Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

No

Only Judeism

Only Islam

Yes to both Judeism and Islam

[TD1]

The Bible exists because God made it exist, and we know God exists because the Bible exists.

Of course, this can be said of every single religious text. In fact, it doesn't even have to be religious, just old enough that its authorship is shrouded in mystery, and it talks about some form of fantasy, e.g. Harry Potter in a thousand years.

[Vilanat]

Where in the OT does it say that the bible was written by god or through god inspiration? and do people who believe this also view the bible editors as inspired by god while editing?

[Arx]

The frequent use of "This is the word of the Lord" "And the Lord spoke through" "...declares the Lord" and similar phrases tends to indicate it. The pentateuch (or first five books - I'm not sure if I'm supposed to call them the pentateuch) are also, I think, attributed to Moses, who was one of the greatest prophets, although the term is a little odd applied to him. Leviticus and Deuteronomy are also basically the recording of God's word to Moses on Mount Sinai, again, if I remember right.

Also, I think it's generally agreed that the Bible hasn't been altered much.

[MonkeyHead]

Not sure about the OT... there seems to be no clear statement that says "God wrote this" or similar, save for a load of "thus sayeth god" or similar.

... but in the NT 2 Timothy 3:16 states this: "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness" - basically saying this book is made by god as it says so in this here book. This book is also important and useful, as it says so in this here book.

[Arx]

Which is why this is the Christian beliefs thread. There is faith involved, yes.

[scrdest]

The frequent use of "This is the word of the Lord" "And the Lord spoke through" "...declares the Lord" and similar phrases tends to indicate it. The pentateuch (or first five books - I'm not sure if I'm supposed to call them the pentateuch) are also, I think, attributed to Moses, who was one of the greatest prophets, although the term is a little odd applied to him. Leviticus and Deuteronomy are also basically the recording of God's word to Moses on Mount Sinai, again, if I remember right.

Also, I think it's generally agreed that the Bible hasn't been altered much.

That's not equivalent - to me, that seems like reading "'(sentence)', said Frank" in a book to claim that Frank is the author of the book. Unless you can find a specific example, it seems more like indirect quotation - and besides, if it was believed to be divinely inspired, why would they feel the need to put explicit mentions of that in the text?

[TD1]

Which is why this is the Christian beliefs thread. There is faith involved, yes.

This seems like a type of the language game theory, which states that scientific processes can't be applied to religion as they are, essentially, different things and have different language associated with them. Given that science is the only truth and method for truth we know, and is all encompassing, faith is not a replacement for actual knowledge.

[Arx]

No. You're overcomplicating what I'm saying. One has to take it on faith that God exists for the Bible to make sense. If one doesn't believe that God exists, then naturally one is going to find eighty percent of the book to be absolute tosh.

[TD1]

And faith is reliable for absolutely nothing. As much faith as you have, someone has more for something completely different. To the outside looker, it seems much more likely that all the people who have equal faith in different things are all equally wrong, as they can't possibly all be equally right.

Faith is only there until knowledge fills in holes, then it changes. The very flexibility of it through the ages suggests it is not correct - knowledge is either right or in the process of being proven correct.

[Frumple]

... which has zog all to do with this thread. Again.

[TD1]

... which has zog all to do with this thread. Again.

Em...how? I'm talking faith. Do you want me to signpost it with "Christian faith" every time I write "faith?"

[MonkeyHead]

No. You're overcomplicating what I'm saying. One has to take it on faith that God exists for the Bible to make sense. If one doesn't believe that God exists, then naturally one is going to find eighty percent of the book to be absolute tosh.

I find this almost to be putting the cart before the horse. Should one not be able to approach the bible with an open mind, read it, and become convinced of the existence of a god rather than already thinking there is one, then reading the book in order to affirm ones preclusions?

[Helgoland]

The bible is not a propaganda leaflet, MH. The Kapital is not supposed to convince readers of Communism either.

[MonkeyHead]

... and Atlas Shrugged is not supposed to convince people of the benefits of right wing open market capitalism? If the bible is not meant to convince people that Christianity is the "right faith", be that a decision they have already made or one that is pending being made (whatever in hell that is supposed to mean), then what exactly is it for?

[Arx]

If you start reading the Bible with the mentality that there is no God, you are not going to be convinced that there is a God. If you start reading the Bible keeping an open mind, you might decide that there is a God.