Are there errors in the Bible?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 31 ส.ค. 2022
- Theology is life. A daily dose of Biblical teaching and reflection from Pastor Bryan Wolfmueller of St Paul and Jesus Deaf Lutheran Churches in Austin, TX.
Today's question is about errors in the Bible, and other attributes of the Scriptures.
Links: Support Deaf Missions in central Texas: www.wolfmueller.co/deaf
The bookstore (where almost everything is free): www.wolfmueller.co/books/
To sign up for Pastor Wolfmueller's free weekly email of theological awesomeness called "Wednesday What-Not", visit www.wolfmueller.co/Wednesday. (Every month we give away a free book to a subscriber!)
All the theological awesomeness ends up on the website: www.wolfmueller.co
Funny story, as I was listening to your video, I was walking my dog and retrieving mail. I just got a mailer from a local seventh day Adventist church advertising their seminar called “Jesus on Prophecy”! I grew up in a non-denominational AoG where prophecy was regular, and now a communicant LCMS. Thanks for your words about the inerrancy and infallibilty of the Bible. God Bless
Inspiration, inerrancy, infallibility.
Clarity, sufficiency, efficacy (power).
Awesomeness
Bart Error-man...
Wow!!! It shows 21k subs. That is amazing. Thank you so much for your work and the Sunday drive home. God bless you sir.
Thank God for sending us your wonderful teaching, and hello for the Atlantic District LCMS.
L mll
Everyone would agree God inspired the original writings.
Only a fool builds without maintaining.
Inspiration without preservation is foolish.
God is NOT a fool.
If we do have the preserved inspired word of God, it will be free of error.
Compare all modern versions for truthfulness by comparing Num 14:30 with Heb 3:16 within themselves.
Discard any version which disagrees with itself and use the one that is left.
This eliminates human judgment and preferential treatment.
We should not read and study what we prefer, but what God preserved.
Excellent! Thanks!
I still would not want you as a driving instructor. But I like your messages,.
Tracey Burroughs from South Africa 🇿🇦 watching your episode
No. If there is an error in the Bible, it's the man reading it
Declaration of forgiveness, a distinction for sure
What's the technical difference between an error and a variant?
Is this the place to ask question? As a KJV fan, I really enjoyed your recent video on Bible Translations. It closely matched what Rev. Joshua Sullivan said on his ATP video series. My question is, using the preference of the Textus Receptus, couldn't we make the same argument for preferring the Septuagint over the Masoretic texts? The practical implications of this are two things, that I am aware of: 1) As a historian it gives us a ca. 7500 years instead of a 6000+ years for the age of the earth (or 6000 years of recorded history v/s 4500 years), and 2) something more practical to most Christians, an argument for including some of the "apocryphal" books of the various cannons as "scripture." Thanks for your great teaching videos and your respectful style of answering.
I think those are separate question. But I think the default position should be to prefer the more antique Septuagint to the 9th century Masoretic text. I have yet to see any sound arguments for favouring the Masoretic text besides attempts to hold to Young Earth creationism at all cost.
There was a very superior (albeit non Scholarly) article written from an Orthodox Christian perspective on the issue but I cannot find it at the moment, I will continue to search for it and will post if I manage to locate it.
Brought up with a Calvinist background and later encouraged by my older brother who himself became a Lutheran, I was brought to the Lutheran church (LCA) while at university. OK, according then to the LCMS, did God create the world in six 24 hour days?
Yes
Luther was annoyed, but ACCEPTED, the fact that the moon reflects light from the sun and is not astronomically "a lesser light."
Franz Pieper insisted on geocentrism even in 1925! Yet today even conservative Christians accept helio-centrism without thinking it opposes Scripture.
NO ERRORS!!!!
Is there anything right in the Bible?
Yes, especially the reference to Mohammad as a mad and evil prophet in Proverbs.
Reading an verset of The Bible at an hour of study with The staff of an Anglican group, l see an intresteng fact. But l not remember what capitole was and no Apostol was. Only l remember that was about how must be rebulding thomething g.
And l see that an Apostol of our verset are presented The verset like an preparation of job, of this plan of rebulding. And, I. Imidiatly most, The Succesive Apostole, are presented this fact like an imperative plan, thomething like
The First Apostol ît was "l ghive you The plan
At The seccond Apostol was, that now you must be build because you have The plan, or moment, or time, like în an. Puzzle.
. So only must see were are this
Yes sure there are many errors; sin. But it’s also the word of God. Been thinking about Luther and KJ 1and6 plus the various editions. The Bible itself is such a wonderful highly enlightened topic. I am very fond of the edition that I am currently using but truthfully it should all be cross referenced and back to Jesus anyway. Again even some of the trickier passages are clarified when you fully understand the passages. Reading scripture is such a high minded academic pursuit it’s not designed for the feeble minded so no there assuming there’s not heresies and the like errors in the Bible.
Thing is, I have no idea why the higher criticism guys even bother going to church if they believe their basis for doing so is flawed and full of errors, at the same time, the average Evangelical's concept of "inerrancy" is untenable and was never held by any Christian before modern times, and for a good reason. I am more conservative than, say. Richard Bauckham (who believe the Sermon of Mount was not a sermon given at one time by Jesus but rather a collection of sayings given at different times by Jesus), but I also do not think every single word some dude utters in a speech must be 100% true for the Bible to be infallible (after all, God himself had to correct some bullshit being said in the Bible, like the nonsense uttered by Job's friends).
No, the Bible is God’s inerrant Word, inspired by the Holy Spirit. No errors in the original manuscripts. In translations maybe but that is human error not inspired by the Holy Spirit!
Hi there :) Two non-related questions. Are you a confessional Lutheran? And it is true, is it not, that according to Luther the divine inspiration of the Bible doesn't insure inerrancy - and that Luther himself did not believe the Bible was inerrant?
Rev. Wolfmueller is as confessional a Lutheran as it gets. And Luther absolutely believed in Biblical Inerrancy.
@@diaryofjane22 Thank you for your reply. I appreciate that. I don't agree with you in regard to Luther and adhere to the Barthian understanding that Luther - and on this we are in accord - believed that the Word of God was infallible, but that the Word of God was something different than the actual, written Bible. When it came to the actual, written Bible, Luther had no problems criticizing parts of it, even to the extent of (famously) excluding Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation from the list of canonical books in his own version of the Bible. Clearly, Luther did not think any Bible including these four was inerrant. Which is also to say that he reserved the right to critically assess the Biblical writings, and that he didn't just accept all of it as gospel truth.
@@editiontiger9201 but Luther did not actually exclude James, for example, though he was critical of it at one point, but eventually often referred to it as authoritative in other texts.
Luther states:
"The Holy Spirit has been blamed for not speaking correctly. He speaks like a drunkard or a fool. He so mixes things up and uses wild, queer words and statements. But it is our fault, who have not understood the language nor known the manner of the prophets. For it cannot be otherwise; the Holy Ghost is wise and makes the prophets also wise. A wise man may be able to speak correctly; that holds true without fail."
@@editiontiger9201 besides, James is antilegomena and was even questioned in the early church as being divinely inspired.
Define "inerrancy" please, there is a difference between the evangelical and rest-of-Christendoms definition of the terms.
Bart Erhman is an empty suit.
He has some good points , but he overinflates their importance and mix them with a lot of assumptions and factually incorrect assertions.
I'm number 1!!!!!!!!!!! haha
Pretty pathetic if all you have to contribute is being first to comment.
What does that make me?
Does your husband say that a lot? 😆
I am very pathetic I suppose. 🥰
@@rachelbolejack4989 nevermind you didn't get it