Although I am not a Protestant, and never thought about Bible inerrancy issue, this was a very thorough and interesting exposition of it. Thanks for the references to theologians like Geisler , Sproul etc
I was helped in understanding inerrancy by reading "Jesus, Contradicted: Why the Gospels Tell the Same Story Differently" by Michael R. Licona. He talks about "flexible inerrancy". It makes much more sense to me than the Chicago Statement that is based on a philosophical argument. I think the jump from the Bible being inspired by God to inerrancy is too big. God inspired human authors and is inerrant in all that it teaches, but it doesn't follow that it was inspired in a way that excludes all errors.
I'm not Catholic, but Thomas Aquinas, in his "Shorter Summa", puts forth a very good argument for the Trinity and the inspiration of Jesus Christ. He writes that God is perfect in every way, while the Son is the revealed Word that is necessary to manifest this perfection. That always struck me as profound.
Thank you for this well laid out teaching on common misconceptions about the Bible. I am always searching for things to share with my friend’s husband who has deconstructed his faith due to modern false church teachings that we grew up believing. Thank you for being a lighthouse to let God’s light call the lost back to safely by sharing truth boldly!
Your labels are why you are blind in your Pharisee doctrine of man! You do not understand any scripture just as this woman has no understanding.. it’s only the understanding been given to you by organised religion! The scripture is written to hide the truth from your carnal mind to get you to see spiritually ! It is not history! It is not about the outside world! It is about the creator of those experiences.. I AM!
You have it right in that these doctrines of inspiration and inerrancy apply to the autographs. Another challenge that is not often mentioned is that of language. Even with the interlinear, most literal word for word versions, there are choices made with the English terms. Choices made by people with particular backgrounds/bias (mostly old, white western men). The vast number of English translations alone speak to the uncertainty of our translations.
That is done through textual criticism, archeology, and other approaches in the realm of apologetics for sure. This, however, then is how you actually interpret scripture, understanding the theology and its applications. Those 2 aren't mutually exclusive. Hope that makes sense. For more in textual criticism, check out Wes Huff, as he has gained lots of popularity lately!
Ah, but this way if you do find an error, you know it can't be an error and come up with some way to rationalize it. Lydia McGrew for example, talks about "good faith errors" and Mike Licona talks about "literary devices". If you're committed to coming up with inerrancy or near-inerrancy, you can always find some way to do that if you're committed to it.
I believe that the Bible is the completely inspired and accurate word of God. However, I did struggle with your syllogism. You used Heb 6:18 to prove premise one. It would seem that you need to first establish premise two before you can use scripture as proof for premise one.
There's no reason for those to be different versions. There's no conflict between one account reporting a side point and three others not doing so. But if the details only mentioned in the Matthew account bother you, no big deal, it's the part that all accounts agree on that is important anyway - That Jesus died for our sins and rose from the dead and that those who put their faith in Jesus will rise with Him.
There are some passages that, if we are honest, contradict each other. For example, there are 2 different accounts for the method of suic*ide of Judas. The standard apologist explanation isn't the plainest and most obvious solution.. From a neutral view, it's likely that the person narrating the story to the different authors had heard different versions. Its unlikely they were eye witnesses. Otherwise, there would have been a uniform story. I have been listening intently to deconstruction testimonies lately, all from scholars, ministers, etc. And this is a major issue...if the bible claims to be inerrant, every word God breathed, how can significant details be wrong. I know it doesn't affect crucial doctrine, except it legitimately challenges our definition of inerrancy.
Even the 1 angel vs. 2 angels description at the tomb, the Christian explanation as told by Alissa, would not hold up against the more logical theory that it was passed down orally, then written 40 years later, described not by eye witnesses but by people that heard from them. And some details got mixed up, like "broken telephone ". I'm just playing a bit of devil's advocate. For this reason, I think the era of apologetics as an evangelistic and debate tool is coming to an end. Nobody will win, as we all look at the evidence with a view to support our own beliefs. And that's not true debate
You have an honorable task for the sake of God and His word. You are noble and sincere and respected by me. However, inerrancy is a favorite target for people not favorably disposed to Christianity because it is an easy target. You can talk about definitions, hermeneutics and cultural background which will not silence the honest questions about certain books of the Old Testament. If the definition, the conservative definition of inerrancy includes a literal belief in the Flood story and Jonah and the whale then there is a big disconnect. If one elephant can drink 50 gallons of fresh water a day which is equivalent to 146,000 pounds of water per year then how could an ark sustain the lives of thousands of species of animals. That would be literally impossible. So with inerrancy, does that allow for legend or myth. You have to answer these practical questions first and then to go on to the theological terms. People leave the faith because they no longer view the bible a perfect book. When flaws are found in a perfect book then faith disappears rapidly. The bible has been the object of their worship and when that breaks down they throw everything out including Jesus. That is not their fault, it is yours!!
The doctrine of inerrancy of The Bible is facing many problems. 1) There is no "The Bible" today and never has been. 2) What version of the Bible is inerrant? Which Vorlage of a certain text was inerrant? MT, LXX, SP, something else? 3) Which version of a certain book is inerrant? The longer versions of Jeremiah, Ester and Daniel or the shorter version? 4) Are later additions and changes by editors and redactors inspired and inerrant? 5)Let's assume Peter or Paul dictated letter to a scribe. Were the words of Peter and Paul inspired and inerrant or the words the scribe has chosen in the epistels?
The problem with Biblical Inerrancy is that it just doesn't hold water against critical scholarship. Here are a few examples: Two creation stories that don't mesh. Two different accounts of Judas's death. No historical records of a Persian queen named Esther. No historical or archeological evidence for the exodus or the conquest. Many contradictory accounts from between the accounts in Samuel and Kings versus those in Chronicles. Plus, your philosophical argument is an argument in circles. Plus, the Chicago Statement is an exercise in contradictions, both claiming the Bible is inerrant while admitting otherwise with many qualifications. Sorry Alisa, nice effort, but like most who demand inerrancy, you do a great job proving the need for inerrancy while coming far from proving it is anywhere close to being inerrant.
Read "Toward a Mature Faith: Does Biblical Inerrancy Make Sense" by Clayton Sullivan, a former Southern Baptist minister and Professor of Philosophy and Religion at the University of Southern Mississippi
@@FreddieMcNabb Who's critical scholarship? Actually the two creation accounts do mesh...remember that they were not cut up into chapters...they were read as one long account...
Jesus, , peace be upon him, said : * Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or what all the prophets before me brought, but to fulfill it. * (Matthew 5:17) ----------------------------- 18* For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. -19* So then, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do likewise will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever practices and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.- 20For I tell you that unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.…*. (Matthew 5:19 )
Just curious if you've ever read through the Bible? I have been a Christian for over 45 yrs and I can tell you that I believe it is inerrant and God-breathed. I have read through the Bible many many times and read at least 3 chapters everyday. I need it and it keeps me close to God. 😊 🙏
@timfinch7857 yes! Yes! I read the Bible several times a year. This argument is from my son in law and I just wanted to hear another answer against it ☺️
@@deannachapman5411 That's awesome that you read through the Bible several times a year! 😊 So many Christians are not reading their Bibles and it makes me happy when I meet those who read and love God's Word. I hope your son in law becomes a believer in Christ (I am assuming by what you said that he is not a Christian) and discovers the truth and the peace and joy that come through knowing God and His precious Word!
I used to believe what she says UNTIL I entered the field of Textual Criticism and found deeper scholarship to refute this. This was hard to watch. Start watching Dr. Dan McClellan for correct learning.
Inerrancy applies to the autographs (though maybe room could be made for spelling errors and such). We don't have these. The existing manuscripts contain spelling mistakes and differ from each other. The teaching is clear enough but I don't see any prospect of establishing inerrancy.
Applying that "the autographs only are inspired" denies Gods promise to preserve his word for all generations. Also it opens up the fallacy, that all translations are equaly correct. This contradicts the Bible. Also, there are forgeries deliberately created to undermine Gods word. Also we have the words of Jesus in the parable of the sower, which he himself explains, that the good seed is the word of God. Then he goes on to the parable of the wheat and the tares, where he introduces a new sower, that sows a corrupt seed into the field, which produces tares growing from this bad seed, which is sown by the devil. Throw out ALL socalled Bibles produced from the catholic church of Babylon. They should come with allergy warnings because they "may contain words that could be misleadingly considered the word of God" - Plants (people) growing from the seed producing tares, will be burned at harvest time, while the plants (people) growing from the preserved pure word of God, will produce fruit (wheat grains) and will be gathered into the barn. Teological mumble jumble produces confusion and chokes out many seeds lost by the wayside. The many nominations the Bible calls the daughters of the mother harlot. We see them gather back under the mother now, starting in USA, the false prophet of revelation. You are being deceived and deceive others. The words of God are pure words. They are not for personal interpretation, but will be opened for the heart searching honestly truth and only truth - not jesuittic teological babylonian mumble jumble. It produces pharisees (tares) and not children of the Kingdom (wheat). Bottom line: The preserved word of God has NO errors. The false "Bibles" are full of errors, that mislead, confuse and deceive people. Go find a Bible that itself verifies its divinity, and throw away all socalled Bibles corrupted and falsified. If the Vatican (Antichrist) provided documents, rest asure they are full of crap and have NO light in them. They are the seed of Satan producing tares, and are candy for the rebellious human heart.
The Latter-day Saints have the most rational position on this subject: We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated (and transmitted) correctly. The inspired writings came forth at first in purity but later were corrupted. Many plain and precious truths were taken from the Bible before it went forth to the modern Gentile nations. This reality has caused many Christians in our day to stumble in blindness. Inerrancy is not a defensable position if one but reads the Bible in the spirit of honesty. The Bible is a great blessing and is the word of God, but it’s plain that the collection of records is not without many insoluble problems. I could cite hundreds of errors in it if that were my dispostion, but this fact does not mean that it’s not from God and to be esteemed as holy scripture. I honor it with all my heart. It is a profound gift from God!
Did you ever notice how cults and offshoots from Christianity claim the Bible was good at one time but has been corrupted? They have to do something to undermine it since it does not affirm what they want to believe. Of course the idea that it is different now than at an earlier time is not supported by evidence. But they won't look into that, and they won't want you to either - that's for sure.
So a non 5 point Calvinist are not saved you just said. Put 1 Corinthians in context of the whole chapter not just one verse. So if you need this “special knowledge “ as you are saying that would be Gnosticism of the highest order. So thanks for admitting you are a gnostic just like your boy Augustine John 17 is the disciples Romans 8 has nothing to do with salvation. It is about sanctification.
I believe that the bible is inerrant from Gods point of view, but there are many apparent contradictions to us. Favorite: John 3:16 "for God so loved the world" same human author: 1 John 2:15 "Do not love the world or anything in the world. "
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
This was an excellent, concise, well organized teaching on a complex topic.
Although I am not a Protestant, and never thought about Bible inerrancy issue, this was a very thorough and interesting exposition of it. Thanks for the references to theologians like Geisler , Sproul etc
Thank you for the clarity and understanding. It is much needed.
It's so important what you said in this video....thank you, Alisa!
I was helped in understanding inerrancy by reading "Jesus, Contradicted: Why the Gospels Tell the Same Story Differently" by Michael R. Licona. He talks about "flexible inerrancy". It makes much more sense to me than the Chicago Statement that is based on a philosophical argument.
I think the jump from the Bible being inspired by God to inerrancy is too big. God inspired human authors and is inerrant in all that it teaches, but it doesn't follow that it was inspired in a way that excludes all errors.
Beautiful my sister!
I'm not Catholic, but Thomas Aquinas, in his "Shorter Summa", puts forth a very good argument for the Trinity and the inspiration of Jesus Christ. He writes that God is perfect in every way, while the Son is the revealed Word that is necessary to manifest this perfection. That always struck me as profound.
Great overview.
Happy to have found you. I just went through the Chigado Statement is really good and everyone should read. Thanks for such a nice video. ❤
Thank you for this well laid out teaching on common misconceptions about the Bible. I am always searching for things to share with my friend’s husband who has deconstructed his faith due to modern false church teachings that we grew up believing. Thank you for being a lighthouse to let God’s light call the lost back to safely by sharing truth boldly!
Your labels are why you are blind in your Pharisee doctrine of man! You do not understand any scripture just as this woman has no understanding.. it’s only the understanding been given to you by organised religion! The scripture is written to hide the truth from your carnal mind to get you to see spiritually ! It is not history! It is not about the outside world! It is about the creator of those experiences.. I AM!
This video was fantastic! Keep up the great work, sister!
Always truthfully and thoughtfully said Alisa. Thank you!💯
Your just beautiful. ..you know this already
But when you teach truth .... your beauty really stands out. .
Your amazing.
Alisa. Love you
Interesting episode, thanks
You have it right in that these doctrines of inspiration and inerrancy apply to the autographs. Another challenge that is not often mentioned is that of language. Even with the interlinear, most literal word for word versions, there are choices made with the English terms. Choices made by people with particular backgrounds/bias (mostly old, white western men). The vast number of English translations alone speak to the uncertainty of our translations.
There's nothing wrong with old white Western men.
Outstanding overview of a vital area of theology. If the Bible “falls,” we h have lost our foundation.
Shouldn't you analyse the Bible to see if it has errors, rather than to just declare that it doesn't?
That is done through textual criticism, archeology, and other approaches in the realm of apologetics for sure. This, however, then is how you actually interpret scripture, understanding the theology and its applications. Those 2 aren't mutually exclusive.
Hope that makes sense. For more in textual criticism, check out Wes Huff, as he has gained lots of popularity lately!
Are you suggesting there are errors?
Ah, but this way if you do find an error, you know it can't be an error and come up with some way to rationalize it. Lydia McGrew for example, talks about "good faith errors" and Mike Licona talks about "literary devices". If you're committed to coming up with inerrancy or near-inerrancy, you can always find some way to do that if you're committed to it.
I believe that the Bible is the completely inspired and accurate word of God. However, I did struggle with your syllogism. You used Heb 6:18 to prove premise one. It would seem that you need to first establish premise two before you can use scripture as proof for premise one.
So which version of the Resurrection is accurate? The one with lots of other resurrections (Matthew) or the three with only Jesus being resurrected?
There's no reason for those to be different versions. There's no conflict between one account reporting a side point and three others not doing so.
But if the details only mentioned in the Matthew account bother you, no big deal, it's the part that all accounts agree on that is important anyway - That Jesus died for our sins and rose from the dead and that those who put their faith in Jesus will rise with Him.
@@midimusicforever So Mark, Luke, and John just "Ignored" or didn't think dozens of other resurrections were "important enough to mention"???
There are some passages that, if we are honest, contradict each other. For example, there are 2 different accounts for the method of suic*ide of Judas. The standard apologist explanation isn't the plainest and most obvious solution.. From a neutral view, it's likely that the person narrating the story to the different authors had heard different versions. Its unlikely they were eye witnesses. Otherwise, there would have been a uniform story. I have been listening intently to deconstruction testimonies lately, all from scholars, ministers, etc. And this is a major issue...if the bible claims to be inerrant, every word God breathed, how can significant details be wrong. I know it doesn't affect crucial doctrine, except it legitimately challenges our definition of inerrancy.
Even the 1 angel vs. 2 angels description at the tomb, the Christian explanation as told by Alissa, would not hold up against the more logical theory that it was passed down orally, then written 40 years later, described not by eye witnesses but by people that heard from them. And some details got mixed up, like "broken telephone ". I'm just playing a bit of devil's advocate. For this reason, I think the era of apologetics as an evangelistic and debate tool is coming to an end. Nobody will win, as we all look at the evidence with a view to support our own beliefs. And that's not true debate
You have an honorable task for the sake of God and His word. You are noble and sincere and respected by me. However, inerrancy is a favorite target for people not favorably disposed to Christianity because it is an easy target. You can talk about definitions, hermeneutics and cultural background which will not silence the honest questions about certain books of the Old Testament. If the definition, the conservative definition of inerrancy includes a literal belief in the Flood story and Jonah and the whale then there is a big disconnect.
If one elephant can drink 50 gallons of fresh water a day which is equivalent to 146,000 pounds of water per year then how could an ark sustain the lives of thousands of species of animals. That would be literally impossible. So with inerrancy, does that allow for legend or myth.
You have to answer these practical questions first and then to go on to the theological terms. People leave the faith because they no longer view the bible a perfect book. When flaws are found in a perfect book then faith disappears rapidly. The bible has been the object of their worship and when that breaks down they throw everything out including Jesus. That is not their fault, it is yours!!
The doctrine of inerrancy of The Bible is facing many problems.
1) There is no "The Bible" today and never has been.
2) What version of the Bible is inerrant? Which Vorlage of a certain text was inerrant? MT, LXX, SP, something else?
3) Which version of a certain book is inerrant? The longer versions of Jeremiah, Ester and Daniel or the shorter version?
4) Are later additions and changes by editors and redactors inspired and inerrant?
5)Let's assume Peter or Paul dictated letter to a scribe. Were the words of Peter and Paul inspired and inerrant or the words the scribe has chosen in the epistels?
Interesting points.
The problem with Biblical Inerrancy is that it just doesn't hold water against critical scholarship. Here are a few examples: Two creation stories that don't mesh. Two different accounts of Judas's death. No historical records of a Persian queen named Esther. No historical or archeological evidence for the exodus or the conquest. Many contradictory accounts from between the accounts in Samuel and Kings versus those in Chronicles. Plus, your philosophical argument is an argument in circles. Plus, the Chicago Statement is an exercise in contradictions, both claiming the Bible is inerrant while admitting otherwise with many qualifications. Sorry Alisa, nice effort, but like most who demand inerrancy, you do a great job proving the need for inerrancy while coming far from proving it is anywhere close to being inerrant.
Read "Toward a Mature Faith: Does Biblical Inerrancy Make Sense" by Clayton Sullivan, a former Southern Baptist minister and Professor of Philosophy and Religion at the University of Southern Mississippi
@@FreddieMcNabb Who's critical scholarship? Actually the two creation accounts do mesh...remember that they were not cut up into chapters...they were read as one long account...
@@FreddieMcNabb Furthermore, where do you get your information? No records of Esther does not mean Esther never existed.
I don't believe in inerrancy but Inspiring Philosophy's channel has addressed several of your claims.
Jesus, , peace be upon him, said :
* Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or what all the prophets before me brought, but to fulfill it. *
(Matthew 5:17)
-----------------------------
18* For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot,
not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
-19* So then, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments
and teaches others to do likewise will be called least in the kingdom of heaven;
but whoever practices and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.-
20For I tell you that unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees,
you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.…*.
(Matthew 5:19 )
I've heard it say the scribes corrupted it
Just curious if you've ever read through the Bible? I have been a Christian for over 45 yrs and I can tell you that I believe it is inerrant and God-breathed. I have read through the Bible many many times and read at least 3 chapters everyday. I need it and it keeps me close to God. 😊 🙏
@timfinch7857 yes! Yes! I read the Bible several times a year.
This argument is from my son in law and I just wanted to hear another answer against it ☺️
@@deannachapman5411 That's awesome that you read through the Bible several times a year! 😊 So many Christians are not reading their Bibles and it makes me happy when I meet those who read and love God's Word.
I hope your son in law becomes a believer in Christ (I am assuming by what you said that he is not a Christian) and discovers the truth and the peace and joy that come through knowing God and His precious Word!
Please read some books by Bart Eherman
Please don't only read books by Bart Ehrman. You'll learn a thing or two if you look at what guys like Keener or Blomberg has to say too.
Watch some videos by Inspiring Philosophy. Bart Eherman was on his channel.
I used to believe what she says UNTIL I entered the field of Textual Criticism and found deeper scholarship to refute this. This was hard to watch. Start watching Dr. Dan McClellan for correct learning.
I don't understand how a person can be a serious biblical scholar and a serious Mormon. Or a serious Mormon and a serious Democrat.
Inerrancy applies to the autographs (though maybe room could be made for spelling errors and such). We don't have these. The existing manuscripts contain spelling mistakes and differ from each other. The teaching is clear enough but I don't see any prospect of establishing inerrancy.
Of course the Bible contains errors! It was written by people and people always err
Applying that "the autographs only are inspired" denies Gods promise to preserve his word for all generations. Also it opens up the fallacy, that all translations are equaly correct. This contradicts the Bible. Also, there are forgeries deliberately created to undermine Gods word.
Also we have the words of Jesus in the parable of the sower, which he himself explains, that the good seed is the word of God. Then he goes on to the parable of the wheat and the tares, where he introduces a new sower, that sows a corrupt seed into the field, which produces tares growing from this bad seed, which is sown by the devil.
Throw out ALL socalled Bibles produced from the catholic church of Babylon. They should come with allergy warnings because they "may contain words that could be misleadingly considered the word of God" - Plants (people) growing from the seed producing tares, will be burned at harvest time, while the plants (people) growing from the preserved pure word of God, will produce fruit (wheat grains) and will be gathered into the barn.
Teological mumble jumble produces confusion and chokes out many seeds lost by the wayside.
The many nominations the Bible calls the daughters of the mother harlot. We see them gather back under the mother now, starting in USA, the false prophet of revelation.
You are being deceived and deceive others. The words of God are pure words. They are not for personal interpretation, but will be opened for the heart searching honestly truth and only truth - not jesuittic teological babylonian mumble jumble. It produces pharisees (tares) and not children of the Kingdom (wheat).
Bottom line: The preserved word of God has NO errors.
The false "Bibles" are full of errors, that mislead, confuse and deceive people.
Go find a Bible that itself verifies its divinity, and throw away all socalled Bibles corrupted and falsified. If the Vatican (Antichrist) provided documents, rest asure they are full of crap and have NO light in them. They are the seed of Satan producing tares, and are candy for the rebellious human heart.
You won't actually understand the Bible until you realize that Satan is where you think he is not.
The Latter-day Saints have the most rational position on this subject: We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated (and transmitted) correctly. The inspired writings came forth at first in purity but later were corrupted. Many plain and precious truths were taken from the Bible before it went forth to the modern Gentile nations. This reality has caused many Christians in our day to stumble in blindness. Inerrancy is not a defensable position if one but reads the Bible in the spirit of honesty. The Bible is a great blessing and is the word of God, but it’s plain that the collection of records is not without many insoluble problems. I could cite hundreds of errors in it if that were my dispostion, but this fact does not mean that it’s not from God and to be esteemed as holy scripture. I honor it with all my heart. It is a profound gift from God!
Very interesting…what is your evidence that “Many plain and precious truths were taken from the Bible”?
Did you ever notice how cults and offshoots from Christianity claim the Bible was good at one time but has been corrupted? They have to do something to undermine it since it does not affirm what they want to believe. Of course the idea that it is different now than at an earlier time is not supported by evidence. But they won't look into that, and they won't want you to either - that's for sure.
I don't understand. That sounds like a postmodern contradiction.
The bibe is full of contradictions and errors
So a non 5 point Calvinist are not saved you just said.
Put 1 Corinthians in context of the whole chapter not just one verse.
So if you need this “special knowledge “ as you are saying that would be Gnosticism of the highest order. So thanks for admitting you are a gnostic just like your boy Augustine
John 17 is the disciples
Romans 8 has nothing to do with salvation. It is about sanctification.
When did she say that?
@
Right out of the gate.
I believe that the bible is inerrant from Gods point of view, but there are many apparent contradictions to us. Favorite: John 3:16 "for God so loved the world" same human author: 1 John 2:15 "Do not love the world or anything in the world. "