10-14-2005, 09:02 AM #1
Do you believe the bible to be these things...
inerrant-Inerrancy refers to text is considered accurate, truthful, reliable, totally free of error, without mistake and absolutely authoritative.
inspired-Inspiration is the belief that God influenced the authors of the Bible so that their writings would be free of error
Infallible-when applied to the Bible, means that it is fully trustworthy. Its text does not deceive the reader.
Does it really matter if the bible is inerrant, inspired and infallible? So, in your mind if there is one error in the bible can it be true?
Just curious to what everyone thinks.
10-14-2005, 11:18 AM #2
I dont belive the bible is anything else than a story with some historical things thrown into it.
10-14-2005, 04:41 PM #3
i dont buy shit the bibles selling
10-14-2005, 08:49 PM #4
There seems to be a common theme developing
10-14-2005, 09:05 PM #5
IMHO, the Old Testament is a collection of ancient Hebrew folklore, and the New Testament attempts to build a fire-and-brimstone religion on top of it.
Doesn't deserve to be taken seriously, much less literally.
10-15-2005, 01:27 AM #6Originally Posted by johan
10-15-2005, 04:27 AM #7Originally Posted by books555
10-15-2005, 05:23 AM #8
I believe the bible is 1 thing...SHIT.
Its like the longest game of chinese whispers and its full of contradictions
10-15-2005, 07:06 PM #9Originally Posted by johan
well isnt the bible a compilation of historical records written at different times thruout history that back up events written by other people and at different times in history?
10-15-2005, 07:20 PM #10
I believe word of mouth has a funny way of changing stuff.
10-15-2005, 09:30 PM #11Originally Posted by Hackamaniac
I am kind of suprised that no one believes the bible to be the infallible, inerrant, inspired word of God.
10-15-2005, 11:13 PM #12Originally Posted by notus
10-16-2005, 04:53 AM #13
sounds like a loaded question to me like you think you have some awsome tidbit you think will be a dagger in the heart of a christian once one says they believe this. Ill set the trap...i believe the bible accurate, truthful, reliable, totally free of error, without mistake and absolutely authoritative. inspired and Infallible
10-16-2005, 04:55 AM #14Originally Posted by Hackamaniac
10-16-2005, 05:47 AM #15
10-16-2005, 06:01 AM #16Originally Posted by max2extreme
There is no historical record of the flood, the exodus or any other miracle that happened. So Im with tock on this one.
10-16-2005, 06:24 AM #17
yeah - if you think someone actually parted a sea by pointing a stick at it i need what your on
likes most stories that have been passed on and on and on over time they become more and more fictional with so much added bs
10-16-2005, 08:33 AM #18
is parting a sea any more miraculous as 2 totally different creatures (male human and female human) being 'accidently created' at the exact same time and fit together perfectly so they can produce off spring to continue to make more of their kind? yea, parting the sea is miraculous and i cant fathom it, but i believe it, just as you either believe in a God (which is miraculous!) or you believe in 'accidental creation' which would also be miraculous.
10-16-2005, 08:44 AM #19Originally Posted by max2extreme
10-16-2005, 09:22 AM #20Originally Posted by max2extreme
The thing is that there is nowhere any sign of those miracles happening outside of the bible. Parting of the red sea would be a awsome event that people would write down. That such a huge part of the egyptian army goes under would aswell be a event that historians would write abput.
And the flood. Well if the flood is true we should se signs of it everywhere, on every mountain we examine. A thing like that doesnt just happen without leaving traces. If nowhere else it should be possible to trance in antartica since the ice would have floated untop of the water and the thickness of the ice sheets would have increased drasticly during that period. But no such signs exist. The climat would have been severly effected for probably centuries afterwards since all the water currents would have been totaly changed. Yet there is no sign of that happening either during that time period as far as I know.
10-16-2005, 09:35 AM #21Originally Posted by johan
Originally Posted by JOHAN
10-16-2005, 09:42 AM #22Originally Posted by max2extreme
Originally Posted by max2extreme
when did the flood happen according to the bible? Sometime during the last 6000 years right?
The ice sheets can be dated very far back. At least 400 000 years from the deepest drill so far and there is nothing indicating we wont find older ice deeper down.
10-16-2005, 09:58 AM #23Originally Posted by johan
on a side note, you know any good sites or what i can google to find out how they determine an ice sheet is 400,000 years old? thats amazing.
10-16-2005, 10:01 AM #24
10-16-2005, 10:11 AM #25
Okay that makes it kind of hard to tell anything so I dont know how one would verify or disprove the bible claims if it happened say 10 million years ago not 4300 years ago
I did a quick google and found that site.
just google age of antartic ice and alot of sites pops up
10-16-2005, 10:16 AM #26
yea i dont know. for now we can assume 4300 years.. at least there are some dates that can get us to 4300 years ago. i read somewhere how there are good evidence in both young earth and old earth, but i dont know if both theories put the flood at the same time and all the extra time comes before the flood or if old earth theory puts noahs flood lots of years before.
Last edited by max2extreme; 10-16-2005 at 10:19 AM.
10-16-2005, 10:16 AM #27
pretty interesting article
10-16-2005, 10:21 AM #28
to if the flood did happen 4300 years ago the rain would probably fall over antartica aswell(or well snow most likely) and that would have caused a incredible thickening of the ice sheet. That would show up in the drills for sure. Now offcourse its possible god didnt make it snow or rain there and in that case I guess the ice sheet would just float ontop of the extra water and than go down again. If that can be traced I have no clue. BUt it should be tracable on the pole where alot of the ice is on land.
10-16-2005, 05:29 PM #29Originally Posted by notus
I believe it is perfect in its original form. What we have today is almost perfect, for instance the noted Scholar Bruce Metger (professor of theology, Princeton) puts the degree of accuracy, from when they were written compared to what we have now at 99.5% percent.
10-17-2005, 03:22 PM #30Originally Posted by johan
Again, the question arises, "Where did all that water come from, and where did it all go afterward?" Seems to be the question that neither Max nor Books wants to touch . . . can't say that I blame them . . .
10-17-2005, 04:39 PM #31
if you search back, i bet you'll find ive answered that question everytime youve asked except for one. why dont you do a search.
10-17-2005, 04:53 PM #32
To me the bible is a book of fiction with nice stories in it, just like a Harry Potter or Agatha Christie novel... nothing more...
If people chose to accept the stories of the bible as fact, then good for them, the day they can supply proof for all those stories I may believe it to be more than fantasy.
But until you show me a man walking on water, resurecting from the dead, parting the sea, changing water to wine or any scientific proof of a "god", I'll just stick to my beliefs (or lack of).
10-19-2005, 06:53 PM #33
A lot of people are tired of not getting any proof, this is why humans dont go to church anymore, and are not buying that religion anymore.
Doing this and that or god will put you in hell.
Here on Montreal they are destroying churchs to build condos.
10-19-2005, 07:05 PM #34
(i use 'you' as a general term sonar, not directing this at you)
tired of not getting any proof? Its probably those same people who wait for others to tell them the proofs instead of actually going out and searching for it themselves, yet if someone from the church knocks on their door, its shut as fast as its opened. i find that most of the people i talk to are uninformed because they are either too lazy to look, dont think it matters, or think they know but truly dont. and they stick to what they "know" because its easier than actually doing a little research...mostly because "im too busy". well you know what, what if after you die God is "too busy for you" like you were "too busy for Him". The proofs are there. Its not a blind faith. and yes, I cant wait till I go to heaven, but Im in no hurry. When its time, its time. Until then, Ill enjoy all of the universe I can that He has given. Thats too bad they are destroying churches to build condos.
10-19-2005, 07:28 PM #35Originally Posted by max2extreme
10-19-2005, 07:49 PM #36
i didnt say there was absolute proof. and thats where faith comes in. but christianity is not a "blind faith" religion either.
10-20-2005, 06:21 PM #37Originally Posted by notus
Your statement is false.
10-20-2005, 06:22 PM #38
Faith is required in most of life.
10-26-2005, 12:05 AM #39Originally Posted by Tock
The water came from our planet being barbarded with astroids millions of years ago... Geologist have found through studying of other asteroids that they contain water.... Watch National Geographic Explorer sometime... A lot to learn on Naked Science
10-26-2005, 04:27 AM #40
He didnt ask the question on what the original water comes from. He wonder where the biblical flood water came from
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)