|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is the Bible the inerrant word of God? Or is it the words of men? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Jar, The problem is most, by a long shot, of Christians are in the Cult of Ignorance. They, the Christian cult of ignorance, say the bible is truth. Sometimes complete and total truth. Sometimes partial truth and they are uniquely able to determine which parts are true. I mean we see that right here on this thread with a number of posters. But ignorance is not the fault of the Bible and it can be cured. The Bible is not the problem, education is the problem. The Bible certainly is at least partial truth and it doesn't take much to determine which parts are truth. The problem is that "truth" has no singular definition or meaning. I'm even pretty sure that even you could learn the basics.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Golffly Member (Idle past 3107 days) Posts: 287 Joined: |
jar writes:
The Bible certainly is at least partial truth and it doesn't take much to determine which parts are truth. The problem is that "truth" has no singular definition or meaning. I'm even pretty sure that even you could learn the basics. Well the bible is riddled with outright errors, contradiction and absurdity. So it certainly has fault.The " truth" is not what the words say. One has to " interpret" where it may be right. The only way that can be done is by knowing history outside the bible. The bible can not be trusted. So maybe I could learn the basics, but I wouldn't accept anything from the bible without outside support. ( and that is the inherent bible issue)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
The bible can not be trusted. So maybe I could learn the basics, but I wouldn't accept anything from the bible without outside support. ( and that is the inherent bible issue) Can you not use reason, logic and reality as some of the tools needed? Is outside support needed for something that makes reasonable and logical sense?Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1470 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
The evidence given in the Bible for all the miracles is stronger than you ever get for any other religion or miracle claim outside it. It really takes some kind of mental deficiency to miss this fact if you have a real knowledge of the Bible. The people in the Bible and the people who wrote it are far from superstitious, and it takes as consummate idiot to think they were, somebody who has absolutely NO clue about people. A real blockhead. The contradictions are the product of blockheaded readers, not the text, and what the witnesses say they witnessed is written with an integrity beyond your capacity to judge. You fail at reading and blame the text. In this folly you will of course find congenial company at EvC. Bleagh to postmodernist reductionist idiocy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1470 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Yes, wow. The real reality is truly wowing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Golffly Member (Idle past 3107 days) Posts: 287 Joined: |
faith writes: The evidence given in the Bible for all the miracles is stronger than you ever get for any other religion or miracle claim outside it. It really takes some kind of mental deficiency to miss this fact if you have a real knowledge of the Bible. The people in the Bible and the people who wrote it are far from superstitious, and it takes as consummate idiot to think they were, somebody who has absolutely NO clue about people. A real blockhead. The contradictions are the product of blockheaded readers, not the text, and what the witnesses say they witnessed is written with an integrity beyond your capacity to judge. You fail at reading and blame the text. In this folly you will of course find congenial company at EvC. Bleagh to postmodernist reductionist idiocy. That is amazing. You managed to not say one accurate thing in that entire paragraph. I'd go through all the superstitious in the bible if I thought it would matter, but it wouldn't. But you could start by studying Jonah and the whale and figure out what " casting lots" means in that story and why it's such a classic example of ancient superstition universally believed at the time. Then ask yourself why the character Jesus believes the tale.Oh, there are no eye witness writers. If there were, it still wouldn't matter. You can interview people right now who have been abducted by aliens. You need outside evidence as fantastic claims need proof beyond the writings of superstitious people. Edited by Golffly, : Added point
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Golffly Member (Idle past 3107 days) Posts: 287 Joined: |
jar writes:
Can you not use reason, logic and reality as some of the tools needed? Is outside support needed for something that makes reasonable and logical sense? Something reasonable and logical, there is always outside evidence.One can apply reason and logic to the bible and it leads to complete debunking.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Something reasonable and logical, there is always outside evidence. One can apply reason and logic to the bible and it leads to complete debunking. Yet you have posted in this very thread that that is not the case. Do the Laws not reflect the laws at the time? Is outside evidence need to know that parables are reasonable or that allegory is an apt way to teach?Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Golffly Member (Idle past 3107 days) Posts: 287 Joined: |
I am not convinced the ridiculous laws were universally applied. More likely, they were conveniently applied according to some other motivation. But I granted you those anyway.
If one can identify a parable or allegory and have it accepted as such, if it's not too stupid, maybe there is a lesson. Like Noah is a lesson that if god is pissed at a few people, he kills everybody. So they don't always say what Christian cult of ignorance want them to say, even if it's a parable or allegory and there is never agreement on that anyway.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1470 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
The evidence given in the Bible for all the miracles is stronger than you ever get for any other religion or miracle claim outside it. It really takes some kind of mental deficiency to miss this fact if you have a real knowledge of the Bible. The people in the Bible and the people who wrote it are far from superstitious, and it takes as consummate idiot to think they were, somebody who has absolutely NO clue about people. A real blockhead. The contradictions are the product of blockheaded readers, not the text, and what the witnesses say they witnessed is written with an integrity beyond your capacity to judge. You fail at reading and blame the text. In this folly you will of course find congenial company at EvC. Bleagh to postmodernist reductionist idiocy.
That is amazing. You managed to not say one accurate thing in that entire paragraph. What's amazing is your ignorant bias against the truth.
I'd go through all the superstitious in the bible if I thought it would matter, but it wouldn't. But you could start by studying Jonah and the whale and figure out what " casting lots" means in that story and why it's such a classic example of ancient superstition universally believed at the time. Casting lots is an ancient method for discovering the will of God. In those days God allowed it among His own people and did reveal His will through it, though not to people who misused it. Satan would answer them Today it is regarded as occultic and should be disregarded because we have direct access to God by prayer, if we are believers of course. It's like many oracles such as Tarot cards, the I Ching and that sort of thing, where people expect to get answers from God or some other entity or deity. Properly speaking, it shouldn't be called superstition but occultism. Superstition is more like thinking you have some kind of connection to God if you collect "relics" you call the bones of some saint, as the RC Church does, or pay money to get somebody out of purgatory, or count a certain number of repetitive prayers and call it a penance for sin, or are afraid of stepping on cracks or try to avoid black cats crossing your path or cross your fingers or knock on wood for luck or avoid anything with the numbers 13 or 666 and so on.
Then ask yourself why the character Jesus believes the tale. Because He is God and it was God who was directing Jonah, but even if He spoke only as a man it was out of the true faith in God that we are to have through knowing His word.
Oh, there are no eye witness writers. If there were, it still wouldn't matter. You can interview people right now who have been abducted by aliens. You need outside evidence as fantastic claims need proof beyond the writings of superstitious people. It takes arrogance to say such things about other people you have no reason whatever to distrust. Not only are you calling these worthy people superstitious but you are calling them liars, since Peter and John both claim to have been eyewitnesses, and Luke claims that what he wrote was based on the testimony of eyewitnesses, and he wrote the most complete description of the birth of Christ. Their testimonies are consistent on all the important points and it all adds up to extraordinary evidence for extraordinary claims:
2 Peter 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. Luke 1:2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; 1 John 1:1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; As for alien abductions, when a lot of people say similar things about an experience they all claim to have had, I would be respectful of their honesty and assume that they are describing something that really happened, that they all happened to experience. You might come to a different conclusion about what they experienced if you did your best to learn what they had to say, but you have no right to call them superstitious or liars and they deserve a fair and careful hearing. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22490 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
NoNukes writes: But if not fiction then what is it? The problems with the stories of Noah and Jonah go beyond being non-literal or inaccurate. They never happened.
I personally believed the flood never happened. Well, in that case it would be accurate to say that you believe the flood is a fiction. I understand you believe that is non-standard terminology, and you understand that I believe it is not, so we'll just have to disagree about that, too. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
vimesey Member (Idle past 98 days) Posts: 1398 From: Birmingham, England Joined: |
It takes arrogance to say such things about other people you have no reason whatever to distrust. Not only are you calling these worthy people superstitious but you are calling them liars, since Peter and John both claim to have been eyewitnesses, and Luke claims that what he wrote was based on the testimony of eyewitnesses, and he wrote the most complete description of the birth of Christ. Their testimonies are consistent on all the important points and it all adds up to extraordinary evidence for extraordinary claims I think that what most fair minded sceptics would say, is not that Peter and John are liars, but that they might well be. We know that people lie - about religion as well as everything else - any number of disgraced evangelist preachers will bear testimony. So until there is worthwhile, corroborating evidence that their (reported and much translated) words are true, we see no reason to trust them (as distinct from having a reason to distrust them). You have that trust - that faith - but in all honesty, you have no way of demonstrating to anyone that your faith is founded on the words of people speaking the truth.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 ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Golffly Member (Idle past 3107 days) Posts: 287 Joined: |
faith writes: Casting lots is an ancient method for discovering the will of God. In those days God allowed it among His own people and did reveal His will through it, though not to people who misused it. Casting lots is essentially rolling dice and god determines the outcome. If you believe god use to do that and no longer does- you are going to have prove that one. )) You are now making up excuses for superstition, that you claim the writers weren't. )) Incidentally, there is fortune telling, astrology, necromancy in the bible. Does this also follow the made up logic, that god use to work like that but doesn't anymore? If you can just make up anything in your noodle, you could go through Harry Potter and clearly show it really happened.The ancient people were very superstitious.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Golffly Member (Idle past 3107 days) Posts: 287 Joined: |
faith writes: As for alien abductions, when a lot of people say similar things about an experience they all claim to have had, I would be respectful of their honesty and assume that they are describing something that really happened, that they all happened to experience. You might come to a different conclusion about what they experienced if you did your best to learn what they had to say, but you have no right to call them superstitious or liars and they deserve a fair and careful hearing. This sums up the problem. A natural conclusion to an eye witness claiming to be abducted by aliens is that person was hallucinating, deluded or lying. We start with the most logical and await evidence. You on the other hand assume the story is true until someone disproves it. That is what is referred to as gullible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Well, in that case it would be accurate to say that you believe the flood is a fiction. I understand you believe that is non-standard terminology, and you understand that I believe it is not, so we'll just have to disagree about that, too. As if we haven't gotten to this point several time so far and suggested that we agree to disagree at least twice. 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
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024