• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

When "Inerrant" Really Means "Full Of Errors"

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
It's no secret that God's "inerrant" word is riddled with errors. One can google "Bible contradictions" and come up with with pages and pages of results outlining hundreds if not thousands of errors and contradictions. Whole books on the subject are available on Amazon. Ken Ham wrote a two-volume rebuttal to the most common ones and his treatise doesn't even scratch the surface. I looked at one site and thought I saw 5000. Turns out it was 50,000. It's true that most are of a minor nature, but quite a few--perhaps 500 by my reckoning are egregious enough to be considered serious enough to question the Bible's veracity.

I recently had a short discussion with a member in here about Leviticus 16:34

34 “And this shall be a statute forever for you: Atonement is to be made once a year for all the sins of the Israelites.”

I questioned, "Why did God say the animal sacrifice is to last forever when He knew He'd be sending His son Jesus in 1200 years or so to replace. I would have suspected God would have said, "This statute is only temporary until I send a more perfect sacrifice in the form of my divine son." The truth is IMHO when the scribes wrote out this passage they had absolutely no idea a civilization called Romans would conquer them and destroy Jerusalem and Herod's Temple in 70 CE, therefore they were not in communication with Yahweh when they wrote this ordinance any more than I am in communication with the man in the moon. IOW, this whole atonement thing is a result of a custom that likely evolved over many centuries rather than being handed down by Yahweh all at once.

These errors are why the discipline, apologetics was invented in the first place--to counter with subterfuge or any other means at their disposal to try to make right what was clearly wrong. I can give a few examples of this suberfuge:

“Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me; your throne will be established forever”

Obviously David's throne and kingdom didn't last forever. It ended when the Babylonians marched into Israel. Clever apologists say however that David's throne didn't really end because one day Jesus (who has been set up to be David's offspring via Matthew's and Luke's completely different genealogies for Jesus) will return to earth to claim the throne and rule from it. How this negates the tens of thousands years Israel is and will be without David's house and kingdom until then is a complete mystery to me.

Another is Ezekiel's prophecy that Tyre would be completely destroyed and never rebuilt. Tyre still exists today. You can visit it (when the pandemic is over). Clever apologists say, however that Ezekiel was speaking of the city's original site. The site where Tyre sits today is a different site. In actuality Tyre consisted of two cities, a coastal town and an adjacent island town off the coast. Nebuchadnezzar did indeed destroy the coastal town but he wasn't able to anything to the island. Later Alexander the Great built a bridge to reach the island but only managed to destroy half of it. So the prophecy failed in two ways.: it wasn't completely destroyed and, contrary to what God says,

"You will never be rebuilt, for I the LORD have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD" --Ezekiel 26:14

Tyre thrives today completely rebuilt. For those who doubt here is a pic of it.
saida-b81a1.jpg


Yahweh was wrong obviously.

Anyway, here is one of the more than 500 most egregious mistakes that IMHO cannot be reconciled even by the most stalwart apologists:

For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation. —Exodus 20:5

The child will not share the guilt of the parent ---Ezekiel 18:20

For I am the Lord; I change not. —Malachi 3:6

Really, God? You changed from commanding punishment up to the 4th generation for the father's sin, but 600 years later you now say no punishment will be visited on the son. I wonder how apologists square those two verses without contradicting Malachi 3:6.

This post is already too long. I will introduce other egregious errors as the thread lengthens, providing apologists are brave enough to address the things I said in this OP.

This is how I understand the Bible.

The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words. (Universal House of Justice)
 

Wrangler

Ask And You Will Receive
Please answer this question:

Did Judas throw the 30 pieces of silver back at the Pharisees and then hang himself

OR

Did Judas keep the 30 pieces of silver and use the money to go out and buy a potter's field?

Why can't both be true? First, he did X, then (after the money wan not accepted) he did Y.
 
But you don't commit to whether you think the prophecies are accurate or inaccurate, even when they are plainly inaccurate like Judas throwing the silver back at the Pharisees and going out as opposed to Judas taking the silver and buying a potter's field with it. Which one did Judas do in your opinion? Or do you absolutely refuse to even consider the question? All you answer is that people like me are evil for trying to sow doubt or something like that when all I'm doing is pointing out the discrepancies. What's so evil about that? This is what I mean about Christians when they are cornered with the truth. Their only recourse is to cover their eyes and ears and keep repeating to themselves, "See no evil, hear no evil. See no evil, hear no evil." That to me is the coward's way out rather than just confronting the problem of textual inaccuracy.
Well, I don't have conversations like this so I'm out. You can call me whatever you want.
 

Wrangler

Ask And You Will Receive
God could continuously reveal in accordance with language updates

This post is a good example of man putting himself in the position of god to judge God (turning on its head Psalm 82:1). It is irrelevant what God could have done. What is relevant is to humbly stand in awe at what he has chosen to do. See Psalm 19.
 

Wrangler

Ask And You Will Receive
Shows the Bible can't be trusted, since words used dont mean what they really mean.

LOL Poetry and literary devices don't exist eh? If one says, "I'm dead tired" or "I'm so hungry, I could eat a horse" has no meaning to you since these words do not mean what they really (literally) mean?
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
Perfectly understandable. I'd like to get your feedback if I can for future egregious errors I post and you point where what is totally opposite in separate in places in the Bible actually agree with each other like these:

"The first angel sounded his trumpet, and all green grass was burnt up." —Revelation 8:7

Next chapter:

"And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing"

So God decides He wants to burn up all the grass on earth, then He changes His mind and decides to stop burning the green grass?????? God sounds insane.

Or this:

No man hath seen God at any time. —John 1:18

For I have seen God face to face. —Genesis 32:30

Or this:

Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign. —II Kings 8:26

Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign. —II Chronicles 22:2

Two Ahaziahs???

Or this:

And it was the third hour, and they crucified him. —Mark 15:25

…about the sixth hour…they cried out…crucify him….Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified. —John 19:14-16

Maybe the recrucified him the 6th hour to get the prophecy right.

Or this:

Answer not a fool according to his folly, —Proverbs 26:4

Answer a fool according to his folly, —Proverbs 26:5

Duh? What?
1j2kh57pkm9sl.png

And one of my favorites:

And [Judas] cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed —Matthew 27:5

And Judas purchased a field with the 30 pieces of silver, the reward of iniquity —Acts 1:18

Care to show us where these actually agree with each other?
They don't. But who claims they do?
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
It's no secret that God's "inerrant" word is riddled with errors. One can google "Bible contradictions" and come up with with pages and pages of results outlining hundreds if not thousands of errors and contradictions. Whole books on the subject are available on Amazon. Ken Ham wrote a two-volume rebuttal to the most common ones and his treatise doesn't even scratch the surface. I looked at one site and thought I saw 5000. Turns out it was 50,000. It's true that most are of a minor nature, but quite a few--perhaps 500 by my reckoning are egregious enough to be considered serious enough to question the Bible's veracity.

I recently had a short discussion with a member in here about Leviticus 16:34

34 “And this shall be a statute forever for you: Atonement is to be made once a year for all the sins of the Israelites.”

I questioned, "Why did God say the animal sacrifice is to last forever when He knew He'd be sending His son Jesus in 1200 years or so to replace. I would have suspected God would have said, "This statute is only temporary until I send a more perfect sacrifice in the form of my divine son." The truth is IMHO when the scribes wrote out this passage they had absolutely no idea a civilization called Romans would conquer them and destroy Jerusalem and Herod's Temple in 70 CE, therefore they were not in communication with Yahweh when they wrote this ordinance any more than I am in communication with the man in the moon. IOW, this whole atonement thing is a result of a custom that likely evolved over many centuries rather than being handed down by Yahweh all at once.

These errors are why the discipline, apologetics was invented in the first place--to counter with subterfuge or any other means at their disposal to try to make right what was clearly wrong. I can give a few examples of this suberfuge:

“Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me; your throne will be established forever”

Obviously David's throne and kingdom didn't last forever. It ended when the Babylonians marched into Israel. Clever apologists say however that David's throne didn't really end because one day Jesus (who has been set up to be David's offspring via Matthew's and Luke's completely different genealogies for Jesus) will return to earth to claim the throne and rule from it. How this negates the tens of thousands years Israel is and will be without David's house and kingdom until then is a complete mystery to me.

Another is Ezekiel's prophecy that Tyre would be completely destroyed and never rebuilt. Tyre still exists today. You can visit it (when the pandemic is over). Clever apologists say, however that Ezekiel was speaking of the city's original site. The site where Tyre sits today is a different site. In actuality Tyre consisted of two cities, a coastal town and an adjacent island town off the coast. Nebuchadnezzar did indeed destroy the coastal town but he wasn't able to anything to the island. Later Alexander the Great built a bridge to reach the island but only managed to destroy half of it. So the prophecy failed in two ways.: it wasn't completely destroyed and, contrary to what God says,

"You will never be rebuilt, for I the LORD have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD" --Ezekiel 26:14

Tyre thrives today completely rebuilt. For those who doubt here is a pic of it.
saida-b81a1.jpg


Yahweh was wrong obviously.

Anyway, here is one of the more than 500 most egregious mistakes that IMHO cannot be reconciled even by the most stalwart apologists:

For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation. —Exodus 20:5

The child will not share the guilt of the parent ---Ezekiel 18:20

For I am the Lord; I change not. —Malachi 3:6

Really, God? You changed from commanding punishment up to the 4th generation for the father's sin, but 600 years later you now say no punishment will be visited on the son. I wonder how apologists square those two verses without contradicting Malachi 3:6.

This post is already too long. I will introduce other egregious errors as the thread lengthens, providing apologists are brave enough to address the things I said in this OP.

The riddle is why you think a perfect book is riddled with errors, the more so since your post is riddled with errors.

And my English is really good, so I can judge what you written good, too.

[Mic drop]
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
LOL Poetry and literary devices don't exist eh? If one says, "I'm dead tired" or "I'm so hungry, I could eat a horse" has no meaning to you since these words do not mean what they really (literally) mean?
It seems to me that far from following any known methodology, Christians decide which parts of the book are poetic devices arbitrarily to suit their personal interpretation.

For example what in Leviticus 16:34 leads you to believe the term "forever" is poetry. And if that is poetry why not other parts of the sentence, for example how do we know the animal sacrifice or the annual part aren't also just poetic device?
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
This post is a good example of man putting himself in the position of god to judge God (turning on its head Psalm 82:1). It is irrelevant what God could have done. What is relevant is to humbly stand in awe at what he has chosen to do. See Psalm 19.
In my opinion one invariably has to judge the gods, for if we were to just humbly stand in awe of every God claim how would we ever distinguish the true from the false God?!

Do you humbly stand in awe of Zues and the other gods or do you judge them? I'm only asking you to be consistent as I see it.
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
It's no secret that God's "inerrant" word is riddled with errors. One can google "Bible contradictions" and come up with with pages and pages of results outlining hundreds if not thousands of errors and contradictions. Whole books on the subject are available on Amazon. Ken Ham wrote a two-volume rebuttal to the most common ones and his treatise doesn't even scratch the surface. I looked at one site and thought I saw 5000. Turns out it was 50,000. It's true that most are of a minor nature, but quite a few--perhaps 500 by my reckoning are egregious enough to be considered serious enough to question the Bible's veracity.

I recently had a short discussion with a member in here about Leviticus 16:34

34 “And this shall be a statute forever for you: Atonement is to be made once a year for all the sins of the Israelites.”

I questioned, "Why did God say the animal sacrifice is to last forever when He knew He'd be sending His son Jesus in 1200 years or so to replace. I would have suspected God would have said, "This statute is only temporary until I send a more perfect sacrifice in the form of my divine son." The truth is IMHO when the scribes wrote out this passage they had absolutely no idea a civilization called Romans would conquer them and destroy Jerusalem and Herod's Temple in 70 CE, therefore they were not in communication with Yahweh when they wrote this ordinance any more than I am in communication with the man in the moon. IOW, this whole atonement thing is a result of a custom that likely evolved over many centuries rather than being handed down by Yahweh all at once.

These errors are why the discipline, apologetics was invented in the first place--to counter with subterfuge or any other means at their disposal to try to make right what was clearly wrong. I can give a few examples of this suberfuge:

“Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me; your throne will be established forever”

Obviously David's throne and kingdom didn't last forever. It ended when the Babylonians marched into Israel. Clever apologists say however that David's throne didn't really end because one day Jesus (who has been set up to be David's offspring via Matthew's and Luke's completely different genealogies for Jesus) will return to earth to claim the throne and rule from it. How this negates the tens of thousands years Israel is and will be without David's house and kingdom until then is a complete mystery to me.

Another is Ezekiel's prophecy that Tyre would be completely destroyed and never rebuilt. Tyre still exists today. You can visit it (when the pandemic is over). Clever apologists say, however that Ezekiel was speaking of the city's original site. The site where Tyre sits today is a different site. In actuality Tyre consisted of two cities, a coastal town and an adjacent island town off the coast. Nebuchadnezzar did indeed destroy the coastal town but he wasn't able to anything to the island. Later Alexander the Great built a bridge to reach the island but only managed to destroy half of it. So the prophecy failed in two ways.: it wasn't completely destroyed and, contrary to what God says,

"You will never be rebuilt, for I the LORD have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD" --Ezekiel 26:14

Tyre thrives today completely rebuilt. For those who doubt here is a pic of it.
saida-b81a1.jpg


Yahweh was wrong obviously.

Anyway, here is one of the more than 500 most egregious mistakes that IMHO cannot be reconciled even by the most stalwart apologists:

For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation. —Exodus 20:5

The child will not share the guilt of the parent ---Ezekiel 18:20

For I am the Lord; I change not. —Malachi 3:6

Really, God? You changed from commanding punishment up to the 4th generation for the father's sin, but 600 years later you now say no punishment will be visited on the son. I wonder how apologists square those two verses without contradicting Malachi 3:6.

This post is already too long. I will introduce other egregious errors as the thread lengthens, providing apologists are brave enough to address the things I said in this OP.
If one is in a Bible fetish community then group think overwhelms their logical mind.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
When "Inerrant" Really Means "Full Of Errors"

I get for one that the natural word "inerrant" is used by the humans as a cover for the "errant" so that the
credulous followers don't probe and object to their words and or their deeds, I understand, please. Right friends, please?
This results their followers to become mislead and not straightforward, a great loss, I figure. Right friends, please?
I remember there was a thread in the RF on the topic of "infallibility", friends could benefit from it, if it is traced. Right friends, please?

Regards
 
Last edited:

1213

Well-Known Member
It's no secret that God's "inerrant" word is riddled with errors.

It is not. You can’t point any contradiction that is really in the Bible. All those contradictions are based on lack of knowledge, misunderstandings or misinterpretations.

...
34 “And this shall be a statute forever for you: Atonement is to be made once a year for all the sins of the Israelites.”

I questioned, "Why did God say the animal sacrifice is to last forever when He knew He'd be ...

For example, that is not a contradiction. It was set for them so that they would keep it forever, but people broke the covenant, which is why God prepared a new one.

For finding fault with them, he said, "Behold, the days come," says the Lord, "That I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers, In the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; For they didn't continue in my covenant, And I disregarded them," says the Lord. "For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel. After those days," says the Lord; "I will put my laws into their mind, I will also write them on their heart. I will be to them a God, And they will be to me a people. They will not teach every man his fellow citizen, Every man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' For all will know me, From the least of them to the greatest of them. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness. I will remember their sins and lawless deeds no more."
Hebrews 8:8-12 (Jeremiah 31:31-34)
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Politicians and royalty rewrote many bible passages. So, they might have been correct when written, but they might (or might not be) right today.

The fact that there are many versions of the same bible, and not all versions are identical, proves that some bibles were altered.

There are more than 450 English translations of the Bible. The Bible has been translated into 2000 different languages. My assumption--if Christianity is the one true religion and the Bible is inerrant--is that the Holy Spirit is watching all this making sure everything stays in accordance with how God the Father wants people to believe in Him and Jesus. I would expect no discordance, confusion, errors, or strife resulting from differing opinions resulting from bad translations. Instead that's all we see in Christianity, which is why there are more than 30,000 different denominations--because each had a different belief in how the Bible should be read. It's a well-known fact that meanings in one language get lost in translation to another language, like Romance languages translated in Asian. Why does this happen if God is watching over the process to make sure it is done correctly? Is God helpless to stop the errors that occur when translating?

Question:

IS God watching over and guiding how these translations are being done so there in uniformity in all 2450 different translations of the Bible

Or

Is it basically just a "free for all" in which mis-translations and errors run amok--which would support my thesis that God is a deist God; He really doesn't care how confusing the Bible is or how many errors it contains?
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
It is not. You can’t point any contradiction that is really in the Bible. All those contradictions are based on lack of knowledge, misunderstandings or misinterpretations.

Then please answer this one question for me, 1213

And [Judas] cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself. —Matthew 27:5

Now [Judas] purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. —Acts 1:18

Did the Pharisees purchase the field per Matthew or did Judas purchase the field per Luke/Acts?
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Why can't both be true? First, he did X, then (after the money wan not accepted) he did Y.

It would make no sense. The 30 pieces of silver (the price of iniquity in Acts) could not be used by both Judas AND the Pharisees to buy the field. If Judas was sorry he threw the money back at them and then went back to ask for it again, how could Matthew be right that it was the Pharisees who bought the field? The most illogical verbal contortions imaginable could not reconcile these two passages.
 

halbhh

The wonder and awe of "all things".
In other words failed prophesies are to be expected. And the Tyre prophecy is a whopper. Another not on why Zeke's prophecy had to be about Nebby. There was a reason that Tyre was so heavily fortified. It was regularly attacked. It was attacked and defeated several times before Zeke's time which was why they went for heavy fortifications. Historically sooner or later heavy fortifications tend to fail. That it was defeated eventually is a big "So what?" especially since the destruction still did not match what was predicted. It was not long before Tyre was reoccupied by the people that use to live there. They were defeated but not eradicated by Alexander.
Clear proof must be absent if faith is to be possible.

Having all those details clearly fulfilled in a way you couldn't be skeptical of would have been easy clear proof.

Which would not allow the chance to take a leap of actual 'faith', which is to believe without obvious visible proof.
 

halbhh

The wonder and awe of "all things".
I'm losing your point. God wanted to make specific prophecies to show His power when they were fulfilled BUT He didn't want them completely fulfilled because then that would destroy faith which is more important to Him than fulfilling prophecy?????
images

In the common bible at least, the repeated goal (said in many dozens of instances/ways) -- the goal for life on Earth is to achieve or take a leap of "faith".

Which is to believe without seeing. (without proof ahead of time)

e.g.:
Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of what we hope for and the certainty of what we do not see.

For that to be possible, clear proof must be absent.

Having every detail of the Ezekiel prophecy fulfilled in a way you cannot be skeptical about would obviate faith, preclude, prevent the chance for faith.

I can't take a leap of "faith" that I have a car, when I can just look and see it visibly.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Clear proof must be absent if faith is to be possible.

Having all those details clearly fulfilled in a way you couldn't be skeptical of would have been easy clear proof.

Which would not allow the chance to take a leap of actual 'faith', which is to believe without obvious visible proof.
The problem with supposedly fulfilling it long after the event is that totally innocent people are punished. If one reads the prophecy in context it is clear that it referred to Nebuchadnezzar and his huge army. They failed. And I have pointed out that it was a twofer, or a BOGO. There were two failed prophecies for the price of one. I am rather amazed that supposed students of the Bible still have not found the second failed prophecy.
 

halbhh

The wonder and awe of "all things".
The problem with supposedly fulfilling it long after the event is that totally innocent people are punished.
(!)

The idea "innocent people are punished" far exceeds in importance the other topic.

Consider: if there is no afterlife, then God would be a great mass murderer, doing genocide, and every person that suffers, and even moreso for children, would be another serious wrong of his, then.

If that were the case.

But though most think this way:

Luke 8:49 While He was still speaking, someone arrived from the house of the synagogue leader. "Your daughter is dead," he told Jairus. "Do not bother the Teacher anymore."
...

Luke 8:52 Meanwhile, everyone was weeping and mourning for her. But Jesus said, "Stop weeping; she is not dead but asleep."

Luke 8:53 And they laughed at Him, knowing that she was dead.


You could simplify in the extreme and in a pinch say the whole bible is about the fact of what Christ says here, and that people are mistaken about death of this body.

That's one possible extreme simplification (but I'd suggest less extreme, really -- there is a lot more that is highly interesting)
 
Top