Believing in strict, factual Biblical inerrancy is not Biblical

[Yahweh Nissi]

Right, this is a debate between myself, Seraph and Bizzlbin Imperitor - with myself proposing this motion and them opposing. May we be like Christ, full of grace and truth as we debate.

The initial structure of my argument is to be as follows:

If two parallel accounts of events in the Bible can be shown to contradict, then one of them is in error. The Bible is therefore shown to not be inerrant if this can be shown. I also not that inerrancy is not a claim the Bible makes for itself and therefore not one we should make if the evidence is to the contrary. I contend that as the Bible does not claim inerrancy for itself, it is not required for the proposition to show beond all possible doubt that contradictions occur, but simply a balance of evidence. To attempt to contort the accounts beond the realms of common sense is to try and force a man-made interpretation of scripture over what is being clearly stated by the Bible about itself. (I in no way wish to imply that the arguments put forth by the opposition will do this).

I will start be showing what I believe to be clear contradictions between the accounts of the calling of the apostles by Jesus, the deniles of Peter and the suicide of Judas.

If it can be show by the opposition that contradictions between these, and other passages the propositon may wish to bring up latter, do not exist, then I will gladly admit that I am wrong and thank them for their correction.

God bless,
YN.

[Yahweh Nissi]

Right - I first note that the often quoted text on the authority of the Bible, states that; "16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2Tim 3:16-17) [NIV]. I fully and joyfully afirm this and gladly accept the Bible as the full and final authority over all areas of my life and that of all creation. However, no mention is made here, notably I think, of factually inerrancy or anything pertaining to it.

The calling of the appostles

(All quotes NIV)

John 1

35The next day John was there again with two of his disciples. 36When he saw Jesus passing by, he said, "Look, the Lamb of God!"
37When the two disciples heard him say this, they followed Jesus. 38Turning around, Jesus saw them following and asked, "What do you want?"
They said, "Rabbi" (which means Teacher), "where are you staying?"
39"Come," he replied, "and you will see."
So they went and saw where he was staying, and spent that day with him. It was about the tenth hour.
40Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, was one of the two who heard what John had said and who had followed Jesus. 41The first thing Andrew did was to find his brother Simon and tell him, "We have found the Messiah" (that is, the Christ). 42And he brought him to Jesus.
Jesus looked at him and said, "You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas" (which, when translated, is Peter).
43The next day Jesus decided to leave for Galilee. Finding Philip, he said to him, "Follow me."
44Philip, like Andrew and Peter, was from the town of Bethsaida. 45Philip found Nathanael and told him, "We have found the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote--Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph."
46"Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?" Nathanael asked.
"Come and see," said Philip.
47When Jesus saw Nathanael approaching, he said of him, "Here is a true Israelite, in whom there is nothing false."
48"How do you know me?" Nathanael asked.
Jesus answered, "I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you."
49Then Nathanael declared, "Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel."
50Jesus said, "You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You shall see greater things than that." 51He then added, "I tell you the truth, you shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man."



Matthew 4

17From that time on Jesus began to preach, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near."
18As Jesus was walking beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon called Peter and his brother Andrew. They were casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen. 19"Come, follow me," Jesus said, "and I will make you fishers of men." 20At once they left their nets and followed him.
21Going on from there, he saw two other brothers, James son of Zebedee and his brother John. They were in a boat with their father Zebedee, preparing their nets. Jesus called them, 22and immediately they left the boat and their father and followed him.


Mark 1

14After John was put in prison, Jesus went into Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God. 15"The time has come," he said. "The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!"
16As Jesus walked beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and his brother Andrew casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen. 17"Come, follow me," Jesus said, "and I will make you fishers of men." 18At once they left their nets and followed him.
19When he had gone a little farther, he saw James son of Zebedee and his brother John in a boat, preparing their nets. 20Without delay he called them, and they left their father Zebedee in the boat with the hired men and followed him.


Luke 5

1One day as Jesus was standing by the Lake of Gennesaret, with the people crowding around him and listening to the word of God, 2he saw at the water's edge two boats, left there by the fishermen, who were washing their nets. 3He got into one of the boats, the one belonging to Simon, and asked him to put out a little from shore. Then he sat down and taught the people from the boat.
4When he had finished speaking, he said to Simon, "Put out into deep water, and let down the nets for a catch."
5Simon answered, "Master, we've worked hard all night and haven't caught anything. But because you say so, I will let down the nets."
6When they had done so, they caught such a large number of fish that their nets began to break. 7So they signaled their partners in the other boat to come and help them, and they came and filled both boats so full that they began to sink.
8When Simon Peter saw this, he fell at Jesus' knees and said, "Go away from me, Lord; I am a sinful man!" 9For he and all his companions were astonished at the catch of fish they had taken, 10and so were James and John, the sons of Zebedee, Simon's partners.
11Then Jesus said to Simon, "Don't be afraid; from now on you will catch men." So they pulled their boats up on shore, left everything and followed him.


Here we see the four accounts of the calling of the first apostles. The contradictions are plain to see - especially between the account of John and that of the synoptics. In John, Jesus first meets Andrew and another, unamed, disciple - who are disciples of John the Baptist. Andrew then immediately goes to get his brother Simon and brings him to Jesus, who names him Peter. The other accounts are obviously different. Mark states that is was after John the Baptist was put in prison that Jesus first met Andrew and Simon, whilst they were fishing - and called them from their boat. Now, one could say (indeed, one must say to make a case for inerrancy) that both accounts happened as stated. But to do so is obtuse. The account of Mark clearly presents this as their first meeting. Jesus just sees them in the boat and calls them, and they immediately leave their boat and nets and follow him. In John, it is explicitly said that the initial two disciples to meet Jeus (one of whom was Andrew) "followed Jesus" (v37) - not that they headed back to Galilee and carried on fishing, before being called later. And they knew then that he was the Messiah (v41) - do you really suggest that, knowing this, they just thought "oh, that's nice" and went back to fishing, having to be called again later? Also note that, in John, after this account of Jesus' first meeting with Andrew, Peter and others, he went to the wedding in Cana (where he changed water into wine) with his disciples (2:2). He went to Capernaum with his disciples (2:12). He went to Jerusalem for the Passover with his disciples (2:17). He then went to the Judean countryside with his disciples (3:22) to baptize people - at the same time as John was baptizing; before he had been put into prison - 22After this, Jesus and his disciples went out into the Judean countryside, where he spent some time with them, and baptized. 23Now John also was baptizing at Aenon near Salim, because there was plenty of water, and people were constantly coming to be baptized. 24(This was before John was put in prison.) (3:22-24) [NIV]. Yet Mark clearly states that the calling of Peter and Andrew was after John was imprisioned. This is the first account given of the calling of disciples in Mark (and Matthew and Luke) - who were these with Jesus in John's account? These accounts are clearly contradictory. Only an a priori assumption of inerrancy could cause one to twist things to say otherwise - but one should not bring a priori assumptions to the Bible, one should see what is the clear meaning of the text and accept it - in this case that the Bible is not inerrant.

Perhaps an even stronger argument, however, comes from comparing the account of Matthew and Mark with that of Luke - as these can in no way be presented as accounts of totally different events that both happened, but at different times. They are accounts of the same basic event - yet they contradict. In Matthew and Mark, Jesus is walking along the shores of the sea of Galilee, sees Simon/Peter and Andrew in their boat, in the water, casting their nets, and he calls them - and they leave their nets "at once" and follow him. In Luke's account, Jesus sees the boats at the shore, with Simon and Andrew washing their nets. He gets into the boat, teaches from near the shore, then they go out deeper, net a huge catch, Simon calls Jesus Lord and they come to the shore and leace their nets "at once". Also note that in Matthew and Mark, after calling Simon and Andrew they go "on from there", "a little further" and then see James and John in their boat and call them from there. In Luke, they were right there to see the catch of fish. These accounts contradict. They are quite clearly not accounts of different events - both are presented as the calling of Simon and Andrew, they were not called twice. And in both, they left their nets and followed Jesus, they did not leave him, go back to do some more fishing and be called be him again later. Jesus was not keen on people starting to follow him, stopping and doing something else again for a while, and then following him again - 18When Jesus saw the crowd around him, he gave orders to cross to the other side of the lake. 19Then a teacher of the law came to him and said, "Teacher, I will follow you wherever you go."
20Jesus replied, "Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head."
21Another disciple said to him, "Lord, first let me go and bury my father."
22But Jesus told him, "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead." (Mat 8:18-22) [NIV]


Hmmm, that is probably enough to be going on with for now. I will let you reply to this, and we can then consider the other passages later.

God bless,
YN.

[Serapha]

Opening statement

to the debate, "Believing in strict, factual Biblical inerrancy is not Biblical"


It is always a privilege to have the opportunity to defend the Word of God, and I would like to take this opportunity to express my appreciation to Yahweh Nassi for bringing this subject to the debate forum. I also want to thank Bizzlebin Imperatoris for his willingness to step forward without hesitation to defend the inerrancy of The Holy Bible.





Certainly, The Holy Bible is the foundation of truth for Christian teachings concerning the plan of salvation. But there is more, and Joseph Free and Howard Vos record an accurate statement concerning the verbal inspiration of The Holy Bible in their book, "Archaeology and Bible History," Revised, 1992, Zondervan.





"Bible believers hold that this record of God's revelation is not only vital for all humankind but is accurate in all respects. We also hold that the Bible writers exercised their own personality, used their own vocabulary, and drew on their own memories, intuitions, and judgments and that at the same time they were prevented from making errors and were so guided by God that they expressed exactly what God wished to make known. This guidance was not so vague that it assured merely the general idea or concept that God wished to convey, but rather it extended even to the choice of words when it would be essential to convey his message. The foregoing description sets forth my view of "verbal inspiration," namely that God guided even to the choice of words when necessary.""



To address the opening statement, I would say that there are no passages in the Bible that cannot be reconciled to be one total truth. God is not the god of confusion, and the Word of God is specific in that it is stated in Psalm 12, verses 6 and 7,



"The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."





Foremost, I agree with the word of Christ, who as the Eternal Word, knows.





John 10:35b

... and the scripture cannot be broken;







~serapha~

(2020 characters)

[Ainesis]

Right - I first note that the often quoted text on the authority of the Bible, states that; "16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2Tim 3:16-17) [NIV]. I fully and joyfully afirm this and gladly accept the Bible as the full and final authority over all areas of my life and that of all creation. However, no mention is made here, notably I think, of factually inerrancy or anything pertaining to it.Hi Yahweh Nissi,

Can I ask a stupid question? If all Scripture is God-breathed and the Bible is not inerrant, wouldn't one of the following have to be true:

God makes mistakes, OR
The work we refer to as Scripture is not the Scripture God-inspired
I know that is a little off-topic, so if you want to PM me a response that is fine. I don't want to derail your post, but I am curious. Thanks!

[Serapha]

In John 1:28, the location of the text is identified, and that location is the Wadi El-Kharrar in Jordon, approximately two miles east of the Jordon River. Jesus is twenty-five miles east of Jerusalem along with John the Baptist and two of John's followers, Andrew and the unnamed disciple. When John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the "Lamb of God", Andrew and the unnamed disciple leave the area where John the Baptist is, and they are following after Christ, eventually to "where he was staying". Very recent archaeological findings verify that there was a small first-century settlement in the Wadi El-Kharrar with what is identified as a small community of disciples of John the Baptist.

And the first thing that Andrew did was to find his brother and to bring him to Jesus where Simon and Jesus have their first conversation. Then Phillip is introduced as well as Nathaniel.

After Jesus' baptism, there is a time of forty days in the wilderness. Then, assuming that the unnamed disciple of John is not Phillip, Nathaniel, Andrew or Peter, Jesus and the five disciples leave the Wadi El-Kharrar. The exact timeframe cannot be established for the journey, but to travel to Cana for the wedding of John 2 requires them to travel past the Galilee and over the mountains to ancient Cana, a trip of many days' journey, perhaps even weeks. There, Jesus and the "presumed" five followers are present when Jesus performs His first miracle. And after the wedding feast of probably several days duration, Jesus and his unnamed disciples, his unnamed brothers, and his mother go "down" to Capernaum, which, in actuality, is again, over the mountains and "down" to Capernaum where they stayed for a few days before Jesus left for Jerusalem.

Now, nowhere in that text does it say that Jesus called anyone to be His disciple. To be a disciple in the first century only meant that one would study under the instruction of a particular rabbi. Two of these "disciples" of Jesus were seemingly studying under the teachings of John the Baptist until such time; they left to follow Jesus by their own volition, and not by the calling of Christ. Everything before John 3:25 takes place before the arrest of John the Baptist and we pick up the chronology in Mark 1:14, where it is stated, "After John was put in prison...." (Reference Josephus concerning John's imprisonment at Machaerus)

Therefore, we may know that Jesus knew several of the men by their decision to be His disciples for many weeks or even many months before Jesus called them to become His disciples.

In Matthew 4:12, after the temptation of Christ and after John the Baptist had been placed in prison, Jesus left Nazareth to live in Capernaum. That passage does fit in with the previous chronologies. After arriving in Capernaum to begin His Galilean ministry, Jesus teaches regularly in the synagogue in Capernaum, and the chronology may be picked up with the Luke passage.


Luke 5

1One day as Jesus was standing by the Lake of Gennesaret, with the people crowding around him and listening to the word of God, 2he saw at the water's edge two boats, left there by the fishermen, who were washing their nets. 3He got into one of the boats, the one belonging to Simon, and asked him to put out a little from shore. Then he sat down and taught the people from the boat. 4When he had finished speaking, he said to Simon, "Put out into deep water, and let down the nets for a catch."


There are several points to note in this passage. The first is the term, "people crowding around him," which indicates that there has been a time lapse since Jesus' arrival in the area of Galilee for he is known already for his teachings. Second, the identify of the area of Galilee is certain, for fishing habits from the first century until the 1950's were unchanged. They are not in Capernaum where the Scriptures identify that Jesus regularly was teaching, but they are in the area of Tabgha which is the area where fishermen from Capernaum anchored from the night's work to wash and clean their nets and where the nets were hung to dry. Third, when Jesus entered the boat and put out "a little from shore" and where Jesus sat down and "taught the people from the boat," is an area identified as "Sower's Cove," an area found between Capernaum and Tabgha. Fourth, Jesus tells the fishermen to "put out into deep water, and let down the nets for a catch". This identifies the type of fishing with seine nets, which are the types of nets which were washed and hung to dry at Tabgha where the natural springs could be used to wash nets.


The point is this...

"One day..." after Jesus was baptized, after the temptation, after the first miracle in Cana, after the synagogue issue in Nazareth, after moving to Capernaum, after the imprisonment of John the Baptist....

then... Jesus began to call His disciples.


And, my opponent makes these statements...



"The account of Mark clearly presents this as their first meeting."



"Mark states that is was after John the Baptist was put in prison that Jesus first met Andrew and Simon, whilst they were fishing"








Where, specifically, does that text cite that this was the first occasion that Jesus met Andrew and Simon?


I would like to address this passage in Luke 5



11Then Jesus said to Simon, "Don't be afraid; from now on you will catch men." So they pulled their boats up on shore, left everything and followed him.



And my opponent's statement:


Jesus was not keen on people starting to follow him, stopping and doing something else again for a while, and then following him again

It is clear from other passages in the Bible, that the "left everything" of this passage is for that day only, for certainly there were other times when the disciples were fishing which are recorded in the Bible.



I don't see any irreconcilable differences in the passages. Perhaps your misunderstanding is related to the term "disciple" in relation to the "disciples" choosing to follow Jesus versus Jesus choosing each person by HIS calling.



(5002 characters less direct quote)

[Yahweh Nissi]

In John 1:28, the location of the text is identified, and that location is the Wadi El-Kharrar in Jordon, approximately two miles east of the Jordon River. Jesus is twenty-five miles east of Jerusalem along with John the Baptist and two of John's followers, Andrew and the unnamed disciple. When John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the "Lamb of God", Andrew and the unnamed disciple leave the area where John the Baptist is, and they are following after Christ, eventually to "where he was staying". Very recent archaeological findings verify that there was a small first-century settlement in the Wadi El-Kharrar with what is identified as a small community of disciples of John the Baptist.

And the first thing that Andrew did was to find his brother and to bring him to Jesus where Simon and Jesus have their first conversation. Then Phillip is introduced as well as Nathaniel.

After Jesus' baptism, there is a time of forty days in the wilderness. Then, assuming that the unnamed disciple of John is not Phillip, Nathaniel, Andrew or Peter, Jesus and the five disciples leave the Wadi El-Kharrar. The exact timeframe cannot be established for the journey, but to travel to Cana for the wedding of John 2 requires them to travel past the Galilee and over the mountains to ancient Cana, a trip of many days' journey, perhaps even weeks. There, Jesus and the "presumed" five followers are present when Jesus performs His first miracle. And after the wedding feast of probably several days duration, Jesus and his unnamed disciples, his unnamed brothers, and his mother go "down" to Capernaum, which, in actuality, is again, over the mountains and "down" to Capernaum where they stayed for a few days before Jesus left for Jerusalem.

Now, nowhere in that text does it say that Jesus called anyone to be His disciple. To be a disciple in the first century only meant that one would study under the instruction of a particular rabbi. Two of these "disciples" of Jesus were seemingly studying under the teachings of John the Baptist until such time; they left to follow Jesus by their own volition, and not by the calling of Christ. Everything before John 3:25 takes place before the arrest of John the Baptist and we pick up the chronology in Mark 1:14, where it is stated, "After John was put in prison...." (Reference Josephus concerning John's imprisonment at Machaerus)

Therefore, we may know that Jesus knew several of the men by their decision to be His disciples for many weeks or even many months before Jesus called them to become His disciples.Fair enough - I take your point about the meaning of the word disciples, and concede that the mention of 'disciples' in John does not suggest contradiction with the synoptic accounts.

In Matthew 4:12, after the temptation of Christ and after John the Baptist had been placed in prison, Jesus left Nazareth to live in Capernaum. That passage does fit in with the previous chronologies. After arriving in Capernaum to begin His Galilean ministry, Jesus teaches regularly in the synagogue in Capernaum, and the chronology may be picked up with the Luke passage.

There are several points to note in this passage. The first is the term, "people crowding around him," which indicates that there has been a time lapse since Jesus' arrival in the area of Galilee for he is known already for his teachings. Second, the identify of the area of Galilee is certain, for fishing habits from the first century until the 1950's were unchanged. They are not in Capernaum where the Scriptures identify that Jesus regularly was teaching, but they are in the area of Tabgha which is the area where fishermen from Capernaum anchored from the night's work to wash and clean their nets and where the nets were hung to dry. Third, when Jesus entered the boat and put out "a little from shore" and where Jesus sat down and "taught the people from the boat," is an area identified as "Sower's Cove," an area found between Capernaum and Tabgha. Fourth, Jesus tells the fishermen to "put out into deep water, and let down the nets for a catch". This identifies the type of fishing with seine nets, which are the types of nets which were washed and hung to dry at Tabgha where the natural springs could be used to wash nets.

The point is this...

"One day..." after Jesus was baptized, after the temptation, after the first miracle in Cana, after the synagogue issue in Nazareth, after moving to Capernaum, after the imprisonment of John the Baptist....

then... Jesus began to call His disciples.

And, my opponent makes these statements...

"The account of Mark clearly presents this as their first meeting."

"Mark states that is was after John the Baptist was put in prison that Jesus first met Andrew and Simon, whilst they were fishing"Where, specifically, does that text cite that this was the first occasion that Jesus met Andrew and Simon?It does not say this specifically, I did not say it did - however, looking a the passage without any preconceptions, the impression that one gets is that Jesus is calling people he has not seen before, not people who already knew him and had acknowledged him as Messiah. Sure, this is hardly incontrovertible evidence on its own, but there are many such passages which are not conclusive by themselves, but together add weight to the argument until to suggest that inerrancy is the case is, IMO, simply repugnant to the plain word of scripture.

Two other examples come from the passage in John I have already quoted, and Matthew 16:13-18;

13When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?"
14They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
15"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"
16Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."
17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

In this passage, after Simon declares Jesus as the Messiah, Jesus then gives him the name Peter - the rock. He is never called Peter before this in Matthew (the narrative refers to him as Peter, but that is because it was written after all this had happened and everyone knew him as Peter - he is never referred to as Peter in dialog). Yet in John, Jesus names him Peter at that first meeting, with John the Baptist. But the account in Matthew very much gives the impression that this is the first time he has been called it - it is a dramatic announcement after Peter confesses Jesus as Messiah, it certainly does not sound like this has been his name for a while. Another, much stronger point comes from the confession of the Messiah itself. The whole tone of the passage suggests that Simon/Peter is confessing this for the first time - the fact that Jesus is asking shows this, he would not need to ask if they had long known he was the Messiah, and he then calls Simon Peter, the rock upon which he will build his church, after Simon has realised that he is Messiah. But in John, Andrew realises Jesus is Messiah straight away, and immediately tells Simon. And this raised the most significant point - for in Matthew, Jesus says “this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven”, but in John it was revealed to him by his brother Andrew - a clear contradiction.

And my argument will not simply rely on these - there is at least one case where there seems to me to be an absolute, definite logical contradiction (which I shall come to in my third major section) and others where, although there is not an absolute logical contradiction, one cannot support inerrancy without obviously twisting scripture, like Peter’s denials and, indeed, the calling of the first disciples in Mark and Matthew, compared with Luke - which I do not believe you have fully addressed. This combination of gestalt and some very specific passages make what I believe to be a conclusive case against inerrancy.

I would like to address this passage in Luke 5

11Then Jesus said to Simon, "Don't be afraid; from now on you will catch men." So they pulled their boats up on shore, left everything and followed him.And my opponent's statement:

Jesus was not keen on people starting to follow him, stopping and doing something else again for a while, and then following him againIt is clear from other passages in the Bible, that the "left everything" of this passage is for that day only, for certainly there were other times when the disciples were fishing which are recorded in the Bible.

I don't see any irreconcilable differences in the passages. Perhaps your misunderstanding is related to the term "disciple" in relation to the "disciples" choosing to follow Jesus versus Jesus choosing each person by HIS calling.As I have said, I take your point about the different meanings of ‘disciples’. But I do not believe you have properly addressed my points about the accounts of Mark and Matthew compared with Luke. You cannot present them as different accounts of the same event without running into contradictions - which I mentioned in my previous post. But neither can they be accounts of different events. You said in regards to the passage in John that there is a difference between people following Jesus of their own accord, and him calling them - but him calling them is what happens in both these cases. I am not saying that the disciples never fished again, but they were only once called to follow Jesus, at once leaving behind all things of this world. After leaving to follow Jesus, they might have fished again, but they would have been with Jesus. In the Matthew/Mark account, Jesus is walking by himself alongside the Sea of Galilee and comes across them and calls them. In Luke, he was teaching by the side of the lake and “saw at the water's edge two boats, left there by the fishermen, who were washing their nets.” He is by the waters edge and then notices the boats, it does not sound like these were people he was already with. But the biggest thing is just the shear once-and-for-all finality of the call on each occasion:-

Mat/Mark: As Jesus walked beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and his brother Andrew casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen. "Come, follow me," Jesus said, "and I will make you fishers of men." At once they left their nets and followed him.

Luke: Then Jesus said to Simon, "Don't be afraid; from now on you will catch men." So they pulled their boats up on shore, left everything and followed him.

These are so clearly one-off callings - there is such a sense of this being a momentous occasion, they are now Jesus’ disciples, they have now left everything to follow him. To suggest that they were different occasions that both occurred at different times, that first one happened and then the other is clearly contrary to what is plainly being said IMO.

God bless,
YN.
(1000 words, less direct quotes - I do not have a character count function, but if I stick to a thousand word limmit, that should be about right)

[Bizzlebin Imperatoris]

Opening-Biblical Inerrancy





(Note: I will use NIV unless specified because no one seems to be able to read the Vulgate.)



In opening, please consider the following scriptures.




Matthew 21:42 Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the Scriptures
Mark 12:10 Haven't you read this scripture

Mark 14:49 But the Scriptures must be fulfilled."

Luke 4:21 and he began by saying to them, "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your

hearing."

John 13:18 But this is to fulfill the scripture

John 19:28 Later, knowing that all was now completed, and so that the Scripture would be fulfilled

John 19:36 These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled

Acts 1:16 "Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago…



The early church considered them solid, 100% true.



Acts 17:2 As his custom was, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures



Surely Paul was not stupid or confused when he used the scriptures on a regular basis to reason with someone. Logic and the Bible go together. True Christianity cannot be spread using lies. Therefore, scripture must be true. If you do not understand scriptures, then pray to God.



Luke 24:45 Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures.



However, only true believers of the resurrection were able to completely understand...



John 2:22 After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the Scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken



As can be seen, the Bible itself claims that it is true.



John 10:35 -and the Scripture cannot be broken-



Therefore, it would be silly to debate the fact that the Bible claims itself true. In light of this, I challenge you to find inconsistencies, for that is the only way to prove the Bible is untrue. Innocent until proven guilty, I challenge you before heaven and earth to prove guilty this work of God.



(MSG Translation) Joshua 24:14-15 "So now: Fear GOD. Worship him in total commitment. Get rid of the gods your ancestors worshiped on the far side of The River (the Euphrates) and in Egypt. You, worship GOD.
"If you decide that it's a bad thing to worship GOD, then choose a god you'd rather serve--and do it today. Choose one of the gods your ancestors worshiped from the country beyond The River, or one of the gods of the Amorites, on whose land you're now living. As for me and my family, we'll worship GOD."

By the way, I am sorry if this comes out slightly funny. I am using Microsoft products :P

[Serapha]

At this time, we are in agreement that the John passages are prior to the synoptic gospels; thus, this rebuttal is in response to your statement concerning the calling of the apostles in the synoptic Gospels.
I am not going to quote you at this point, but simply, I am going to give you a lesson in Greek fishing terminology and in the fishing practices on the Galilee during the first century. It should be noted that the fishing practices on the Sea of Galilee did not change from the first century until about 1950 CE. The only differences in fishing on the Galilee pertain to the materials used in making nets. In the first century, the nets were made of linen, and later replace by cotton, and in the 1950's, the cotton nets were replaced with invisible nylon which changed the fishing industry completely.

Therefore, first, I want to address the terminology for "nets" in the synoptic Gospels.


1) amfiblhstron Used twice... Matthew 4:18 and Mark 1:16 Paraphrased from Thayer's Lexicon, this is "anything thrown around one to impede his motion, as chains, a garment; spec. a net for fishing," and it is specifically identified as a cast fishing net. It is translated specifically as "to cast to and fro now to one side now to the other" It needs to be stressed here that cast fishing was individual.

"The cast-net, called kela in Hebrew, is circular, measures from six to eight meters in diameter and has lead sinkers attached to its edges. It was used by a fisherman working alone who would arrange it on his right arm and, standing in shallow water or in a boat, throw it forcefully out onto the water where it would land like a parachute and sink to the bottom. A fisherman using this net had to approach his prey silently and without casting a shadow." (1)


http://www.urantiabook.org/archive/j_arc/
See thumbnail #1

2) diktua Used in Matthew 4:20, 21; Mark 1:18, 19; Luke 5:2, 4, 5 6. While Thayer describes this term as being a generic term for "net", Mendel Nun identifies more specifically that thediktua is trammel fishing. Specifically because Mark 1:18 is identified as "nets" which trammel fishing normally required five nets in the middle layer between two outer nets. Cast fishing is a singular net. (2)


3) saghnhwhich is used in Matthew 13:47 and which is seine fishing. Thayer describes it as a "drag-net". Mendel Nun describes it accurately. (3)


See thumbnail #2


"In the early mornings the crews arrange the heavy net on the "table" of the stern of the boat and sail off to a selected fishing area. The boat touches shore and half the crew jump out and take the first rope. The boat sails out with the trailing line until it reaches the end of the line. Then the boat turns and sails parallel to the shore until the net is "spread." The boat then turns back to the shore trailing the second set of ropes. On reaching the shore, the remaining half of the crew alights and takes the end of the other towing line.

The whole team now harness themselves to the ropes and pull the net to the shore. The sinkers have dragged the net to the bottom, the floats have lifted the head-rope, and the net now forms a rectangular wall that advances to the shore with its lower edge at the bottom of the lake. The two groups of fishermen climb from the water up the beach, moving also toward each other."


Now, let's move to the biblical text.



Matthew 4:18-22

18 And Jesus, walking by the sea of Galilee, saw two brethren, Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net ( amfiblhstron, cast fishing)into the sea: for they were fishers.
19 And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.
20 And they straightway left their nets (diktua, trammel fishing), and followed him.
21 And going on from thence, he saw other two brethren, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in a ship with Zebedee their father, mending their nets (diktua) ; and he called them.
22 And they immediately left the ship and their father, and followed him



Mark 1: 16-20

16 Now as he walked by the sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and Andrew his brother casting a net (amfiblhstron, cast fishing) into the sea: for they were fishers.
17 And Jesus said unto them, Come ye after me, and I will make you to become fishers of men.
18 And straightway they forsook their nets (diktua, trammel fishing) , and followed him.
19 And when he had gone a little further thence, he saw James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, who also were in the ship mending their nets (diktua, trammel fishing) .
20 And straightway he called them: and they left their father Zebedee in the ship with the hired servants, and went after him.



Luke 5:1-11

1 And it came to pass, that, as the people pressed upon him to hear the word of God, he stood by the lake of Gennesaret,
2 And saw two ships standing by the lake: but the fishermen were gone out of them, and were washing their nets (diktua, trammel fishing).
3 And he entered into one of the ships, which was Simon's, and prayed him that he would thrust out a little from the land. And he sat down, and taught the people out of the ship.
4 Now when he had left speaking, he said unto Simon, Launch out into the deep, and let down your nets (diktua, trammel fishing) for a draught.
5 And Simon answering said unto him, Master, we have toiled all the night (trammel fishing), and have taken nothing: nevertheless at thy word I will let down the net (diktua, trammel fishing) .
6 And when they had this done, they inclosed a great multitude of fishes: and their net (diktua, trammel fishing) brake.
7 And they beckoned unto their partners, which were in the other ship (seine fishing would not include a second ship), that they should come and help them. And they came, and filled both the ships, so that they began to sink.
8 When Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus' knees, saying, Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord.
9 For he was astonished, and all that were with him, at the draught of the fishes which they had taken:
10 And so was also James, and John, the sons of Zebedee, which were partners with Simon. And Jesus said unto Simon, Fear not; from henceforth thou shalt catch men.
11 And when they had brought their ships to land, they forsook all, and followed him.


There are three points that need to be established.

1) The Matthew passage and the Mark passage use the identical terminology, changing the type of fishing net during the course of the text. This is a strong argument supporting the concept that the gospel of Matthew was written after the gospel of Mark. It is a strong argument for Mark to have obtained his information for his gospel from the fisherman Peter, who would have known and used the correct terminology for the different nets. Matthew, who was not a fisherman, may not have known the difference in fishing nets, but makes the very same identity of nets, in the very same context, first for the casting of nets, and second for the trammel net.

2) The Luke passage has no indication of anyone using cast nets, but only to the references of trammel nets, but has the added details of the episode of trammel fishing.

3) If I may quote Mendel Nun concerning the use of two boats, "Because of the limited fishing grounds at Heptapegon, two crews were working in partnership that night. In order to avoid disputes over fishing rights in this choice area of the lake, fishing crews would work together and share the catch. This was exactly how fishing was organized there until the 1960s when musht fishing in that area ceased to be commercially viable." (2)



I want to note that the only way that the text of Matthew and Mark can change from casting nets to trammel nets is for there to have been a usage of trammels nets. With the usages of the term "nets" it is apparent that James and John with Peter and Andrew had been fishing with trammel nets as Peter tells the Lord. ("We have toiled all night.") Yet, we have them cleaning the trammel nets and also cast fishing with casting nets after a fruitless night of fishing on the Galilee. The difference I see is in the time of the day's fishing, and not a conflict in the type of fishing.





In all three gospels:



1) The time is after a night's fishing.

2) All of the fishermen are, at some point, cleaning their trammel nets

3) All of the fishermen eventually leave their trammel nets to follow Jesus.



However, Luke adds the specifics:



1) Both boats are put into the water

2) The fishermen, James and John with Peter and Andrew) are on the water.

3) The Lord provides the catch, which was a miracle because of the time of day.

4) The Lord identified that from that time forward, they shall be fishers of men. That is not in conflict with the Matthew and Mark passages of "I will make you fishers of men" because, after the miracle of the catch, henceforth, they did become fishers of men.



Using the correct Greek terms, the Greek tenses of the verbs, and the knowledge of fishing practices, there is no conflict in the passages. Something happened in Matthew and Mark between the usage of "casting nets" and "trammel nets" and, what happened is the episode further identified in Luke.



And just for the record, fishing practices were so established on the Sea of Galilee, that I can tell you that the time of the calling of the apostles in Matthew, Mark and Luke is in the spring. The time of the passage in John, of the baptism of Jesus and the first miracle in Cana is before the "spring" Passover, and the time for fishing with trammel nets in the northern Galilee is in the winter or spring while the fish gather there for the warmth of the natural springs.



(1) Cast-Net, by Mendel Nun, © Copyright 1987 - 2004 Jerusalem,

(2) Let Down Your Nets, by Mendel Nun, © Copyright 1987 - 2004 Jerusalem Perspective.

(3) "The Sea of Galilee and its Fishermen in the New Testament," by Mendel Nun, Kibbutz Ein Gev, Israel

(4921 characters less direct quote)

[Yahweh Nissi]

Therefore, first, I want to address the terminology for "nets" in the synoptic Gospels.

1) amfiblhstron Used twice... Matthew 4:18 and Mark 1:16 Paraphrased from Thayer's Lexicon, this is "anything thrown around one to impede his motion, as chains, a garment; spec. a net for fishing," and it is specifically identified as a cast fishing net. It is translated specifically as "to cast to and fro now to one side now to the other" It needs to be stressed here that cast fishing was individual.

"The cast-net, called kela in Hebrew, is circular, measures from six to eight meters in diameter and has lead sinkers attached to its edges. It was used by a fisherman working alone who would arrange it on his right arm and, standing in shallow water or in a boat, throw it forcefully out onto the water where it would land like a parachute and sink to the bottom. A fisherman using this net had to approach his prey silently and without casting a shadow." (1)

2) diktua Used in Matthew 4:20, 21; Mark 1:18, 19; Luke 5:2, 4, 5 6. While Thayer describes this term as being a generic term for "net", Mendel Nun identifies more specifically that thediktua is trammel fishing. Specifically because Mark 1:18 is identified as "nets" which trammel fishing normally required five nets in the middle layer between two outer nets. Cast fishing is a singular net. (2)

3) saghnhwhich is used in Matthew 13:47 and which is seine fishing. Thayer describes it as a "drag-net". Mendel Nun describes it accurately. (3)



"In the early mornings the crews arrange the heavy net on the "table" of the stern of the boat and sail off to a selected fishing area. The boat touches shore and half the crew jump out and take the first rope. The boat sails out with the trailing line until it reaches the end of the line. Then the boat turns and sails parallel to the shore until the net is "spread." The boat then turns back to the shore trailing the second set of ropes. On reaching the shore, the remaining half of the crew alights and takes the end of the other towing line.

The whole team now harness themselves to the ropes and pull the net to the shore. The sinkers have dragged the net to the bottom, the floats have lifted the head-rope, and the net now forms a rectangular wall that advances to the shore with its lower edge at the bottom of the lake. The two groups of fishermen climb from the water up the beach, moving also toward each other."

My thanks for this highly interesting and informative information.


Now, let's move to the biblical text.

Matthew 4:18-22

18 And Jesus, walking by the sea of Galilee, saw two brethren, Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net ( amfiblhstron, cast fishing)into the sea: for they were fishers.
19 And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.
20 And they straightway left their nets (diktua, trammel fishing), and followed him.
21 And going on from thence, he saw other two brethren, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in a ship with Zebedee their father, mending their nets (diktua) ; and he called them.
22 And they immediately left the ship and their father, and followed him

Mark 1: 16-20

16 Now as he walked by the sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and Andrew his brother casting a net (amfiblhstron, cast fishing) into the sea: for they were fishers.
17 And Jesus said unto them, Come ye after me, and I will make you to become fishers of men.
18 And straightway they forsook their nets (diktua, trammel fishing) , and followed him.
19 And when he had gone a little further thence, he saw James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, who also were in the ship mending their nets (diktua, trammel fishing) .
20 And straightway he called them: and they left their father Zebedee in the ship with the hired servants, and went after him.

Luke 5:1-11

1 And it came to pass, that, as the people pressed upon him to hear the word of God, he stood by the lake of Gennesaret,
2 And saw two ships standing by the lake: but the fishermen were gone out of them, and were washing their nets (diktua, trammel fishing).
3 And he entered into one of the ships, which was Simon's, and prayed him that he would thrust out a little from the land. And he sat down, and taught the people out of the ship.
4 Now when he had left speaking, he said unto Simon, Launch out into the deep, and let down your nets (diktua, trammel fishing) for a draught.
5 And Simon answering said unto him, Master, we have toiled all the night (trammel fishing), and have taken nothing: nevertheless at thy word I will let down the net (diktua, trammel fishing) .
6 And when they had this done, they inclosed a great multitude of fishes: and their net (diktua, trammel fishing) brake.
7 And they beckoned unto their partners, which were in the other ship (seine fishing would not include a second ship), that they should come and help them. And they came, and filled both the ships, so that they began to sink.
8 When Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus' knees, saying, Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord.
9 For he was astonished, and all that were with him, at the draught of the fishes which they had taken:
10 And so was also James, and John, the sons of Zebedee, which were partners with Simon. And Jesus said unto Simon, Fear not; from henceforth thou shalt catch men.
11 And when they had brought their ships to land, they forsook all, and followed him.

There are three points that need to be established.

1) The Matthew passage and the Mark passage use the identical terminology, changing the type of fishing net during the course of the text. This is a strong argument supporting the concept that the gospel of Matthew was written after the gospel of Mark. It is a strong argument for Mark to have obtained his information for his gospel from the fisherman Peter, who would have known and used the correct terminology for the different nets. Matthew, who was not a fisherman, may not have known the difference in fishing nets, but makes the very same identity of nets, in the very same context, first for the casting of nets, and second for the trammel net.

2) The Luke passage has no indication of anyone using cast nets, but only to the references of trammel nets, but has the added details of the episode of trammel fishing.

3) If I may quote Mendel Nun concerning the use of two boats, "Because of the limited fishing grounds at Heptapegon, two crews were working in partnership that night. In order to avoid disputes over fishing rights in this choice area of the lake, fishing crews would work together and share the catch. This was exactly how fishing was organized there until the 1960s when musht fishing in that area ceased to be commercially viable." (2)

I want to note that the only way that the text of Matthew and Mark can change from casting nets to trammel nets is for there to have been a usage of trammels nets. With the usages of the term "nets" it is apparent that James and John with Peter and Andrew had been fishing with trammel nets as Peter tells the Lord. ("We have toiled all night.") Yet, we have them cleaning the trammel nets and also cast fishing with casting nets after a fruitless night of fishing on the Galilee. The difference I see is in the time of the day's fishing, and not a conflict in the type of fishing.

In all three gospels:

1) The time is after a night's fishing.

2) All of the fishermen are, at some point, cleaning their trammel nets

3) All of the fishermen eventually leave their trammel nets to follow Jesus.

However, Luke adds the specifics:

1) Both boats are put into the water

2) The fishermen, James and John with Peter and Andrew) are on the water.

3) The Lord provides the catch, which was a miracle because of the time of day.

4) The Lord identified that from that time forward, they shall be fishers of men. That is not in conflict with the Matthew and Mark passages of "I will make you fishers of men" because, after the miracle of the catch, henceforth, they did become fishers of men.

Using the correct Greek terms, the Greek tenses of the verbs, and the knowledge of fishing practices, there is no conflict in the passages. Something happened in Matthew and Mark between the usage of "casting nets" and "trammel nets" and, what happened is the episode further identified in Luke.

And just for the record, fishing practices were so established on the Sea of Galilee, that I can tell you that the time of the calling of the apostles in Matthew, Mark and Luke is in the spring. The time of the passage in John, of the baptism of Jesus and the first miracle in Cana is before the "spring" Passover, and the time for fishing with trammel nets in the northern Galilee is in the winter or spring while the fish gather there for the warmth of the natural springs.So - you are saying that Mark and Matthew record that Jesus saw them cast fishing, then later called them whilst they were trammel fishing and they left these trammel nets and followed Him - with Luke picking things up after they had been cast fishing and giving details of the trammel fishing?

I first note that your statement that "All of the fishermen eventually leave their trammel nets to follow Jesus." (emphasis mine) does not seem to be in accordance with the text - for it says that after Jesus called them; "straightway they forsook their nets" (emphasis mine), or "at once" in the NIV. However, one could say that Mat and Mark record Jesus seing them cast fishing, leave out all that Luke discribes, and then come back in with Jesus calling. However, a contradiction is still there, because in Mat and Mark Jesus calls Peter and Andrew, who "straightway", "at once" leave their trammel nets and follow Him. Then, "going on from thence", "when he had gone a little further thence" he then saw James and John, called them - and they "immediately left the ship and their father, and followed him". Yet in Luke, they were partners fishing together - when Peter and Andrew got the huge catch with Jesus they beckoned to their partners who came and helped them and filled their boat with fish. And Jesus called them then, and they went to shore, forsook everything and followed Him.

I am afraid this still seems to me to contradict.

God bless,
YN.

(certainly less than 5000 characters, less direct quotes)

[Yahweh Nissi]

My appologies for my patchiness in responding, I am currently on a Jews for Jesus mission in Manchester and will be for the next two weeks - I will try to get to an internet cafe as often as possible, and I should be able to have a long session tomorrow and post the next major point in my argument.

I would greatly appreciate both of your prayers for this mission - that God would send His spirit on Manchester so people's hearts would be softened and ready to recieve the Gospel and that many would be saved, particularly the Jews, to whom the Gospel was first sent.
By the way Biz - I do understand the scriptures, I use them to reason with people (see the 'A metaphorical gospel?' thread in the Liberal Theology forum, where I am of course arguing against this view) and will be on this mission. I consider them "God breathed, and useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." - just not inerrant on minor factual details, for reasons some of which have been posted, and the rest of which will come out in the course of this debate (the strongest ones have not yet been posted).

God bless,
YN.

[Yahweh Nissi]

Peter's denials

(All quotes NIV, all emphases mine)

Mat 26

69Now Peter was sitting out in the courtyard, and a servant girl came to him. "You also were with Jesus of Galilee," she said.
70But he denied it before them all. "I don't know what you're talking about," he said.
71Then he went out to the gateway, where another girl saw him and said to the people there, "This fellow was with Jesus of Nazareth."
72He denied it again, with an oath: "I don't know the man!"
73After a little while, those standing there went up to Peter and said, "Surely you are one of them, for your accent gives you away."
74Then he began to call down curses on himself and he swore to them, "I don't know the man!"

Mark 14

66While Peter was below in the courtyard, one of the servant girls of the high priest came by. 67When she saw Peter warming himself, she looked closely at him.
"You also were with that Nazarene, Jesus," she said.
68But he denied it. "I don't know or understand what you're talking about," he said, and went out into the entryway.
69When the servant girl saw him there, she said again to those standing around, "This fellow is one of them." 70Again he denied it.
After a little while, those standing near said to Peter, "Surely you are one of them, for you are a Galilean."

In both of these passages, the first denial it to a servant girl. However, in Mat, the second denial is to a different person; "another girl saw him". Whilst in Mark, it is the same girl who accuses him a second time; "the servant girl", "she said again".

Luke 22

54Then seizing him, they led him away and took him into the house of the high priest. Peter followed at a distance. 55But when they had kindled a fire in the middle of the courtyard and had sat down together, Peter sat down with them. 56A servant girl saw him seated there in the firelight. She looked closely at him and said, "This man was with him."
57But he denied it. "Woman, I don't know him," he said.
58A little later someone else saw him and said, "You also are one of them."
"Man, I am not!" Peter replied.
59About an hour later another asserted, "Certainly this fellow was with him, for he is a Galilean."
60Peter replied, "Man, I don't know what you're talking about!" Just as he was speaking, the rooster crowed.

In both Mat and Mark, the second accuser is a woman, although they contradict over the identitiy of that woman; "another girl", "the servant girl". Whilst in Luke, the second accuser is a man; "Man, I am not!"

John 18

The other disciple, who was known to the high priest, came back, spoke to the girl on duty there and brought Peter in.
17"You are not one of his disciples, are you?" the girl at the door asked Peter.
He replied, "I am not."
18It was cold, and the servants and officials stood around a fire they had made to keep warm. Peter also was standing with them, warming himself...
25As Simon Peter stood warming himself, he was asked, "You are not one of his disciples, are you?"
He denied it, saying, "I am not."
26One of the high priest's servants, a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, challenged him, "Didn't I see you with him in the olive grove?" 27Again Peter denied it, and at that moment a rooster began to crow.

Now, in Mat and Mark, it had been a group of people that accused Peter the third time; "those standing there", "he swore to them". Whilst in Luke it is one person; "Man, I don't know what you're talking about!", and even more clearly one person in John; "One of the high priest's servants".

Also, in John the first accusation and denial occured "at the door", whilst in the other accounts, the first occurs in the coutyard - at a fire in Luke (which matches the second denial in John).

Many contradictions are clearly present. (Even more obvious ones occur if one takes for definate the refenced to the cock crowing a second time in Mark, but these passages are disputed). Now, some seek to get around this by saying Peter must have denied more than three times - but this is an sburd assertion. Jesus was very specific - "Before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times." Why on earth would Jesus specify three if He knew Peter was going to deny Him more times. He could have just said "you will deny me" - but He specified the number, and it was three. Also, all four accounts take pains to state that the cock crowed straight after the third denial; "Immediately a rooster crowed.", "Immediately the rooster crowed.", "Just as he was speaking, the rooster crowed.", "Again Peter denied it, and at that moment a rooster began to crow." - i.e. that as soon as Jesus' prophocy, that Peter would deny Him three times, had been fulfilled, the cock crowed. Indeed, as none of the passages leave any space for another denial after the last one, the contradiction between the accounts of the final denial are an absolute, rock-solid, contradiction.

God bless,
YN. (~1000 words).

[Serapha]

Yahweh Nissi, I am posting two replies with a total count of less than 5000; however because of the special features, the system transmits it with a much higher character count.

~serapha~

Matthew 4:18-22 is in blue
Mark 1: 16-20 is in green
Luke 5:1-11 is in orange





18 And Jesus, walking by the sea of Galilee

16 Now as he walked by the sea of Galilee

1 And it came to pass, that, as the people pressed upon him to hear the word of God, he stood by the lake of Gennesaret,



2 And saw two ships standing by the lake: but the fishermen were gone out of them, and were washing their nets (diktua, trammel fishing).







http://www.jesuswalk.com/images/galilee-boat.jpg







(The text does not state that it was Peter, Andrew, James, and John who were cleaning the nets, but just the fact that the nets were being washed. It was common for fishing boats of the first century to hold 12 men in one boat... see the



http://www.jesuswalk.com/lessons/5_1-11.htm





, saw two brethren, Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net ( amfiblhstron, cast fishing)into the sea: for they were fishers.

, he saw Simon and Andrew his brother casting a net (amfiblhstron, cast fishing) into the sea: for they were fishers.




3 And he entered into one of the ships, which was Simon's, and prayed him that he would thrust out a little from the land. And he sat down, and taught the people out of the ship.
4 Now when he had left speaking, he said unto Simon, Launch out into the deep, and let down your nets (diktua, trammel fishing) for a draught.
5 And Simon answering said unto him, Master, we have toiled all the night (trammel fishing), and have taken nothing: nevertheless at thy word I will let down the net (diktua, trammel fishing) .
6 And when they had this done, they inclosed a great multitude of fishes: and their net (diktua, trammel fishing) brake.
7 And they beckoned unto their partners (Those in the boat belonging to James and John), which were in the other ship (seine fishing would not include a second ship), that they should come and help them. And they came, and filled both the ships, so that they began to sink.
8 When Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus' knees, saying, Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord.
9 For he was astonished, and all that were with him, at the draught of the fishes which they had taken:




19 And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.


17 And Jesus said unto them, Come ye after me, and I will make you to become fishers of men



10 And so was also James, and John, the sons of Zebedee, which were partners with Simon. And Jesus said unto Simon, Fear not; from henceforth thou shalt catch men.
11 And when they had brought their ships to land, they forsook all, and followed him.


20 And they (Simon and Andrew) straightway left their nets (diktua, , and followed him. )trammel fishing)


18 And straightway they forsook their nets (diktua, trammel fishing) , and followed him.



21 And going on from thence, he saw other two brethren, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in a ship with Zebedee their father, mending their nets (diktua) ; and he called them.



19 And when he had gone a little further thence, he saw James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, who also were in the ship mending their nets (diktua, trammel fishing) .



22 And they immediately left the ship and their father, and followed him



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~





Now, I am going to do a paraphrase of the three texts that should clarify your thinking.





One day as Jesus was walking along the shores of the Galilee, the crowds were pressing Him to hear the Word of God. Jesus saw two boats anchored near the shore, but the fishing boats were emptied of workers. There must have been over twenty fishermen on the shores from those two boats. Some were washing and cleaning the nets from the previous night's work, but two of them, Andrew and Peter whom Jesus had known for many months, were cast fishing along the shores of the Galilee. Jesus walked out into the water and entered the fishing boat that belonged to Peter, and He asked Peter to cast off and move the boat into deeper water that He might teach to the people on the shore. It took more than one person to maneuver the boat, so Peter took several of the fishermen who were cleaning the nets to help him maneuver the boat as Jesus had requested.



Jesus sat down in the boat, and He taught the people. When He had finished speaking, He asked Peter to launch the fishing boat into the deep water that they might catch some fish. Peter explained that they had fished all night and caught nothing, but in faith, he said he would go into the deep waters and at Jesus' command, he would drop the nets into the deep Peter took the fishing boat back to the shore and collected the fishermen who where already weary from the night's work, and they brought the nets they had been washing and cleaning. James and John launched their boat also along with their crew of fishermen including their father to join Peter and Andrew's boat for they were partners in the fishing industry and they had fished together from the days of their youth in Bethsaida where they had lived before their sojourn in Capernaum.



And when Peter's crew of men dropped their nets into the Sea, immediately they saw that the nets were filled with fish. As they began to pull in the nets, Peter saw that the catch was too much for their ship, and it would capsize their boat, so he called to his partners, James and John, to help them with the catch. Peter recognized the miracle that Jesus had provided for him, and he bowed before Jesus and declared his sinful nature. Jesus talked to Peter and told him not to be afraid, that in the future, he would no longer be a fisherman but a fisher of men.



Peter brought his ship, cargo and crew to the shore and they began to remove the fish from the nets so the nets may be washed yet again for the next use. Jesus told Peter and Andrew to leave their nets and follow him, and immediately they left their nets to follow Jesus. Jesus went to the second fishing boat which was further along the shore of the Galilee, and seeing James and John cleaning the nets from the catch, He called to them also, and he tells them to leave their nets and follow him, and immediately James and John left their nets to follow Jesus.

[Serapha]

Now, I would like to a moment to address the statement concerning giving Peter the name of "Cephas" in the Gospel of John.









John 1:42

And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.





John 1:42 (Novum Testamentum Graece Interlinear)

He led him to - Jesus. Looking at him - Jesus

hgagen auton proV ton ihsoun. embleyaV autw o ihsouV



said, Thou art Simon the son of John, thou shalt be called

eipen, su ei simwn o uioV iwannou: su klhqhsh



Cephas (which is translated Peter).

khfaV {o ermhneuetai petroV}.





I would like to reference Robertson's on that passage....

Thou shalt be called Cephas (su klhqhsh Khpaß). Apparently before Simon spoke. We do not know whether Jesus had seen Simon before or not, but he at once gives him a nickname that will characterize him some day, though not yet, when he makes the noble confession (Matthew 16:17 (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=Mt+16:17)), and Jesus will say, "Thou art Peter." Here the future passive indicative of kalew is only prophecy. The Aramaic Chpaß (rock) is only applied to Simon in John except by Paul (1 Corinthians 1:12 (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=1Co+1:12); Galatians 1:18 (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=Ga+1:18), etc.). But the Greek Petroß is used by all. In the ancient Greek petra was used for the massive ledge of rock like Stone Mountain while petroß was a detached fragment of the ledge, though itself large. This distinction may exist in Matthew 16:17 (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=Mt+16:17), except that Jesus probably used Aramaic which would not have such a distinction.



And in Matthew 16:17







Matthew 16:13-18

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.



With a focus on this statement...



18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.








Matthew 16:18

kagw de soi legw oti su ei petroV, kai epi tauth th petra oikodomhsw mou thn ekklhsian, kai pulai adou ou katiscusousin authV.







The Greek meaning of "Petros" (rock) is different from the Aramaic meaning for "Cephas" (a stone) . For a fulfillment of the prophecy of John, the passage in Matthew must be taken in the Aramaic text of "Cephas" or the prophecy is not fulfilled. The teaching of Catholicism to imply Peter as the "rock" of the church would not fulfill the prophecy of John 1:42, meaning a piece (a stone) of the rock face.



It was not coincidence that Jesus had taken His disciples to Caesarea Philippi for this discourse. The rockface at Caesarea Philippi reflected the worship to Caesar, to the Greek gods and particularly to the god Pan, where a grotto for worship was present during the time of Christ. The rockface at Caesarea Philippi included niches cut out of the rockface with inscriptions to identify the rock idols that were displayed for public worship. Peter is called a piece of the "rockface" of the church of Christ, of which the gates of hell could not prevail. The gates of hell were known at the time of Christ to be at Caesarea Philippi. When the water level of the tributary within the cave of the rockface was lowered, mythology taught that the gates of hell were opened and that demons walked upon the face of the earth.



Again, it was no coincidence that Jesus took His disciples to Caesarea Philippi for the question and profession of who He was, for the foundation of the church was Christ with Peter as a piece of the rock, as a part of the total rockface (the church) and that the gates of hell would not prevail against the church of Christ.



~serapha~

(4995 less direct quote)

[Bizzlebin Imperatoris]

Praise the Lord I can access CF again! Here is my post finally! I am on the road for another 6 days or so, but I will be on when I can. If you want me to be more detailed, let me know. I am one for conciseness :)

Peter's denials



(All quotes NIV, all emphases mine)



Mat 26



69Now Peter was sitting out in the courtyard, and a servant girl came to him. "You also were with Jesus of Galilee," she said.

70But he denied it before them all. "I don't know what you're talking about," he said.

71Then he went out to the gateway, where another girl saw him and said to the people there, "This fellow was with Jesus of Nazareth."

72He denied it again, with an oath: "I don't know the man!"

73After a little while, those standing there went up to Peter and said, "Surely you are one of them, for your accent gives you away."

74Then he began to call down curses on himself and he swore to them, "I don't know the man!"



Mark 14



66While Peter was below in the courtyard, one of the servant girls of the high priest came by. 67When she saw Peter warming himself, she looked closely at him.

"You also were with that Nazarene, Jesus," she said.

68But he denied it. "I don't know or understand what you're talking about," he said, and went out into the entryway.

69When the servant girl saw him there, she said again to those standing around, "This fellow is one of them." 70Again he denied it.

After a little while, those standing near said to Peter, "Surely you are one of them, for you are a Galilean."



In both of these passages, the first denial it to a servant girl. However, in Mat, the second denial is to a different person; "another girl saw him". Whilst in Mark, it is the same girl who accuses him a second time; "the servant girl", "she said again".



You must understand the process of these accusations. They were in no way neat or formal. Servant girl A accuses him the first time yes, but the second time, it is B that notices him. Nonetheless, A re-accuses Peter.





Luke 22



54Then seizing him, they led him away and took him into the house of the high priest. Peter followed at a distance. 55But when they had kindled a fire in the middle of the courtyard and had sat down together, Peter sat down with them. 56A servant girl saw him seated there in the firelight. She looked closely at him and said, "This man was with him."

57But he denied it. "Woman, I don't know him," he said.

58A little later someone else saw him and said, "You also are one of them."

"Man, I am not!" Peter replied.

59About an hour later another asserted, "Certainly this fellow was with him, for he is a Galilean."

60Peter replied, "Man, I don't know what you're talking about!" Just as he was speaking, the rooster crowed.



In both Mat and Mark, the second accuser is a woman, although they contradict over the identitiy of that woman; "another girl", "the servant girl". Whilst in Luke, the second accuser is a man; "Man, I am not!"



It was not uncommon to call a servant just a person, but as I proposed above, the man no doubt accused Peter also, but not solely. People were shouting wildly, these were some of the same fanatics who asked to crucify Jesus.





John 18



The other disciple, who was known to the high priest, came back, spoke to the girl on duty there and brought Peter in.

17"You are not one of his disciples, are you?" the girl at the door asked Peter.

He replied, "I am not."

18It was cold, and the servants and officials stood around a fire they had made to keep warm. Peter also was standing with them, warming himself...

25As Simon Peter stood warming himself, he was asked, "You are not one of his disciples, are you?"

He denied it, saying, "I am not."

26One of the high priest's servants, a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, challenged him, "Didn't I see you with him in the olive grove?" 27Again Peter denied it, and at that moment a rooster began to crow.



Now, in Mat and Mark, it had been a group of people that accused Peter the third time; "those standing there", "he swore to them". Whilst in Luke it is one person; "Man, I don't know what you're talking about!", and even more clearly one person in John; "One of the high priest's servants".



Each one was emphasizing different parts. He had to answer the person, as well as the crowd. Still, how one identifies the addressee does not change the actual entity. Since a lot of these accounts are not firsthand from a standpoint, each of the witnesses recognized a different part. Who knows, maybe the specific people talked about were actually the ones speaking the account to the writer?



Also, in John the first accusation and denial occured "at the door", whilst in the other accounts, the first occurs in the coutyard - at a fire in Luke (which matches the second denial in John).



Peter was probably a little scared, as we see, so it makes sense that he was near the door to the courtyard, a way for him to run out, but also close to the fire, to listen in, be warmed and whatnot.



Many contradictions are clearly present. (Even more obvious ones occur if one takes for definate the refenced to the cock crowing a second time in Mark, but these passages are disputed). Now, some seek to get around this by saying Peter must have denied more than three times - but this is an sburd assertion. Jesus was very specific - "Before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times." Why on earth would Jesus specify three if He knew Peter was going to deny Him more times. He could have just said "you will deny me" - but He specified the number, and it was three. Also, all four accounts take pains to state that the cock crowed straight after the third denial; "Immediately a rooster crowed.", "Immediately the rooster crowed.", "Just as he was speaking, the rooster crowed.", "Again Peter denied it, and at that moment a rooster began to crow." - i.e. that as soon as Jesus' prophocy, that Peter would deny Him three times, had been fulfilled, the cock crowed. Indeed, as none of the passages leave any space for another denial after the last one, the contradiction between the accounts of the final denial are an absolute, rock-solid, contradiction.



God bless,

YN. (~1000 words).



Indeed, Peter only denied Jesus three times, as it was prophesied.

[Thunderchild]

excerpt... [quote]"16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." [quote](2Tim 3:16-17) [NIV].

Which variants of the "scriptures" are referred to?

* The writers of the New Testament had not, at the time of writing, had their work classified as scripture - their comments regarding scripture refer strictly to the Old Testament.

* At the time that the NT was being written, there were three extant variants of the Old Testament: these being the Hebrew (original), the Samaritan and the Septuagint. Of the three, the Jerusalem Temple regarded both the Hebrew and Septuagint texts as authoritative. However, the Septuagint drew heavily on the Samaritan texts for its source material, and a small but significant number of passages in the Septuagint are not to be found in either the Hebrew or Samaritan texts.

* Neither the Hebrew nor the Samaritan texts foreshadow the coming of the Christ as clearly as does the Septuagint. The early disciples' arguments regarding the matter of the Christ's advent were based on the Septuagint version - and so compelling were those arguments that the Jewish Establishment of the time (circa AD 150) decided that the Septuagint was no longer authoritative.

* "God breathed" needs careful consideration: the term seems to be (according to all the information I have been able to acquire thus far) unique to this passage. No scholar of the Bible is willing to declare a precise and proper interpretation for the term. It is possible that the term is equivalent to "what he said is a breath of fresh air."

* The cited passage does not declare that everything in the Bible (nor in the Old Testament texts) is without error - only listing some of the purposes for which scripture is useful.

* Errors of translation aside, there are errors in the source texts for the Bible.

* Nothing in the Bible declares that "everything in the Bible is scripture."

[Thunderchild]

But the Greek Petroß is used by all. In the ancient Greek petra was used for the massive ledge of rock like Stone Mountain while petroß was a detached fragment of the ledge, though itself large.

In point of fact, no reference to a petroV seems to exist outside the Bible. In Koinè Greek, petra is a feminine noun (in Hebrew Cephas is a masculine noun) - the new ending is added to the Greek form, making a masculine variant for the name of the man Peter.

[Serapha]

At a request to open the thread and begin discussions again...

Fourth reply to the inerrancy of the Bible.


excerpt... "16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." 2Tim 3:16-17) [NIV].

Which variants of the "scriptures" are referred to?

* The writers of the New Testament had not, at the time of writing, had their work classified as scripture - their comments regarding scripture refer strictly to the Old Testament.






I would disagree according to the Scriptural statements themselves.


Paul claimed his teachings were the inspiration of God (1 Cor 2:7-13, 1:37, 1 Thes 2:13). John claimed Revelation was the inspiration of God (Rev 1:2)



Paul wrote that he intended his letters to be read in the churches (Col4:16, 1 thes 5:27, 2 Thes 2:15) Peter even wrote that "These things" might remain in the churches "after his departure" (2 Peter 1:15, 3:1-2)



Paul quoted "the Scriptures" (1 Tim 5:18)..... These words "The laborer is worthy of his hire." These words are found no where in the Bible except in Matthew 10:10 and in Luke 10:7. This indicates that even at the time of Paul, the gospels of Matthew and Luke were already in distribution to the churches and accepted as Scriptures.



Peter classes Paul's letters as "other Scriptures" (2 Peter 3:15-16)



The apostles wrote extensively to the churches attempting to meet the needs of the churches. God has said He would preserve His word, and I believe that those letters which have survived are God preservation efforts and not those of "the Church" of today, but the church of believers in Christ of the first century.



The early church fathers, Clement (95 AD) refers to Matthew, Luke, Romans, Corinthians Hebrews, 1 Timothy and 1 Peter. Polycarp, in 110 AD quotes from Philippians and he writes that the churches are sharing letters among themselves.





~serapha~


(1544 characters)

[Thunderchild]

Paul wrote that he intended his letters to be read in the churches (Col4:16, 1 thes 5:27, 2 Thes 2:15) Peter even wrote that "These things" might remain in the churches "after his departure" (2 Peter 1:15, 3:1-2)
"These things" might remain: Did the writers mean these things to be considered scripture or valid tradition?

John claimed Revelation was the inspiration of God (Rev 1:2)
Revelation 1:1b-2a (the relevant contiguous sentence) "He made it known by sending his angel to his servant, John, who testifies to everything he saw": hardly a claim to be inspired writing.

Paul claimed his teachings were the inspiration of God (1 Cor 2:7-13, 1:37, 1 Thes 2:13).
"We speak a message of wisdom, not as the rulers of this age count wisdom, but a wisdom that God has revealed by his Spirit to us" (1 Cor 2:7-13 synopsis) does not make a claim that the author is engaged in writing scripture: nor can "revealed" and "inspired" be considered interchangable terms.
1 Thessalonians 2:13 states that the word of God was received for what it was: the word of God... At a stretch, that might be considered a claim that the message being referred to was inspired, but it still fails to declare that the writing itself is inspired

Paul quoted "the Scriptures" (1 Tim 5:18)..... These words "The laborer is worthy of his hire." These words are found no where in the Bible except in Matthew 10:10 and in Luke 10:7.
I would not expect to find exactly the same wording for statements translated into English from two different languages - and the concepts are indeed to be found in the Old Testament in a variety of places: Malachi 3, Leviticus 19:13, Deuteronomy 24:15 to name but three.

If Keiko today writes something that Ralph tomorrow deems scripture, that does not mean Keiko regards what she is writing - at the time of writing - to be scripture.

However, that certain passages of the Bible are deemed, at the time of writing, by the author, to be not scripture is demonstrable.

[Adammi]

I love oxymorons!! The title of this thread is obviously one.

Believing in strict, factual Biblical inerrency is not biblical.

If biblical inerrrancy is unBiblical, then I guess that the bible is inerrant because the Bible is errant. Think about it.

I laugh in the face of hypocrites. ;)

[bluemarkus]

saints receive through the prompting of the holy spirit, that the scriptures are true. then they are looking for edification, not for things to complain about.

ancient language, technology and thinking was very different from our 21 century know it all systematology.

the bible is brilliant. it is a book that reads you.

Markus

[bluemarkus]

jesus had lived for a longer time in the area where he recruited.
he knew the guys. there are several accounts in your bible of the "calling of the first disciples" that differ a bit.

passage headlines are not part of scripture, and sometimes can be misleading or even distort context.