"Biblical inerrancy" is a doctrine found in many (not all, and probably not even most) Christian churches. This doctrine teaches that the Bible was inspired by God, and thus is inerrant (without error) in everything it teaches. In short, "the Bible is the word of God, and every word's true."

I disagree, for the following reasons:

1. Humans wrote the Bible. God-breathed or not, the Bible was written using the hands of humans. Humans are fallible, and as humans continue to write, errors become more and more inevitable.

I have seen the following analogy in refutations of this point:
"I am prone to car accidents.
I drove my car to the library.
Therefore, I crashed my car.

Just because I'm accident-prone and I drove my car to the library does not mean that I crashed my car on the way to the library. Likewise, man gets it right every once in a while- why not when writing the Bible?"

This is a weak analogy because it lacks an understanding of probability. Being accident-prone means that you have a high chance of crashing your car, not that you crash your car every time you drive.

Also, the analogy compares the single act of driving once to the process of writing the Bible- a process that spanned millenia and required dozens of authors.

The creation of the Bible was not one action, but literally thousands of actions; every verse was an opportunity for error. Humans screw up every once in a while, and it is only reasonable that such happened on a verse here and there throughout the Bible.

2. We only have the word of biblical authors that the Bible is the inerrant word of God; reliance on such testimony is like letting a defendant free because he protests his innocence.

3. To say that God inspired the authors of the Bible still leaves the option that their beliefs were the motivation for writing the Bible; this differs significantly from the accepted explanation that God spoke to the authors, and then the authors transcribed God's word.

4. In my mind, there is enough evidence that Jesus was a real person, the son of God, who truly preformed miracles. Thus, one could argue that Jesus' teachings came straight from God/the trinity. This brings me to my main point: Jesus' teachings conflicted with teachings (advocated by fallible humans) found elsewhere in the Bible.

For examples, refer to Jesus' sermon on the mount; he routinely uses the phrase "you have heard" when referring to an older teaching that he is about to contradict.

In another part of the Bible, Jesus teaches that what you eat does not make you unclean, but that which you say and do makes you unclean. This is in direct contradiction to all the dietary laws in the old testament. There is also a commandment in Exodus that prohibits work on the sabbath, and yet Jesus defended a man who violated this commandment.

Therefore, there is a conflict between what Jesus taught and what humans claim that God taught. I would rather side with Jesus. Even if you don't believe in Jesus, his teachings do come with logical explanations; in contrast, the ban on homosexuality and the definition of gender roles come without explanation and are therefore arbitrary.

5. Fundamentalists argue that if you doubt parts of the Bible, then eventually you will doubt the entire document. This is known as the "slippery slope argument."

This argument fails to look at the Bible from the perspective of one who believes there are errors in the Bible. One who believes the Bible is free from error sees only one category for all the teachings in the Bible: those that come directly from God, and are therefore inerrant.

However, those who believe that the Bible has errors also believe that there are different categories for the teachings of the Bible: those that come from God (ie. the teachings of Jesus), and those that don't. The idea of doubting the teaching of Jesus is a preposterous to me as doubting the theory of creationism is to a fundamentalist!

Those are my arguments against biblical inerrancy. I believe that to question the Bible is not to question God, but to question the men responsible for writing the Bible. Also, an understanding that fallible men wrote the Bible frees Christians from the biases and prejudices of the biblical authors.

This issue is important to me, because there is a sharp divide in my extended family on this issue. I appreciate any response, for any response will allow me to improve my thinking. Thank you!

That was a reply to CelticNewAger's question about the trinity. I didn't give much context, though. Um...what I meant was that (if you accept Christian theological teachings) the trinity always existed.

quote:

I really like polite (no-shove religion down throat) Christians.

I'm a Christian; however (or therefore), I'm also a liberal Democrat. I don't believe in legislating theology.

quote:

Jesus wasn't created in 4-6 B.C. He'd always been around, but that was just his physical manifestation on Earth.

Hm. . . I didn't know that, but that doesn't mean much. I learn something new everyday.

I really like polite (no-shove religion down throat) Christians.

Jesus wasn't created in 4-6 B.C. He'd always been around, but that was just his physical manifestation on Earth.

If the Holy Trinity is where God derived his power, then what did God do before Jesus?

Let's see 'em answer that one....

That was sarcasm, right? Because otherwise it wouldn't make much sense.

quote:

I disagree, iankinzel. My question for you is, do you realize how much God loves you?

Wow. Your skills at debating are absolutely staggering. The way you can see things from the perspective of other people is just so amazing - I am truly stunned.

Nobody can ever truly know how much they are loved by God. I believe God loves me too much to hold me to a code based on cultural bias, that we've held on par with the teachings of his own son.

I agree that we can still be Christian without believing everything the Bible says; thus, it irritates me when people assume I'm not a Christian because of my objection to biblical inerrancy. I'm a devout Methodist.

Give me an example of a verse or teaching that I've cited, and show me my error. In my experience, when somebody cites a controversial Bible verse, there are some Christians who will twist it into something it's not, just to maintain the belief in biblical inerrancy. I'd be glad to debate this.

I disagree, iankinzel. My question for you is, do you realize how much God loves you? I believe Christ loves His Church far too much to allow one of His primary method of communication (along with the Spirit) with them to be tainted. It's been my experience that when a Bible verse, or even chapter, seems...wrong, or, not in line with Christianity, then it's usually A) you don't understand the true meaning - you're either missing something, or you're adding things in which it isn't really saying, or B) the verse is right, and you are wrong. But in any case, you can be Christian and still believe the Bible isn't completely true. There are many kinds of Christians, and we're all the Church.

I notice this is your first post. Welcome on board! Judging from where you stand, I'm looking forward to some good debates in the future.

quote:

Originally posted by AnonymousFriend4Christ:

It's the only religous (I think...don't hold me to that...) book that prophesies things that have actually come TRUE, not generally, but PRECISELY.

This is far from settled. Archaeologists now believe that the Bible's record for prophecy is a combination of writing prophecy of events that already occured, and changing events to fit prophecies.

quote:

Now, I will agree with you on one thing- you may find inaccuracies in it.BUT that is only because things have been lost in translation. Until you have studied the ENTIRE Bible in its original context in its original language, then I'm sorry, but you really have no right to judge it.{/quote]

There are many churches that teach that the Holy Spirit has intervened at every stage of every translation. That's what I'm disputing. Also, we can't verify that the original Bible was inerrant either until we've studied the ENTIRE Bible in its original language.

[quote]Number two, you say that Jesus' teachings conflicted with teachings elsewhare in the Bible.Not so my friend. Always look at a verse in context, not just alone.

I look at the context, too; but, I don't want to take forever typing, so I put in what I judge to be enough context.

quote:

And,Jesus may have said some things that differed from Old Testament teachings. BUT there is a reason for this. A new age was beginning called the 'Church Age.'

The amazing part is Jesus' advocacy of Moses' law. One can find instances in which he told people that they had to follow the commandments as a part of salvation. Jesus only struck down the ceremonial laws, not the moral laws.

quote:

If you still don't believe me (which I'm sure that my small-witted argument did nothing to make you see my point more clearly) then just give me examples of your point straight from the Bible and I will do my best to show you my side using those same verses. I think I could enlighten you a little. Just think about it.

OK, you're on! : )

-Matthew 1:12-16 lists the genealogy of Christ from the exile in Babylon to Christ. There, it says the Jacob was Joseph's father. However, However, Luke 3:23 says that Heli was Joseph's father.

-Genesis 1:25-26 says that God created beasts before she created humans. However, Genesis 2:18-19 claims that God created beasts first.

-Genesis 22:1 says "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham." This is when Abraham almost sacrifices Isaac. However, James teaches that "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man."

-Matthew 7:21-23: "Not everyone who calls me, 'Lord! Lord!' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only those who do what my Father in heaven whants them to do. When the judgment day comes, many will say to me, 'Lord! Lord!' In your name we spoke God's message, by your name we drove out many demons and performed many miracles!' Then I will say to them, 'I never knew you. Get away from me, you wicked people!" Also, Romans 2:13 says "For it is not by hearing the Law that people are put right with God, but by doing what the Law commands."

However, Galatians 2:16 says "Yet we know that a person is put right with God only through faith in Jesus Christ, never by doing what the Law requires." There are other verses claiming salvation by faith alone. Based on what Jesus said, I'm going for the faith+works/proof of faith=salvation formula.

-In Matthew, Jesus says that those who seek God shall find God. However, Romans 9:18 states, "So then, God has mercy on anyone he wishes, and he makes stubborn anyone he wishes."

-This is my favorite one. It's not really fair, because I have an ace up my sleave, so to say. Just refute this one.

Psalms 112:1-3: "Praise the lord! Happy is the person who honors the Lord, who takes pleasure in obeying his commands. The good man's children will be powerful in the land; his descendans will be blessed. His family will be wealthy and rich, and he will be prosperous forever." Riches=blessing.

Matthew 19:24: "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." Riches=curse.

quote:

Besides, if the Bible has errors, where would those errorsbe exactly?

Our own thinking will indicate where those errors lie.

quote:

How do we know that the whole thing is not wrong?

Our own thinking will indicate to us that the Bible is more than just a bunch or crock.

quote:

And then, how could you say that you believed? I'm not attacking anyone.And I'm most definitely NOT saying that anyone's not a Christian. I'm just saying that you should think about it.

I have thought about it. I no longer hold the Bible as my highest authority on spiritual matters, but rather my own faith in the trinity: God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit-- not human authors.

Whoa, this is a touchy issue. Um, my church is one of those that believes very strongly in Bible inerrancy. Now, just hear me out and let me share with you why.
Number one, yes, the Bible was written by men, but they were inspired by God as to what to write. Well they could still make mistakes, you may argue. I don't believe that God would have led others to trust in those things if he had have allowed them to make mistakes. Also, you tend to look at only the new testament. That is only a small percentage of the Bible and the time that it was written. The Bible's history begins like 4,ooo years ago. It's the only religous (I think...don't hold me to that...) book that prophesies things that have actually come TRUE, not generally, but PRECISELY. I could give you tons of examples, but I won't go into that right now. If you want me to, just ask and I'll be happy to fill you in. The Bible is an amazing book. And what makes it so amazing is that it isn't just a book written by men...it is a book inspired by God. Now, I will agree with you on one thing- you may find inaccuracies in it.BUT that is only because things have been lost in translation. Until you have studied the ENTIRE Bible in its original context in its original language, then I'm sorry, but you really have no right to judge it. Now, I must be honest, I have not done this myself. But I know people who have and they have shown me countless examples of this and explained this very thing to me.They are wiser than me, and since I have no way to prove them wrong, I believe them.
Number two, you say that Jesus' teachings conflicted with teachings elsewhare in the Bible.Not so my friend. Always look at a verse in context, not just alone. And,Jesus may have said some things that differed from Old Testament teachings. BUT there is a reason for this. A new age was beginning called the 'Church Age.'Jesus knew that some things had to change. We are humans,after all, and changing is in our nature. So, he..."adjusted" things, if you will. Look at everything in context and you will see this. If you still don't believe me (which I'm sure that my small-witted argument did nothing to make you see my point more clearly) then just give me examples of your point straight from the Bible and I will do my best to show you my side using those same verses. I think I could enlighten you a little. Just think about it.Besides, if the Bible has errors, where would those errorsbe exactly? How do we know that the wholething is not wrong? And then, how could you say that you believed? I'm not attacking anyone.And I'm most definitely NOT saying that anyone's not a Christian. I'm just saying that you should think about it.

quote:

Originally posted by clpo13:
BoMoWo, where's your proof that Jesus was God? I haven't yet seen anything concrete on that claim. Jesus was a man who lived and died around two millenia ago. He wasn't a deity, not even semi-divine.

Usually when Christians interchange Jesus and God or when they call Jesus "God's son" they know what you just said. It's just a common error of speech.

Kind like the "good" and "well" grammar thing...most people know when to say which one and just forget to use the right one because of habit or they don't care about which one they use.

You prove to me it's error, you said that Jesus conflicted with other parts of the Bible, yet being God's son by your own admission He would have the right to do that, yet He did not because He was promised as a saviour from the law and it's judgements.

quote:

Originally posted by BoMoWo:
The proof that He is still alive today is that He still shows His power when we call on His name. Now I understand having to see it to believe it, so I can only tell you from my experiences and that of close friends. I have seen many miracles that He has done through me and others around me, you will probably disbelieve most of what I say, but here it is anyways, just a few of them.

My friend and I were in a meeting that was for healing, and God spoke to me and told me that a lady had bad pain in her knees, so I went to this lady's son who is a close friend of mine and asked him if he knew whether his mom had pain in her knees. He did not know so I went to his mom and asked her about it, she immediatly explained how she had arthritis pain in both of her knees, so I told her that God wanted to heal her and I called a friend of mine over to pray for her with me. We commanded her to be healed in the name of Jesusand within moments the pain left her body completely and has never returned.

That is onlyone of the miracles I have seen, I could recount many more, but I have to leave the house, if you want to hear more, just let me know.

Thank you, you just proved Jesus is God's son. Now prove that the Bible is inerrant.

The proof that He is still alive today is that He still shows His power when we call on His name. Now I understand having to see it to believe it, so I can only tell you from my experiences and that of close friends. I have seen many miracles that He has done through me and others around me, you will probably disbelieve most of what I say, but here it is anyways, just a few of them.

My friend and I were in a meeting that was for healing, and God spoke to me and told me that a lady had bad pain in her knees, so I went to this lady's son who is a close friend of mine and asked him if he knew whether his mom had pain in her knees. He did not know so I went to his mom and asked her about it, she immediatly explained how she had arthritis pain in both of her knees, so I told her that God wanted to heal her and I called a friend of mine over to pray for her with me. We commanded her to be healed in the name of Jesusand within moments the pain left her body completely and has never returned.

That is onlyone of the miracles I have seen, I could recount many more, but I have to leave the house, if you want to hear more, just let me know.

BoMoWo, where's your proof that Jesus was God? I haven't yet seen anything concrete on that claim. Jesus was a man who lived and died around two millenia ago. He wasn't a deity, not even semi-divine.

I highly doubt that a sandal wearing hippy would write a law against mixed fibers. As long as they're organic, Jesus wouldn't care.

Jesus did not contradict the law, rather He fulfilled it, being it's writer in the first place.

If you believe that the whole Bible is without error, then why don't you believe the law of Leviticus? This is exactly my point: many fundamentalists will profess to believe in biblical inerrancy as long as it's convenient, and no further. Then, they criticise other people who also pick and choose out of the Bible, saying that they are less Christian or whatever.