Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is the Bible the inerrant word of God? Or is it the words of men?
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(4)
Message 91 of 2241 (701787)
06-26-2013 8:41 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Ossat
06-26-2013 4:56 AM


Ossat writes:
My belief in the Bible as being the word of God is mainly a matter of faith, so my claim is not something that I can support at this moment with the kind of evidence you would require to acknowledge it.
Okay, so no evidence of God's authorship. And the only evidence of authorship we have is by men. In fact, the only evidence we have for authorship of anything, let alone the Bible, is by men. We have no evidence of anyone but men ever writing anything.
However I do know there's plenty of evidence around. All universe, living and not living things testify of the existence of God, things didn't just happened the way evolutionists think.
This is another topic, and I already granted the existence of God for the sake of this discussion.
I know you don't believe in anything of this and think that mainstream scientist have everything figured out.
I don't at all think scientists have figured everything out. What I do think is that scientists have evidence for what they*have* figured out.
But this is my faith and I'm sure I'm doing well.
No one's questioning your faith. If you want to believe something on faith, that's your business. The question is why anyone else should accept your belief that is based only upon faith. You believe the Bible was written by God. Great, go ahead and believe that, I don't care. But why should anyone else believe that? If faith is all you got, then all the world's religion got that, so your belief that your sacred scribblings are written by your God have no greater claim on truth than the equivalent claims of the adherents of any other religion.
I don't have much knowledge about this things that I present as evidence, but I now there are creationist scientists (even if you wouldn't call them scientists) working in understanding our universe from a biblical perspective.
This is off topic, but "creation science" is a contradiction in terms. They are science denialists. Because their beliefs are based upon faith instead of evidence, creation science, like religion, is divided into many different beliefs.
Now while the Bible may have not been physically written by God, it was revealed, which give it the same value. The texts there were revealed by God to Moses, Paul and the prophets. And not, I don't have evidence of that either, but I do choose to believe it.
That's fine by me. And even though you don't believe in periods at the end of the last sentence of a paragraph, I do, and I even have evidence that that's correct. The point is that if you don't have evidence for something, why are you arguing for it? Go off and get some ammunition, then come back.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Ossat, posted 06-26-2013 4:56 AM Ossat has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(4)
Message 92 of 2241 (701788)
06-26-2013 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by Ossat
06-26-2013 5:00 AM


Ossat writes:
It baffles me how you seem to think that God is only an evil monster when the Bible clearly shows His character to be very different.
Okay, he's only sometimes an evil monster. That he's also sometimes loving and compassionate, how does that make his character "very different"? Seems more like a very abusive parent. "Oh, did I murder all of mankind except your family? I am just so sorry. I promise to never do it again, and I promise to be kind and loving from now on." Until the next blow up, of course.
You're just in love with what you believe. Doesn't matter what it is. If you believe it, you love it and think it is good. The facts don't seem to matter. You gotta take a step back and take a look at what the Bible really says about God, this time not ignoring or rationalizing the bad stuff. Some things *are* evil and immoral, even when a god does them.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Grammar.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Ossat, posted 06-26-2013 5:00 AM Ossat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by vimesey, posted 06-26-2013 9:15 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


(2)
Message 93 of 2241 (701789)
06-26-2013 9:15 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Percy
06-26-2013 8:48 AM


Some things *are* evil and immoral, even when a god does them.
*Especially* when a god does them, since he's omnipotent, infinitely wise, and has naff all excuse.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Percy, posted 06-26-2013 8:48 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 94 of 2241 (701833)
06-26-2013 4:03 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Ossat
06-26-2013 4:56 AM


Mainstream science has figured out everything?
Pull the other one, mate. It's got bells on.
Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
Edited by Larni, : No reason given.

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Ossat, posted 06-26-2013 4:56 AM Ossat has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(2)
Message 95 of 2241 (701890)
06-27-2013 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Ossat
06-26-2013 4:56 AM


Ossat writes:
I know you don't believe in anything of this and think that mainstream scientist have everything figured out.
Science is basically a matter of one step forward and two steps back; every question we answer provokes two more questions. That's why science-minded people tend to be leery of any claims that a book has all the answers.
I used to have as my signature, "People who have all the answers usually don't understand the questions." That's the problem with the Bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Ossat, posted 06-26-2013 4:56 AM Ossat has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


(3)
Message 96 of 2241 (701896)
06-27-2013 1:27 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Ossat
06-26-2013 5:00 AM


What part of killing gays, dashing babies against rocks and having rape victims marry their rapist is not evil?

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Ossat, posted 06-26-2013 5:00 AM Ossat has not replied

  
MFFJM2
Member (Idle past 3207 days)
Posts: 58
From: Washington, DC
Joined: 10-11-2009


(3)
Message 97 of 2241 (724342)
04-16-2014 8:44 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by Ossat
06-26-2013 4:32 AM


Ossat writes:
quote:
I'm sorry but I don't really think you know that much about the Bible.
Apparently he knows more about the Bible than you do, since you are apparently unaware that God killed the first-born of Egypt. This was after God had hardened the heart of Pharoah so he wouldn't let Moses and his people go.
quote:
You may be able to quote every single passage but if you cannot find anything good your knowledge is vain.
I'm sure you mean his knowledge is "in vain", but no matter. The Bible has some few valuable inferences in it, but there is so much murder and mayhem, it's hard to get to the occasional good or life-affirming statement.
quote:
You can quote many texts where God appears as a cruel being, let's say He is.
Okay, then He's a monster and totally unworthy of worship, and if the the Bible is inerrant that is the only reasonable inference.
quote:
Let's say He has wanted all those people dead, but He also died Himself for the whole world.
It doesn't change a thing. A deity who proclaims everyone in the world is a sinner, based on rules He created, sacrifices himself to himself, to remove the sins that he determined were sins, when He knew all along that these sins were going to happen and could have prevented them in the first place sounds perverse.
quote:
Even if you don't believe, if you think God is just a fictional character, don't you think He has much more good than evil when sacrificing Himself to save everybody?
No, it's immoral, and unconscionable. It's immoral to punish anyone, let alone sacrifice them, for the guilt (if there ever was any guilt) of others, let alone the so-called "original sin", punishing the children for the sins of the father. You yourself recognize how immoral this kind of action is, because if you saw it you'd try to stop it.
quote:
Suppose, again within the context of a Bible as a fictional story, that all that people who died under God's law were saved from a much worse fate if they lived a little bit more.
You mean the people who were killed by God, then their lives were taken from them without due process of law, and He is guilty of murder. What legitimate authority does God have that He can take someone's life..? Would it be okay for me to kill an infant so that there would be no chance they could become a sinner, and be guaranteed to go to Heaven..? This kind of thinking is depraved.
quote:
They died, but at the end God died Himself to save them.
Which is immoral. No, according to the story Jesus had a bad afternoon, after which he temporarily left this plane of existence, only to become the ruler of the universe, for all time. A sacrifice implies that something is given up permanently, not as a short term loan. What exactly did Jesus give up..? Didn't he return according to the story so his apostles could meet him..? So he didn't die after all. What exactly was sacrificed..? The suffering of Jesus pales by comparison to the suffering of human beings every day, and they don't get to be the ruler of the universe afterwards.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Ossat, posted 06-26-2013 4:32 AM Ossat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by Pressie, posted 04-16-2014 9:37 AM MFFJM2 has replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 98 of 2241 (724343)
04-16-2014 9:37 AM
Reply to: Message 97 by MFFJM2
04-16-2014 8:44 AM


Thanks MFFJF2
Thank you for this, MFFJM2.
Your answers are very forceful, but up to the point.
Really needed to be expressed as a result of the ridiculous 'arguments' made by many religious people. You expressed the logic behind your arguments against reliogionism very eloquently this way. Destroying the crazy nonsense lots of religious people use as 'arguments' and yet they pretend to be 'logical'.
Mind if I used them (with referencing you here, of course)?
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by MFFJM2, posted 04-16-2014 8:44 AM MFFJM2 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by MFFJM2, posted 04-16-2014 1:01 PM Pressie has not replied

  
MFFJM2
Member (Idle past 3207 days)
Posts: 58
From: Washington, DC
Joined: 10-11-2009


Message 99 of 2241 (724361)
04-16-2014 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Pressie
04-16-2014 9:37 AM


Re: Thanks MFFJF2
Feel free.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Pressie, posted 04-16-2014 9:37 AM Pressie has not replied

  
djufo
Member (Idle past 3454 days)
Posts: 55
From: FL
Joined: 10-02-2014


Message 100 of 2241 (737959)
10-02-2014 8:15 PM


The bible is the composition of ancient texts translated by modern men and perhaps with errors. Many ancient texts were left outside of the bible. As far as what the Bible says, yes, is the word of the Gods. Ancient scribes serving for them were instructed to write in clay tablets.

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by Stile, posted 10-03-2014 2:57 PM djufo has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 101 of 2241 (738006)
10-03-2014 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by djufo
10-02-2014 8:15 PM


All in the same boat
djufo writes:
far as what the Bible says, yes, is the word of the Gods. Ancient scribes serving for them were instructed to write in clay tablets.
Nope. I sometimes wish it were so... but it's not.
They were only mistaken.
How do I know? Because believing in God doesn't make a difference.
I mean, it does make a difference to an individual... that's not what I'm talking about.
(Not believing in God also makes a difference to an individual... so it's not really proof of anything one way or another).
What I'm talking about is that if you take a-big-group-of-people-who-believe-in-God and compare them with a-big-group-of-people-who-don't-believe-in-God... there's no difference between them.
And if God exists, He would make a difference. At least for something. Otherwise, He wouldn't be "God" by any definition humans have ever used.
quote:
The Bible is not inerrant, it is most definitely the words of men.
This is shown beyond the shadow of a doubt merely because of the non-significance of any group of Bible believers.
Take any general group of Bible believers...
They are not special.
They are not happier.
They are not richer.
They are not more loved.
They are not more loving.
They're just the same as everybody else.
That's why the Bible isn't inspired.
If it was inspired, there should be some sort of discernible difference to be found.
Message 11

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by djufo, posted 10-02-2014 8:15 PM djufo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by djufo, posted 10-04-2014 11:25 AM Stile has replied

  
djufo
Member (Idle past 3454 days)
Posts: 55
From: FL
Joined: 10-02-2014


Message 102 of 2241 (738033)
10-04-2014 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by Stile
10-03-2014 2:57 PM


Re: All in the same boat
"believe" is the key word you have used. To Believe or to not Believe, is directly related to ignorance. Lack of knowledge. You either know or do not know to make a point.
The ancient texts were never written in "belief". The were written in knowledge of what was going on in those days which by the way, were bizarre times. Unimaginable and incomprehensible for the vast majority of average mortals. Hence the "disbelief"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Stile, posted 10-03-2014 2:57 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by ringo, posted 10-04-2014 11:52 AM djufo has replied
 Message 119 by Stile, posted 10-07-2014 9:46 AM djufo has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 103 of 2241 (738040)
10-04-2014 11:52 AM
Reply to: Message 102 by djufo
10-04-2014 11:25 AM


Re: All in the same boat
djufo writes:
The ancient texts were never written in "belief".
How do you know the intentions of the authors?
Why did Ian Fleming write Casino Royale? Did he need the money? Was he trying to prove he could write as well as Tolstoy? Did he do it on a bet? I'm sure he told people why he did it in interviews, etc. but how do we know he was telling the truth? He was a fiction writer, after all. How do we know that anything he said wasn't fiction?
And if we can't tell the intentions of somebody in our own lifetime, how much harder is it to tell the intentions of somebody thousands of years ago?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by djufo, posted 10-04-2014 11:25 AM djufo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by djufo, posted 10-04-2014 3:21 PM ringo has replied

  
djufo
Member (Idle past 3454 days)
Posts: 55
From: FL
Joined: 10-02-2014


Message 104 of 2241 (738057)
10-04-2014 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by ringo
10-04-2014 11:52 AM


Re: All in the same boat
Based on your logic, perhaps then there was a global conspiracy thousands of years ago to write the same fictional story all over the world. The mayans depicted the same deities depicted in mesopotamia, as the ones in ancient India and Peru. What technology they used to communicate and create this story to later confuse humans? thats a total mystery.
Also based on your logic, why should we believe that Washington and the founding fathers really existed? yes theres a bunch of people who would say "I'm a direct descendant" how can they prove that and why should I believe it? just because everybody believes the story means is truth and I am forced to believe it too?
Bottom line, why in the world ancients civilizations would base their existence in writing our origins the best they could to pass it onto us other than the truth?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by ringo, posted 10-04-2014 11:52 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by NoNukes, posted 10-04-2014 5:36 PM djufo has replied
 Message 110 by Percy, posted 10-05-2014 10:43 AM djufo has not replied
 Message 114 by ringo, posted 10-05-2014 2:11 PM djufo has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 105 of 2241 (738083)
10-04-2014 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by djufo
10-04-2014 3:21 PM


Re: All in the same boat
The mayans depicted the same deities depicted in mesopotamia, as the ones in ancient India and Peru. What technology they used to communicate and create this story to later confuse humans? thats a total mystery.
Could you provide more detail on this? Which deities are the same? How does this relate to the topic of the Bible?

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by djufo, posted 10-04-2014 3:21 PM djufo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by djufo, posted 10-04-2014 5:50 PM NoNukes has replied
 Message 107 by djufo, posted 10-04-2014 5:57 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024