A couple questions for the "Bible isn't the word of God" believers

2,827 Views | 49 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by dermdoc
lobopride
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Before I begin let me say that every church I have ever been a part of attested that the Bible was the word of God. Until reading it on this board I didn't know there were other beliefs on this.

1. Is there anything you would put as an authority equal to or greater than the Bible? Like Church teaching or personal revelation from an angel or God.
2. I have heard some people say that the Bible is inspired by God, but not the word of God. Does that put it on a lower rung authoritatively for you?
3. If you believed that the Bible made direct and obvious claims to be the Word of God would that change your mind on this matter? For instance, I can see some people saying that the Bible is the words of men for men and any claims that being the word of God were made by men not God.

Just to be clear this post isn't really to foster a discussion as to whether or not you believe the Bible is the word of God; rather it is meant to see how the Bible fits in with everything else religiously.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Bible is the word that points to the Word (Jesus). It is an icon pointing to the Word of God made flesh.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

1. Is there anything you would put as an authority equal to or greater than the Bible? Like Church teaching or personal revelation from an angel or God.

The Church predates the NT scriptures. The Church formed the canon of scripture, organically, through use. What aligned with the teaching of the Apostles, what was formed within Apostolic Tradition, was recognized and used as authoritative. So the authority comes from collective agreement and use by the people of God. The scriptures don't self-ratify. They don't include their own canon. They are dependent on external authority because of this alone (never mind the issue of interpretation).

Quote:

2. I have heard some people say that the Bible is inspired by God, but not the word of God. Does that put it on a lower rung authoritatively for you?

The Word of God is Jesus Christ. When the NT scriptures were written "the Bible" didn't exist and wouldn't exist for centuries. It's fairly clear then that the authors of the NT could not be referring to "the Bible" when using this language. Now I do think the scriptures are an icon of Christ - He says they speak of Him. And they are absolutely inspired by God, by the Spirit, both in their authorship and in their selection, protection, and use. Every era of the Church has had different scriptures - different forms - and I firmly believe that we have the scriptures God wants us to have.

Quote:

3. If you believed that the Bible made direct and obvious claims to be the Word of God would that change your mind on this matter? For instance, I can see some people saying that the Bible is the words of men for men and any claims that being the word of God were made by men not God.

I touched on the first half above - this becomes an anachronistic or tautological claim.

I don't know about the second part - words of men for men seems a bit denigrating.

You don't have to have a binary approach. Scripture can be God-breathed (which is in the scripture) without being the sole authority of the faith (which is not). The reality is that Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition are two sides of the same coin, they are mutually supportive, and neither is complete without the other.
lobopride
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'll read through that. Thanks!
AgLiving06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

1. Is there anything you would put as an authority equal to or greater than the Bible? Like Church teaching or personal revelation from an angel or God.

I think what you get above are good examples of is how your questions get subtly shifted. In these conversations, the discussion is never about the scriptures. This is really only an argument about authority. So in the responses above the answer is "yes, the church is the authority over Scripture." Who "the church" is will differ among the groups of course, but each church claims this authority as unique to them.

Quote:

2. I have heard some people say that the Bible is inspired by God, but not the word of God. Does that put it on a lower rung authoritatively for you?

The Scriptures are the Word of God, but they are not the only Word of God. Jesus when he spoke, was the word of God, and likewise, when Pastors preach, they are speaking the Word of God.

I had someone explain it to me this way and I really like it:

"A Christian doesn't need the Bible, but he does need Jesus. And he doesn't "get" Jesus through the Bible, he gets him through the church's proclamation which is of course normed and guided by the Bible. So, there is a close inter-relationship between all three forms of the Word of God, but the ordering is not without significance: Jesus comes in first, then the proclamation of the Living story, then the written account to norm and direct the proclamation."


ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
lobopride said:

Before I begin let me say that every church I have ever been a part of attested that the Bible was the word of God. Until reading it on this board I didn't know there were other beliefs on this.

1. Is there anything you would put as an authority equal to or greater than the Bible? Like Church teaching or personal revelation from an angel or God.
2. I have heard some people say that the Bible is inspired by God, but not the word of God. Does that put it on a lower rung authoritatively for you?
3. If you believed that the Bible made direct and obvious claims to be the Word of God would that change your mind on this matter? For instance, I can see some people saying that the Bible is the words of men for men and any claims that being the word of God were made by men not God.

Just to be clear this post isn't really to foster a discussion as to whether or not you believe the Bible is the word of God; rather it is meant to see how the Bible fits in with everything else religiously.
hmm

1) The Triune God is definitely higher in authority. The church teaching and personal revelation angle is tricky, as both can be hit or miss depending on the church and the person. I think the Holy Spirit can get left out of this a lot, but that's also tricky. Anyone can claim the Holy Spirit falsely or out of vanity. So I go more by the Christian ideals of brotherhood, selfless love, charity, justice, hope, and self-sacrifice. I think dedication to any or all of these things is more important than dedication to Scripture.

2) It must. One follows the other. It's interesting to see the place that Scripture holds in the vast majority of Christianity and contrast it with the place it has held with Protestants since the 1500s. If Jesus is the Word of God, and the Bible is not, then it is obviously less important. We see this in the Catholic/Orthodox churches. The Orthodox don't even have the Bible as Protestants would define it. There is no single bound volume of all the Scriptures together in that tradition. Pretty much the only other place in world religions that put as much emphasis on a single volume book as Protestants is Islam and the Koran. Given the widespread influence of Islam for nearly a thousand years before the Reformation, I've always wondered if there was some subtle influence there.

3) The opposite is true. The Bible specifically says that Jesus is the Word of God. As has been stated, why would you believe a document that aggrandizes itself to that level? Any document can claim to be authoritative. So even if the Bible does tell us that, why would we believe it versus thousands of other documents that claim the same? You still need some authority outside the book to validate it
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'd like to point out that the OP didn't ask about scripture, but about the thing he is calling the Bible. That is a very specific thing, and so the claims are not merely about scripture but about the Bible.
lobopride
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Zobel said:

I'd like to point out that the OP didn't ask about scripture, but about the thing he is calling the Bible. That is a very specific thing, and so the claims are not merely about scripture but about the Bible.


So if you add up all scripture together would you get the Bible (I know Catholics and Protestants don't have the same books) ?
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Right. So which books? Isn't that kind of like "other than that Mrs Lincoln how was the play"?

But even so, the entire concept of "The Bible" as in a single book with a fixed set of books in it is relatively modern. Even more for chapter and verses and section notes and so forth.
craigernaught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Who is this topic directed towards? Who are these "the Bible isn't the word of God" believers?
lobopride
How long do you want to ignore this user?
craigernaught said:

Who is this topic directed towards? Who are these "the Bible isn't the word of God" believers?


Almost everyone who has responded so far has been in that group.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Really?

I think the scriptures are God-breathed and are the word of God. But properly the Word is the Son, the second person of the Trinity.

The original question has a ton of presuppositions.
craigernaught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Don't be vague. Just say what you mean.

Who are you talking about?
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
lobopride said:

craigernaught said:

Who is this topic directed towards? Who are these "the Bible isn't the word of God" believers?


Almost everyone who has responded so far has been in that group.

This is patently false
Hendrix
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Bible is fiction written by multiple fictional people hundreds in f years apart. The Bible means well but it's pure fiction and a good story.
craigernaught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Eye roll
craigernaught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The fact that someone can try to seriously argue that an actual written work was was written by "multiple fictional people" is just astounding.

I can't believe I have to say this, but fictional people don't write real life books.
Star Wars Memes Only
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A real life book can be accredited to a fictional author, though, which is what I took Hendrix to be saying (because otherwise you're right, his statement obviously makes no sense.)
craigernaught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't think the Gospel of Luke was written by a guy named Luke who was an eyewitness to Jesus, that Exodus was written by Moses, or that the prophet Isaiah wrote all of Isaiah.

But there's no reason to believe that Paul wasn't a historical person and that he didn't write 1 Corinthians or the other undisputed Pauline texts. Same can be said for any number of books in the Bible. For some, we just don't know. Likewise, it makes little sense to call all of these works "fiction" when they consist of many different types of literature. Placing a modern understanding of "fiction" on multiple types of literature from the ancient world is silly.

The whole thing is lazy.
Hendrix
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
dargscisyhp said:

A real life book can be accredited to a fictional author, though, which is what I took Hendrix to be saying (because otherwise you're right, his statement obviously makes no sense.)


Bingo brainiacs.
agAngeldad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hendrix said:

The Bible is fiction written by multiple fictional people hundreds in f years apart. The Bible means well but it's pure fiction and a good story.
I'll play: The Bible is the oldest most replicated book in history. It is the most authenticated book and verified book to be continually reproduced.

Can you explain why you think this is fiction?
Hendrix
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Because it's obvious. Didn't Moses if he existed start the Bible 1200 BC? Then a bunch of authors hundreds of years after his death AD finished it. Is that right? You realize it almost completely fiction. Great uplifting stories. But if you don't agree with us your going to hell to burn forever. Great scare tactic for the brainless. It's really laughable if you objectively read it. It's just a bunch of miracle stories exaggerated from hundreds of years in the past and a lot of scare tactics. George Carlin does an excellent take on religion. It's on YouTube. It's hilariously true.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This is lazy and tired. Saying things like "brainiacs" just drives home the point that you're not interested in a real discussion. Could you spare us, then? People are talking.
craigernaught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
George Carlin is funny. He's often right.

But comedians aren't exactly the authorities I turn to for historical and form criticism of ancient texts.
747Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Hendrix said:

The Bible is fiction written by multiple fictional people hundreds in f years apart. The Bible means well but it's pure fiction and a good story.

agAngeldad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hendrix said:

Because it's obvious. Didn't Moses if he existed start the Bible 1200 BC? Then a bunch of authors hundreds of years after his death AD finished it. Is that right? You realize it almost completely fiction. Great uplifting stories. But if you don't agree with us your going to hell to burn forever. Great scare tactic for the brainless. It's really laughable if you objectively read it. It's just a bunch of miracle stories exaggerated from hundreds of years in the past and a lot of scare tactics. George Carlin does an excellent take on religion. It's on YouTube. It's hilariously true.
The bible is a love story about God that loves people and wants a relationship with them. Like marriage, no one would want to be married in a relationship with someone that doesn't love them. It is either Love or divorce.

If the original new testament manuscripts were to be stacked on top of each other there it would surpass the highest building in on earth, located in Dubai which is 2717 tall. The total height, 1 mile approximately 5280 foot.

There are over 25,000 manuscripts of the NT and 10 copies of The Gallic Wars and 643 of The Iliad. Looking at the OT, only 9 words of discrepancies can be found, one is COLOR vs COLUR, yet COLUR is common in some languages. The bible is the most read, copied and unchanged book for over thousands of years.

They are other books (Mary and Thomas) that some argue should have been included. However, the books of the bible went through a very through process of authentication. Verification of words, dates, times, names etc. These became the commonly agreed upon books of the bible. There some words that have indeed vary however, the meaning remained the same. Even the books not in the BIBLE have the same message.

Until WWII the highest average level of education was about 8th grade. 2000 years ago the literacy rate was about 1%. very few could read or write. Stories and education was passed verbally by story telling. Story telling was accurate. Eventually, the population began to grow and the disciples realized they had to write these words (NT) or they would become lost.

Coping the words of the bible was a very difficult task and was not taken lightly. A Talmud or scribe had to count the words, letter and lines of each page to be sure they were recorded accurately. It would take up to 2 years to write a bible. If any part did not line up, they would throw it away and start over.

From you point of scare and hell, I can see where that comes from. However, if you look at the bible as a love story so pure that God would give you as many chances as possible to love Him and to accept His gift of salvation, (like the spouse that continually forgives the other until there is no hope), then perhaps you can see the story about a man that loved his people so much that he chose to die for them as a free gift of forever life, if only you would accept his grace.

Not trying to change your mind but rather offering a short opposite view.
codker92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
God did not write the bible. He inspired the people who did. God appeared as a glorified man and told them what to write.
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

There are over 25,000 manuscripts of the NT and 10 copies of The Gallic Wars and 643 of The Iliad. Looking at the OT, only 9 words of discrepancies can be found, one is COLOR vs COLUR, yet COLUR is common in some languages. The bible is the most read, copied and unchanged book for over thousands of years.
There are many thousands of discrepancies in the bible most small some not. Within the NT since there are repeat tales it lends itself to more discrepancies and evidences interpolations and revisions due to a large number of copies available for comparison.


Quote:

Verification of words, dates, times, names etc
nope. In fact many discrepancies like this still exist, and there are even places where for instance luke attempts to correct mark, but they left mark unchanged.
Ags4DaWin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There is a very good case for the OT and what u described is very true about the OT.

The NT however is murky as all get out. The standard of the OT cannot be applied to the NT as far as accuracy and uniformity across manuscripts. The NT isn't in the same ball park as the OT in that regard.
bmks270
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
craigernaught said:

Who is this topic directed towards? Who are these "the Bible isn't the word of God" believers?

Among self identified christians, most likely Catholics.
bmks270
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
God spoke to the profits and told them to record the words. That makes up a lot of the Old Testament.
Then the New Testament consists of 4 biographies of Jesus, and a series of letters written by Christ's disciples to the Christ believers about proper belief and behavior.
That is what the Bible is.

The Bible contains the word of God and his instruction.
bmks270
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Hendrix said:

Because it's obvious. Didn't Moses if he existed start the Bible 1200 BC? Then a bunch of authors hundreds of years after his death AD finished it. Is that right? You realize it almost completely fiction. Great uplifting stories. But if you don't agree with us your going to hell to burn forever. Great scare tactic for the brainless. It's really laughable if you objectively read it. It's just a bunch of miracle stories exaggerated from hundreds of years in the past and a lot of scare tactics. George Carlin does an excellent take on religion. It's on YouTube. It's hilariously true.

A ton of biblical events are not considered fiction. Lots of kings and battles mentioned in the Bible are widely accepted as ancient history by historians.
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And a Ton are considered fiction. Even more than those accepted,
Ordhound04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think some of the issues regarding the OT is that we have a tendency, both atheists and some believers to read the bible, in particular the OT as a science or history textbook. They are not not written that way.

The bible was not a single premade book given by God, rather the bible is a library of books. One would not go into the library, pick up a book of poetry and music, and then get mad when it doesn't read like a text book. In the same vein, if we read the bible like a text book, for every book, we are bound to miss the point, and the teaching.
Quad Dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What you end up with is one group of Christians deciding one book that a different group of Christians label as allegory is actual literal fact and the Earth is 6,000 years old. While a different group of Christians will claim sections about hating homosexuals used as justification for hating homosexuals are to be followed verbatim, while also claiming other similar sections are to be interpreted through a historical lens for a different audience thousands of years ago.
Meanwhile the rest of us see this nonsense, and just say "let me know when you decide what your religions says before I decide to follow it" Who are we supposed to believe?


Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.