bible errancy

Jake, this is an old one and has been exhaustively treated by a number of apologists, here is one such example;Who was Joseph's FatherAlso, please consider the following quote from Robert Horn in 'The Book That Speaks For Itself';"Think for a moment about what needs to be demonstrated concerning a "difficulty" in order to transfer it into the catagory of a valid argument against doctrine. Certainly much more is required than the mere appearance of a contradiction. First, we must be certain that we have correctly understood the passage, the sense in which it uses words or numbers. Second, that we possess all available knowledge in this matter. Third, that no further light can possibly be thrown on it by advancing knowledge, textual research. archaeology, etc...Difficulties do not constitute objections. Unsolved problems are not of necessity errors. This is not to minimize the area of difficulty; it is to see it in perspective. Difficulties are to be grappled with and problems are to drive us to seek clearer light; but until such a time as we have total and final light on any issue we are in no position to affirm, "here is a proven error, an unquestionable objection to an infallible Bible." It is common knowledge that countless 'objections' have been fully resolved since this century began."In Christ,Ron

Brethren,When discussing the inerrancy of scripture it is important to understand that there are what are known as "apparent contradictions." These are things that seem to be contradictions, but upon further examination the scripture is vindicated. We believe that scripture is infallible in its original tongues. Here is a link to the recently reaffirmed Chicago Statement:http://www.reformed.org/documents/icbi.htmlAs a student of God's word I was always a skeptic. I'm from the "Show Me" State (Missouri). I studied every argument against the scripture I found and none of them were realistic. Establishing the authority of scripture is the most basic requirement in apologetics. Many over the centuries have sifted through the Word of God trying to find a contradiction. The Word of God is an Anvil that has worn out many hammers. In Liberal Seminary settings things are talked about that are so far beyond normative Bible study- that they pick at the Bible until they don't know what to believe. I have read old scholarship materials on Bible archeology that pretended that so many ancient sites were not as the Bible said that have been totally disproved since Israel took over the land in 1948. Did we read any corrections or retractions? No. because most of the writers were dead and the scripture they tried to discount preached their funeral. Friends, when you see the great load of evidence as to how God has protected his word through the centuries it is a fearful thing. Perhaps we can point to some as this thread develops as apologetics is one of my favorite subjects :-D God Bless,-Robert

Though I have not studied this supposed contradiction, I will point out that any male ancestor was sometimes called father. Abraham is the father of Issac, but also the father of Jacob, Esau, etc.

I love these two quotes from Charles Spurgeon:"The only real argument against the Bible is an unholy life. When a man argues against the Word of God, follow him home, and see if you cannot discover the reason of his enmity to the Word of the Lord. It lies in some sort of sin.""The Word of God is like a lion. You don't have to defend a lion. All you have to do is let the lion loose, and the lion will defend itself."Its fine to have questions or doubts about certain passages; be honest with God about them and ask him to reveal his truth. In the end, we must not judge the Word of God, but allow it to judge us. The authority and infallibility of Scripture is an absolutely essesntial doctrine to the Christian faith. Without it, everything crumbles.Jesus believed in the authority of Scripture (Old Testament) and then told the apostles that the Holy Spirit would lead them into all truth, and thus we have the new testament Scripture. A helpful sermon might be R.A Torrey's sermon on this website. (I think its called "Why I believe the Bible to be the Word of God")The Bible is given to us that we may know God the Father through Jesus Christ and this only comes by revelation of the Holy Spirit. One of the most dangerous things in the church, or world for that matter, is a person who knows the Bible but does not know God. This was the case with the Pharisees...Anyways, that may have been a little bit of a tangent but I hope it helps.In Him, Jake Kail

Again Jake, this has been covered by numerous apologists, a diligent search on the web will clearly show this. Jake, you are fond of quoting Matthew 6:6 where Jesus instructs His disciples to pray in their closet. I'm wondering how you can be sure anything Matthew has written is Spirit inspired when his geneology is in question?In Christ,Ron

I can't find any explanation, can you direct me to one on the web? or provide it here? A Google search using the names Salathiel and Zorobabel might be a good place to start.Regarding Matt 6:6 if Jesus had said we should stand before others and pray long and loud to show our faith, would you do so? Wouldn't this stand out as inconsistent with the rest of His word?Why discuss what was not said? Lets stick to what He did say. How are Jesus' words in Matt 6:6 inconsistent with public prayer? It seems clear the lesson in Matt 6 was dealing with the motives behind praying, not with whom we do or don't pray. Obviously Jesus himself prayed with His disciples because they asked Him to teach them how to pray;Luke 11:1 And it came to pass, that, as he was praying in a certain place, when he ceased, one of his disciples said unto him, Lord, teach us to pray, as John also taught his disciples.Obviously Jesus was praying before them and they were so astonished with His prayer that they asked Him to teach them. It must have been awesome to listen to Jesus pray!In Christ,Ron

Common prayer and things like the Nicene Creed, repetitively spoken aloud in church services, numb the spirit and encourage stifling conformism. (They also tend to displace the vital role that personal prayer plays in the spiritual life. one who has been to Church and participated, albeit rotely, in prayer may not be as inclined to do so personally, in private.)Clearly prayer can be offered with improper motives both in the closet and in public. I would agree that there are some potential pitfalls in public prayer and there have been many abuses of Jesus' teaching on prayer in Matt 6, but there is also tremendous value in a people praying together in the unity of the Spirit.Luke 11:1 does not say that Jesus was praying aloud. It does not say they even witnessed Him praying, just that they knew He was doing so at a "certain place".I feel it is most probable that they were together in prayer. As Jews, the disciples would have been intimately familiar with prayer but when they heard Jesus pray they heard something very different than what they were used to. It must have stirred them deeply. You will notice that it isn't recorded anywhere that they asked Jesus how to do miracles or how to preach, no, they asked Him how to pray.No where does Jesus declare support for public prayer, and clearly He speaks against praying in front of others, and thus it is a suspect practice.)And no where does he say anything against public prayer except that it should not be offered with the wrong motives, or to use an OT term, no "strange fire".In Christ,Ron

Nothing could have been more dispiriting than going to services and being directed to stand, sit, say this, pray that, believe this, sing now, etc. I had questions, and when I asked them, I was told that they would not be answered because I was not allowed to ask them in the first place. I was to believe as instructed, without question or doubt. Hell awaited anyone who even questioned Church dogma,My mother is/was Lutheran (Missouri synod) and, though she apparently wasn't stifled (she probably didn't ask many questions), she was very put off by the mistreatment of a sick girl in her neighborhood, and apparently her pastor would say the mistreatment was wrong but wouldn't stand against it.One would think she would have blamed the church, and not the Bible, but she didn't make a very clear distinction between them. She was (at least until recently) fairly averse to treating the Bible as inerrant. Since I've talked with her at length on the matter, pointing out that Scripture condemns, rather than supports the sort of hypocrisy she saw, I think she doesn't object anymore.The point: the fact that some (probably most) people who claim to be following the Bible are hypocritical abominations does not necessarily reflect upon the Bible itself. It is grounds for investigation, but it is not a clear-cut objection to the inerrancy of Scripture. Particularly when it can be easily shown that such hypocrisy is condemned by the very same Scripture that the hypocrites claim as support.yet good works were clearly lacking from the agenda of the Church. But you know what, I could read, think and reason myself and what I discovered was that ceremony, interpersonal relationships, church functions, etc. were far more important to the ministers and congregants than charity, love, and peace.If this is so (and I don't doubt it), they were living in sin. Perhaps they put on a show (and perhaps even believed it themselves) of righteousness, but they were wicked hell-deserving sinners.Everyone was doing what they wanted and relying on "saving grace" and blood washing away our sins.Oh how the Gospel has been twisted and exchanged for a license to lasciviousness. Without even getting into Eternal/Conditional security, I'm fairly sure than anyone who can fornicate, get drunk, backstab, wilfully refuse to help those in need when capable of helping, or otherwise flagrantly rebel against the revealed will of God... they're not saved, they're not Christians, I'm fairly certain they never were. Perhaps I'm coming off as excessively judgmental here, and I'd like to mention that I would still do whatever I could to help even hypocrites insofar as the Lord willed (including bringing their error to their attention), but the Lord is FURIOUS with hypocrites and it's rubbing off on me.But the problem isn't the Bible.The problem is people not taking the Bible seriously. If you'd like I could give you a whole string of verses that, if they took it seriously, would probably leave those kinds of hypocrites on the floor. Not because of me or anything about me, but by the truth and power of God's Word. They probably wouldn't take it seriously, though.If you toss out the authority of Scripture (not that you're conciously doing it, but even ONE error in the Bible really trashes things), people like that can even more easily explain away their evil and call it holy.I think I'm going to calm down now, if the Lord lets me :)God's grace be with you all, in Christ Jesus,-Keith