|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,419 Year: 3,676/9,624 Month: 547/974 Week: 160/276 Day: 34/23 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 4950 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is the bible authoritive and truly inspired? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1962 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
Jaywill, old bean: Utilitarian is not Unitarian. I do need to be careful about that. Thanks.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
jaywill writes: Out of regard for the topic and our departure from it, I think I will not contribute to the drift more for now. Some people here want talk about Inspiration and such things concerning the Canon of Scripture. There is a little overlap. But I think the regular contributers to this thread want to discuss Inspiration. Yet there is no such thing as a universal Canon. In fact the ONLY books that are common to all the Canon are the first five books of the Old Testament. Are you saying that God was unable to inspire the committee of Canon? Or were there different inspirations for each committee? Or are all the Canon simply the product of man? Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1962 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
Nuggin, I misread Utilitarian as Unitarian. My mistake.
I'll have to research Utilitarian for my own education.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1962 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
Purpledawn,
I wrote:
Fortunately, this matter of 1 cor. 14:36,37 effects no major tenet of the New Testament. I don't think I understood what you were saying when I wrote this. The verses you thought are additions were 34,35 ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Nuggin Member (Idle past 2514 days) Posts: 2965 From: Los Angeles, CA USA Joined: |
An incorrect assumption on your part. My ethical system is utilitarian in nature primarily, with an overtone of autonomy. You must be kidding. I consider Unitarianism very close to biblical Christianity. WOW, talk about reading what you want to be there instead of what is there. My ethical system is not based on UNITARIANISM. It's based on UTILITARIANISM. Utilitarianism is "That which benefits the most people and/or harms the least is the best choice." In other words, given an ethical choice in which a person owns a food warehouse and there are 100 starving people - I'm likely to advocate breaking into the warehouse so that the starving people will be fed. This is because the life or death need of 100 starving people outweighs the fiscal need that the individual warehouse owner has. However, I am also an advocate for autonomy. So, if they choice would require killing the warehouse owner in order to feed the 100 people, I would be against it. The death of the warehouse owner is a greater violation of his autonomy than the theft of his wealth. And, though hunger is dangerous, the starving people are not in immediate danger of dying.
Numbers, Deutoronomy, Exodus, Joshua are among the "historical" books. On your say so you are asking me to take what was presented as history and regard it as some other genre. Obviously you recognize that they are not in fact 100% accurate historical accounts hence your use of quote marks around "historical". Historical accounts, even ones which are significantly better documented than the accounts in the Bible, are still presented in context. Hence: "History is written by the winners." Maybe a historical account of Exodus written by the Egyptians would give different insight into the actions of the character of "God". For example:"I woke up today to find the city covered in frogs. What the hell is going on?! No one has told me anything." On the topic of destroying whole towns because one person there is a different religion... You try and justify this by pointing out that the Bible tells you that you really need to be sure before you do this. That's NOT a justification! The instructions and act are completely amoral at their very core. Killing EVERYONE, even the faithful, and ANIMALS which can never been held accountable for religious opinions, because ONE person in the town happens to NOT be Jewish?! That's profoundly unjust. In fact, I would go so far as to say that it is absolutely evil. It requires that EVERYONE in EVERY TOWN constantly be on the hunt for anyone who has a different opinion. America was founded by people running away from exactly that sort of religious attitude.
Remember that God assured Abraham that if He found a minority of worthy people in a town He would not destroy the entire town (Genesis 18:23-33). Thanks. I hadn't be aware of this glaring contradiction in the actions and instructions of your main character. This is another fine example of why we know that the Bible is not the inspired word of God. An all knowing all seeing deity would not switch attitudes so radically between books. He wouldn't say "Okay, if there are some people in a town, I'll save it."Then later say, "Nah screw it, if the town is 99.99% faithful and one person who disagrees, kill them all!"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Nuggin Member (Idle past 2514 days) Posts: 2965 From: Los Angeles, CA USA Joined: |
Well, since the judgments of the OT did not ALWAYS go to the extreme of having children killed, I would surmise that God TOO thought the number of such incidents should be kept DOWN. So He did not always go to that length. Well, if instead of God we were talking about Noah or Isaac or Abraham or John or Solomon, etc - we'd excuse this - because they are mortal men of limited power. The character of God on the other hand has literally limitless power. He can do ANYTHING. He can elect to not kill the children if he wants. Are you claiming it's NOT within God's power to have the last plague of Egypt be the death of all the soldiers in the army instead of the first born sons? He CHOOSES to murder the children rather than do any of the infinite list of other solutions because he WANTS to murder the children. It's really as simple as that. If the character was limited in scope, we could justify these decisions as "He had to make a tough choice". But he DOESN'T!!! He's free to do literally ANYTHING at ANY TIME including preventing the crime for which he is punishing people from ever having happened in the first place. That's the problem with creating a character like this. If you tell us the character is "good" and can "do anything", then ALL ACTIONS of that character must be "good" if not "the absolutely best choice". What you have in the Bible is a character which is either:A) Not good B) Not all powerful C) Neither good nor all powerful. That's a problem, especially when the morality of the society matures and the religion fails to keep up. No one in Biblical times thought twice about the fact that God is 100% wrong on the question of slavery, because they didn't appreciate the fact that slavery was immoral. We, as a society, have matured a great deal, we now recognize that slavery is amoral and are left with the question: "Why does God love slavery so much?" The problem is that Christianity has been trapped in the Bronze Age forever while we have moved forward. Even Islam is further ahead moralistically than Christianity as a result of having arisen later. Thought it to now suffers from stagnation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Thanks. I hadn't be aware of this glaring contradiction in the actions and instructions of your main character. This is another fine example of why we know that the Bible is not the inspired word of God. An all knowing all seeing deity would not switch attitudes so radically between books. He wouldn't say "Okay, if there are some people in a town, I'll save it."Then later say, "Nah screw it, if the town is 99.99% faithful and one person who disagrees, kill them all!" Actually Genesis 18 is well worth reading in context, because it does not say what jaywill claims. In Genesis 18 the God character says he is down because he has heard rumors and that he is going to check the stuff out, but if it is "Word" he is gonna kill them all. It is Abraham that is appalled by the morality the God character is showing it calls him out on his position. It's Abe that says, "Yo, God, is that any way for the Judge to behave?"
quote: The God character starts negotiating, backing off a bit but Abe stays on his case. We know that Abe didn't succeed totally but at least he tried. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 104 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
The God character starts negotiating, backing off a bit but Abe stays on his case. We know that Abe didn't succeed totally but at least he tried. God in heaven tell me you are pretending to be this ignorant. Is it possible God already knew all these facts and was trying to demonstrate to Abraham that there were no righteous people there? BTW, were there any righteous people, there? Only a simpleton would miss the point that God was leading Abraham in a direction Tell me Jar, do you think Jacob, could take God in a wrestling match Dawn Bertot
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Dawn Bertot writes: Is it possible God already knew all these facts and was trying to demonstrate to Abraham that there were no righteous people there? BTW, were there any righteous people, there? Only a simpleton would miss the point that God was leading Abraham in a direction Tell me Jar, do you think Jacob, could take God in a wrestling match According to the story, no, the God Character did not know what was going on.
quote: Have you ever read the Bible? And yes, if you read the story Lot was there so yes, there were righteous people there. And about Jacob? Have you read the Bible?
quote: In the story it is a draw, even though Jake is handicapped by the God character putting Jacob's hip out of joint. Edited by jar, : fix the subtitle Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 104 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
According to the story, no, the God Character did not know what was going on. Did God end up being right, even before he ALLEDGEDLY found out, what he supposedly did not already know. Well how about that, he was right after all it was for Abrahams purposes, not Gods. How convient of God to be omnipotent and omniscient, it just happened to work out, eh
[qs]In the story it is a draw, even though Jake is handicapped by the God character putting Jacob's hip out of joint. I wonder who that MAN was in the wrestling match? Wonder why it was a draw? Maybe like Abraham, he was trying to show Jacob something jar is it necessary for you to play the dumb card in every single post Dawn Bertot
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
seanfhear Junior Member (Idle past 4614 days) Posts: 23 From: California Joined: |
To get back to the original question.
The bible is inspired just like much of our literature is inspired. The inspiration is from the author’s perception of the world around him/her. Giving authority and literalism to ancient myths and campfire stories is the best way to control a group of people beyond arms reach. A person who is raised in or near a Christian environment may, at least initially, be hesitant to question the authority of the bible. If, however, you handed the bible to someone who had never heard of it before, it would take a fair bit of persuasion to establish it as authoritative. You would expect to see inconsistencies in value judgments when writings from different authors and different times are crammed together and called a book.Metaphors are used in most writings both ancient and modern. God is used as a metaphor when there is not an actual person expected to exist. That’s probably why god is usually referred to as he. Even though the bible isn’t supernaturally inspired or authoritative, it still has some interesting and some useful stories, not any more violent than modern wars or video games. "Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices." Voltaire |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Dawn Bertot writes: jar writes: According to the story, no, the God Character did not know what was going on. Did God end up being right, even before he ALLEDGEDLY found out, what he supposedly did not already know. Well how about that, he was right after all it was for Abrahams purposes, not Gods. How convient of God to be omnipotent and omniscient, it just happened to work out, eh There is nothing allegedly about the story. It is very clear what it said and I even quoted it for you since it seems you had never read it. In the story the God character does not know.
quote: But the important point is that Abraham did see that what God proposed was immoral, pointed it out, and the God character in the story agrees and modifies his behavior.
Dawn Bertot writes: jar writes: In the story it is a draw, even though Jake is handicapped by the God character putting Jacob's hip out of joint. I wonder who that MAN was in the wrestling match? Wonder why it was a draw? Maybe like Abraham, he was trying to show Jacob something jar is it necessary for you to play the dumb card in every single post In the story the man is God, and the reason that it was a draw was that even after putting Jake's hip out of joint he continued to struggle. Even when the God character asks to call it a draw Jake continues. I quoted the passage for you.
quote: Note the last line. According to the story the god character says "you have struggled with God and with men and have overcome." Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 755 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
The God character starts negotiating, backing off a bit but Abe stays on his case. Am I somehow morally deficient because I imagine Charlton Heston and Mel Brooks doing that dialogue?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
seanfhear Junior Member (Idle past 4614 days) Posts: 23 From: California Joined: |
Am I somehow morally deficient because I imagine Charlton Heston and Mel Brooks doing that dialogue? That would be inspirational. "Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices." Voltaire
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3478 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:I'm not talking about "typos". The added lines I mentioned in Message 316 are not typos. In Message 312, I listed the top ten most familiar verses that weren't originally in the New Testament. This means that all people throughout the ages were not guided by the same words. I agree that the "typos" for the most part don't impact the basic tenets of Christianity, but the additions/omissions might. It is debatable whether the additions were made to support a tenet or a tenet was based on the "original" manuscript. This would make a good topic in itself. I will probably propose a thread when I get time to write a good OP. The Johannine Comma is a good example. The words in bold below are not in the older Greek manuscripts, but were in the later Latin Vulgate.
1 John 5:7 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 5:8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one." This can impact the Doctrine of the Trinity and potentially the divinity of Jesus. Read these parallels from various version of our Bible today.
1 John 5:7 Here are two examples:
New International Version (1984)
Which one has the authority and why?For there are three that testify: King James BibleFor there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. Ultimately people give authority to the version of the Bible they choose to use in their religion; but since Christianity is not a theocracy, the Bible does not have authority outside of a religion. Quite frankly, Christians choose what portions have "authority" over their daily lives. The authors of the NT weren't all necessarily presenting the same message.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024