User:Opercularis

All you ever need to know: http://atheism.about.com/od/aboutjesus/a/holyforeskin.htm

Errancy links

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/index.htm

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/bibleanalysis.html#inerrant

http://members.aol.com/ckbloomfld/index.html

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html

http://biblical.justdrew.net/

http://members.aol.com/bbu84/biblicalstupidity/links.htm

http://lists.topica.com/lists/ii_errancy/read

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleged_inconsistency_in_the_Bible#Amongst_the_Gospels

http://www.freethoughtdebater.com/tenbiblecontradictions.htm

http://web2.airmail.net/capella/aguide/errors.htm

http://www.aznewage.com/errors.htm

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/david_zaitzeff/asa_arch.html

http://atheism.about.com/od/errorsinthebibl/index_a.htm

http://www.skepticreport.com/creationism/acalltoheresy.htm

http://www.inerrancyexposed.com/index.html

So how come inerrant?

From: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html

Of the various methods I've seen to "explain" these:

1. "That is to be taken metaphorically" In other words, what is written is not what is meant. I find this entertaining, especially for those who decide what ISN'T to be taken as other than the absolute WORD OF GOD--which just happens to agree with the particular thing they happen to want...

2. "There was more there than...." This is used when one verse says "there was a" and another says "there was b," so they decide there was "a" AND "b"--which is said nowhere. This makes them happy, since it doesn't say there WASN'T "a+b." But it doesn't say there was "a+b+litle green martians." This is often the same crowd that insists theirs is the ONLY possible interpretation (i.e. only "a") and the only way. I find it entertaining they they don't mind adding to verses.

3. "It has to be understood in context" I find this amusing because it comes from the same crowd that likes to push likewise extracted verses that support their particular view. Often it is just one of the verses in the contradictory set is suppose to be taken as THE TRUTH when if you add more to it it suddenly becomes "out of context." How many of you have goten JUST John 3:16 (taken out of all context) thrown up at you?

4. "there was just a copying/writing error" This is sometimes called a "transcription error," as in where one number was meant and an incorrect one was copied down. Or that what was "quoted" wasn't really what was said, but just what the author thought was said when he thought it was said. And that's right--I'm not disagreeing with events, I'm disagreeing with what is WRITTEN. Which is apparently agreed that it is incorrect. This is an amusing misdirection to the problem that the bible itself is wrong.

5. "That is a miracle." Naturally. That is why it is stated as fact.

6. "God works in mysterious ways" A useful dodge when the speaker doesn't understand the conflict between what the bible SAYS and what they WISH it said.