-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Are you obligated to believe the entirety of the bible?
- Thread starter Draka
- Start date
Lindsey-Loo
Steel Magnolia
I believe you are obligated to believe the Bible in its entirety, because it is the inspired word of God. Why would I not believe all of God's inspired words?
As far as whether you must believe it literally or not, I think some things are literal, others may be symbolic. People interpret the Bible in many different ways, and I don't necessarily believe that one would be condemned for misinterpreting parts of the Bible.
As far as whether you must believe it literally or not, I think some things are literal, others may be symbolic. People interpret the Bible in many different ways, and I don't necessarily believe that one would be condemned for misinterpreting parts of the Bible.
Darz
Member
Even if God inspired the original writers of the Bible, the original texts have been long lost or destroyed. Copies were made of the originals, and then copies of those copies were made, and later, translations were made from those copies. When the copies were written, errors were made, possible changes were made, and translations often times obscure or change the original meaning of the text. To pick up your English translation of the Bible and proclaim that it is the inspired word of God is a far stretch in my opinion.
Lindsey-Loo
Steel Magnolia
I disagree. If you compare our modern English translations to the most ancient copies of Bible books we have (i.e. Dead Sea scrolls, the Codex Sinaiticus, the Codex Vaticanus) there are only slight grammatical differences. Especially the Dead Sea Scrolls. Until 1947, we had no ancient manuscripts of the Old Testament, so it was debatable at that time if the Bible was actually accurate, since scholars had no truly ancient texts to compare it to. The Dead Sea Scrolls were perfectly identical to manuscripts copied 1,000 years later-the very manuscripts that our English Bible translations are derived from. The Bible has been copied and translated throughout history with enormous precision.
Besides, as a Christian, I do not believe God would allow the Bible to be miscopied and mistranslated.
cardero
Citizen Mod
Would this include the inspirings of Neale Donald Walsh's Conversations With GOD?
Lindsey-Loo
Steel Magnolia
Erm...I'm thinking...not. At least, I'm not aware of Neale Donald Walsh's Conversations With God being in the Bible.
cardero
Citizen Mod
So what exactly is your criteria that a book is inspired by GOD and deserving of your/our belief?
Do the communicators with GOD have to be dead so that there is no way we can really question their inspirations or agendas?
Do the authors have to be primitive?
Do the books have had to be canonized at the same time? If an author who documents inspirations from GOD misses the publication date in which the book is compiled there is absolutely no reason to believe or consider this persons words?
Do the doctrines and teachings have to match? How does one know if the original teachings are man/GOD/demon/alien/spirit inspired? Is it because they are all bound in one book?
Last edited:
How do you believe in poetry?
cardero
Citizen Mod
How does one believe in one poem, one poet, one poetry book? Believing is easy and free, proving that there is just one source for poetry is difficult.
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
Entirety of the Bible, you will have to explain - do you mean every word? Generally, most would say yes - I'll say no, but it's best if you do.
I personally think believing in the Bible too much focusing on literalism is destructive as a faith, and destroys the beauty of the teachings of messages of the prophets of the Bible.
Job is, in its original language, poetry - without a doubt, for example, so it is possible that Job may not even have existed, or if there is one whom Job is based off, it could have easily been not as a single person, but many, contradicting the way that many literalists believe.
Jesus also spoke in parables, and Paul's writings are rather vague - why? I believe a lot of it is meant to be taken beyond literalism, metaphors and poetry.
This is the problem with translation; things do get lost in translation. As a linguist, I can tell you that for nothing.
Let's say for a second that Jesus taught in Aramaic, and his messages are preserved orally for some time, before written onto paper (maybe there are some in Aramaic that have not been discovered
I think so) - in Greek, the lingua franca, as opposed to the language Jesus. The Hebraisms would be understandable to any Jew of the time, even if the words are word-for-word, a Jew would have been able to go, "Aahh, I understand this!", even if the Jew did not have a perfect knowledge of Hebrew or Aramaic, they would have still for the most part understood the metaphors meant; the problem is when it is delivered to a Gentile, who does not have the same knowledge - and begins to take them out of context.Coupled with the fact the majority of Christians are Gentiles, and reading in the languages literally, not checking back to the sources (for this, I seriously think Bible scholars should go back to Aramaic as well, so they can check them) as many do not have the time, or do not have the know-how, to do this. There are dozens of words in Aramaic and Hebrew that are puns, and since they work by root systems, they can also be lost, and generally, will be.
dawny0826
Mother Heathen
I believe the entirety of the bible. I agree with I Panicked..., there is much that can be read and interpreted quite literally and then there is much that is more symbolic.
The Word is God. It would be impossible for me to grow in my faith if I rejected God's word and instruction.
Smoke
Done here.
When I was a Christian, I would have quoted the Orthodox priest who said, "The Bible is not the Word of God. The Bible is, at best, words about God." Orthodox Christians who are not in a mood to mince words sometimes refer to Protestants as book-worshipers, and not, I think, without good reason.
At the same time, people who say they believe in biblical inerrancy seem gifted with the ability to disregard what it says, except in those relatively rare cases when it says what they want to hear. This is evident not only in certain groups' fixation on homosexuality and abortion, but in the whole dogmatic framework of various churches and sects, whose members go about blithely convinced that their utterly non-biblical concepts (dispensationalism and the concept of "accepting Jesus as your personal savior" spring to mind) are firmly rooted in the Bible.
By treating the Bible as a magical, infallible book, people exempt themselves from the hard work of really trying to understand the Bible, and give themselves license to believe that whatever hunch they may have while looking into its pages is a direct message from God.
At the same time, people who say they believe in biblical inerrancy seem gifted with the ability to disregard what it says, except in those relatively rare cases when it says what they want to hear. This is evident not only in certain groups' fixation on homosexuality and abortion, but in the whole dogmatic framework of various churches and sects, whose members go about blithely convinced that their utterly non-biblical concepts (dispensationalism and the concept of "accepting Jesus as your personal savior" spring to mind) are firmly rooted in the Bible.
By treating the Bible as a magical, infallible book, people exempt themselves from the hard work of really trying to understand the Bible, and give themselves license to believe that whatever hunch they may have while looking into its pages is a direct message from God.
Last edited:
Smoke
Done here.
I've been trying, but failing, to think of a nice way to say "See?"If one believes they have the Holy Spirit, it's the Spirit that provides confirmation and revelations. Essentially, the real "magic" lives within the believer. And that "magic" tends to manifest while one is in the Word.
Or at least that's how it works with me.
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
Yawwwn! I'm sorry what was that again?
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
Yaawwwn. I'm sorry, do you have anything useful to say?
nothing is obligated for as human kind.we do got rights to choose.and this is a grate gift from God.animals dont have this u nknow
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
If God was concerned about that, the bible would've been much more clear, coherent and concise from the very beginning, not to mention much more impressive and awe inspiring. In it's present form it is a rather sloppy and underwhelming work.
Skeptic's Annotated Bible / Quran / Book of Mormon
Last edited:
CCAPalandiriel
Member
I'm surprised you think that. Have you even read the whole thing? Its far from sloppy and underwhelming...the metanarrative is amazing when you see it. The creation...fall...and the ultimate redemption of mankind. It is truly beautiful.