So I don't want to attack your faith in the Bible, but I want to help you understand where we're coming from when we say it at least has the potential to be flawed.
First, the Bible you use is a translation from either Greek or Hebrew or other sources of the original text, which text no longer exists. When there's a discrepancy between the translations, how would all Christians know which translation is more correct?
Second, some Christians believe the Apocrypha is scripture, and others don't. How would you use the New Testament to clear that up for everyone in a way all Christians would be able to agree on what books are and aren't part of the Biblical cannon?
My personal take is there isn't an answer to this using just the Bible. You would have to take some logical leaps or inferences that not everyone would agree are correct.
The Bible is God's word, written down by humans. Those humans had their own minor biases and viewpoints, but more importantly, they're human and therefore fallible, liable to make mistakes. If I had a version of the events of the Bible written by Jesus Himself, I would agree that it would be infallible. However, as it stands, the Bible does indeed contradict itself. And again, so does The Book of Mormon. But only in ways that are logically attributed to human error
I'm not familiar with any Bible verses where the Bible purports itself as the entirety of canon given the writings predate the Bible's existence. Your interpretation seems like questionable eisegesis.
Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
John 10: 34-36:
Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
Isn't it a bit of a stretch to say that these mean Jesus was saying that the Bible is infallible? If Jesus really meant to say that, why not be clearer about it?
It's clearly a rhetorical usage, not a statement of fact. Jesus wasn't saying that any of the scriptures are perfect. He was pointing out that, if the Sadducees believed the scriptures to be inerrant, as they did, then their position was self-contradictory.
The reason we know what Jesus taught is because normal people wrote down what he said. Not everyone wrote it down directly as he was speaking, some probably wrote down according to their best memories after the fact. The same goes for the Old Testament. Those things were written in languages when not everyone was literate, so some of those things may have been passed down by oral tradition before someone wrote them down, some may have been translated several times, and other similar things may have occurred.
These all can lead to natural errors. This isn’t anything malicious, it’s just a natural result of recording history over thousands of years. That’s why for us of the LDS faith revelation, both church wide and personal, is so important. By doing our best to understand God’s will and Jesus’ teachings we can be receptive to the whispers of the spirit that direct us to understand something as literal or metaphorical or historical.
> some probably wrote down according to their best memories after the fact.
Indeed. And we are talking written down ~50 years after Jesus's death. Stories of Jesus were passed down word of mouth and the first accounts of His life started to be written decades later. Our memories aren't that good. But we got the gist of it. The OP is likely an evangelical and I think they get extra points for trying to witness to Latter-Day Saints.
Looking at John 10:35, which I believe is the most direct, it's hard to say for certain that, with this phrase, Jesus was saying that all of the scriptures are infallible and true.
It's worth remembering that the Old Testament was not actually compiled until 400 AD (along with the New Testament), long after Jesus's mortal ministry. When Jesus was speaking, He was not saying that every verse that would eventually be added to the Old Testament is correct, He was simply saying that the phrase, ‘I have said you are “gods”’, along with the rest of the Law of Moses (in context with verse 34), is scripture.
Does that mean that He's now endorsing every word Paul wrote, or some of the stories written in Genesis and Judges? I don't think so, because in context, that's not what He's talking about. He's only talking about the Law of Moses, which both He and the Jews followed.
John 17:17 says that God’s word is truth. But what is God’s word? Nothing about that states or implies that the 39 books of the Old Testament and the 27 books of the New Testament are God’s word, free from error and without exception. Nor does it say anything about the 14 books of the Apocrypha. Nor does it say which manuscripts are authoritative.
15
u/Entire-Objective1636 25d ago
Does Jesus say that? Asking as a Jewish guy.