The Soda Shop Message Boards

I would like to hear people's thoughts on Biblical Inerrancy. If the Ark was 295 cubits instead of 300 cubits or if the genealogies aren't meant to be historical does that invalidate all of the Bible? I leave this quote to spark discussion.

The total result is not "the Word of God" in the sense that every passage, in itself, gives impeccable science or history. It carries the Word of God and we (under grace, with attention to tradition and to interpreters wiser than ourselves and with the use of such intelligence and learning as we may have) receive that word from it not by using it as an encyclopedia or an encyclical but by steeping ourselves in its tone and temper and so learning its overall message.

Of course it doesn't invalidate the whole Bible if these things are incorrect; that's like saying that because one of Isaac Newton's measurements was wrong, every thing he ever contributed to science was wrong. But it still does raise some questions, questions that will perhaps never be answered on Earth. I don't think God put any inaccuracies in the Bible (This is the first I've heard of the Ark thing, so I haven't looked into that yet), but even if he did, he put them there for a specific reason. Do I know the reason? Heck no. Still, interesting topic. I can see it being somewhat controversial as well, so of course it has my stamp of approval.

Oh, and I agree with your quote as well.

I was just using the ark's measurements as an example, I don't know of any actual disputes over the length of the ark. I was just more meaning let's say there was an archeology discovery tomorrow of the ark and it turned out that one of the measurements in the Bible was 5 cubits off, would that mean the Bible is invalidated?

I think I would take a slightly different tact than you and say that God did not dictate every letter or word in the Bible, I believe the writings in the Bible to be inspired but that is different than dictated. So I think any errors are not created by God but are simply part of the reality of using humans to write the Bible. I mean there are minor differences in Gospel accounts, does that make them false? No it just means different Apostles wrote different accounts, still inspired but not dictated.

I like the quote as well, C.S. Lewis is a great author and theologian.

Yeah, I was actually thinking that too. I don't actually believe that God dictated the Bible to the Apostles, in that he didn't shout every word down to them with an audible voice. I believe that he inspired it at all, but it's possible that some of the word choices and minor details were the human writers' doing. And I also don't think he would've struck them down with a lightning bolt if they got one word wrong or something, so it's very possible that any errors were either made on accident at the original conception of the book or added in later translations. It's such an old book that I don't think it's fair for people to declare that the whole thing is completely invalid because of one possible mistake.

Eleventh Doctor wrote: So I think any errors are not created by God but are simply part of the reality of using humans to write the Bible. I mean there are minor differences in Gospel accounts, does that make them false? No it just means different Apostles wrote different accounts, still inspired but not dictated.

I like the quote as well, C.S. Lewis is a great author and theologian.

What you say is mainly smooth sailing, well put. But, it's just rather doubtful the Bible has any errors in it whatsoever. Even errors about technicalities rather than spiritual things. For example, there are apparent contradictions in the authors accounts, but the ones I've heard are explained fairly easy.

I agree with Pound Foolish. I doubt actual original texts have any inaccuracies. In translations or copies on the other hand the inspiration of the Bible does not carry over.

The Bible is only inspired in the original texts? So what do we do with the Old Testament since all we have are translations?

Therefore our problems with translations. Once translated out of even the Hebrew translation, their are some debates of numbers. I can think of three of such in the OT.

You said the inspiration itself doesn't carry over though, can you clarify what you mean by that? To me that has connotations of more than just a few numbers being wrong.

It does for the most part. Also sometimes verb tenses are changed.

Do you mean the inspiration does carry over for the most part?

Yes, I believe it does.

If science disagrees with the Bible, it is the science that is incorrect.

So is science wrong to say the earth is round? Revelation 7:1 "After these things I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, on the sea, or on any tree." Also are there only four winds on the earth?

Well every thing is really made from strait lines.

Can you expand on that? Also what about the four winds?

Simply, something like this: http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/ ... 581d9f.jpg

Why should there not be four winds?
Perhaps it is (although maybe not) referring to the seasons. ?

I have no idea what that drawing is

Referring to four seasons that don't exist in the region the Bible was written in?

It's a drawing with all strait lines.


And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

Okay and what does that drawing prove?

Okay, there are seasons, it doesn't say four. Also this just proves my point about the figurative language in the Bible