Reply to something said in different forum -- Bible error

[undertow]

Undertow
I look forward to your post. It will be interesting to see how you will be able to find mistakes in the bible when nobody has been able to do it for 2000 + years

This isn't really true. That Christians can always make up some desperate attempt of a "solution" to a Bible problem doesn't show that there isn't a good weight of evidence that the Bible contains error. (I don't claim that Christian attempts at resolving alleged Bible error is always desperate, but some of it certainly is.)

A couple of articles worth reading:

http://www.inerrancyexposed.com/bethlehem.html
http://www.inerrancyexposed.com/judas.html

If you don't want to look honestly at the Bible then you can't be forced to do so.

 

[undertow]

Re: Reply to something said in different forum -- Bible erro

Another example of Bible error:

Jairus's Daughter: Was She Dead or Wasn't She?
Farrell Till


All three synoptic gospels relate the story of Jairus's daughter,
whom Jesus allegedly raised from the death. The accounts by Mark
and Luke are in substantial agreement, but Matthew's version differs
in one significant point that cannot be reconciled with the other
two without resorting to typically ridiculous fundamentalist "explanations."
Although the passages are quite long, they all need to be read
to see the problem, so we will look first at the two accounts
that are in basic agreement. An ellipsis will be inserted in each
version to signal omission of the healing of the woman with the
issue of blood, a miracle that allegedly happened while Jesus
was on his way to Jairus's house. All three versions report this
miracle, but it is not relevant to the matter of inconsistency
in the story of Jairus's daughter; hence, it will be omitted in
order to save space and focus attention on inconsistencies about
the raising of Jairus's daughter:

MARK'S VERSION: Now when Jesus had crossed over again by boat
to the other side, a great multitude gathered to Him; and He was
by the sea. And behold, one of the rulers of the synagogue came,
Jairus by name. And when he saw Him, he fell at His feet and begged
him earnestly, saying, "My little daughter lies at the point
of death. Come and lay Your hands on her, that she may be healed,
and she will live." So Jesus went with him, and a great multitude
followed Him and thronged Him.... While He was still speaking,
some came from the ruler of the synagogue's house who said, "Your
daughter is dead. Why trouble the Teacher any further?"



As soon as Jesus heard the word that was spoken, He said to the
ruler of the synagogue, "Do not be afraid; only believe."
And He permitted no one to follow Him except Peter, James, and
John the brother of James. Then He came to the house of the rule
of the synagogue, and saw a tumult and those who wept and wailed
loudly. When He came in, He said to them, "Why make this
commotion and weep? The child is not dead, but sleeping."And
they ridiculed Him. But when He had put them all outside, He took
the father and the mother of the child, and those who were with
Him, and entered where the child was lying. Then He took the child
by the hand, and said to her, "Talitha, cumi," which
is translated, "Little girl, I say to you, arise." Immediately
the girl arose and walked, for she was twelve years of age. And
they were overcome with great amazement" (5:21-24, 35-42,
NKJV).



LUKE'S VERSION: So it was, when Jesus returned, that the multitude
welcomed Him, for they were all waiting for Him. And behold, there
came a man named Jairus, and he was a ruler of the synagogue.
And he fell down at Jesus' feet and begged Him to come to his
house, for he had an only daughter about twelve years of age,
and she was dying....While He was still speaking, someone came
from the ruler of the synagogue's house, saying to him. "Your
daughter is dead. Do not trouble the Teacher."



But when Jesus heard it, He answered him, saying, "Do not
be afraid; only believe, and she will be made well." When
He came into the house, He permitted no one to go in except Peter,
James, and John, and the father and mother of the girl. Now all
wept and mourned for her; but He said, "Do not weep; she
is not dead, but sleeping." And they ridiculed Him, knowing
that she was dead.



But He put them all outside, took her by the hand and called,
saying, "Little girl, arise." Then her spirit returned,
and she arose immediately. And He commanded that she be given
something to eat. And her parents were astonished, but He charged
them to tell no one what had happened (8:40-42, 49-56, NKJV).



At this point, the significant thing to notice is that both Mark
and Luke reported that Jairus's daughter was yet alive when her
father came to Jesus to ask for help. This is not the case in
Matthew's version:

While he spoke these things to them, behold, a ruler came and
worshiped Him, saying, "My daughter has just died, but come
and lay Your hand on her and she will live." So Jesus arose
and followed him, and so did His disciples....



When Jesus came into the ruler's house, and saw the flute players
and the noisy crowd wailing, He said to them, "Make room,
for the girl is not dead, but sleeping." And they ridiculed
Him. But when the crowd was put outside, He went in and took her
by the hand, and the girl arose. And the report of this went out
into all that land (Matthew 9:18-19, 23-26).



The major problem in the story, then, is quite simple: was the
girl dead when her father came to Jesus for help or wasn't she?
Mark said Jairus told Jesus that his daughter was lying _at
the_point_of_death_, and Luke simply said that "she was
dying." Matthew, however, had the girl's father say, "My
daughter _has_just_died_." It couldn't possibly be true
that the girl was both alive and dead at the time Jairus came
to Jesus. She was either dead at the time or she wasn't. If she
was yet alive, then Mark and Luke were right and Matthew was wrong;
if she was dead at the time, then Matthew was right and Mark and
Luke were wrong.

Fundamentalists, of course, will not allow a simple thing like
glaring contradiction to deter them from believing that the Bible
is the inerrant, inspired word of God, so they have an explanation
to offer. Matthew, you see, was writing the story from the point
of view of the girl's death being so certain (if Jesus didn't
intervene) that he had Jairus say, "My daughter has just
died." Inerrantists will usually suggest an analogy like
a basketball team whose star center suffers a serious injury just
before the big game. "We have lost the game," someone
might say under the circumstances, not at all meaning that the
game has already been played and lost but that defeat is certain
without the star player. This, they will argue, is all that Matthew
meant. Jairus's daughter was so ill that death was certain without
divine intervention, so it was appropriate for him to have Jairus
speak figuratively and say, "My daughter has just died."
Mark and Luke, on the other hand, chose to write more literally;
hence, they stated that the girl was in a state of serious illness
but still alive when her father came to Jesus. "So, you see,"
inerrantists will gleefully (and arbitrarily) declare, "there
really is no contradiction here."

Although a how-it-could-have-been explanation like this may satisfy
Bible inerrantists desperately looking for a solution to an embarrassing
problem, it will not satisfy objective minds who can't help noticing
its failure to resolve all problems involved in reconciling the
three accounts of this story. Inconsistency in what Jairus said
to Jesus is just one of several difficulties in the story. Let's
notice, for example, that Mark and Luke both have five elements
in their versions of the story: (1) Jairus came to Jesus to ask
him to help his daughter, (2) Jesus and his disciples then went
with Jairus to his home, (3) on the way there, they were met by
some [Mark] or someone [Luke] coming from Jairus's house who announced
that the daughter had died, (4) Jesus nevertheless continued on
to Jairus's house, and (5) at the house, he raised the girl from
the dead.

All of these elements are also in Matthew's version _except
number three_. Matthew said nothing about anyone from Jairus's
house meeting Jesus to announce that the girl had died. On this
point, inerrantists will of course argue that omission does not
constitute cotradiction, but I am not citing Matthew's omission
of this detail as proof of contradiction or even inconsistency
but rather to challenge the likeliness of the figurative interpretation
that inerrantists apply to what Matthew's Jairus said to Jesus.
They insist that the statement could have had the figurative meaning
mentioned above, i.e., the death of the girl was certain and imminent
enough to warrant Jairus's saying, "My daughter is dead."
However, Matthew's omission of the message brought by some[one]
from Jairus's house gives sufficient reason to reject their explanation.
Mark and Luke, who began their versions of the story with the
premise that the girl was still alive, stated that Jesus and Jairus
were met by some[one] who announced that the girl had died. Matthew,
on the other hand, who began the story with Jairus saying that
his daughter had just died, said nothing about anyone coming to
announce that the girl was now dead. Why? The answer is simple:
Matthew was telling a story about Jesus going to raise a girl
who was already dead, so it would have made no sense at all to
have some[one] meet him to announce that the girl was dead. He
would have already known that, because it was exactly what Jairus
had said to him: "My daughter has just died." Hence,
Matthew's omission of this detail is sufficient reason to reject
the premise that he wanted readers to understand that Jairus was
speaking figuratively in this version of the story.

 

[Oscar3]

Undertow
While I am not the sharpest tool iin the shed I will tell you what I know to be true.

2 timothy 3:15-17
15 and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

By saying that the glorias scriptures have errors tells me two things.
1) Your saying God made a mistake, thus calling him a liar
2) Your not a Christian because if you were the Holy Spirit of God would have revealed your errors to you.

If I were Jg or vic or anybody else who believs in the bible the way its written I would not waste my valuable time debating this because as you have already stated

[quote_undertow]Christians can always make up some desperate attempt of a "solution" to a Bible problem[/quote]

Which tells me there will be no good answer.
If the bible trully contained a single error in it, it would have been expolited to no end and killed Chritianity.

I pray you will find Jesus.

 

[undertow]

By saying that the glorias scriptures have errors tells me two things.
1) Your saying God made a mistake, thus calling him a liar

Not really.

2) Your not a Christian because if you were the Holy Spirit of God would have revealed your errors to you.

Right. Like the Holy Spirit helps Christians to read the Bible in a million different ways...

If the bible trully contained a single error in it, it would have been expolited to no end and killed Chritianity.

A parallel argument would show that the Quran is without error! Would you accept that the Quran is without error?

 

[Imagican]

Oscar,

I will 'assume' that you are aware of the MANY different 'translations of the Bible'. This being assumed, 'which one' would 'you say' is the 'correct version'? They can't ALL be right for there are MANY discrepancies between each. So, are ALL Bible the 'true' Word of God? And if NOT, which one IS? And, if MOST are NOT completely 'accurate' what makes you 'think' that ANY ONE IS?

The Catholics prepared the King James version. Having 'their OWN doctrine' CERTAINLY had an influence of 'how' they 'understood' what they were 'translating'. John 1:1 is a PRIME example. Are you aware that there were NO capital letters in the ORIGINAL writing? So, exactly 'WHO' do you 'think' added them and 'why'? Do yourself a favor and read John 1:1 WITHOUT the capital letters and WATCH the truth unfold before your VERY EYES.

John 1:1

John 1
1In the beginning was the word, (the word of God that 'brought about creation itself), and the word was with God, and the word was God.

2The same was in the beginning with God.

3All things were made by him; (God), and without him was not any thing made that was made.

4In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

5And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

6There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.

7The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.

8He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.

9That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

10He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

(Notice that IF you accept what is written WITHOUT any preconceived notions, what we have here is a short story of the relationship of God and mankind. For when Christ came, we see that the Jews had been 'led astray' from the 'teachings of Moses' and had already adopted the teachings of men OVER those of Moses).

11He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

(This is referring to God NOT Christ. For there were MANY of His OWN people that DID receive Him. It was God that had been 'rejected' by His 'Chosen People'.)

12But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

13Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (Please note that if this were referring to Christ, it would have stated: 'but of The Spirit'. But NO, it says; 'but of God'.)

NOW comes Christ................

14And the Word was made flesh, (Christ became a man and stated HIMSELF that the Word that He offer WAS NOT HIS OWN, but GIVEN Him of the FATHER), and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

15John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

16And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.

17For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

19And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?

20And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ.

21And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

22Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself?

23He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias.

24And they which were sent were of the Pharisees.

25And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?

26John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not;

27He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose.

28These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing.

29The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, (Please note here Lamb OF God, NOT God the Lamb), which taketh away the sin of the world.

30This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.

31And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.

32And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.

33And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.

34And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

35Again the next day after John stood, and two of his disciples;

36And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!
37And the two disciples heard him speak, and they followed Jesus.

38Then Jesus turned, and saw them following, and saith unto them, What seek ye? They said unto him, Rabbi, (which is to say, being interpreted, Master,) where dwellest thou?

39He saith unto them, Come and see. They came and saw where he dwelt, and abode with him that day: for it was about the tenth hour.

40One of the two which heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon Peter's brother.

41He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ.

42And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.

43The day following Jesus would go forth into Galilee, and findeth Philip, and saith unto him, Follow me.

44Now Philip was of Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter.

45Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph, (is this another mistake? For we know that Joseph was NOT the father of Jesus. God WAS His Father).

46And Nathanael said unto him, Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth? Philip saith unto him, Come and see.

47Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!

48Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.

49Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.

50Jesus answered and said unto him, Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig tree, believest thou? thou shalt see greater things than these.

51And he saith unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.

Now, do you really believe what being offered here 'starts with God, refers immediately to Christ, goes back to God and 'THEN states that Christ came to earth? If one simply eliminates the capital W, it is PLAIN to see that the FIRST few verses of John are talking about GOD, NOT Christ. For the word WORD is NOT synonymous to Christ EXCEPT to those that have been 'taught' such BY THE CHURCHES.
Or, is John offering a simple quick chronologic order in which God CREATED this World and those in it, then sent HIS SON as a witness of HIM and as the Lamb of God?
So, while the Word IS the 'beginning' of the knowledge of God. It is by NO MEANS the 'final' understanding or complete understanding. It is ONLY the beginning. And even IF there were 'changes' made to the original scripture, there is STILL enough of the 'truth', (if one relies upon The SPIRIT rather than the 'wisdom of men'), to allow one to develope a relationship with the Father through His Son.

 

[Vic C.]

The Catholics prepared the King James version.

What!?!?

 

[Vic C.]

The Catholics prepared the King James version. Having 'their OWN doctrine' CERTAINLY had an influence of 'how' they 'understood' what they were 'translating'. John 1:1 is a PRIME example. Are you aware that there were NO capital letters in the ORIGINAL writing? So, exactly 'WHO' do you 'think' added them and 'why'? Do yourself a favor and read John 1:1 WITHOUT the capital letters and WATCH the truth unfold before your VERY EYES.

Oscar, before you believe that, read this:

http://www.du.edu/~etuttle/classics/nugreek/lesson1.htm

The Greek alphabet reached its definitive form in 5th-century BC Athens, when some letters were dropped, others added, and still others written in new ways, in a thorough standardization of the alphabet. The ways of writing the letters changed gradually. At first, what we call capital letters were used. Then, to facilitate rapid writing with a pen on parchment, these letters were modified into a minuscule form.

With the introduction of printing, fonts were designed based on the minuscule letters, and this is the basis for the letters used today in Greek. The capital letters were retained for emphasis, as in Latin. In our style, we use capital letters only for proper nouns, and for the first letter in a paragraph. Sentences begin with the usual small letters. There is no connected script for Greek even today, such as we use in English, but simply rapid ways of writing the minuscule characters.

You see, the caps were preserved, so, we knew where to insert them. Punctuation, however, was a different issue.

 

[John the Baptist]

--CURSED BE THE MAN .. MAKETH FLESH HIS ARM! Jer. 17:5--

Aha! (?) Well, whatever? :
Anyway, Back to my K.J., and still in full belief that even my Bible [ALONE] is its own Hermeneutics!!

And I have NO trouble with it! I see a DOCUMENTED by God division in Isaiah 8:20. First is HIS work done by Himself. And then, His work 'given' to other's, who are 'holy men of God' to do His work of testimony. That comes out as the Eternal Covenant & then the 66 books. Covenant & Testimony!
Are mans court testimony all exactly alike?? Even when they swear to tell the Truth??

Are there errors? Well, here is how I see it. (and again the Word explains itself Matt. 4:4 & 2 Tim. 3:16) Just say that there were 7 'real' holy men of God on this forum! And the Holy 'Spirit God' gave the 'Doctrine of God Son' to pen. And then came the Word of God/Christ to each one of the seven.

Remember that It came individually to each. Now, each one does the penmanship of explaining the doctrine in their individual descriptive words. Remember some of these ones used words that were surely not the Word's that the Godhead would use. 2 Kings 18:27 (urine? see the K.J.)

OK: Go! You seven hear only (or see) a picture of the resurrection, like the first four books from the N.T. so you write it down as you see it? Are they just alike? If they are, why did God have four written? And this is to be their Truthful 'TESTIMONY'!

Sorry about this from here on! :o There are some very VAIN folks in the world today, huh? These worldly ones do not BELIEVE that you seven know what you have heard, is written down righ!? Or that the words have other meanings than you project? Or.. that the Holy Spirit was caught off guard using you 'Holy Men' to do the Godhead's work! They forgot that you do not think alike, or your education is all different, or whatever else that the devil can toss out!

Again: In other Words, the world needs to get back into the Word of God! It needs nothing from the 'Arm Of Flesh' to explain itself! It is its own Hermeneutics. These 'Holy Inspired' mens 'Testimony' is 'ALL' needed to understand the Word of God! See 1 Corinthians 14:32 and Christs very own Words of Matthew 4:4, and again Timothy's definition of how to KNOW DOCTRINE as he 'penned' it by the Holy Spirits moving him, in 2 Timothy 3:16-17. [ALL SCRIPTURE!!] (nothing else seen!)

And, in Isaiah 28:8-10 we see the CHURCH TABLES (where one should be fed) FULL OF VOMIT! (and awful word huh?) Yet read on! No one seems to understand what the rest of the verse means? But it tell's what we are to do to [KNOW] in Bible Study what the Godhead REQUIRES!

But seeing that the church's have this vomit problem of Revelation 17:1-5 & ALL SLEEPING of Matthew 25:1 on.. and the judgement to be 'SPEWED' out in Revelation 3:16-17, so.. what we have is hours & hours & reams & reams of study from the Arm of Flesh! And what happened to the Matthew 4:4 Instruction?? You tell me that we do not have VAIN folks today with their own god, being their self???

Personally, as I see it, it is way past time that the real folks of God that are 'still' (???) searching for Him, get back into His Word with the way that He tells us to do it! Just think what would be the outcome if some of these ones spent the time in His Word instead of all of this vain other stuff? In fact, most of these even use the Arm of Flesh for just their hobby/horse 'subjects'! : And.. that in and of itself, should be a RED FLAG to the True Christian Seeker!

---John

 

[BradtheImpaler]

If the bible trully contained a single error in it, it would have been expolited to no end and killed Chritianity

I don't know, is the Koran error-free? It must be, because if not it would have been "exploited" and Islam "killed"? Last time I noticed it was doing pretty well.

Once someone accepts that a religious work (or anything) is inerrant by faith, possible errors/contradictions therein will not even be considered by that person. You have simply accepted a premise by faith. This premise was not proven to you, therefore any proof to the contrary will not be considered by you. This is a voluntary form of brainwashing.