contradictions in the Bible when there are none?

-]Response, again, your straw man, try to be less deceitful or more accurate…. I told you to pick one, I already gave you mine several times. /-]

Hummm…
[SIGN]
Response, again, your straw man, try to be less deceitful or more accurate…. I told you to pick one, I already gave you mine several times. [/SIGN]

 

[Cat_Herder]

-]Response, again, your straw man, try to be less deceitful or more accurate…. I told you to pick one, I already gave you mine several times. /-]

Hummm…

Response, again, your straw man, try to be less deceitful or more accurate…. I told you to pick one, I already gave you mine several times.

You haven’t given a single example of a contradiction in the Bible, just a bunch of sources from the fringes which have been thoroughly debunked. My response was and is: there are no contradictions in the Bible. What is your rebuttal, if any?

 

[chase200mph]

You haven’t given a single example of a contradiction in the Bible, just a bunch of sources from the fringes which have been thoroughly debunked.

Response, really show me my post and cite how you debunked it…. I am now calling you a liar!

My response was and is: there are no contradictions in the Bible. What is your rebuttal, if any?

Responses, then you have never read it…… go read it and I’ll get back to you when you’re done. It’s off to bed, 3 AM comes earlier and earlier for me, until later think on this, if the bible was both or either Infallible or Inerrant, there would be only one denominational view point OR at the very least, a clear winner in any debate therein. Since there are no winners, think on this, The bible is not a relevant historical document, is has no accredited value outside of itself (meaning one can study the bible academically, but only as it pertains to its own content), and even if I were the biggest dummy on the planet, it would be more than enough to win any argument on its academic validly…… you simply have no ground/s to stand on and I am not going to accredit you on ‘what you choose to believe’. Have a great night….

 

[chase200mph]

You haven’t given a single example of a contradiction in the Bible, just a bunch of sources from the fringes which have been thoroughly debunked. My response was and is: there are no contradictions in the Bible. What is your rebuttal, if any?

PS, and to what end? I mean if I take the time to provide a list, your response is going to be I am not of the spirit and don’t/couldn’t understand. I view this as a claim that the spirit descends upon you and creates ignorance and then tells you to lay claim to this fallacy of logic. If one thing is universal, it’s wisdom, and wisdom isn’t re-written to validate and invalid point. IF this were not so, then what’s the point in believing in a bible since every Christian could then legitimately claim the other can’t understand it…… oh wait, that’s what you folk do isn’t it… incoherent reasoning and no education as a defense for faith in the bible, hummmmmm a Christian perspective………Did the men who Jesus used to preach His gospel - men who were, “uneducated and untrained men” - seek to change those characteristics, or teach others to become educated and trained? (Acts 4:13) Why did Jesus say, “I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” (Mark 10:15)
jesusfamilies.org/Articles/Education-olotry.htm

 

[Cat_Herder]

You haven’t given a single example of a contradiction in the Bible, just a bunch of sources from the fringes which have been thoroughly debunked.

Response, really show me my post and cite how you debunked it…. I am now calling you a liar!

I lost count of your personal attacks a long time ago.

The two times you cited a Bible verse, you did not cite other Bible verses and say, “see, a contradiction.” Instead you brought out a bunch of questionable extrascriptural scholarship which I then proceeded to rebut.

My response was and is: there are no contradictions in the Bible. What is your rebuttal, if any?

Responses, then you have never read it…… go read it and I’ll get back to you when you’re done. It’s off to bed, 3 AM comes earlier and earlier for me, until later think on this, if the bible was both or either Infallible or Inerrant, there would be only one denominational view point OR at the very least, a clear winner in any debate therein.

That would be the Catholic Church, but since you reject authoritative scholarship on the matter as “denominational [explicit term],” and since you refuse to actually comment on the Bible, I don’t think you’ll leave it at that.
chase200mph;7106123:

Since there are no winners, think on this, The bible is not a relevant historical document, is has no accredited value outside of itself (meaning one can study the bible academically, but only as it pertains to its own content),

Plenty of archaeologists and anthropologists have done just that. The historicity of the Exodus is solid, we know where King David’s tomb is, etc.

 

[Cat_Herder]

PS, and to what end? I mean if I take the time to provide a list, your response is going to be I am not of the spirit and don’t/couldn’t understand.

What makes you think that? Is that a response you got from a Protestant?

If one thing is universal, it’s wisdom, and wisdom isn’t re-written to validate and invalid point. IF this were not so, then what’s the point in believing in a bible since every Christian could then legitimately claim the other can’t understand it……

You could look at the objective history of each denomination and come to the conclusion that each rejected the authority of the Catholic Church. This analysis is impossible with any of the Protestant denominations because none of them date back to 33 AD, i.e. Calvary. The Catholic Church does.

oh wait, that’s what you folk do isn’t it… incoherent reasoning and no education as a defense for faith in the bible, hummmmmm a Christian perspective………

If Catholics are uneducated you’re going to have a hard time explaining how our priests came up with science and how the Church invented the university.

Did the men who Jesus used to preach His gospel - men who were, “uneducated and untrained men” - seek to change those characteristics, or teach others to become educated and trained? (Acts 4:13) Why did Jesus say, “I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” (Mark 10:15)

God gave us brains and doesn’t expect us to turn them off. Childlike faith is a wonderful thing, and something to strive for, but elsewhere we are told:

[BIBLEDRB]1 Peter 3:15-16[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[Brian_Culliton]

[SIGN1]IT’S A TRAP![/SIGN1]

You face a Catch-22 because Polycarp did two things.

1. He wanted the Pope to adopt a Quartodeciman observance of Easter.
2. He also demanded that “with this Church [of Rome] on account of its potior principalitas the whole Church, that is, the faithful from every quarter, must needs agree.”

What are you talking about? You are quoting Irenaeus not Polycarp, and taking is words badly out of context too.

What Polycarp wanted was for the churches in the west to keep the same customs as the churches of Asia Minor; a custom may I remind you he learned from the Apostle John.

From the same work we find Irenaeus pointing to Polycarp as a prime example of apostolic teaching.

“But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried [on earth] a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom, departed this life, having always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are true.”

Now, you have three choices:

1. Admit that Polycarp is authoritative as to all that he taught (i.e. that he taught with John’s infallible authority) and submit to the authority of the Bishop of Rome, currently Pope Benedict XVI, as Polycarp did after the Pope rejected Quartodecimanism.

I’m afraid your misquote took the wind out of your straw-man argument there.

Who submitted to whom?

“But though matters were in this shape, they communed together, and Anicetus conceded the administration of the eucharist in the church to Polycarp, manifestly as a mark of respect. And they parted from each other in peace, both those who observed, and those who did not, maintaining the peace of the whole church.” (E.H. 5:24:17)

1. Deny that Polycarp is authoritative as to anything that he taught, and abandon your argument against the Bishop of Rome.

This is interesting. So you are saying that the bishop of Rome has the authority to override apostolic teaching. That explains a lot about why Catholics believe doctrines that cannot be traced to the apostles. Thanks for the insight.