Who is really in charge of inspiration?

I steered your question into another thread. We can pick up that argument there. To reiterate this topic: We faithful do not nor cannot know, in the strict definition of the word.We are responsible for our own actions, regardless of whether the inspiration came from the clouds, a bottle, or Mom.

.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Try to stay on track, jaydub. I was responding to Phat's comment about WAR. You can climb back down your rabbit hole: I'm not following you.

---

"What can be asserted without proof, can be dismissed without proof."-Hitch.

No, but a story teller was inspired to keep adding episodes so that over time more and more meals and more and more nights shelter were earned. Nah, they did that all on their own. In addition we have no idea whether more returned then left or not. Many folk decided not to return. That was a major problem and lead to cranking up the propaganda machine to make the "old country" look like something worth returning to. The result was the creation of an Israel that never really existed in reality.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Take it up with the people who believe that stuff. I don't believe the book fullstop, so criticising a belief derived from it or from some group associated with it means nothing to me. That is indeed the question.However, none of what you wrote after that answered that question. You study the Bible, and therefore you know that the Bible was inspired by your god. You completely ignore the point: how do you know it's actually your god and not a masquerading malignant? How could you tell that your god is real and true as compared to any other?"The Bible says so" is not a sufficient answer. I can answer it with "the Quran says so" or "the Vedas say so" or whatever other holy text comes up on Google with a section stating that its deity(ies) alone are the true ones.So, by what method can you distinguish the inspiration of that text as the one true god from the inpiration of any other text?

No Nij. I take it up with the people who made the accusation about sacred text. You made the point. So I took it up with you - give me some examples.And it was a genuine question. For all I know you could have provided many examples. So you want to erect a big strawman and cast stones at it. When the validity of your strawman is questioned, you don't care.Right. If you're into erecting strawmen to show how powerful your arguments are, I can't take this discussion too seriously. I didn't ignore it.I compared spiritual growth with natural growth. And I spoke of the development of keener discernment. I also spoke of Christ's words of knowing the real advocates of His teaching by their fruits.When I first began to read the Bible with the help of the Holy Spirit, it expressly spoke to me. I told you that when, in the matters in which God convicted me, I obeyed, my discernment encreased. I wrote that in obedience, the ability to detect the real from the unreal grows.You ask "But how do you know you are right?" I have evidence that I am on the right track. That is all I need - indications that I am going down the right road.I don't really KNOW that the whole universe was not created 10 minutes ago with an appearance of age. I don't have mathmatical certainty that the earth is moving. I cannot really prove that it is not standing perfectly still and everything else around it is moving. I assume it is moving. I cannot absolutely prove it.When Christ encreases in my life and liberates me from things which I in vain could not previously liberate myself from, I have an indication that I am on the right track to believe the New Testament that Jesus is alive and available to me.I don't feel that I am obligated to become totally familiar with Buddhism, Islam, Zorasterism, Confucianism, or Hinduism because I believe in my New Testament.It is adaquate that I have some basic familiarity with other beliefs. I do not have to master all their details. And you do not find me here criticizing other who put forth thier beliefs in thier texts.Do you see me posting here condemning Moslems, Hindus, or Buddhists ? I speak about the Bible and how to believe it. You do not see me here arguing that: [b]"First you have to understand that the Bhgata Vita is all wrong. And the Quran is all wrong. And the sayings of the Buddha are all wrong. The sacred texts of Hinduism is all wrong.I do not proactively go after religions to declare them without any truth.So your challenge "How do you know YOUR Bible is right and OTHER sacred text is all wrong?" I would respond that I would be surprised if there were absolutely NOTHING of truth in any of the major world religions. I assume that they contain some amount of that which is true.I am here to busy speaking of the unsearchable riches of Jesus Christ. Let me turn the question to you ? If God existed and were to become a man, who among all human beings who have lived on this earth, would you vote for as being the most likely candidate to be that incarnated God ?If you ask me. I would say that the man Jesus Christ occupies a class of people consisting of one member - Himself.If you asked me I would say Jesus most qualifies to be the candidate for God having become a man. And I would say that the second most likely person comes nowhere close to Jesus Christ. Well, I don't think there is another book in existence quite like the Bible. In terms of the length of time in which the varied author's works span, there is not another book quite like it.I think the some Indian Sanskrit text are possible comparisons in length of time of compilation. I will be looking into that.What you are really talking about is tolerance, I think. I think a truly tolerant person is one who has a firm belief himself. I have met many a sloppy person who has no clue what to believe. They are simply clueless about the meaning of their lives. They fancy themselves as very tolerant.But I want you to first show me someone who has a firm belief in something, perhaps something he would even be willing to die for. Then in the light of those strong convictions we can see if he is "tolerant" of others who have a different belief.I have to run an errand at the moment. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

What you are really talking about is tolerance, I think. I think a truly tolerant person is one who has a firm belief himself. I have met many a sloppy person who has no clue what to believe. They are simply clueless about the meaning of their lives. They fancy themselves as very tolerant.

​

But I want you to first show me someone who has a firm belief in something, perhaps something he would even be willing to die for. Then in the light of those strong convictions we can see if he is "tolerant" of others who have a different belief.

---

To which i respond with-

quote:

---

The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.

---

Socrates > biblical authors, imho.It has NOTHING to do with tolerance, or strength of belief; just the opposite. Someone who has such a firmness of religious belief that they would die for their belief is an intolerant fool, not a tolerant genius.Experience has taught me that "sloppy idiots," tend to be the most intolerant and least wise. It takes great strength of character and intellect to accept the fact that your belief's MAY be wrong, and to listen to others' insight. The one who will die before questioning himself is the simplest and most vain form of idiot. In religious terms, he or she is a total fundamentalist, indoctrinated not to question their sacred doctrine. If this is how people lived, the world would be a horrible place.You, jaywill, are begging the question. When asked how you know the bible is not a fabrication of an evil diety by nij, you keep responding using the bible as source. Edited by Damouse, : No reason given.Edited by Damouse, : No reason given.

People die for false causes all the time. "God is on our side" is the slogan in every war, for both sides.Strength of conviction says little or nothing about the value of the conviction. As often as not, people with strong convictions are just easy to fool.

---

"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi

The serpent in Eden tricking Eve and then Adam into eating the fruit.

The temptation of Jesus (offering bread, "all the kingdoms of the world", etc.).
Is the first an example of playing tricks on the faithful, or is it not?
Is the second an example of trying to get someone to sign themselves over to evil, or not?

​

And as for other religions -- because were you really so conceited as to think using a Biblical example meant I only wanted to hear about the Bible? -- how about Quran 38:80*, 7:15*: the devil will "beguile" anybody he can into living an evil life or disobeying the direct order of Allah. Also, 17:60* "... Satan promises them nothing but deceit".

​

* give or take.
There's three. But I suppose since you aren't taking this too seriously, you won't really need more.

​

You ask "But how do you know you are right?" I have evidence that I am on the right track. That is all I need - indications that I am going down the right road.

Believers in the Quran, the Vedas, the teachings of Buddhism, Sikhism, Daoism could easily give the same answer.
So such a method is inconclusive in determining whether it's the right god.

​

Besides that, how do you know it is the God you say you believe in doing that? What tells you that it isn't the devil or Basement Cat or a repeat of the Flying Spaghetti Monster's intoxication making you feel good about doing something?

​

What you are really talking about is tolerance, I think. I think a truly tolerant person is one who has a firm belief himself. I have met many a sloppy person who has no clue what to believe. They are simply clueless about the meaning of their lives. They fancy themselves as very tolerant.

No, I am not talking about tolerance. I am talking about how why any firm believer can be sure that their god(s) is/are the correct god(s) on the basis of "this book says so". I'll thank you not to drive this off-topic.

​

You are still ignoring the fact that a) that book could have easily been written or inspired by the devil/Basement Cat/an immortal evil banana, and b) that anything you perceive as coming from the god you believe in can easily be a trick played by said devil/cat/banana.
So, once again: how do you tell that your god is the real or true one instead of just a deception?

The Bible says that Satan has deceived "the whole world." It says that the whole world lies in the evil one. The word picture of this passage is like a passive patient lying on an operating table under the knife of an evil doctor.I regard this as more serious a mischievous pranks, or "tricks" being played on the faithful. This is not the activity of a naughty leperchaun "playing tricks" on the faithful. This is a great cosmic evil that has the entire world deceived.It doesn't matter if you're "the faithful" or not. There is a cosmic evil intelligence diametrically opposed to God and God's will. There is one man who has dealt a defeating blow to this advasary, Jesus Christ.Man was meant to be the deputy authority over this creation of God. And a Man - Jesus the Son of God, has restored that rightful position to Man. He is in the process of spreading that victory from Himself alone into the members of His Body. His body are those organically united with Him through His salvation and His Holy Spirit.Jesus is what God meant by man. I understand you now. You meantioned plural "religions". So now you have two examples of maleviolent activity from the Bible. As a Christian I accept these examples. ME ? Conceited ?? Boy I am offended !!!Actually, I am much worse then you could possibly know. That is one of the things, along with other weaknesses and sins, which drives me into the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation. He is humility incarnate. So praise the living God that I know where I can go for salvation from my sins. my conceit, my self centeredness, transgressions against God and man.You should feel very happy for me that I have such eternal hope and encouragement I am receiving forgiveness from God and deliverance in enjoying my Savior. Okay, you have given me something from the Bible. And you have given me something from the Quran. I said - "IF" - your game was strawmen, THEN I would not take you seriously. Right ?Now, this is my impression about the Quran from what I have read.The Quran is written not over 1600 years but over the course of about 30 years by one man. So be it. Perhaps that's not important to some people. But 40 different authors of idely varying walks of life, in three different languages over a span of 1,600 year are the source of the Holy Bible.When I read the Quran my opinion is that it appears to say many things which are in the Bible. It refers to biblical characters and biblical affairs. However, there is something perculiar in the way it mentions these things.It seems to give the reader the impression that the speaker is privy to more details then were disclosed in the Bible. It is kind of like someone saying -"Well, you all know the story of Abraham. But because I am privy to more of the real inside story, I will now supply you with the additional information so as to promote Islam."This sense of giving the reader additional information stricks me as adding some fabricated details to the truth in order to propogate some lies.I rarely speak against the Quran on this forum. Your challenge insists that I have to say something by way of comparison. Because there is much in the Quran from the Bible, that amount of truth attacks millions of listeners.The Quran emphasizes that there is only one God. Since there is only one true God, that portion of the Quran convicts millions of its value.The Quran emphasizes that idolatry should not be practiced. Since that is also a major theme in the Bible, that portion of the truth again, attracts millions of people.My opionion is that the Quran is trying to create a Arab Law Giver - an Arab version of a Moses. This to me is a step backwards from the Gospel of the Grace of Christ back to a law keeping self effort to be justified before righteous God - in the case of Islam - Allah.Details of both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament are mentioned. But the author slyly plants the thought that previously undisclosed details are now being provided to give the "inside story".Of course the "inside story" deception of the Quran is to deny the Son of God vehmently. Actually, man never really knows God intimately in the Quran. There is no thought of God becoming the forgiven sinner's Father.You only must know how to bow, how to prostrate yourself, how often to fast, how to recite a prayer, how to give alms, how to make a trip to Mecca, etc. There is no thought of KNOWING God. There is the thought of OBEYING God. Mohammed becomes another Moses figure.I have asked Moslems if they know God. They evade the issue. They know ABOUT God. They know ABOUT Allah. They consider it humilty that no one could know God and God certainly calls no one His son or daughter.In other words there is no organic life relationship between man and God in the Quran.In contrast Jesus teaches the He and His Father will come to make a most intimate abode and dwelling place within the innermost being of the forgiven sinner - That I have experienced. You ask "How do you know that you are not being tricked by a maleviolent deceiver ?"Ultimately, I suppose only time will decide this with finality. I mean in an ultimate sense I would only know at the last judgment. I think I am on the right track. There are probably areas in which I am not so clear. But I am way more impressed with Christ the Son of God then Mohammed the alledged prophet.As human beings they simply are not in the same class. The testimony of the life of Mohammed and how he lived simply does not compare to that of Jesus Christ.Now, I wish I could read the rest of you post. But right now I have to stop. I'll try to address it latter.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

A bit like the New Testament, really. Since the 'speaker' of the Koran is God, you would have to be arguing that God isn't privy to more details than disclosed in the Bible for this to be a problem of some kind.

That's what the evil god Carl wants you to think. He inspired the Bible to deceive you into thinking that everybody but you is deceived.

---

"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi

Most of the churches that I have belonged to have stressed that the Bible was inerrant. (without error) but having participated in and observing many arguments to the contrary, I cant accept this as true without blind faith. The problem then becomes IF the book has errors, how do we know that anything we believe is true? Upon further reflection, I concluded that we don't know. And I concluded that it is ok not to know, as long as one trusts that God knows and is living and active. THAT one I wont be throwing away in the forseeable future.

I didn't notice a lot of extra hitherto unknown details of Old Testament history suddenly supplied by the New Testament.Some exceptions I can think of. But on the far greater references of the New Testament to the Hebrew Bible you do not have this same kind of additional details, as if the writers are now supplying you with a more complete record.Now, I do admit that you do have some theological interpretations about Old Testament history and passages. But here the Old Testament ITSELF gives us a heads up that a NEW COVENANT is to come in the future.Attempts by Moslems to portray Mohammed as a prediction from the Bible are more then feeble and obvious fabrications. For example, it is ridiculous for Moslem's to argue that Christ's speaking of the Holy Spirit to come to the disciples AFTER His resurrection, refers to the "prophet" Mohammed ". No I would only have to argue that Allah of the Quran is not the same God who inspired the Bible. And I would point out that Mohammed himself dounbted that he was getting messages from God. At one time he thought he was getting messages from demons. His wife and another relative encouraged him to the opposite.God would not tell us that Christ as raised from the dead in the New Testament only to latter tell us that He really was not. Rather, Judas died there in the place of Jesus. Or some such other direct negation of the New Testament.Do you think we are told by God that Christ is the Son of God Who died and rose from the dead only to latter tell us Christ is NOT Son of God and NEVER died at all ?Do you believe God would say both things ?Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Fixed it for you : )You keep saying "god told us" when in fact you're not sure if he did.Seeing as this is a thread about divine inspiration, i thought this was relevant. The bible was not a fax from god.