Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9049 total)
64 online now:
Tangle (1 member, 63 visitors)
Newest Member: Wes johnson
Upcoming Birthdays: DrJones*
Post Volume: Total: 887,622 Year: 5,268/14,102 Month: 189/677 Week: 48/26 Day: 0/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Catholics & Inerrancy
Trae
Member (Idle past 3328 days)
Posts: 442
From: Fremont, CA, USA
Joined: 06-18-2004


Message 20 of 89 (614253)
05-03-2011 6:14 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by GDR
05-01-2011 7:02 PM


GDR writes:

For example look at Joshua who believes, or at least said that he does, that he is to kill every living being in the cities he conquers, and then take everything of value. We then can look at the 10 commandments saying though shall not kill or steal and at Jesus saying that we are to love our enemies. Did Joshua get it right - I'd say no. Is the history recorded accurately - probably.


I don’t see how this resolves the issue. If one is going to invoke poor signal strength in the message, then either Jesus also had the same issue or should have clarified that previous writers got things wrong. If the writers can get a flawed message then the idea of blindly following their writings is horrific.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by GDR, posted 05-01-2011 7:02 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by GDR, posted 05-03-2011 4:03 PM Trae has responded

  
Trae
Member (Idle past 3328 days)
Posts: 442
From: Fremont, CA, USA
Joined: 06-18-2004


Message 22 of 89 (614870)
05-08-2011 6:43 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by GDR
05-03-2011 4:03 PM


I cannot begin to wrap my head around what thought process it takes for someone to believe that a God can be made flesh, speak to his followers and not have an obligation to point out where writings are in error, misleading, or deceptive. Certainly an omniscient being would have to know how those writings would be misused over the centuries, to not speak up on the matter if they are in actuality in error, misleading, or deceptive would make such a being culpable and a party to later atrocities.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by GDR, posted 05-03-2011 4:03 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by GDR, posted 05-08-2011 5:24 PM Trae has responded

  
Trae
Member (Idle past 3328 days)
Posts: 442
From: Fremont, CA, USA
Joined: 06-18-2004


Message 44 of 89 (615178)
05-11-2011 7:28 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by GDR
05-08-2011 5:24 PM


GDR writes:

If the Bible is read in the way that I'm suggesting that it should, and assuming I am correct, then we don't have to worry about misusing it. It is only when we try to turn the Bible into something else, such as an object of worship that we start to run into trouble. As a Christian it is God as revealed through Jesus and His Holy Spirit that I worship. The Bible tells that story with all of its triumphs and failures.

As I have said before Jesus said that by loving God and loving our neighbour all of the laws and prophets are fulfilled. It's pretty simple really and can also be summed up by Micah 6:8 when the question is asked what does God want of us. The answer is that we humbly love kindness and do justice.


So all the rest of the moral teachings of the Bible are suspect?
GDR writes:

… and assuming I am correct,


Which just seems to bring everything back to if the Bible can be wrong in complete swatches of text, where is the justification for viewing it as nothing more than the work of tribal myth. Where is the authority?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by GDR, posted 05-08-2011 5:24 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Dogmafood, posted 05-11-2011 8:25 AM Trae has responded
 Message 46 by GDR, posted 05-11-2011 2:22 PM Trae has responded

  
Trae
Member (Idle past 3328 days)
Posts: 442
From: Fremont, CA, USA
Joined: 06-18-2004


Message 48 of 89 (615294)
05-12-2011 5:46 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by Dogmafood
05-11-2011 8:25 AM


Dogmafood writes:

The bible is not literally inerrant in that it contains many historical errors, embellishments, omissions and contradictions. However, these errors are converted to ‘non-errors’ when considered as part of a whole work. Much like taking a shot of tequila might be considered an error until you follow it with some salt and lemon. Or if you looked at a picture like this and said that the horse and dragon are not anatomically correct but then you see that they are precisely what was intended.

So the ‘truth’ or perfect message is in there but it is only ‘knowable’ after you believe that it is the perfect message and therefore faith is required. A shot of ether to get the engine going. After you accept it the authority is revealed.

If the testable portions of the Bible fail spectacularly, then what new tests are available once you opt into your view of the Bible? If no new tests are available, then how is what you say any different than wishful thinking?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Dogmafood, posted 05-11-2011 8:25 AM Dogmafood has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Dogmafood, posted 05-13-2011 12:10 AM Trae has responded

  
Trae
Member (Idle past 3328 days)
Posts: 442
From: Fremont, CA, USA
Joined: 06-18-2004


Message 49 of 89 (615296)
05-12-2011 6:29 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by GDR
05-11-2011 2:22 PM


Re: Authority?
GDR writes:


There is nothing to suggest that The Bible on its own has any authority. All authority is God’s authority and the Bible only has authority as delegated by God.

As Paul writes in Timothy 2:

quote:
16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness ; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

When a believer uses the Bible to make a point based on the Bible they’re using the Bible in an authoritative way. When I asked where is the authority, I am asking that given we know that parts of the Bible are incorrect then by what objective metric can be used to determine what is any parts are correct. If the writers were wrong about so much of what they wrote, why should anyone believe they were correct about any of their incredible statements?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by GDR, posted 05-11-2011 2:22 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by GDR, posted 05-12-2011 11:09 AM Trae has responded

  
Trae
Member (Idle past 3328 days)
Posts: 442
From: Fremont, CA, USA
Joined: 06-18-2004


Message 56 of 89 (615439)
05-13-2011 12:53 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by GDR
05-12-2011 11:09 AM


Re: Authority?
GDR writes:

It seems to me that you think that the Bible is to be used as a book of laws. I don't see it that way. As I said it is a road map, and just as on any road map there is the correct route, there are also many side roads.


I don’t recall using ‘law’. ‘Road map’ sounds suspiciously close to ‘following a prescribed path’. Perhaps you wish to expand on the differences you see between the two terms?
GDR writes:

However, as the prophet Micah says, what God wants of us is that we love kindness, do justice and walk humbly with our God, or as Jesus says love God and neighbour. If you want to the Bible to be a book telling you what to do that is all you need to know. The Bible though is more than that. It is the story of God involving Himself in the affairs of man as He interacts with us through our hearts and minds so that we freely accept having His love, kindness and justice written in our hearts and minds.


Is it your position that when the writers of the Bible go beyond the above they’re simply offering opinions? If so, how does opinion become a ‘map’?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by GDR, posted 05-12-2011 11:09 AM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by GDR, posted 05-13-2011 10:37 AM Trae has responded

  
Trae
Member (Idle past 3328 days)
Posts: 442
From: Fremont, CA, USA
Joined: 06-18-2004


Message 57 of 89 (615441)
05-13-2011 1:27 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Dogmafood
05-13-2011 12:10 AM


Dogmafood writes:

As a ‘notatheist’, I see the problem this way. We might think that as a God it would be easy to communicate with the sentient parts of your creation. But maybe that is not the case.


Which I think is obvious by the inability of so-called followers to reliably convey the so-called messages. But that puts us back to why follow the book if the message is corrupted? It also raises the problem of either Christ had uncorrupted information or why trust Christ’s messages?

Dogmafood writes:

If the message of the bible is that we should ‘love God and neighbour’ then perhaps the authority lies in the evidence that the world is a better place when we love. The bible certainly has some pertinent lessons for us regarding how to get along with each other. Many of these lessons seem to be applicable across a vast swath of time and are in that sense fundamental.


Couldn’t someone just as easily point to all the problems of ‘love of God’ to show the opposite?

If as people claim here that there is much that is incorrect in the Bible, then it would seem fair to raise ‘signal to noise ratio’. The Bible also contains pertinent lessons for we certainly should not follow.

Dogmafood writes:

The great irony for me is that the bible makes alot more sense when you remove the personification of god.


I’m confused, are you saying it makes more sense if you remove Jesus, or perhaps you’re saying if you remove an anthropomorphic God, or something else?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Dogmafood, posted 05-13-2011 12:10 AM Dogmafood has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by GDR, posted 05-13-2011 11:00 AM Trae has responded

  
Trae
Member (Idle past 3328 days)
Posts: 442
From: Fremont, CA, USA
Joined: 06-18-2004


Message 60 of 89 (615727)
05-16-2011 2:58 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by GDR
05-13-2011 10:37 AM


Re: Authority?
When I use authoritative I mean in the sense of, “because the Bible says so”. The Bible is often used as an authority on topics. Even those who grant the Bible may not be inerrant often site it as a reference for moral authority.
GDR writes:

Trae writes:

Is it your position that when the writers of the Bible go beyond the above they’re simply offering opinions? If so, how does opinion become a ‘map’?

I don't know how to answer such a general question as that. The Bible is as we all know a collection of books with many different authors collected together to create the one great meta-narrative. In general though, I don't see it as opinion but as people inspired to record all the narratives that together form the great narrative that is the Bible. I realize that the Bible isn't all narrative but I think that even the poetry, drama etc blend in and become part of the whole story.


‘Love your neighbor’ isn’t really a lengthy laundry list of morals. The writers of the new testament give additional moral teachings. If the Bible is not inerrant why should anyone believe that the Bible writers are passing along a message from God, rather than their own beliefs?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by GDR, posted 05-13-2011 10:37 AM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by GDR, posted 05-16-2011 11:30 AM Trae has responded

  
Trae
Member (Idle past 3328 days)
Posts: 442
From: Fremont, CA, USA
Joined: 06-18-2004


Message 61 of 89 (615729)
05-16-2011 3:48 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by GDR
05-13-2011 11:00 AM


That post was not a comment specifically about the Bible (though it would encompass the writers of the Bible if we assume they're no better connected than currented followers). Dogmafood suggested that God might find it difficult to communicate with his followers.

A problem with this line of thought is clearly that God’s current followers fare poorly in communicating a consensus of messages by any reasonable objective standard. So either the communication is incredibly rare, or the current communication is incredibly flawed. If God’s message is this poorly discerned then it seems to me silly for anyone to say that they actually know God’s message. If the Bible is demonstratively errant and if modern followers cannot demonstrate they are actually in communication with God, then it seems frankly evil to claim “what God wants”.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by GDR, posted 05-13-2011 11:00 AM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by GDR, posted 05-16-2011 11:39 AM Trae has responded

  
Trae
Member (Idle past 3328 days)
Posts: 442
From: Fremont, CA, USA
Joined: 06-18-2004


Message 64 of 89 (616045)
05-19-2011 5:38 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by GDR
05-16-2011 11:30 AM


Re: Authority?
GDR writes:

Sure there are inconsistencies even in the NT, but it is like 5 people describing a car accident. Their stories may differ slightly but they are all in agreement that there was an accident. The Gospel writers may remember things in a slightly different order etc but they all agree that Jesus was crucified, buried and then appeared again with a new kind of physicality.


So ignore inconsistencies as a problem by saying they’re not the important parts, but that agreement is proof of the miraculous? Why not believe all the stories of which there is but one account? Since they cannot be inconsistent with their own telling?

GDR writes:

Once again the Bible in total is the story of the people that God chose to bring his message to the world. It tells of when they got it right, and when they got it wrong.


Can you clarify this? How can we know which parts are right and which are wrong?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by GDR, posted 05-16-2011 11:30 AM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by GDR, posted 05-20-2011 7:09 PM Trae has acknowledged this reply

  
Trae
Member (Idle past 3328 days)
Posts: 442
From: Fremont, CA, USA
Joined: 06-18-2004


Message 65 of 89 (616047)
05-19-2011 5:49 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by GDR
05-16-2011 11:39 AM


What I am saying is that it seems objectively correct that that there is no message or that there is no objective way to ferret out which messages or of God. This being the case there is no discernable way to determine between a flawed Bible inspired by God and a flawed Bible which is not inspired by God.
GDR writes:

If God were to supernaturally make everything crystal clear we would no longer be able to choose unselfish love.


But yet that is exactly what we’re told he does do. Miracles to some and not others. Grace to some and not others. Messengers to some and not others. Born in Christian countries to some and not for others.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by GDR, posted 05-16-2011 11:39 AM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by GDR, posted 05-20-2011 7:42 PM Trae has acknowledged this reply

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021