How to investigate a Holy Book?

[oldbadger]

Good for you. I'm so skeptical now. And that is because I was so gullible when I was young and trusted that religious people were telling me the truth.

Ha ha! Me too!
I was such an idiot for so long, in fact I wonder how I ever got through to any level of survival. It took many years for any level of sense to surface.... .......... true.

Working in commercial investigation for so long did eventually drag me towards a better general understanding.....

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Question is, when a person wants to investigate a holy book (such as Quran, Bible, or Bahai scriptures), what should be the position of the investigator initially?

1. Should he start as a person who 'knows the book is Not from God', and then just tries to find problems in the book to prove it?
2. Should he start as a person who is considering the possibility that the book is from God?
3. Or He should not have any goal, or position. He should just read and investigate the text to see where it gets him to? (Completely neutral)

Which one is the fair position to begin with, when you want to read and investigate a holy book which claims to be from God?

I'ld go for option 3.
And may I note that calling it a "holy" book, is technically already a departure of the neutrality of that option.

​

Does it matter if your initial position is fair?

Yes.

From your experience how has been your position? Were you biased in anyway?

My position was 1.
The thing is, I didn't go into those books (bible and quran) blindly. I was already well aware of what christianity and islam were and had a rough idea of what I'ld find in those books - which was only confirmed when I came around to reading it myself.

I wouldn't call it a bias though. I'ld call it a priori knowledge instead.
The word "bias" kind of implies there are a unjustified a priori ideas. I don't feel like my a priori beliefs were unjustified.

Do you think being bias helps you to really investigate and understand a holy book in the right way?

Why do I have the feeling that what you mean by "the right way", is more then meets the eye?

To me, "the right way" is the "normal way" of assessing the accuracy / truth value of anything: see how it matches up against observable reality.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Since holy books are supposedly from God, I think the first thing an investigator should do is to find out what God is. Then it would be easier to figure out what is being said. One should assume a book from God will not be written like books from people.

The problem with that is that each religious scripture tends to define god(s) on its own terms, and you actually have to read the scripture to know about it.

So it's not like you can first try and found out what it being meant by god only to then read it, because you have to read it before you can understand how it defines the god it talks about....

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I would first start to find out where the original book came from and who wrote it.

It doesn't help much if people dont even know its origins and authorship.

If it makes claims about reality, then you can cross reference it against reality and then I'ld say that it doesn't really matter where it came from or who wrote it. If it's wrong it's wrong and if it's right it's right.

Its merrit should be able to stand on its own, no matter its origins.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Sorcery - the reason they resorted to that accusation is because they didn't want to accept miracles.

Or because they were simply ignorant, superstitious and gullible, off course....

Plenty of people have been accused of sorcery and witchcraft. A great portion of which has seen their heads chopped of or have been burried alive, burned alive, drowned in a lake, etc.

Mohammad did raise the dead per Shiite hadiths, and as for the Quran, it only says their final excuse was to bring "all their forefathers" back, which is too much of a demand, since God is not going to resurrect all their ancestors nor would they accept at this point if he did.

I have no reason to believe it when it makes such claims.
I have many reasons not to believe it.

 

[Hawkins]

From your experience how has been your position? Were you biased in anyway? Do you think being bias helps you to really investigate and understand a holy book in the right way?

It boils down to why do you need a God for.

Why humans need a God at all? We need a God for only one thing, or else God is only optional and can be ignored. It is a human nature to prepare for one's own future. That's why you need a pension plan when getting old. All left is how far a future you need to prepare for. It's a matter of faith, either you believe with faith that life ends here (thus a pension plan is good enough and you don't need a God with this assumption of faith), or you believe with faith that life may go beyond.

If you believe that there's a chance that life may go beyond our physical death, then you need God for the info of what could possibly lying ahead. Humans are incapable of telling such a future, that's where they need a God for.

If the US government has a critical message for its citizens, what should it do? Either it keeps each individual informed of the message, or if this is not possible then it needs to turn on its media such as CNN in full power to broadcast/preached this piece of news. This piece of news should be broadcast/preached to each and every state, not just a particular state.

Similarly, a religion is the media of a God. The holy book is the message to be broadcast/preached. Does this religious media has an explicit effort in preaching the message to every nation? Or is it just for a particular "state"? If the media only broadcast in middle east or India, the effort and message of their gods is thus not for all mankind.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Question is, when a person wants to investigate a holy book (such as Quran, Bible, or Bahai scriptures), what should be the position of the investigator initially?

1. Should he start as a person who 'knows the book is Not from God', and then just tries to find problems in the book to prove it?
2. Should he start as a person who is considering the possibility that the book is from God?
3. Or He should not have any goal, or position. He should just read and investigate the text to see where it gets him to? (Completely neutral)

Which one is the fair position to begin with, when you want to read and investigate a holy book which claims to be from God?
Does it matter if your initial position is fair?

From your experience how has been your position? Were you biased in anyway? Do you think being bias helps you to really investigate and understand a holy book in the right way?

A nuanced version of 1: because "holy books" are false much more often than they're true, we should approach a holy book we've never examined before with the mindset that it's much more likely to be false than true.

Be open to be proven wrong, but don't ignore prior data.

 

[CG Didymus]

A nuanced version of 1: because "holy books" are false much more often than they're true, we should approach a holy book we've never examined before with the mindset that it's much more likely to be false than true.

Be open to be proven wrong, but don't ignore prior data.

Some "holy books" like the Egyptian or Tibetan books of the dead I right off the bat assume are myth or reflect the superstitious beliefs of the people and religion of the time. But I've never read them. I only have that belief because of what Christians have told me.

Now, because of what Baha'is say, I have a similar belief about the Bible, but I take it a step further than Baha'is do. They say the stories aren't historically true but are symbolic of some spiritual truth. For me, if the stories aren't true, than they are myth. And just like the books of any other religion, the stories can be mythical but have some kind of spiritual teaching. But, unlike the Baha'is, I don't see why I should believe the message came from some God and not from people?

Like the Bible, why couldn't it be the Hebrew/Jewish story, told in legend and myth, about their history and their belief about their God? Now I do think that the people at the time went expected to believe the stories as true, and that their God was real and true also. That way, the people would be expected to live by the laws and moral codes that this God of theirs wanted them to live by. And, if they didn't live by those rules, a lot of stories told of how their God punished them.

So, for me, the stories were meant to get people to obey the laws of the land. Which means that anything about God wasn't necessarily true but was hoped that people would believe God was true and watching them. So it makes me read religious writings about God as nothing more than mythical stories.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

They say the stories aren't historically true but are symbolic of some spiritual truth. For me, if the stories aren't true, than they are myth. And just like the books of any other religion, the stories can be mythical but have some kind of spiritual teaching.

I see it has been offered on many occasions that the stories were most likely based on an event, but the event was not the purpose behind the story. The event became a way to tell a more deeper spiritual understanding.

The example is Matthew 8:3 "Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. “I am willing,” he said. “Be clean!” Immediately he was cleansed of his leprosy. 4 Then Jesus said to him, “See that you don’t tell anyone."

The Messengers of God are able to do things such as healing us of our Material ills, but that is not what the story offers as Jesus asked no one is told of that. What the story of Matthew 8 offers is a spiritual solution. It is an opportunity to understand what it means for the dead to bury the dead.

So what is the point in material healing when death is again the ultimate destiny?

It is all about the 2nd Birth, being born again and we can then see that spiritually we also need to be healed of all this things mentioned in Matthew 8. The only way to be healed is complete Faith and servitude to Christ, or we are the dead that will bury the dead.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

A nuanced version of 1: because "holy books" are false much more often than they're true, we should approach a holy book we've never examined before with the mindset that it's much more likely to be false than true.

Be open to be proven wrong, but don't ignore prior data.

Some "holy books" like the Egyptian or Tibetan books of the dead I right off the bat assume are myth or reflect the superstitious beliefs of the people and religion of the time. But I've never read them. I only have that belief because of what Christians have told me.

Now, because of what Baha'is say, I have a similar belief about the Bible, but I take it a step further than Baha'is do. They say the stories aren't historically true but are symbolic of some spiritual truth. For me, if the stories aren't true, than they are myth. And just like the books of any other religion, the stories can be mythical but have some kind of spiritual teaching. But, unlike the Baha'is, I don't see why I should believe the message came from some God and not from people?

Like the Bible, why couldn't it be the Hebrew/Jewish story, told in legend and myth, about their history and their belief about their God? Now I do think that the people at the time went expected to believe the stories as true, and that their God was real and true also. That way, the people would be expected to live by the laws and moral codes that this God of theirs wanted them to live by. And, if they didn't live by those rules, a lot of stories told of how their God punished them.

So, for me, the stories were meant to get people to obey the laws of the land. Which means that anything about God wasn't necessarily true but was hoped that people would believe God was true and watching them. So it makes me read religious writings about God as nothing more than mythical stories.

I see it has been offered on many occasions that the stories were most likely based on an event, but the event was not the purpose behind the story. The event became a way to tell a more deeper spiritual understanding.

The example is Matthew 8:3 "Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. “I am willing,” he said. “Be clean!” Immediately he was cleansed of his leprosy. 4 Then Jesus said to him, “See that you don’t tell anyone."

The Messengers of God are able to do things such as healing us of our Material ills, but that is not what the story offers as Jesus asked no one is told of that. What the story of Matthew 8 offers is a spiritual solution. It is an opportunity to understand what it means for the dead to bury the dead.

So what is the point in material healing when death is again the ultimate destiny?

It is all about the 2nd Birth, being born again and we can then see that spiritually we also need to be healed of all this things mentioned in Matthew 8. The only way to be healed is complete Faith and servitude to Christ, or we are the dead that will bury the dead.

Regards Tony

I think that Christians use them to "prove" that Jesus was God, because he had the power and authority to do supernatural things and to heal incurable diseases and bring people back to life... and to forgive sins. Something that the NT says that only God can do. Since Baha'is don't make Jesus into God, there is no need for those things. But, because of the way they are written, I do believe they were intended to be believed as actual events.

So Baha'is read the Bible looking for the symbolism behind these "fictional" events. And some Christians, like Fundies, read the Bible believing those things really happened, even things like Creation and the Resurrection. It sure leads to some very different beliefs about God.

 

[CG Didymus]

I see it has been offered on many occasions that the stories were most likely based on an event, but the event was not the purpose behind the story. The event became a way to tell a more deeper spiritual understanding.

Yeah, I get it. Like when God obliterated Sodom and Gomorrah. It was based on an actual event but the deeper meaning was... you don't mess with God. No, I don't believe the event ever happened, and I'd be greatly surprised if you, or any Baha'i does. Fire from heaven and Lot's wife turning into a pillar of salt? But still, the deeper meaning was... nobody messes with God if they know what's good for them.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Yeah, I get it. Like when God obliterated Sodom and Gomorrah. It was based on an actual event but the deeper meaning was... you don't mess with God. No, I don't believe the event ever happened, and I'd be greatly surprised if you, or any Baha'i does. Fire from heaven and Lot's wife turning into a pillar of salt? But still, the deeper meaning was... nobody messes with God if they know what's good for them.

Well how about an Amen for that.

Regards Tony

 

[Link]

The destroyed nations. It's a truth.

 

[amatuerscholar]

3 is impossible. No one without interest in a holy book to see if it's true or false, will devote enough time. If you are neutral, it means you are not interested. So many religions, so little time. We have to go to a book to see if it's true or false, we have our expectations, God has his ways to guide, so just go at it. Quran challenges humans to find contradictions in Quran and allows that to be part of their reflection. It says go ahead try to prove it is false. If you can't find a contradiction, better yet, don't give up on proving it false, bring a book like it in terms of guidance and form. In fact, a book claiming to have all guidance required from Humanity is bound to contradict somewhere if not from God, such is the nature of human fallibility.

The case is now, that translations are such that Quran is awfully translated. It's translated and interpreted in a way, that the wonderful Creator of the universe, would never intend. So humans ended up finding faults with Islam and Quran, but this due to history and nature of humans relying on Satanic humans to think for them.

That and there no present miracles and great portion of the Quran is exactly about miracles and why you should not accuse those bringing such signs to be sorcerers.

I don't think that's true. I can approach the Bible from a neutral point of view while still being a Christian. It doesn't mean I'm not interested in the book, it simply means I view it differently. I view it as any other historical work, or group of works. It's much like when I read Josephus. I have an interest in Josephus, but I attempt to remain neutral while reading his works so I can pick out the fact from the myth.

I don't have to try to prove a book true or false. I can take a middle path, seeing that the book is both true as well as false. That it contains both things that are true and things that aren't.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

The destroyed nations. It's a truth.

Allah brings to naught all civilisations that neglect the commandments given. Allah makes all things new. The Holy Books contain all these warnings and the promises.

That is the history of this world and Allah does not change that way. It is a very good meditation Link as to what is unfolding in the age we live in.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

Allah brings to naught all civilisations that neglect the commandments given. Allah makes all things new. The Holy Books contain all these warnings and the promises.

That is the history of this world and Allah does not change that way. It is a very good meditation Link as to what is unfolding in the age we live in.

Regards Tony

Well supposedly, God wasn't happy with the evil going on and decided to drown everybody except Noah and his family. Still, evil persisted. But, that's assuming that Noah and the Flood are real history. And actually, I hope it isn't, because that would make God kind of dumb to kill everyone when he well knew that his creation was flawed and would just go right back to doing evil. But, we can pretend the story was real, and now several thousands of years later, do you think we'll do better with what God has given us with the Baha'i Faith? No, Baha'is still say God will put us through all kinds of tribulations... and then will people get it right? I would assume you think "yes", but really? People still have the same flaws. God hasn't rewired us. And, if he is going to, why didn't he do it long ago. Rewired to do the right thing all of the time, instead of just some of the time? Or, like some, do wrong most of the time.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Well supposedly, God wasn't happy with the evil going on and decided to drown everybody except Noah and his family. Still, evil persisted. But, that's assuming that Noah and the Flood are real history. And actually, I hope it isn't, because that would make God kind of dumb to kill everyone when he well knew that his creation was flawed and would just go right back to doing evil. But, we can pretend the story was real, and now several thousands of years later, do you think we'll do better with what God has given us with the Baha'i Faith? No, Baha'is still say God will put us through all kinds of tribulations... and then will people get it right? I would assume you think "yes", but really? People still have the same flaws. God hasn't rewired us. And, if he is going to, why didn't he do it long ago. Rewired to do the right thing all of the time, instead of just some of the time? Or, like some, do wrong most of the time.

Such to me is an ever advancing civilization. Will we learn the full lesson this time. No, but we will learn more and progress to a unity of mankind under One God. I see in the far distant future, that it will be a Universe we have to connect with.

Regards Tony