• 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!

God-Inspired Scripture

Jayhawker Soule

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
blue taylor said:
No text is God inspired. There are thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of texts about some kind of god or another. Most every religion has "god-inspired" texts
Click to expand...
So out of these "thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of texts" not one is "god-inspired." Just how many have you read?
 
Jayhawker Soule

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
blue taylor said:
They all claim to be inspired by a god. They can not all be right, unless there are a lot of gods. But they can all be wrong.
Click to expand...
You really should stop while you're behind. :D

  • You have not read even a fraction of these "thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of texts" and, therefore have no basis for your calim.
  • Even if it was true that every one of these "thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of texts" claimed to be god inspired, and even if every single individual text contradicted each of the other "thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of texts", that is no basis for claiming, as you do, that "No text is God inspired."
You're just not very good at this ... :(
 
B

blue taylor

Active Member
Jayhawker Soule said:
You really should stop while you're behind. :D

  • You have not read even a fraction of these "thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of texts" and, therefore have no basis for your calim.
  • Even if it was true that every one of these "thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of texts" claimed to be god inspired, and even if every single individual text contradicted each of the other "thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of texts", that is no basis for claiming, as you do, that "No text is God inspired."
You're just not very good at this ... :(
Click to expand...
No text can be inspired by god unless god exists.
 
savagewind

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Jayhawker Soule said:
Sorry if I overlooked it: has anyone offered a workable definition of "God Inspired"?
Click to expand...
I have rejected the popular Christian opinion that it means it was written by God using secretaries.
2 Timothy 3:16 uses the word theopneustos translated, God breathed. theos and pneó.
Ancient people knew what wind can do. They knew it can destroy but it can also lead a boat to somewhere. There is much you can read in scripture about the wind. 2 Timothy means all scripture is god wind. God is some one they obeyed and feared. Wind is something that does what it "wants". John 3:8
 
Redemptionsong

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
Neo Deist said:
My two cents...

1. Humans make mistakes all the time. Humans wrote the Bible, and every other holy book on the planet. Logic would tell you that those hoy books contain errors.

2. God inspired does not mean "God came down from the cosmos, sat at a desk with quill and ink, and wrote the Bible." Religions have a habit of saying that the Bible (or their version of it) is God inspired with the emphasis being that you can't question it. Why not? Because every religion knows that it has some BS in it, and they'd rather not talk about it.

I can look at a waterfall and be inspired to do a painting.

3. Science prevails where religions often flounder.
Click to expand...

A truth is a truth, whether revealed through science or through the spirit. God created the heaven and the earth. I do, however, believe that God is perfect, and that he is capable of delivering a perfect word through his prophets. Errors may arise through later copying, but the safeguards against such errors are rigorously enforced and reduce the likelihood of error to a minimum. Furthermore, in many cases (particularly with the NT) it's possible to compare ancient manuscripts to discover where these errors have crept in.

There are other forms of inspiration, as you mention, but I do not believe that these come close to the experience of being called by God to speak his Word. As it says in Jeremiah, 'Then said I, Ah, Lord God! Behold, I cannot speak: for I am a child. But the LORD said unto me, Say not, I am a child: for thou shalt go to all that I send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak. Be not afraid of their faces: for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith the LORD. Then the LORD put forth his hand, and touched my mouth, And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth.'
 
Last edited:
Redemptionsong

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
Riverwolf said:
Yes.

Because, in fact, not all humans need love. There are people who lack this need.
Click to expand...

Are you serious, Riverwolf?
I've been fostering kids for the last 18 years and I can tell you from experience that when children are neglected they grow up with serious difficulties and mental health issues.

We all need to be loved and nurtured.
 
Redemptionsong

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
Ingledsva said:
Well obviously special people in Tanakh are going to be put forward as having attributes of the coming JEWISH Messiah. That has nothing to do with Jesus. He claimed to be the Jewish Messiah, even did some of the things he thought that Messiah was supposed to do, - which of course he knew, being Jewish. But he didn't fulfill the actual prophecies.
Click to expand...

OK, Ingledsva, lets have a look at some of Isaiah's prophecies.

But maybe you could start by giving me what you understand to be the Jewish messianic expectation. We can hardly determine whether Jesus fulfils an expectation without knowing what it is and where, in scripture, it has come from.
 
Redemptionsong

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
arthra said:
Well "redemption song" thanks for your post... I don't see that we agree regarding Prophet Muhammad and the Qur'an. Muhammad as you may already know claimed descent from Abraham through Ishmael thus the covenant of Abraham with God continued through His children. There were even in the Bible non-Israelite prophets. Abraham was a progenitor of Israelites and Ishmaelites. The racial identity of Prophet Job is not apparent... and Cyrus a Persian was the Lord's Anointed.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your response. There are a lot of issues that I'd like to discuss here. Let it be known, I do not have a prejudice against Muslims or Baha'is! My interest is in the Truth.

This point above is an interesting one. I want to draw a distinction between the literary prophets of Israel and those in the Bible who are chosen for their obedience and their 'type'. Abraham, for example, was not a literary prophet. He was not chosen by God to be a spokesperson of the Word.

Job, I believe, was an Israelite.

A far more controversial figure is Luke. I believe he was an Israelite by descent, but based on the slimmest of evidence many New Testament commentators claim that he was a Gentile.
 
Last edited:
viole

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Redemptionsong said:
It's evident, from various threads on this site, that there are people who believe that the Bible can be pulled apart without damaging the overall integrity and structure of the whole. They think, for example, that Paul's writings are not authoritative whilst other books in the New Testament are God-breathed. Or they believe that all the books of the New Testament are without divine inspiration, yet accept the writings of the Old Testament (Tanach) as from God.
I would like to suggest that God has given the Bible a perfect weave - an internal structure that cannot be broken.
I would also like to suggest that much misunderstanding, particularly with regard to the Pauline epistles, is the result of failure to appreciate the dispensational nature of God's dealings with mankind.
Click to expand...

Hej Redemptionsong (have we already met somewhere else? Your name is not new to me.)

I think the Bible breaks at page one. We do not really need to go so far as Paul in order to question its authority.

What we can read there is not even remotely close to what we know today. So, unholy humans, with the knoweledge available few thousands years ago, seem more plausible as authors than holy spirits, who should know better.

Don't you think so?

Ciao

- viole
 
Last edited:
Redemptionsong

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
arthra said:
Translation of A.Yusuf Ali

That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
Click to expand...

Twice is it written in the Qur'an, 'they killed him not'. This is, when added to the phrase 'nor crucified him', about as clear a rejection of the crucifixion as you can get!

I would also challenge the idea that Jesus did not die. Even though the Spirit of God returned to God (Luke 23:46) Jesus 'gave up the ghost' (died). Dying was actually a fundamental part of his earthly mission, as the gift of myrrh (Matthew 2:11) symbolized. The references to his death are so extensive that there can only be said to exist a clear contradiction between the Bible and Qur'an. I can only imagine that this contradiction exists because Muhammad did not understand the importance of Jesus' death in bringing about redemption (John 11:50-52).
 
viole

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Redemptionsong said:
I can only imagine that this contradiction exists because Muhammad did not understand the importance of Jesus' death in bringing about redemption (John 11:50-52).
Click to expand...

Which is something Muslims and Jews might share.

Ciao

- viole
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top