To Err is Human

A common attack on the Bible goes like this: Man wrote the Bible. Man is imperfect. Therefore, the Bible is imperfect. Even if this argument was valid (followed logically), it wouldn't be sound because the 1st premise presumes what it's trying to prove. What's at issue is whether natural man is solely responsible for the Bible or whether God worked through men and inspired the text. The approach is circular. But the argument isn't even valid. Consider this reply. "Your argument is that man wrote the Bible and man is flawed, therefore, the Bible is flawed. If that's true then it's also the case that your argument, offered by you, a fallible human being, is therefore flawed. And if your point of view is flawed, then why should I believe it?" It doesn't follow that if man is capable of error, then he always does err. If so, then this person's own statements would always have to be false, because he's also an errant human. 

http://www.str.org