Is your Bible Inerrant?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Ed Edwards, Sep 21, 2003.

?
  1. -3 the Bible has many major errors and is invalid

    1.0%
  2. -2 the Bible has major errors so is only marginally useful

    1.0%
  3. -1 the Bible has minor errors and should be used with caution

    4.2%
  4. 0 the Bible has minor errors but is still useful

    11.5%
  5. 1 The Bible is inerrant on all doctrinal issues

    12.5%
  6. 2 The Bible is inerrant on all issues: doctrinal, historic, and scientific

    45.8%
  7. 3 The Bible is inerrant in the original autographs

    3.1%
  8. 4 The Bible is inerrant only in the Textus Receptus (TR)

    4.2%
  9. 5 The Bible is inerrant only in the KJV 1611 (exclusive of translator notes)

    2.1%
  10. The Bible is inerrant only in the KJV 1611 (including the translator notes)

    1.0%
  11. 7 The Bible is inerrant only in the KJB1769 and/or KJB1873

    3.1%
  12. 8 inerrant in any English translation based on the TR

    1.0%
  13. 9 inerrant in any English translation translated by dynamic equivalence

    9.4%
  14. 10 The Bible is inerrant in all English translations

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  15. 11 inerrant as implemented in the Doctrine of the Church of England <img border="0" title="" alt=

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  16. 12 inerrant implemented in the US Republican Party platform <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Jim Ward New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    448
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why do you KJBOs have such a
    problem with even simple English?

    My dictionary says:
    Bible 1. the collection of
    sacred writings of the Christian religion

    I have ONE COLLECTION,
    it currently has about 20 Bibles
    in it: individual collections.
    Well, one book actually has 4 Bibles
    in it
    </font>[/QUOTE] Typical avoidance of the question reply. Every time a Bible dis-believer gets exposed with a question theyrespond with another question and do not attempt to answer the question asked of them.

    Of course we all know that Ed is not a Bible believer but a bibles "believer".

    Thanks for the this morning Ed, it is very much appreciated.


    Jim
     
  2. Jim Ward New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    448
    Likes Received:
    0
    Michelle, you said: "You are making the claim, now you prove it!"


    All I can say is don't hold your breath waiting for the proof.


    Jim
     
  3. Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't believe in the Bible, I believe
    in the Jesus of the Bible.

    The reason it seems i don't answer questions
    is that some don't understand my answer.
    Consider the question:

    Why do you mv lovers have such a hard time with simple math?

    1. Arithemetic is a subset of mathematics.
    Arithemetic is simple math. Most people
    do not know this or forget it is true
    when they use "math" in their conversation.

    2. Most people on this board seem to forget
    that there are two "Word of God":

    A. the written Word of God: the Bible
    B. the living Word of God: Messiah Iesus

    There is one and only one living Word
    of God: Christ Jesus. (though Messiah
    Yeshua has many names and titles)
    There are many written "Word of God"s
    in many Languages and many in English.

     
  4. Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, my Bible is inerrant, it is
    a 21st Century King James Version (KJ21).

     
  5. robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,368
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Michelle, the argument isn't against Erasmus the man. He's long-dead and has no effect upon the present world. But his WORK remains.

    Now, God could've used Cesare Borgia to have collated the Greek mss had He so chosen, so the "who" isn't so important. However, the "what" is. Skanwmatos reminded us that Erasmus revised the TR FIVE times, and that after him, Stephanus and then Beza each revised it. Here's a URL to the history of the TR:

    http://www.bibletexts.com/terms/tr-history.htm
     
  6. Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, my Bible is inerrant,
    it is a CONTEMPORARY ENGLISH VERSION !

     
  7. Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, My Bible is inerrant cause it
    is a King James Version, 1769 edition
    (KJV1769)


    Or is it a 1762? I don't know how to tell :(
     
  8. Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    New Voter, New Voter!!!!
    voter #81 alert.



    Yet another vote with the majority:

    3 The Bible is inerrant in the original autographs 46% (37)
     
  9. Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, my Bible is inerrant.
    I have a freshly pressed copy of
    the Holman Christian Standard
    Bible (HCSB) (Holman, 2004).

    ILn the new testament it has quotes from
    the Old Testament bolded

     
  10. Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Item corrected for spelling.
     
  11. Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    An 82ed person has voted!
    I need to visit my MIL today.
    She was 92 on Monday.
     
  12. Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Spring forward
     
  13. Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    SF = spring forward
     
  14. Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why do you KJBOs have such a
    problem with even simple English?

    My dictionary says:
    Bible 1. the collection of
    sacred writings of the Christian religion

    I have ONE COLLECTION,
    it currently has about 20 Bibles
    in it: individual collections.
    Well, one book actually has 4 Bibles
    in it
    </font>[/QUOTE] Typical avoidance of the question reply. Every time a Bible dis-believer gets exposed with a question theyrespond with another question and do not attempt to answer the question asked of them.

    Of course we all know that Ed is not a Bible believer but a bibles "believer".

    Thanks for the this morning Ed, it is very much appreciated.


    Jim
    </font>[/QUOTE]Uh, scuse me Jim but your answer to my questions was just as bad, if not more potent. Remember telling me that when I quit playing around you might start answering. I never heard you specifically answer the questions in my string. It has become obvious that maybe you have no answers? ;)

    All we got was a very long testimony about how you became a KJVo with a lack of accurate scripture reference.
     
  15. Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    My Bible: the New Living Translation (NLT)
    is still inerrant!
     
  16. Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Some 83rd person has voted! Yea! & thank you.
     
  17. Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't have time to read all 200 pages here :D

    I think it is difficult to answer your questions because there are more than one correct answer. I assume, by this, the most accurate answer should be the one selected (do you work at Tinker--I can tell a government question when I see it. )

    Anyway, I voted that the originals were inerrant, but I also believe that the doctrine, science and history is inerrant. I can't go as far as to say ALL English Bibles are inerrant, then we have to consider the Catholic and JW translations (of which the Catholic contain the apocrypha). We do know that the original autographs were inerrant, so therefore, to me that is the "most" correct answer.
     
  18. Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Next time i'll try to remember to put:
    "vote for the highest number with which you
    can fully agree."

     
  19. Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    There are now 85 votes.
    Thank you for your vote.

    The 5 newest votes are shown in the left margin.
    The total votes for each category is shown
    at the right end of the line (which do to wrap around
    may be at the left also?).

    Poll Results: Is your Bible Inerrant? (85 votes.)
    Is your Bible Inerrant?
    Choose 1

    == - -3 the Bible has many major errors and is invalid 0% (0)
    == - -2 the Bible has major errors so is only marginally useful 1% (1)
    +1 - -1 the Bible has minor errors and should be used with caution 1% (1)
    +1 - 0 the Bible has minor errors but is still useful 6% (5)
    == - 1 The Bible is inerrant on all doctrinal issues 11% (9)
    +1 - 2 The Bible is inerrant on all issues: doctrinal, historic, and scientific 11% (9)
    +2 - 3 The Bible is inerrant in the original autographs 45% (38)
    == - 4 The Bible is inerrant only in the Textus Receptus (TR) 4% (3)
    == - 5 The Bible is inerrant only in the KJV 1611 (exclusive of translator notes) 5% (4)
    == - 6. The Bible is inerrant only in the KJV 1611 (including the translator notes) 2% (2)
    == - 7 The Bible is inerrant only in the KJB1769 and/or KJB1873 1% (1)
    == - 8 inerrant in any English translation based on the TR 4% (3)
    == - 9 inerrant in any English translation translated by dynamic equivalence 1% (1)
    == - 10 The Bible is inerrant in all English translations 9% (8)
    == - 11 inerrant as implemented in the Doctrine of the Church of England 0% (0)
    == - 12 inerrant implemented in the US Republican Party platform 0% (0)

     
  20. Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yea! #86 voted right*

    #10. The Bible is inerrant in all English translations 10% (9)

    * right is defined as "my side" ;)

    Thank you 86th voter