As I stated before, God allows us to use our brains. There isn't any history book that makes such a claim either. But at the same time, I haven't read many history books that as a side note states that some information may be inaccurate.<quoted text>
The printing press wasnt invented until the 15th century. Before that all bibles were hand copied and therefore very scarce and valuable. Only wealthy people could own one. Bibles were simply not available to commoners and most commoners couldnt read or write their spoken language let alone Latin.
The Two oldest known complete copies of the New Testament are not identical and neither is identical to any of the bibles available today. Strangely enough both of the oldest bibles date to the 4th century when belief in Christianity as defined by the First Council of Nicaea became the law of the Roman Empire.
Nowhere does the Bible claim to be inerrant. At no place in its more than 30,000 verses does the Bible claim that it is factually accurate in terms of history, science, geography and all other matters (the technical definition of inerrancy). "Inerrant" itself is not a word found in the Bible or even known to Christian theologians for most of history. Rather, the word was coined in the middle of the 19th century...- David Lose, Director of the Center for Biblical Preaching at Luther Seminary
I would include that there's a bit of irony in that a number of people suggest one using logic and reasoning. When it comes to God, who I think promotes logic and reasoning (just read the words of Jesus).
The Bible doesn't start out by stating "This is an inerrant book starting from Genesis to Revelation". However when reading the words of Jesus, and God, the words suggest truth. The Bible speaks of Old Testament historical men of faith in the New Testament. If God/Jesus 'exists'(which I believe He does) is it logical to believe that the very book that gives His testimony is only partially inspired?
If you follow the "flawed man" theme (referring to Biblical writers), then you would have to be open to the potential flaws of Bible critics, whether atheists, or seminary theologians.