Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!aplcen!samsung!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: hall@vice.ico.tek.com (Hal Lillywhite) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: inconsistencies in the Bible (digest of postings) Message-ID: Date: 11 Dec 89 08:53:43 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR. Lines: 80 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu >From: Joe Nunes [Many examples of inconsistencies deleted, some I regard as phoney but most are real] >Some final points: > I have not gone through all this trouble to attempt to destroy anyone's >beliefs (I doubt that I could succeed even if I wished to). I did this because >I very much resent being told that the only reason I have not found Jesus is >because I have refused to open my eyes. Well, as a matter of fact I have opened >my eyes and read the Gospels and that has led to me to the conclusion that >they are not the literal word of God and that a great portion of their accounts >of the life and death of Jesus is fictional. I can accept that you have an >absolute certainty that Jesus is the son of God, that he died for our sins, >etc. Why can't you accept that I have the opposite certainty, and that I have >come by it honestly? I'm not sure but Joe almost seems to be saying that he cannot be a Christian because he cannot accept Biblical inerrancy. If so I hope he will reconsider. Many Christians reject inerrancy. I think this may be an example of the mischief which can be done by insisting that all who believe in Jesus must believe exactly the same way someone else does. We may drive people away over differences which are not really central to Christianity. It seems to me that there are 4 possible positions a Christian can take with respect to Biblical inerrancy: 1. The Bible is totally inerrant and all must believe this to be saved. 2. The Bible is totally inerrant but belief in this is not a condition of salvation. 3. The Bible is not inerrant and all must believe this. 4. The Bible is not inerrant but those who believe otherwise can still be saved. I suspect that very few would agree with position 1. After all the New Testament indicates we must believe in Jesus to be saved but I can't think of any indication that a belief in Biblical inerrancy is necessary. In fact through the ages the Bible has had little relevance for many illiterate Christians and I suspect few people would call literacy a requirement for salvation. Likewise, position 3 is unlikely to be widely accepted. Those who reject inerrancy are probably unlikely to think that salvation requires all to believe as they do. Again the central required belief is of Jesus Christ and differing beliefs will be allowed in other areas. This leaves us with 2 positions which I suspect between them attract the great majority of Christians: The Bible may or may not be inerrant but salvation does not depend upon which of these beliefs a person has. Certainly there are many in each camp but I would like to see the disagreement kept at least civilized. My own view is that inerrancy is neither necessary to a belief in Jesus nor a very tenable position. Men (and women) are not perfect and that includes the prophets who recorded the scriptures. While I recognize that some claim that these prophets and the people who copied and translated the scriptures down through the ages were given some special ability to avoid error, I do not agree with this claim. The various translations of the Bible available today are abundant proof that at the very least some regard certain versions as unclear. In fact the Christian world does not even agree on which books should be included in the Bible. One thing which I admit disturbs me about the inerrantists is that at least all those I've talked to seem start from a belief that it must be inerrant because God is perfect and therefore the book he gave us must also be perfect. Yet these same people seem to have no difficulty with the idea that a perfect God could create man who then became imperfect. If he allows us enough freedom to sin why would he not allow us enough to make mistakes (or maybe even deliberate changes) in the Bible. Even if it's not perfect God can work through it for our salvation.