Is the Holy Bible Inerrant or Infallible?

HOME
COMMON MISUNDERSTANDINGS
THE WENTWORTH LETTER
2 TIMOTHY 3:16-17
READY ANSWERS 1 PETER 3:15
MCELVEEN'S 'ANONYMOUS' MORMONS
WALL TO WALL ANONYMOUS WITNESSES
UNIVERSAL APOSTASY PROPHECIES IN THE HOLY BIBLE
THE APOSTASY - INTERNAL CAUSES
THE PERSECUTED CHURCH OF CHRIST BECOMES A PERSECUTING ANTI-CHURCH
POST APOSTASY NOVELTIES
PROPHECIES OF THE COMING APOSTASY
EXTERNAL CAUSES OF APOSTASY
CORRUPTION OF THE ESSENTIAL RITE OF BAPTISM
FIENDISHLY CLEVER!
THE ANTI-MORMONS' FLAW
THE ANTI-MORMON PREDICAMENT
PROFESSOR HAROLD J BERRY SPLURGES NONSENSE
INVENTING CUMORAH
JOSEPH SMITH PROPHET OF GOD
MORMONS AND MOON MEN
BAPTISM BY TOTAL IMMERSION ESSENTIAL FOR SALVATION
PAUL & BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD - WHO ARE 'THEY'?
A LUTHERAN BISHOP ON BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD
SALVATION FOR THE DEAD: THE MORMON POSITION
BEECHER ON SALVATION FOR THE DEAD
PAUL AND GENEALOGY
ROT SPEAKS WITH FORKED ONGUE AND THREATENS FORMER DIRECTOR
REFORMED AEGYPTIAN - OOPS, I MEAN HEBREW!
REFORMED EGYPTIAN - AN HEBREW LITERARY PARALLEL
ANACHRONISMS IN THE BOOK OF MORMON
CROSS-EYED STAR GAZERS
FROM ANTI-MORMON TO MORMON - MY JOURNEY!
A DIVINE COMEDY
ANTI-MORMON LITERATURE - GUEST OP-ED
WORST OF THE ANTI-MORMON WEB #1
ED DECKER LIES - 1
ED DECKER LIES - 2
ED DECKER LIES - 3
ED DECKER LIES - 4
ED DECKER LIES - 5
ED DECKER LIES - 6
ED DECKER LIES - 7
ED DECKER LIES - 8
ED DECKER LIES - 9
ED DECKER LIES - 10
ANTI-MORMONS AWASH WITH BOGUS DEGREES
IS "DR" JAMES WHITE'S DOCTORATE BOGUS?
THE BIBLE CALLS THEM "FOOLS"
EGG ON FACES
UTAH MISSIONS INC. BATTLES AMONG ITSELF
REACH OUT TRUST [ROT] USES INNUENDO AS A WEAPON
ROT'S FORKED TONGUE
SATANIC INFLUENCE ADMITTED IN ROT JOURNAL
WHAT REACH OUT TRUST DARE NOT REVEAL
REACH OUT TRUST - THE POISONED CHALICE
REACH OUT TRUST EMBRACES DUNGEONS & DRAGONS
IMAGES OF HATE -CHAPTER 1
CHAPTER 2
CHAPTER 3
CHAPTER 4
CHAPTER 5
CHAPTER 6
CHAPTER 7
CHAPTER 8
CHAPTER 9
CHAPTER 10
CHAPTER 11
CHAPTER 12
CHAPTER 13
CHAPTER 14
CHAPTER 15
CHAPTER 16
CHAPTER 17
CHAPTER 18
CHAPTER 19
CHAPTER 20
CHAPTER 21
CHAPTER 22
CHAPTER 23
CHAPTER 24
CHAPTER 25
CHAPTER 26
CHAPTER 27
CHAPTER 28
CHAPTER 29
CHAPTER 30
CHAPTER 31
CHAPTER 32
APPENDIX 'A'
APPENDIX 'B'
APPENDIX 'C'
APPENDIX 'D'
BIBLIOGRAPHY
FOOTNOTES & THE END
ALMA 7:10 - SETTLED!
“AND IT CAME TO PASS”
GUEST OP-ED: WHAT'S WRONG WITH THOSE STUPID MORMONS?
FRED PHELPS' DEPRAVITY!
MORMONS & THE HOLY BIBLE
NON-MORMONS & THE HOLY BIBLE
MISSING BOOKS OF THE HOLY BIBLE
BIBLE - INERRANT? INFALLIBLE?
CARM.& THE HOLY BIBLE
CARM. THE BIBLE IS NOT THEIR FINAL AUTHORITY
'GOOD WORKS' IN BIBLICAL CHRISTIANITY
WHAT THINK YE OF CHRIST?
IMPOSSIBLE TEXTS
CHRISTOLOGY ACCORDING TO EUSEBIUS
THE MORMON JESUS
MORMONS DO NOT SAY ALL NON-LDS CHRISTIANS ARE CORRUPT
MORMONS AND OTHER CHRISTIANS
A PASTOR ASKS A FAIR QUESTION.
CARM 101 - A DISAPPOINTMENT!
MCELVEEN'S DELUSION
SHAFOVALOFF FLUNKS THE 2 NEPHI 25:23 TEST
CARM.& ATONEMENT & SALVATION
CARM ~ MAKES IT UP!
CARM AND THE DEVIL
CARM ~ DOCTRINE OF GOD
CARM ON THE INCARNATION
CARM & THEOSIS
THE HULSES: LYIN' FER JESUS!
ROCKY HULSE
THE TRUTH ABOUT MORMONISM
JOSEPH SMITH
JOSEPH SMITH BY THOSE THAT KNEW HIM
TRUTH IN LOVE TO MORMONS . COM
DON'T SAY YOU LOVE ME IF IT ISN'T TRUE!
PLURAL MARRIAGE COMMANDED BY GOD
PLURAL MARRIAGE IN THE EARLY AND MEDIAEVAL AND LATER CGHRISTIAN CHURCHES
PLURAL MARRIAGE BROUGHT BACK BY EVANGELICALS
LORI MCGREGOR TALKS TWADDLE
CONCERNED CHRISTIANS INC,
JESUS TELLS CHRISTIANS TO FORSAKE THEIR SINS
A STINGING COMPLAINT AGAINST CONCERNED CHRISTIANS
R.O.T.
RENDELL'S DISHONEST CLAIMS
DOUG HARRIS BETRAYER & PROMISE BREAKER
L.O.U.T.
ROT'S SNEAKY FANATICS
ROT TALKS ROT
ROT'S FORKED TONGUE & DOUBLE MINDEDNESS
UNIVERSALISM TAUGHT - DR HANSON'S THOUGHTS
MINOR IRRITATIONS & PETTY NIGGLES
BOGUS 'DR' JAY DEE NELSON
GB HANCOCK
BOGUS 'DR' WALTER R MARTIN
BOGUS 'DOCTOR' WILLIE DYE
BOGUS 'DR' FALES
FALES' BOGUS DEFENDER
BOGUS RESPONSE TO BOGUS "DR" FALES
BRINKERHOFF'S EGREGIOUS ERROR
BRINKERHOFF'S TREACHERY EXPOSED - 1
BRINKERHOFF'S TREACHERY EXPOSED - 2
IS ANTI-MORMONISM CHRISTIAN ?
DANGEROUS FUNDAMENTALISM
"THE GOD-MAKERS"
GODMAKERS AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS - AN EDITORIAL
ERYL DAVIES
IS GOD IMMATERIAL?
THE VISIBLE GOD
EGYPTIAN INFLUENCE IN ANCIENT PALESTINE
EGYPTIAN INFLUENCE ON HEBREW THOUGHT AND LITERATURE
SEPARATING THE WHEAT FROM THE CHAFF
BEECHER ON MORMONS AND THE BIBLE
SALVATION & BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD
JESUS PREACHED IN HELL TO SAVE SOULS
THE JOHANNINE COMMA
EZEKIEL'S STICKS
BOOK OF MORMON
EVIDENCES OF THE BOOK OF MORMON
TEMPLES
JOSEPH SMITH'S OWN STORY
ELDER OAKS AT HARVARD LAW SCHOOL
SOME CHRISTIANS TELL LIES FOR CASH
MISCELLANY
YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED
THE WALL OF TRUTH & THE WALL OF SHAME
THE PERSECUTION CULTUS
INSANITY AWARDS
DAN CORNER CORNERED & PITCHFORKED!
ISAIAH 29 & THE BOOK OF MORMON
BOM CHANGES
AM I AN ANTI-MORMON?
WHY I AM A MORMON
COMPACT DISCS
THE INSANITY OF ANTI-MORMONISM
A FALSE DICHOTOMY - MORMONISM OR CHRISTIANITY - WHY MUST I CHOOSE WHEN I CAN BE BOTH AT THE SAME TIME?
A MORMON ANSWERS
DEIFICATION - THEOSIS CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE
SALVATION FOR THE DEAD - A BIBLE TEACHING
THE CHRIST OF MORMONISM IS THE CHRIST OF THE HOLY BIBLE
THE BOOK OF ABRAHAM
ON THE HOLY TRINITY
BIBLE TEACHINGS THAT DO NOT SUPPORT THE TRINITY - 01
AN EXAMPLE OF ANTI-MORMON FOOLISHNESS
A CASE STUDY ~ ANTI-MORMON ATTITUDES
JP HOLDING'S BOOK, "THE MORMON DEFENDERS"
ARE YOU PREPARED FOR HIM?
THE STANDARD OF TRUTH
BLACK MUSEUM OF ANTI-MORMONISM
THE SALAMANDER LETTER
DANITES - THE MYTH
I HAD A DREAM - A CAUTIONARY TALE
CARELESS TALK - DR MICHAEL L BROWN
LINKS FOR FURTHER STUDY

  

Let me explain why Latter-day Saints consider the question of Biblical inerrancy as a hot topic.  It is crucial to determine whether the versions of the Holy Bible still in existence are free from error, or whether they are not.  The crucial question is not whether they were perfect when they were first written by the holy men that God inspired to write them, but whether during the millennia of transmission from one form into another, the original texts have been miraculously preserved so that what God caused to be written in every age has remained perfectly free from error or corruption of any kind, or whether errors and corruptions have become part of the texts now extant. Isn't it simply fair to want proper answers to these questions rather than be forced by dogmatists to take on trust what someone who does not know the answers himself tells us about inerrancy and infallibility in the Holy Bible? 

It is not a question of degree, because if one single phrase or word is found to be incorrect for any reason, then the claim of biblical inerrancy fails.  Inerrantists insiste there is not the smallest deviation, and when indisputable deviations are demonstrated they become inventive in proferring explanations that defy sound sense in order to maintain that an error or a corruption is nothing more than an optical illusion. 

Biblical inerrancy, then, is a doctrinal position that the Bible is totally accurate and totally free of error, and that "Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact." Of course the difficulty is that no one has an original biblical manuscript. The 'Originals' no longer exist!

  Some Christians equate inerrancy with infallibility and others do not.  The Christian world is sharply divided between inerrantists and those that trust not only the evidence of their eyes but also up-to-date  scholarship.  In Judaism there had never been a belief in the literal word of the Hebrew Bible, hence the co-existence of the Oral Torah.

Within Christianity, some mainstream Evangelical and Protestant groups adhere to the current inerrancy of Scripture as it reads today. However, some note that "Evangelical scholars ... doubt that accepting the doctrine of biblical inerrancy is the best way to assert their belief in biblical authority.  

The term "inerrant" is often used by 'conservative' theologians in some religions despitr cogenmt evidence against their positions. For example, in Christianity to refer to the Old and New Testaments, in Islam to refer to the Qur'an, and in other religions to refer to their own holy books.

  It should be noted that the belief that the Holy Bible is inerrant is extra-biblical, and does not occur anywhere in the Bible monographs, although some that do not understand what is written will claim otherwise on grounds so slim they are invisible, even to the practiced eye of faith.

  There are over 5,600 Greek manuscripts containing all or part of the New Testament, as well as over 10,000 Latin manuscripts, and perhaps 500 other manuscripts of various other languages. Additionally, there are the Patristic writings which contain copious quotes, across the early centuries, of the scriptures.

  Most of these manuscripts date to the Middle Ages. The oldest complete copy of the New Testament, the Codex Sinaiticus, which includes two other books not now included in the accepted NT canon, dates to the 4th century. The earliest fragment of a New Testament book is the Rylands Library Papyrus P52 which dates to the mid 2nd century and is the size of a business card. Very early manuscripts are extremely rare and never amout to anything more than fragments.

  The average NT manuscript is about 200 pages, and in all, we have about 1.3 million pages of text. No two manuscripts are identical, except in the smallest fragments, and the many manuscripts which preserve New Testament texts differ among themselves in many respects, with some estimates of 200,000 to 300,000 differences among the various manuscripts.

  

Bart Ehrman

     Most changes are careless errors that are easily recognized and corrected. Biblical scribes often made mistakes because they were tired or inattentive or sometimes inept. Indeed, the single most common mistake in our manuscripts involves "orthography" [spelling], significant for little more than showing that scribes in antiquity could spell no better than most of us can today. In addition, we have numerous manuscripts in which scribes have left out entire words, verses, or even pages of a book, presumably by accident. Sometimes scribes rearranged the words on the page, for example, by leaving out a word and then reinserting it later in the sentence.

  In the 2008 Greer-Heard debate series, noted New Testament scholars Bart Ehrman and Daniel B. Wallace discussed these variances in detail. Wallace mentioned that understanding the meaning of the number of variances is not as simple as looking at the number of variances, but one must consider also the number of manuscripts, the types of errors, and among the more serious discrepancies, what impact they do or do not have.

  For hundreds of years, biblical and textual scholars have examined the manuscripts extensively. Since the eighteenth century, they have employed the techniques of textual criticism to reconstruct how the extant manuscripts of the New Testament texts might have descended, and to recover earlier recensions of the texts. However, King James Version (AV) - only inerrantists often prefer the traditional texts (i.e., Textus Receptus which is the basis of AV) used in their churches to modern attempts of reconstruction (i.e., Nestle-Aland Greek Text which is the basis of Modern Translations), arguing that the Holy Spirit is just as active in the preservation of the scriptures as in their creation. These inerrantists are found particularly in non-Protestant churches, but also a few Protestant groups hold such views.

AV-only inerrantist Jack Moorman says that at least 356 doctrinal passages are affected by the differences between the Textus Receptus and the Nestle-Aland Greek Text.

  Some familiar examples of Gospel passages in the Textus Receptus thought to have been added by later interpolaters and omitted in the Nestle Aland Greek Text include the Pericope Adulteræ, [John 7:53-8:11] the Comma Johanneum, [1 John 5:7–8] and the longer ending in Mark 16. [Mk 16:9-20]

  Many modern Bibles have footnotes [Critical Apparatus] to indicate areas where there is disagreement between source documents. Bible commentaries offer discussions of these.

  Evangelical Christians generally accept the findings of textual criticism, and nearly all modern translations, including the popular New International Version, work from a Greek New Testament based on modern textual criticism.

  Since this means that the manuscript copies are not perfect, inerrancy is only applied to the original autographs (the manuscripts written by the original authors) rather than the copies.[1] For instance, the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy says, "We affirm that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture." 

  A faction of those in the "The King-James-Only Movement" rejects the whole discipline of textual criticism and holds that the translators of the King James Version English Bible were guided by God, and that the KJV thus is to be taken as the authoritative English Bible. However, those who hold this opinion do not extend it to the KJV translation into English of the Apocryphal books, which were produced along with the rest of the Authorized Version. Modern translations differ from the KJV on numerous points, sometimes resulting from access to different early texts, largely as a result of work in the field of Textual Criticism. Upholders of the KJV-only position nevertheless hold that the Protestant canon of KJV is itself an inspired text and therefore remains authoritative. The King-James-Only Movement asserts that the KJV is the sole English translation free from error.

  That this is not so has been clearly and unequivocally refuted by Hebrew scholar Professor Jacob Weingreen, former Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland, and former Professor of Hebrew, Unversity of Dublin, Ireland, in his "Introduction to the Criticism of the Hebrew Scriptures." Some examples of Weingreen's findings follow.

" ... an important feature will be the phenomenon of human fallibility which manifested iyself in the professional copying of ancient manuscaripts. Scattered throughhout the writings of the Hebrew Bible are instances of miscopying due to a variety of reasons, but ultimately to be attributed to human fallibility or misunderstanding." [Introduction]  

"It might sound rather trite to observe that even professionally experienced people are prone to fallibility in their specialized work, in spite of the scrupulous care taken by them in the execution of their tasks." [Introduction]

Rabbinic Antecedents of Textual Criticism

  

  

To be continued ........................