Belief in God or texts

[idav]

Does belief in god drive the belief in particular texts or is it the other way around. The bible or Quran are true therefore god exists?

 

[LuisDantas]

The desire to believe in a specific form of God must exist, at least, before the Bible or the Quran can be considered convincing.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Religious texts are rather poor arguments for the existence of a god, so I have to believe it is the reverse that is true.

 

[Badran]

From between those two, i think people's belief in god is usually considerably more important and fundamental to them than their belief in texts.

 

[ChristineES]

I started to believe in God before I ever read any religious texts. I can only speak for myself.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Both seem synonymous by way a text can generate a belief, or a belief can produce a text.

 

[Sabour]

Does belief in god drive the belief in particular texts or is it the other way around. The bible or Quran are true therefore god exists?

Generally, the belief that there is God means that there is right and wrong and one is not free to live life the way he want.

Normally, those are the people who begin looking at scriptures because they should be handed something that they can test and see if that is what one must follow.

In this case, people know that there is one scripture and are looking for the "right" scripture.


As for your second part of the question, "The bible or Quran are true therefore god exists", this argument can also be used for those who are atheist or agnostics.

So I think both approaches can be used, the first is for the ones who already believe in God, and the other approach for the ones who don't believe or aren't sure.

I hope that I touched on all the points you were addressing.

 

[idav]

Thanks for the comments, seems pretty unanimous.

If god is the foundation how can any text be more true? Any premise that god exists would make any text possibly true, seems difficult to sort through.

 

[Quintessence]

Pardon, but what does it mean to "believe in" a text? This way of looking at it sounds a bit strange to me. Granted, so does talking about "believing in" the gods, but believing in a text sounds significantly stranger to me than that does.

 

[seeking4truth]

What about all the societies that had belief in God but no written texts?

Belief in God is as old as human society. Writing is much younger.

Before the development of writing people depended on their collective memories and were much better at it than we are today.
It is not just to judge the accuracy of their memories based on own own - we have depended on writing for several centuries but memories were used for many more before that.

 

[Sabour]

Thanks for the comments, seems pretty unanimous.

If god is the foundation how can any text be more true? Any premise that god exists would make any text possibly true, seems difficult to sort through.

I am not sure I followed on this. Can you explain ?

 

[DarrenR]

To me, the belief in texts is almost a form of idolatry. We tend to put the text at a higher level than god. It's understandable because without texts it's difficult for most to have a relationship with god. The problem is we tend to worry more about what the text says than how the text came to be. Religious texts, any of them, have been altered to support the view of the group that uses them. That's why a Christian Bible supports Christianity, the Koran supports Islam, and the Torah supports Judaism. They are all "real" texts but the choice of a religion is usually made before much of any text has been read. Then since they have been "prepped" the appropriate text is studied and it confirms their religion no matter which one they picked, because they seldom read other texts that have different interpretations much less study how the text they are reading came to be.

 

[Thief]

I think the choice is made by your place of birth...first.

Deciding for yourself seems a but more rare.

I believe breaking from tradition is the essence of a strong belief.
Leaning to practice and recital always seemed shallow to me.

Text is useful when attempting to understand why people nod their heads.
Some congregation lean hard to recital, almost to forbiddance of thought.

 

[Sabour]

To me, the belief in texts is almost a form of idolatry. We tend to put the text at a higher level than god. It's understandable because without texts it's difficult for most to have a relationship with god. The problem is we tend to worry more about what the text says than how the text came to be. Religious texts, any of them, have been altered to support the view of the group that uses them. That's why a Christian Bible supports Christianity, the Koran supports Islam, and the Torah supports Judaism. They are all "real" texts but the choice of a religion is usually made before much of any text has been read. Then since they have been "prepped" the appropriate text is studied and it confirms their religion no matter which one they picked, because they seldom read other texts that have different interpretations much less study how the text they are reading came to be.

Am not sure I understood your stand on this. Are you saying we should be more worried about the context or how the text came into place ?

 

[DarrenR]

Am not sure I understood your stand on this. Are you saying we should be more worried about the context or how the text came into place ?

Both. The Koran has context that Christians don't accept. The Christian Bible has context that Muslims don't accept. Etc. Etc. Etc.

The context has to be understood or the text is meaningless, but once the context is understood, it's just as important to learn the history of how and when the text came to be. It's easy to quote text but it's just as easy to quote contradictions from another text.

 

[Sabour]

Both. The Koran has context that Christians don't accept. The Christian Bible has context that Muslims don't accept. Etc. Etc. Etc.

The context has to be understood or the text is meaningless, but once the context is understood, it's just as important to learn the history of how and when the text came to be. It's easy to quote text but it's just as easy to quote contradictions from another text.

Well just to clear things up.

We as Muslims believe in the "Injil" which is revealed to the prophet Jesus peace be upon him. However, we believe that today's bible is not the "Injil" because the bible today contains some word of man as the original was lost.

But, our main problem is not with the bible. I mean even though the bible contains some word of men, there are still many concepts in Christianity that are not found in the bible.

Like the Crucifixion, Trinity, "begotten son", and that Jesus peace be upon him died for people's sins. These concepts can be contradicted within the bible itself.

So our main concern is not in the bible itself, but with the interpretations of the bible as many try to make the bible say what it doesn't.

If you trace how the bible changed over time and what was the original one, you will find that actually Quraan confirms the "bible".

 

[idav]

I am not sure I followed on this. Can you explain ?

We could come into this world with no religion, start believing in god, then pick a text but all texts will verify that god is real. What verifies which texts are from god, which all theists believe in one form or another?

 

[DarrenR]

Well said one-answer. It's all about interpretation of text. I respect the Quraan as much as any other sacred text. I am not Muslim, but I'm not any particular belief. I simply respect that reading all the texts keeps us more open minded.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

If god is the foundation how can any text be more true? Any premise that god exists would make any text possibly true, ...

That is simply nonsense.

 

[idav]

That is simply nonsense.

Belief in god makes it possible that when people say god is here or there, it might be true, with the premise god is real.