Scripture. What is considered Scripture?

[1Mind1Spirit]

So you believe some scriptures are inerrant. How could it be a false doctrine then? :idunno:



If they are that minute, what is the point of arguing about it on a forum? :idunno:



If he 'said it well' then your main focus is that you are accepted among evangelicals? If you are so interested in being included with evangelicals, why would you pick fights? Why do YOU make it a big deal and contention? The only thing Dr. Wallace says, is that it isn't an issue to chuck you out of the faith and he was influenced by talking to his family and those like Bruce Metzger. IOW, he works a bit closer among these men and sees them as brothers, even if he sees them wrong. If you are so concerned with the inclusion, why come to TOL and start a fight???



Nope, not serious at all. All you are showing here, is that you are not familiar with the Protestant Reformation nor how 'we' collate our book based on inspiration. For instance, there is no mention of God in the Maccabees. Great history, but certainly not inspired for spiritual concerns. It simply informs of what happened with no mention of God's plan or work. Obviously we should read it. Obviously, it is not one of the books God guided men to write. Don't get caught in details, this is just an example to show what's and why's, not get into debate with you. We are completely at odds and disagreement and there is no point, the only thing I want to know are answers to the above and make a mention of your theology vs. mine here. Again, there is no point in arguing, we strongly disagree. I simply want to know why you find it necessary to come to an evangelical board to fight, then quote Wallace saying it isn't a big deal. It just doesn't add up. -Lon

I don't see it as starting a fight.

What I see is provoking thought and pointing more to seeking Christ and God via the Holy Spirit.

He has actually stated such earlier in this thread.

Watch you got against the Holy Spirit, Willis?

 

[2003cobra]

So you believe some scriptures are inerrant. How could it be a false doctrine then? :idunno:

If you want to define inerrancy as saying some of the Bible is inerrant while other parts have minor errors, that will be a position more defensible than the one you have been claiming.

Of course, I was pointing out that the text does not say what the poster wished it would say.

If they are that minute, what is the point of arguing about it on a forum?

I have stated why many times. How could you have missed it?

You still have no idea how to explain Matthew saying all the generations from David to the deportation were 14 when there were actually 18, so you want to just question my motives to take the focus off the fact that Matthew has an error and that disproves your false doctrine of inerrancy.

If he 'said it well' then your main focus is that you are accepted among evangelicals? If you are so interested in being included with evangelicals, why would you pick fights? Why do YOU make it a big deal and contention? The only thing Dr. Wallace says, is that it isn't an issue to chuck you out of the faith and he was influenced by talking to his family and those like Bruce Metzger. IOW, he works a bit closer among these men and sees them as brothers, even if he sees them wrong. If you are so concerned with the inclusion, why come to TOL and start a fight???

It seems you are confused because you are trying to attribute motivations to me that I have not indicated.

I mentioned Wallace because he has credibility among the ones who claim inerrant scriptures and he says making inerrancy a core doctrine is a slippery slope that has led many of his students to have a crisis of faith.

Nope, not serious at all. All you are showing here, is that you are not familiar with the Protestant Reformation nor how 'we' collate our book based on inspiration. For instance, there is no mention of God in the Maccabees. Great history, but certainly not inspired for spiritual concerns. It simply informs of what happened with no mention of God's plan or work. Obviously we should read it. Obviously, it is not one of the books God guided men to write. Don't get caught in details, this is just an example to show what's and why's, not get into debate with you. We are completely at odds and disagreement and there is no point, the only thing I want to know are answers to the above and make a mention of your theology vs. mine here. Again, there is no point in arguing, we strongly disagree. I simply want to know why you find it necessary to come to an evangelical board to fight, then quote Wallace saying it isn't a big deal. It just doesn't add up. -Lon

Is there a mention of God in Esther?

So, your canon is from the 1800s. The 66-book canon was listed nowhere before that.

This implies you believe the Church was wrong until the 1800s. Who had the authority in the 1800s to rewrite the canon to exclude the Maccabees? They were in the canon of the Festal Letter Of Bishop Athanasius in 367 (although Esther wasn’t). They were in the canon of the Council of Cathage in 397. They were in the 1611 KJV. Who has the right to take them out of the Bible just 200 years ago after they had been in the canon for 1500 years?

 

[TestedandTried]

Have you read the passage?

2 Peter 1 First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, 21 because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

It is clearly about prophecy of scripture.

It is clearly about their speaking when moved.

Pretending this is about the entire Bible is inconsistent with the text.

Firstly, a big apology over the wording of the passage...spoke as moved by the Holy Spirit (paraphrase). You are right in that sense...I was wrong; I clearly stated that you were reading in, not so.

However, Scripture itself records that the speaking was written down as commanded by God.
I do not see that there should be an issue of prophecy of Scripture...the entire Bible is referred to as prophecy. There are at least 2 uses of the term prophecy: to declare God's message and to foretell.
I really want to get on with the discussion with Jason over inspired Scripture, not to say I will not respond to you as well.

 

[CherubRam]

Shalom.

Scripture. What is considered Scripture?

Shalom.

Jacob

Our bibles were "Canonized" by the Catholic Church. What does that tell you?

 

[Jacob]

Our bibles were "Canonized" by the Catholic Church. What does that tell you?

I do not believe this. The Catholic Church may claim that this is the case.

 

[Lon]

Spoiler

If you want to define inerrancy as saying some of the Bible is inerrant while other parts have minor errors, that will be a position more defensible than the one you have been claiming.

Of course, I was pointing out that the text does not say what the poster wished it would say.

I have stated why many times. How could you have missed it?

You still have no idea how to explain Matthew saying all the generations from David to the deportation were 14 when there were actually 18, so you want to just question my motives to take the focus off the fact that Matthew has an error and that disproves your false doctrine of inerrancy.


It seems you are confused because you are trying to attribute motivations to me that I have not indicated.

I mentioned Wallace because he has credibility among the ones who claim inerrant scriptures and he says making inerrancy a core doctrine is a slippery slope that has led many of his students to have a crisis of faith.


Is there a mention of God in Esther?

So, your canon is from the 1800s. The 66-book canon was listed nowhere before that.

This implies you believe the Church was wrong until the 1800s. Who had the authority in the 1800s to rewrite the canon to exclude the Maccabees? They were in the canon of the Festal Letter Of Bishop Athanasius in 367 (although Esther wasn’t). They were in the canon of the Council of Cathage in 397. They were in the 1611 KJV. Who has the right to take them out of the Bible just 200 years ago after they had been in the canon for 1500 years?

You are conflating ideas here. The Protestant bible is based on inspiration and inerrancy. Others? Collated and held for different reasons. In the end, it is a disagreement going nowhere because I'm entrenched as are you. One of us, clearly wrong. Both of us 'think' it is the other guy but our devotion shows. Me: Lots of scriptures because I know it and esteem them. You? Obviously your stance has produced a faith that doesn't need them and doesn't esteem them and so, the time spent in them is demonstrated here, as less familiar. There are internal reasons from reading these books over and over again that FULLY convince me they are inspired and thus, inerrant. I don't care what, at all, what your opinion over the matter is. The fruit of our different belief over the matter is shown in thread. I don't want yours. It is lacking as far as my desire. The Bereans were more noble, BECAUSE they esteemed and studied the scriptures. Therein in, lies the difference. There is no point in dragging this out any further. I'm simply describing the 'fruit' that I particularly desire and it is not yours. That's it.

 

[Lon]

I don't see it as starting a fight.

Depends on which side of the discussion you are on, no? You have sympathies for his view.

What I see is provoking thought and pointing more to seeking Christ and God via the Holy Spirit.

:nono: I don't see it that way. The Lord Jesus Christ specifically told the Samaritan that the Jews had the truth. Which? The Scriptures. That is why Jesus said to His disciples, "Do what they say, not as they do." Jesus read from the scriptures as well. "Correcting them" is anti-scriptural. They were/are not meant for that and it is a complete waste of time. I simply 'trust' them. You? Cobra? :nono: You have to analyze them first and waste a LOT of time. The Holy Spirit doesn't inspire that. It is against His and my nature.

He has actually stated such earlier in this thread.

Yeah, but it doesn't answer the question: Why start a fight among evangelicals you KNOW that disagree adamantly with you? It isn't worth the fight because 'fight' is all it will amount to. A4T gave scriptures several times that demands we avoid such controversies. It is time I take obedience to the scripture seriously. For me, they are the words the Lord Jesus Christ 1) used and memorized which about does any other position in as far as we evangelicals are concerned. 2) they are words you cannot live without Matthew 4:4 3) EVEN if they were in error, (they aren't), they are words we MUST live by and undermining them imho, is putting a milestone about necks and a grievous sin, according to the Lord. Better he were cast in the sea, our Lord says. Causing doubt for NO GOOD reason, is imho, a sin. It 'causes' one to stumble. Here Cobra is, saying it is no big deal and that other's faith were shipwrecked and what is he doing? THE VERY THING THAT CAUSED THE OTHER ONES TO STUMBLE. The VERY thing! Is that from God? The Holy Spirit? :nono: There is no love in his actions these past two weeks. Mine? To build up the faith of the very ones he is attacking. Genesis 3:1 That wasn't the Holy Spirit questioning God's Words either. For Cobra, another error, "Don't eat" then "Don't even touch them lest ye die." Point? "Did God REALLY say???" It was the VERY FIRST thing Satan did. The thing that sent the Lord Jesus to the Cross.

Watch you got against the Holy Spirit, Willis?

The "Holy" Spirit? Nothing. Other spirits? :think:

Was questioning 'what God said' good or bad for Adam and Eve? :think:

 

[2003cobra]

Firstly, a big apology over the wording of the passage...spoke as moved by the Holy Spirit (paraphrase). You are right in that sense...I was wrong; I clearly stated that you were reading in, not so.

However, Scripture itself records that the speaking was written down as commanded by God.
I do not see that there should be an issue of prophecy of Scripture...the entire Bible is referred to as prophecy. There are at least 2 uses of the term prophecy: to declare God's message and to foretell.
I really want to get on with the discussion with Jason over inspired Scripture, not to say I will not respond to you as well.

Thanks for the post.

Could you show me in scripture where 2 John is declared to be prophecy? And Philemon?

Would you like for me to post Metzger’s discussion stating that inspiration was never a criterion for canonicity and that the early church fathers considered other noncanonical writers inspired?

 

[2003cobra]

Our bibles were "Canonized" by the Catholic Church. What does that tell you?

Not the 66-book canon. It has only been around a couple of hundred years.

And not the canon of the Church of the East, with its 22 book New Testament.

And not The Ethiopian Church canon, which is larger.

 

[2003cobra]

You are conflating ideas here. The Protestant bible is based on inspiration and inerrancy. Others? Collated and held for different reasons. In the end, it is a disagreement going nowhere because I'm entrenched as are you. One of us, clearly wrong. Both of us 'think' it is the other guy but our devotion shows. Me: Lots of scriptures because I know it and esteem them. You? Obviously your stance has produced a faith that doesn't need them and doesn't esteem them and so, the time spent in them is demonstrated here, as less familiar. There are internal reasons from reading these books over and over again that FULLY convince me they are inspired and thus, inerrant. I don't care what, at all, what your opinion over the matter is. The fruit of our different belief over the matter is shown in thread. I don't want yours. It is lacking as far as my desire. The Bereans were more noble, BECAUSE they esteemed and studied the scriptures. Therein in, lies the difference. There is no point in dragging this out any further. I'm simply describing the 'fruit' that I particularly desire and it is not yours. That's it.

I do esteem the scriptures. I do study them. I study them honestly and read what they actually say rather than what I wish they would say.

I just don’t ignore the obvious facts and pretend they are inerrant. I also don’t pretend they claim to be inerrant.

I do agree that you are entrenched.

Which Protestant Bible are you referring to? The 66-book canon from the 1800s?

Have you noticed that no one even tries to explain the error in Matthew’s genealogy, claiming all the generations from David to the deportation were 14 when the OT lists 18? That is an obvious error, and it disproves your false doctrine of inerrancy — a doctrine never presented in scripture.

 

[2003cobra]

Lon writes;
Yeah, but it doesn't answer the question: Why start a fight among evangelicals you KNOW that disagree adamantly with you?

I used to be one of inerrancy evangelicals.

I am hoping evangelicals are sufficiently dedicated to the Lord that they can hear the truth.

As in the quote of Daniel Wallace that I shared, making inerrancy a core doctrine is a slippery slope that turns immature people from the faith. Jesus said people who do that would be better off with millstones around their neck. Those teaching the false doctrine of inerrancy set up immature Christians for a crisis of faith.

 

[Lon]

Have you noticed that no one even tries to explain the error in Matthew’s genealogy, claiming all the generations from David to the deportation were 14 when the OT lists 18? That is an obvious error, and it disproves your false doctrine of inerrancy — a doctrine never presented in scripture.

Right, we "don't care" what you think. We care about what we have ALREADY determined it means, NOT what you believe it means. I'm a well-educated man. I also read and reread these scriptures over and over. They are to be 'lived by' not 'scrutinized' as YOU are doing. Nobody cares. The question then, again, is 'why come to an evangelical board where you KNOW we adamantly disagree with you, just to start a fight? I know why Satan questioned Eve, to make her stumble and fall, and lose faith in God's instructions. You? I've no idea why you started this fight.

Lon writes;
Yeah, but it doesn't answer the question: Why start a fight among evangelicals you KNOW that disagree adamantly with you?

I used to be one of inerrancy evangelicals.

I am hoping evangelicals are sufficiently dedicated to the Lord that they can hear the truth.

As in the quote of Daniel Wallace that I shared, making inerrancy a core doctrine is a slippery slope that turns immature people from the faith. Jesus said people who do that would be better off with millstones around their neck. Those teaching the false doctrine of inerrancy set up immature Christians for a crisis of faith.

You've given a couple of reasons that amount to "I want you to fall, so that when it comes time to fall, you won't fall." :dizzy: You are doing the very thing that you say caused others to fall. The EXACT thing that MADE them fall. Well, I believe in God's Sovereignty and 1 John 2:19 as giving clarity over such, but I do know too, that 'woe' is to the man that causes 'one of these little one's to stumble.' I don't really see your 'noble' crusade or noble motive here. -Lon

 

[2003cobra]

Right, we "don't care" what you think. We care about what we have ALREADY determined it means, NOT what you believe it means. I'm a well-educated man. I also read and reread these scriptures over and over. They are to be 'lived by' not 'scrutinized' as YOU are doing. Nobody cares. The question then, again, is 'why come to an evangelical board where you KNOW we adamantly disagree with you, just to start a fight? I know why Satan questioned Eve, to make her stumble and fall, and lose faith in God's instructions. You? I've no idea why you started this fight.

You've given a couple of reasons that amount to "I want you to fall, so that when it comes time to fall, you won't fall." :dizzy: You are doing the very thing that you say caused others to fall. The EXACT thing that MADE them fall. Well, I believe in God's Sovereignty and 1 John 2:19 as giving clarity over such, but I do know too, that 'woe' is to the man that causes 'one of these little one's to stumble.' I don't really see your 'noble' crusade or noble motive here. -Lon

See the part I emphasized?

It essentially says “Don’t confuse me with the facts. I know what I have chosen to believe. I will never change my mind no matter what new information appears. I am like the leadership in Jerusalem when Jesus appeared. I will ignore the truth and condemn those brining it.”

You have chosen to ignore the errors in scripture and to pretend the scriptures say something else. You claim to esteem the scriptures, but denying what the scriptures actually say reveals that to be inaccurate.

Look at the passage you referred to but did not quote in context:
Children, it is the last hour! As you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. From this we know that it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they did not belong to us; for if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But by going out they made it plain that none of them belongs to us.

Was it the last hour when John wrote this letter? If so, why are we now 1900 years later and the Lord has not yet returned?

The Apostles expected the Lord return at any minute, during their lifetime. They were Lord will return, and honest people will recognize that John was wrong in thinking he was in the last hour.

In the same way, you are wrong to pretend the Bible is inerrant. The fact that you won’t even try to explain the error in Matthew’s genealogy is overwhelming evidence of your error.

 

[Lon]

See the part I emphasized?

Yeah, and since you are a bit dense, let me spell it out for you: "Determined." Not willy nilly, it came from reading scripture and clearly discerning what God is saying. I didn't write Matthew 4:4. Your 'gotcha' is frankly amateur and a waste of time. Satan did it in the Garden too. Genesis 3:1, you know, the same question you keep asking evangelicals? "Did God REALLY say???" There ya go. I'm unmoving so don't try and one-up me. 1) You aren't intelligent enough 2) It is just causing a fight, nothing noble. You are a detestable hack on TOL at the moment. Keep it up, but it is really kind of 'satanic' looking to me. NOTHING good will come of you or your more than questionable debate tactics. None of us are impressed. 3) I'm not interested.

Spoiler

It essentially says “Don’t confuse me with the facts. I know what I have chosen to believe. I will never change my mind no matter what new information appears. I am like the leadership in Jerusalem when Jesus appeared. I will ignore the truth and condemn those brining it.”

You have chosen to ignore the errors in scripture and to pretend the scriptures say something else. You claim to esteem the scriptures, but denying what the scriptures actually say reveals that to be inaccurate.

Look at the passage you referred to but did not quote in context:
Children, it is the last hour! As you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. From this we know that it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they did not belong to us; for if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But by going out they made it plain that none of them belongs to us.

Was it the last hour when John wrote this letter? If so, why are we now 1900 years later and the Lord has not yet returned?

The Apostles expected the Lord return at any minute, during their lifetime. They were Lord will return, and honest people will recognize that John was wrong in thinking he was in the last hour.

In the same way, you are wrong to pretend the Bible is inerrant. The fact that you won’t even try to explain the error in Matthew’s genealogy is overwhelming evidence of your error.

Nope. lain: Not falling for your drivel and contentious nature. Didn't read a lick after the first half of the first line.
You are inept and worth less than my time. The ONLY thing I'm doing at this point is questioning YOUR motives. They look incredibly less than honorable or Christian to me. Satan did the EXACT same thing in the Garden Genesis 3:1 "Did God REALLY say?" Not interested. If Eve would have shown him the door and outed, the same way I'm doing, of the conversation, it'd be all over. Look what YOU did immediately after I echoed the words of Satan. You simply went back to repeating "Did God REALLY say?" instead of taking my concern to heart. I do NOT see you as serving the body AND PURPOSELY causing trying to question if "God really said." Nobody who is reading their bible is going to have a problem. It is the young or the one who doesn't read it enough that I worry about. You are a blight. Again, there is NO good reason for what you are attempting. You are causing disruption as well as aiming for undermining God's Word and people's faith. I believe it is a sin. I'm not on your board wherever you errantists live. If I 'were' it would be to encourage that God knows what He is doing and does so efficiently. It wouldn't be trying to take away from your faith, but build it up. Contrast that with your illaudable attack here. YOU are the guest on OUR board. Try to act like a guest instead of the brute you've become. Nobody wants you in their house when you presume upon us. It isn't appreciated. It is just a fight and you on our doorstep.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Depends on which side of the discussion you are on, no? You have sympathies for his view.

Truth is truth.

I used to be on your side of the discussion but I've learned better.

Why do you prefer lies?

:nono: I don't see it that way. The Lord Jesus Christ specifically told the Samaritan that the Jews had the truth. Which? The Scriptures. That is why Jesus said to His disciples, "Do what they say, not as they do." Jesus read from the scriptures as well. "Correcting them" is anti-scriptural. They were/are not meant for that and it is a complete waste of time. I simply 'trust' them. You? Cobra? :nono: You have to analyze them first and waste a LOT of time. The Holy Spirit doesn't inspire that. It is against His and my nature.

It is the Holy Spirit's nature to speak truth and let the chips fall where they will.

Yeah, but it doesn't answer the question: Why start a fight among evangelicals you KNOW that disagree adamantly with you? It isn't worth the fight because 'fight' is all it will amount to. A4T gave scriptures several times that demands we avoid such controversies. It is time I take obedience to the scripture seriously. For me, they are the words the Lord Jesus Christ 1) used and memorized which about does any other position in as far as we evangelicals are concerned. 2) they are words you cannot live without Matthew 4:4 3) EVEN if they were in error, (they aren't), they are words we MUST live by and undermining them imho, is putting a milestone about necks and a grievous sin, according to the Lord. Better he were cast in the sea, our Lord says. Causing doubt for NO GOOD reason, is imho, a sin. It 'causes' one to stumble. Here Cobra is, saying it is no big deal and that other's faith were shipwrecked and what is he doing? THE VERY THING THAT CAUSED THE OTHER ONES TO STUMBLE. The VERY thing! Is that from God? The Holy Spirit? :nono: There is no love in his actions these past two weeks. Mine? To build up the faith of the very ones he is attacking. Genesis 3:1 That wasn't the Holy Spirit questioning God's Words either. For Cobra, another error, "Don't eat" then "Don't even touch them lest ye die." Point? "Did God REALLY say???" It was the VERY FIRST thing Satan did. The thing that sent the Lord Jesus to the Cross.

Yeah but.....?

Now that sounds like Satan. :think:

The "Holy" Spirit? Nothing. Other spirits? :think:

I didn't ask you about other spirits.

Why didn't you believe the Holy Spirit inspired Solomon when he penned this....?

King James Bible
For wisdom is better than rubies; and all the things that may be desired are not to be compared to it.

Or this...?

Job 28:15
"Pure gold cannot be given in exchange for it, Nor can silver be weighed as its price.

Was questioning 'what God said' good or bad for Adam and Eve? :think:

Are you really that desperate?

 

[Lon]

Truth is truth.

I used to be on your side of the discussion but I've learned better.

You know better.

Why do you prefer lies?

See, that's why you only see it as 'discussion.' I've corrected you politely enough times, for you to know, you generally are the one who needs to adjust his theology, not the other way around. Try not to over-assert your position as often as you do.

It is the Holy Spirit's nature to speak truth and let the chips fall where they will.

Incorrect: Mark 9:42 "Woe" to the one that does this. I'm not the one who said it. Isaiah 5:20, is someone who is undiscerning.
Again, "Woe" to him.

Yeah but.....?

Now that sounds like Satan. :think:

The problem is yours. I'm questioning YOUR (and His) words, not God's. That is the difference. You and he ARE questioning whether these are God's words or not. See the HUGE GLARING difference? :think: Again, I'm pleased to correct you. AT LEAST you listen where he does not and will not. He isn't here for that.

I didn't ask you about other spirits.

Truth trumps 'wrong.' You don't HAVE to entertain wrong once you have the Truth. If the Spirit lives in you, HE will guide you into ALL truth. John 16:13 Romans 8:9-11

Why didn't you believe the Holy Spirit inspired Solomon when he penned this....?

King James Bible
For wisdom is better than rubies; and all the things that may be desired are not to be compared to it.

Or this...?

Job 28:15
"Pure gold cannot be given in exchange for it, Nor can silver be weighed as its price.

:doh: NOW, inadvertently, you are arguing for 'my' side. If scripture isn't perfect, then neither is this quote.

"I" am the one that believes this is the inspired word of God! Think, 1Mind! Wisdom is discerned, not learned. If the Spirit is in you, Romans 8:9, THEN He guides you in truth and wisdom and with scripture. You want to correct scripture? You'd be turning off the voice of the Spirit at that point and begin relying on your own thoughts at that point. You and I 'can' make mistakes. God CANNOT.

Are you really that desperate?

Yeah, actually. John 15:5 The ONLY thing I have is God and His Word. Matthew 4:4 I CANNOT live with them/Him. Titus 1:2 Has to be correct or it is all for not and you and I are dead in our sins.

 

[glorydaz]

I do esteem the scriptures. I do study them. I study them honestly and read what they actually say rather than what I wish they would say.

Read what they actually say.....while claiming they are filled with contradictions.


In other words, you have NO SOURCE of TRUTH, and are left with your own "truth" whatever you decide that may be.linger:

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Truth trumps 'wrong.' You don't HAVE to entertain wrong once you have the Truth. If the Spirit lives in you, HE will guide you into ALL truth. John 16:13 Romans 8:9-11

:thumb:

You'd be turning off the voice of the Spirit at that point and begin relying on your own thoughts at that point.

Nope.

Isaiah 65:24

“And it shall come to pass, that before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear.”

You and I 'can' make mistakes. God CANNOT.

Yup.

 

[2003cobra]

Lon writes;
since you are a bit dense,

Lon, I think your insults reflect the fact that I am speaking truth to you and you cannot refute the errors that I have raised against your false doctrine of inerrancy. I have other errors to discuss but you won’t address the last one I mentioned at all.

If Matthew made the error of claiming that all the generations from David to the deportation are 14, while the OT lists 18, how can you deny that is an error?

God never promised us a perfect book, and the good news of the gospel did not require perfect communications. When Peter preached at Pentecost and many came to salvation, Peter was inspired but not inerrant. God has always used imperfect people and the scriptures detail their imperfections. Why would you think perfection is a requirement for the documents?

 

[2003cobra]

Read what they actually say.....while claiming they are filled with contradictions.

I never claimed that. Does your scripture condemn telling lies?