A dialog with a Xtian

IzzAtheist@AOL.COM
Tue, 22 Apr 1997 02:03:39 -0400 (EDT)

Here is an email dialog I had with a Xtian I met on an America OnLine message
board:

Izz
Do you believe that there are contradictions or errors in the Bible?

Morgan
I beleive that the Bible is the inspired revelation of God, and therefore
without error. However, error needs to be defined carefully if any productive
discussuion is to ensue. I've heard charges leveled that the Bible contains
certain conradictions, yet when the list of supposed contradictions is
produced, actual, logical contradictions are not present.

Izz
If so, which Bible version do you consider error-free?

Morgan
I would not assert that any translation of the Bible possesses complete
inerrancy, but would only ascribe such a title to the ancient parchment and
vellum manuscripts written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek. Admitedly
some Christians will argue that the King James version of the Bible is
inerrant, yet any biblical historian knows that the original published in
1611 was plagued with spelling and grammatical errors (i.e., hardly
inerrant).

Izz
Do you believe that any of these inerrant manuscripts exist today?

Morgan
Yes I do. The Vatican Manuscript (i.e., Codex B), the Sinaitic Manuscript
(i.e., Codex Aleph), and the Alexandrian Manuscript (i.e., Codex A), the
manuscript of Ehpraem (i.e., Codex C), The Codex Bezae (i.e., Codex D) are a
few examples that come to mind.

Izz
Have you joined the Errancy list?

Morgan
The answer to your question is no. I think it absurd to presume that anyone
may reasonably dialogue upon the topic of biblical inerrancy without
addressing the subject of science in some way, not to mention epistomology,
and eventually theism. Then again, if I were an athiest, I probably wouldn't
wish to defend such a weak proposition. I am certainly interested in
discussion, but not when it is so unecessarily intellectually choked.

I do thank you for advising me of the mailing list's existence though.

Izz
How can these manuscripts all be inerrant? They do not agree, but vary.

Morgan
First off, there is a vast chasm that exists between the notion of variance,
and that of outright contradiction.

Izz
Baloney. We are talking about copies of one book, aren't we? Any difference
at all is a contradiction.

Morgan
I now challenge you to supply the
examples of these manuscript disagreements, and please use concrete,
specific, and detailed examples. If you wish to call the Bible's bluff, you
must be prepared to have you bluff called.

Izz
I don't have the slightest clue what you mean by "bluffing". As to citing
examples of the differences, are you asking me to prove there are
differences, because you do not believe there are any, or is this challenge
simply an effort to bring discussion to a halt, since you expect, quite
rightly, that I do not have personal access to all the manuscripts listed? If
you are merely trying to be difficult, there is no point in going on.
Otherwise, I expect you to acknowledge that these manuscripts are in no ways
identical.

Morgan
PS: Since each of the manuscripts I listed is was penned in the Koine Greek
language, I expect that you are familiar with that language thoroughly enough
to recognize such supposed contradictions within those manuscripts.

Izz
I do not need to be personally familiar with these documents in order to
discuss them. I have read about them, and am quite content to use the
knowledge of others, without verifying everything myself. Frankly, I feel you
are trying to end the discussion, since you can see that the path we are
taking will lead you to admit that your belief in the inerrancy of the Bible
is either false or meaningless.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------
Izz
Rather an unpleasant fellow. I am glad he did not join the list. I am quite
aware, thanks to some of you on this list, of web pages that show some of the
differences and problems caused by the variances between the manuscripts we
have. However, I had no intention of letting this fellow get away with his
absurd demand that I prove something which he had not even taken a stand
against. I feel this fellow to be quite dishonest, and I would not be
surprised if he is a bad apple indeed.

Izz