dark-in-the-whale
New Member
Just got kicked of a Christianity forum because I don't think the Bible is the inerrant word of God. This looks like a friendlier place. Look forward to reading your posts.
Hello Forum
- Thread starter dark-in-the-whale
- Start date
citizenzen
Custom User Title
- Messages
- 3,231
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 0
Well, at least they won't kick you out for that.
Welcome to IO!
Welcome to IO!
Nick the Pilot
Well-Known Member
HI DITW, and welcome to the Forum. You will find plenty of us non-Christians here who also do not think that the Bible is inerrant.
Namaste DITW,
Now this is a Christian who calls them as he sees them and often gets in trouble for that. Are you Christian and have a different view of the bible or do you come from oustside the faith?
Now this is a Christian who calls them as he sees them and often gets in trouble for that. Are you Christian and have a different view of the bible or do you come from oustside the faith?
Jenn
Established Member
Hello dark-in-the-whale and welcome. I see you live near Hartford ... I lived in Suffield for a couple years when I was much younger. 
The only thing that you'll be thrown off this forum for is if you behave like those people treated you. So let your hair down and tells us a bit about your journey and where you're at right now.
The only thing that you'll be thrown off this forum for is if you behave like those people treated you. So let your hair down and tells us a bit about your journey and where you're at right now.
NiceCupOfTea
Pathetic earthlings
- Messages
- 1,242
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 0
greeting and welcome, I believe that the Bible is the innerant word of God but I realize that not everyone shares my views.
which forum did you get booted from ?
which forum did you get booted from ?
nativeastral
fluffy future
hello d.i.n.t.w., do you prefer dark or whale
Welcome. As this is an interfaith discussion board, I suspect you'll find a bit more open attitude toward a non-dogmatic view of Christianity than you apparently experienced elsewhere though some discussions here have tended to get a tad heated in the past. earl
earl
shawn
Well-Known Member
Welcome.....hopefully you find your way out of your whale......it is so much brighter out than in.
Saltmeister
The Dangerous Dinner
Hello and greetings, Dark-In-The-Whale.
I hope you find these forums to be a good platform for debate and discussion, as well as expression of your own individual journey.
Personally I think the idea of an "inerrant" Text is ridiculous.
Firstly, what is it supposed to mean to have an "inerrant Text?" When does a Text have error and when is it correct?
I think you will find that the reason why people believe the Text is correct is not because it is inherently correct, but because the Text meets the criteria for correctness based on their own interpretation of the Text. The criteria of correctness is inspired by the Text and this makes the whole scheme biased, because if the Text didn't exist, there'd be no criteria. The criteria for correctness is not independent and is influenced by the existence of the Text and the literary expressions found in the Text.
It is a claim of objectivity that cannot be proven to be objective.
The only people that are likely to claim that the Bible is the inerrant word of God are Christians who have an interest in making such a claim. Jews, Buddhists, Muslims or atheists, for example, would be unlikely to have an interest in making such a claim. Because the claim is not unanimously or universally made and because there is no consensus on the claim being true, I cannot put any confidence into the claim and have to say it is biased and unjustified.
Secondly, the Bible, just like any historical writing or document, is a piece of literature. All literature is open to interpretation, application, examination and scrutiny.
The purpose of literature is to express, explain, explore, depict and describe. The Bible is no different. Just like a novel, the Bible has a plot, characters, themes, a setting and a story. There is often a hero and a villain, protagonist and antagonist. There are crises that need resolution. There are relationships between people. There is politics. There is a journey.
To come to a full appreciation of any story, you cannot assume that you know the story. The implications of a story should be left to your own imagination. Fundamentalist Christians assume they know the story of Jesus, of Christianity, but they leave so many issues and questions unexplored. They think they truly worship him, but I often feel that they undervalue him because of the asking and thinking that they don't do.
The notion of "error" and "correctness" is ridiculous because the author of any piece of literature writes what he wants. It is far more important that a person is able to express himself freely than if what he writes is historically or scientifically correct. Every author writes his own truth.
It would be stupid if the writers of the Gospels were constantly being interrupted by the "Man in the Sky" because they were about to write something that people in the 21st century could not accept, like saying that the earth was flat or that women were inferior to men. It would be stupid if a prophet kept getting visions from an angel, and God kept saying to a prophet, "No, no, you can't write that. That isn't true. The earth is not flat and women and men are equal."
The media today is notorious for sensationalist and aiming-for-the-money journalism. Making money by telling shocking stories in newspapers, the radio and television are more important than the truth. In the democratic world, they enjoy a large amount of freedom. There is no government intervention and certainly no God knocking on the doors of their premises saying, "No you can't publish that."
Some may argue that God guarded the Text against "error," but I would like to argue that God doesn't censor religious texts and simply allows people to write what they want. Furthermore, a religious text is more genuine when people simple write from the bottom of their heart. To say that the Bible is the inerrant word of God implies that God censored and manipulated the authors. This makes their words not genuine because they did not write from the bottom of their heart. They were merely instruments, rather than lovers, of God.
Thirdly, Christianity doesn't depend on an "inerrant" Text. The story, the legend is more important than the words. Jesus was a miracle worker. He made the blind see and healed the sick. Christians should not be believing in the miracle of uncorrupted words but the miracle of living. Fundamentalist Christians ask, do you believe in an inerrant Text?
I say to them, which is more important, words or living? Jesus was good at asking questions like that. I believe this should be counted as one of the Jesus questions.
I hope you find these forums to be a good platform for debate and discussion, as well as expression of your own individual journey.
Personally I think the idea of an "inerrant" Text is ridiculous.
Firstly, what is it supposed to mean to have an "inerrant Text?" When does a Text have error and when is it correct?
I think you will find that the reason why people believe the Text is correct is not because it is inherently correct, but because the Text meets the criteria for correctness based on their own interpretation of the Text. The criteria of correctness is inspired by the Text and this makes the whole scheme biased, because if the Text didn't exist, there'd be no criteria. The criteria for correctness is not independent and is influenced by the existence of the Text and the literary expressions found in the Text.
It is a claim of objectivity that cannot be proven to be objective.
The only people that are likely to claim that the Bible is the inerrant word of God are Christians who have an interest in making such a claim. Jews, Buddhists, Muslims or atheists, for example, would be unlikely to have an interest in making such a claim. Because the claim is not unanimously or universally made and because there is no consensus on the claim being true, I cannot put any confidence into the claim and have to say it is biased and unjustified.
Secondly, the Bible, just like any historical writing or document, is a piece of literature. All literature is open to interpretation, application, examination and scrutiny.
The purpose of literature is to express, explain, explore, depict and describe. The Bible is no different. Just like a novel, the Bible has a plot, characters, themes, a setting and a story. There is often a hero and a villain, protagonist and antagonist. There are crises that need resolution. There are relationships between people. There is politics. There is a journey.
To come to a full appreciation of any story, you cannot assume that you know the story. The implications of a story should be left to your own imagination. Fundamentalist Christians assume they know the story of Jesus, of Christianity, but they leave so many issues and questions unexplored. They think they truly worship him, but I often feel that they undervalue him because of the asking and thinking that they don't do.
The notion of "error" and "correctness" is ridiculous because the author of any piece of literature writes what he wants. It is far more important that a person is able to express himself freely than if what he writes is historically or scientifically correct. Every author writes his own truth.
It would be stupid if the writers of the Gospels were constantly being interrupted by the "Man in the Sky" because they were about to write something that people in the 21st century could not accept, like saying that the earth was flat or that women were inferior to men. It would be stupid if a prophet kept getting visions from an angel, and God kept saying to a prophet, "No, no, you can't write that. That isn't true. The earth is not flat and women and men are equal."
The media today is notorious for sensationalist and aiming-for-the-money journalism. Making money by telling shocking stories in newspapers, the radio and television are more important than the truth. In the democratic world, they enjoy a large amount of freedom. There is no government intervention and certainly no God knocking on the doors of their premises saying, "No you can't publish that."
Some may argue that God guarded the Text against "error," but I would like to argue that God doesn't censor religious texts and simply allows people to write what they want. Furthermore, a religious text is more genuine when people simple write from the bottom of their heart. To say that the Bible is the inerrant word of God implies that God censored and manipulated the authors. This makes their words not genuine because they did not write from the bottom of their heart. They were merely instruments, rather than lovers, of God.
Thirdly, Christianity doesn't depend on an "inerrant" Text. The story, the legend is more important than the words. Jesus was a miracle worker. He made the blind see and healed the sick. Christians should not be believing in the miracle of uncorrupted words but the miracle of living. Fundamentalist Christians ask, do you believe in an inerrant Text?
I say to them, which is more important, words or living? Jesus was good at asking questions like that. I believe this should be counted as one of the Jesus questions.
Jenn
Established Member
Good post, Saltmeister. I can understand deeply the Christian belief that God inspired the Bible, but the way I was taught as a child ... that God dictated every single word to its writers ... well! The one that always rubs me the wrong way is when I'm told that it is actually the KJV that is inerrant, no other translation or version of the Bible -- which leaves one a bit confused over those who translate the Bible into other languages directly from the Hebrew and Aramaic. Even as a child, I disagreed with that!