Is the Bible The Inerrant Word of God?

If the Bible is the Word of God, should it not be free of errors? However, as it shall be shown, there are a few errors within its text. If it is indeed the word of God, how can these errors be explained?

There are a few examples of textual interpolation, meaning that there is clear proof that text was added to the Bible after its initial completion. Consider the following two examples:

Link

As you can see when you visit the link posted above, there is a message which says:

((The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20.))Message

The message concerns the following passage.

When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. 10She went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning and weeping. 11 When they heard that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it.12 Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country. 13These returned and reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them either.

14Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen.

15He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. 16Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."

19After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God. 20Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.Mark 16

Here's another example:

Link

((The earliest and most reliable manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53-8:11.))Message

53Then each went to his own home.

John 8

1But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" 6They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." 8Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?"

11"No one, sir," she said.

"Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin."John 7

In light of these proven textual interpolations, how can the Bible be inerrant and subsequently the Word of God?

NOTE: There are many more errors. However, I've only chosen to mention these two.

There is no such thing as the "word of God", just humans claiming their own views are shared by God to make themselves seem more credible.

There is no such thing as the "word of God", just humans claiming their own views are shared by God to make themselves seem more credible.

black_cat19

I already believe this. My question is directed toward those who believe that it is. I'd like to know how they can reconcile these textual discrepancies?

The Bible was once the word of God, but not anymore.GazaAli

Nothing is the word of God unless you hear it straight from him; "prophets" and priests are just common men, and "sacred books" are just the words of these same men put on paper.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]The Bible was once the word of God, but not anymore.black_cat19

Nothing is the word of God unless you hear it straight from him; "prophets" and priests are just common men, and "sacred books" are just the words of these same men put on paper.

I don't know why, but I lol'ed when I read this.

Quite simple. The bible is written by man. If you believe there is a God, then God is perfect, and man is just a collective of screw ups. JustPlainLucas

Not to mention a miserable little pile of secrets. :P

I don't get it. Where are the errors?

Please don't kill me

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]The Bible was once the word of God, but not anymore.black_cat19

Nothing is the word of God unless you hear it straight from him; "prophets" and priests are just common men, and "sacred books" are just the words of these same men put on paper.

The Bible is made up by humans. Simple.

[QUOTE="black_cat19"]

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]The Bible was once the word of God, but not anymore.GazaAli

Nothing is the word of God unless you hear it straight from him; "prophets" and priests are just common men, and "sacred books" are just the words of these same men put on paper.

Your reasoning is poor due to the following:

1. God is supposed to perfect and consistent. Why would he allow the Bible to be corrupted and not the Qu'ran? Why protect one text from perfection, but not another? In fact, if he had simply guarded the Bible from errors, then there would have been no need for the Q'uran.
2. How would you know how to pick the correct copy from multiple copies? Could someone not do the same for the various copies of the Bible?

Conclusion: Neither the Bible nor the Qu'ran is the Word of God.

[QUOTE="black_cat19"]

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]The Bible was once the word of God, but not anymore.GazaAli

Nothing is the word of God unless you hear it straight from him; "prophets" and priests are just common men, and "sacred books" are just the words of these same men put on paper.

All books have to be written by someone; they don't just fall from the sky of materialize out of thin air, and there's no way you could possibly know that whoever first wrote the Quran wasn't just putting his own views on paper and claiming they were God's instead of his so people would listen.

If something is the word of God, I don't see why that would necessarily imply that humans would be incapable of altering it after the fact, nor why that would imply that the original document(s) cease to be the word of God.

This isn't the first time you've made a thread like this; you seem awfully eager to convince people that the Bible is not the word of God...

[QUOTE="GazaAli"][QUOTE="black_cat19"]

Nothing is the word of God unless you hear it straight from him; "prophets" and priests are just common men, and "sacred books" are just the words of these same men put on paper.

black_cat19

All books have to be written by someone; they don't just fall from the sky of materialize out of thin air, and there's no way you could possibly know that whoever first wrote the Quran wasn't just putting his own views on paper and claiming they were God's instead of his so people would listen.

But that's apparently what the Christian God did to create this planet / universe. There's still a very good reason he couldn't make the book himself.

He isn't real.

Bracing for a 10+ page ****storm in T minus 10, 9, 8...D_Battery

Mind if I seat behind you? No, I wasn't trying to make you my turd shield....:P

This is one point of view and I'm sure a lot of people agree with you. But I don't. I believe the bible was once the word of God but humans tampered with it. Tho I still believe that the Quran is still the word of God, since we don't have multiple copies of it. And even if we had, I would know how to pick the right one.GazaAli

We absolutely did have multiple copies of it, so much so that they were creating a division among Muslims, which caused Uthman to have all copies save that which was compiled by Abu Bakr. The idea that every version of the Qur'an has always been exactly the same is just false.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"][QUOTE="black_cat19"]

Nothing is the word of God unless you hear it straight from him; "prophets" and priests are just common men, and "sacred books" are just the words of these same men put on paper.

black_cat19

All books have to be written by someone; they don't just fall from the sky of materialize out of thin air, and there's no way you could possibly know that whoever first wrote the Quran wasn't just putting his own views on paper and claiming they were God's instead of his so people would listen.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]This is one point of view and I'm sure a lot of people agree with you. But I don't. I believe the bible was once the word of God but humans tampered with it. Tho I still believe that the Quran is still the word of God, since we don't have multiple copies of it. And even if we had, I would know how to pick the right one.GabuEx

We absolutely did have multiple copies of it, so much so that they were creating a division among Muslims, which caused Uthman to have all copies save that which was compiled by Abu Bakr. The idea that every version of the Qur'an has always been exactly the same is just false.

1-Because Bible was not supposed to be the end. On the other hand, Quran and prophet Muhammad were supposed to be the end.GazaAli

There's no way you could possibly know that; it's just what you've been told, and all religions say that.

1-Because Bible was not supposed to be the end. On the other hand, Quran and prophet Muhammad were supposed to be the end. 2-I agree that someone can choose the correct copy of the bible. Not everyone, but some will.GazaAli

Your reasoning is still poor. So, because God never intended for the Bible to be the final message, he allowed it to be corrupted? What about the few hundred years between the completion of the Bible and the supposed revelation of the Qu'ran? You mean to tell me that God allowed hundreds of years to go by with only a corrupt version of the Bible available to man, before he revealed the Qu'ran? That's absolutely absurd. The only conclusion is that both books are false and that God never revealed anything to man.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]1-Because Bible was not supposed to be the end. On the other hand, Quran and prophet Muhammad were supposed to be the end.black_cat19

There's no way you could possibly know that; it's just what you've been told, and all religions say that.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]1-Because Bible was not supposed to be the end. On the other hand, Quran and prophet Muhammad were supposed to be the end. 2-I agree that someone can choose the correct copy of the bible. Not everyone, but some will.BluRayHiDef

Your reasoning is still poor. So, because God never intended for the Bible to be the final message, he allowed it to be corrupted? What about the few hundred years between the completion of the Bible and the supposed revelation of the Qu'ran? You mean to tell me that God allowed hundreds of years to go by with only a corrupt version of the Bible available to man, before he revealed the Qu'ran? That's absolutely absurd. The only conclusion is that both books are false and that God never revealed anything to man.

[QUOTE="black_cat19"]

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]1-Because Bible was not supposed to be the end. On the other hand, Quran and prophet Muhammad were supposed to be the end.GazaAli

There's no way you could possibly know that; it's just what you've been told, and all religions say that.

I'm not jumping and I never called you brainwashed, I'm just having a perfectly calm discussion: you present your views, I disagree and present mine in turn. That's all, no need to get defensive. :P

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]This is one point of view and I'm sure a lot of people agree with you. But I don't. I believe the bible was once the word of God but humans tampered with it. Tho I still believe that the Quran is still the word of God, since we don't have multiple copies of it. And even if we had, I would know how to pick the right one.GazaAli

We absolutely did have multiple copies of it, so much so that they were creating a division among Muslims, which caused Uthman to have all copies save that which was compiled by Abu Bakr. The idea that every version of the Qur'an has always been exactly the same is just false.

Again, false. There are entire chapters that are either additional to or missing from the chapters in the official Qur'an today when one compares it to the copies destroyed during the reign of Uthman.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"][QUOTE="GabuEx"]

We absolutely did have multiple copies of it, so much so that they were creating a division among Muslims, which caused Uthman to have all copies save that which was compiled by Abu Bakr. The idea that every version of the Qur'an has always been exactly the same is just false.

GabuEx

Again, false. There are entire chapters that are either additional to or missing from the chapters in the official Qur'an today when one compares it to the copies destroyed during the reign of Uthman.

Where can one view the contents of the copies destroyed during the reign of Uthman? There must be some way to view them, if one is able to determine that there exists a difference.

The only conclusion is that both books are false and that God never revealed anything to man.

BluRayHiDef

[QUOTE="GazaAli"][QUOTE="GabuEx"]

We absolutely did have multiple copies of it, so much so that they were creating a division among Muslims, which caused Uthman to have all copies save that which was compiled by Abu Bakr. The idea that every version of the Qur'an has always been exactly the same is just false.

GabuEx

Again, false. There are entire chapters that are either additional to or missing from the chapters in the official Qur'an today when one compares it to the copies destroyed during the reign of Uthman.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="GazaAli"] The differences were in accents not contents.BluRayHiDef

Again, false. There are entire chapters that are either additional to or missing from the chapters in the official Qur'an today when one compares it to the copies destroyed during the reign of Uthman.

Where can one view the contents of the copies destroyed during the reign of Uthman? There must be some way to view them, if one is able to determine that there exists a difference.

You can see a full discussion of the differences here.

[QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Again, false. There are entire chapters that are either additional to or missing from the chapters in the official Qur'an today when one compares it to the copies destroyed during the reign of Uthman.

GabuEx

Where can one view the contents of the copies destroyed during the reign of Uthman? There must be some way to view them, if one is able to determine that there exists a difference.

You can see a full discussion of the differences here.

Are you Muslim? If not, then what are you?

I doubt that it is; but I find your "evidence" kind of shaky because it only focuses on a few verses. What disappoints me is that the gospels diverge on how some events took place. Some event(s) that happened in one gospel are not mentioned in the other gospels; Jesus sweating blood in the garden of Gethsemane is one example. This suggests that the gospel writers were telling the stories based on what they heard from others. If we're dealing with the message of God, I would need something more reliable than a bunch of oral traditions because oral traditions can easily be distorted into something that sounds nothing like what the original message was.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="GazaAli"] The differences were in accents not contents.GazaAli

Again, false. There are entire chapters that are either additional to or missing from the chapters in the official Qur'an today when one compares it to the copies destroyed during the reign of Uthman.

It's not just letters and words. Are you familiar with sura al-khal'?

O Allah, we seek your help and ask your forgiveness, and we praise you and we do not disbelieve in you. We separate from and leave who sins against you.

Or sura al-hafd?

O Allah, we worship You and to You we pray and prostrate and to You we run and hasten to serve You. We hope for Your mercy and we fear Your punishment. Your punishment will certainly reach the disbelievers.

These are two chapters contained within the version of the Qur'an compiled by Ubay bin Ka'b, but are not present in the official version of the Qur'an. And Ubay bin Ka'b certainly was not a nobody; he was a companion of Muhammad, and one of the first people to have memorized the entire Qur'an.

I'm not defensive, but I hate the word "you've been told", it implies that a theist can't have a free mind and research stuff, think about it....etcGazaAli

That's not what I meant at all. People are perfectly capable of thinking for themselves and making their own conclusions, it's just that sometimes they get so used to their status quo they don't bother questioning what they've "known" all their lives. Since you're an Arab and a Muslim, the idea that the Quran and prophet Muhammad were meant to be the end is indeed "what you've been told", so perhaps my statement would cause you to question that and look at it from a different perspective, but by no means was I implying that you couldn't "have a free mind".

Again, I'm not attacking you, just trying to have a healthy discussion here; I got past the stage of insulting others to make a point a long time ago. :)

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

Where can one view the contents of the copies destroyed during the reign of Uthman? There must be some way to view them, if one is able to determine that there exists a difference.

BluRayHiDef

You can see a full discussion of the differences here.

Are you Muslim? If not, then what are you?

What I am seems not terribly relevant to the discussion at hand. :P

Quite simple. The bible is written by man. If you believe there is a God, then God is perfect, and man is just a collective of screw ups. JustPlainLucas

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]I'm not defensive, but I hate the word "you've been told", it implies that a theist can't have a free mind and research stuff, think about it....etcblack_cat19

That's not what I meant at all. People are perfectly capable of thinking for themselves and making their own conclusions, it's just that sometimes they get so used to their status quo they don't bother questioning what they've "known" all their lives. Since you're an Arab and a Muslim, the idea that the Quran and prophet Muhammad were meant to be the end is indeed "what you've been told", so perhaps my statement would cause you to question that and look at it from a different perspective, but by no means was I implying that you couldn't "have a free mind".

Again, I'm not attacking you, just trying to have a healthy discussion here; I got past the stage of insulting others to make a point a long time ago. :)

[QUOTE="GazaAli"][QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Again, false. There are entire chapters that are either additional to or missing from the chapters in the official Qur'an today when one compares it to the copies destroyed during the reign of Uthman.

GabuEx

It's not just letters and words. Are you familiar with sura al-khal'?

O Allah, we seek your help and ask your forgiveness, and we praise you and we do not disbelieve in you. We separate from and leave who sins against you.

Or sura al-hafd?

O Allah, we worship You and to You we pray and prostrate and to You we run and hasten to serve You. We hope for Your mercy and we fear Your punishment. Your punishment will certainly reach the disbelievers.

These are two chapters contained within the version of the Qur'an compiled by Ubay bin Ka'b, but are not present in the official version of the Qur'an. And Ubay bin Ka'b certainly was not a nobody; he was a companion of Muhammad, and one of the first people to have memorized the entire Qur'an.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="GazaAli"] As far as I know, different people started to make copies of the Quran according to their accent and thus changed letters and words. So Uthman made a copy with the Uthmanic writing.GazaAli

It's not just letters and words. Are you familiar with sura al-khal'?

O Allah, we seek your help and ask your forgiveness, and we praise you and we do not disbelieve in you. We separate from and leave who sins against you.

Or sura al-hafd?

O Allah, we worship You and to You we pray and prostrate and to You we run and hasten to serve You. We hope for Your mercy and we fear Your punishment. Your punishment will certainly reach the disbelievers.

These are two chapters contained within the version of the Qur'an compiled by Ubay bin Ka'b, but are not present in the official version of the Qur'an. And Ubay bin Ka'b certainly was not a nobody; he was a companion of Muhammad, and one of the first people to have memorized the entire Qur'an.

Sura al-khal' can be seen in Arabic here, and sura al-hafd can be seen in Arabic here.

Their original Arabic text isn't the point, though; the point is that they aren't in the official version of the Qur'an...

This isn't the first time you've made a thread like this; you seem awfully eager to convince people that the Bible is not the word of God...

GabuEx

Yea, it's getting pretty old. It could be worse though. DS...

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

This isn't the first time you've made a thread like this; you seem awfully eager to convince people that the Bible is not the word of God...

LikeHaterade

Yea, it's getting pretty old. It could be worse though. DS...

My other attempts failed because the threads were closed. This is the only time I've ever been able to successfully make a thread concerning the Bible.

[QUOTE="LikeHaterade"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

This isn't the first time you've made a thread like this; you seem awfully eager to convince people that the Bible is not the word of God...

BluRayHiDef

Yea, it's getting pretty old. It could be worse though. DS...

My other attempts failed because the threads were closed. This is the only time I've ever been able to successfully make a thread concerning the Bible.

Why were they closed? I just think that your threads are redundant. You're starting to get a reputation for them and that's never good. Try deviating from the subject of religion in your next thread. Make a thread about sandwiches or blue ray, or how sandwiches look in blue ray.