The literal & infallible word of God

[jcmasters]

Excellent point.

My problem with this thread is that a lot of people are arguing about the infallibility of a book that they barely know anything about. If you have a problem with certain parts of the Bible, do some research about the historical context and exactly who the audience of the book is. There are plenty of bibles that include this kind of information. If you read the passage, understand the context, and STILL disagree with it, THEN you can argue its infallibility.

Just arguing what you THINK rather than what you KNOW is merely that: arguing.

Right, and of course you know that the detractor will say, "How is it that we 'KNOW' anything?"

Jesus was pretty clear that you have to have a child's mindset in order to enter the Kingdom. Children don't require a lot of proof. Of course, the detractor will say that it's just another form of brainwashing.
But another point on proof is found in many places in the Bible. Adam and Eve were in God's presence directly, and yet they still disobeyed. The Israelites were in God's direct presence at the base of Mt. Sinai and yet they still disobeyed. They had God's direct presence in the 40 year traveling in the wilderness, and yet they still disobeyed.

So, this whole bit about "I'll believe in God when I have proof he exists," is really a moot point. It's been tried already.

As to the original purpose of this thread, consider this:
Put yourself in God's place for a moment for this example. Let's say you wanted to get your message out to your creation. Time has no meaning for you, and you want your message to come from different angles, different sources, and different times but the final product be congruent enough upon perfunctory cursory inspection.
If you are all knowing, all powerful, and unrestrained, wouldn't you simply MAKE that happen? The Bible, and the Jewish people are still around for a reason. God made it that way.

The Bible is not a collusion of effort...it can't be because of the time periods in which it was written.
If we look at it from God's point of view, and not ours, it's much more clear.

Yours,

JC Masters

 

[angellous_evangellous]

If we look at it from God's point of view, and not ours, it's much more clear.

If we were able to do that, we wouldn't need a Bible or anything else.

 

[jcmasters]

If we were able to do that, we wouldn't need a Bible or anything else.

That's what the Bible is for. To show us God's perspective. Problem is, we're too stuck looking at it from our own perspectives that we miss the point entirely.

JC Masters

 

[kadzbiz]

Cool. I believe that Kadzbiz's ability to bilocate proves that he's the authority.

I've looked up bilocate. Not found except in wikipedia and that explanation doesn't make sense with your comment. Please explain what you have stated thanks. I can't comment on your comment until I understand it.

... I'm also new to these forums......I agree that you can get 4 people who observed an event, who come up with different perspectives.....
Girl's perspective: I was crossing the side street and the bus broadsided me on purpose........Who did the cops believe? .....

Firstly, welcome. Secondly, I'm not talking about perspectives, I'm talking about completely different series of events or actions. And it doesn't matter what cops believe, we don't do the judging in a case, the court does. A cops duty is just to collect evidence, whether it's true or false.

......My problem with this thread is that a lot of people are arguing about the infallibility of a book that they barely know anything about. .....

Hey? There are people that are experts on the bible who still argue about it with other experts.

And those who read it.

No Willamena, those who read it only have an interpretation of the truth. You can only know the truth 100% if you are the creator or the creator has told you its meaning.

 

[kadzbiz]

......If we look at it from God's point of view, and not ours, it's much more clear......

You cannot, simple as that.

That's what the Bible is for. To show us God's perspective. Problem is, we're too stuck looking at it from our own perspectives that we miss the point entirely.

This is my whole point. The bible was written by men, not God. Men who wanted to tell people "how it is". The bible may have some historical value as a book (put aside what is may do psychologically for one's spiritual well-being as I've got nothing against the bible with respect of how it may help people in their daily lives) but it is only as book. What is written in the bible as far as what God said or did should be taken in the same context as any living person today coming up to you in the street and telling you that God sat down with them last night and had a chat.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

What is written in the bible as far as what God said or did should be taken in the same context as any living person today coming up to you in the street and telling you that God sat down with them last night and had a chat.

But the Bible is not in that context. The enduring antiquity of the Bible and its role in worldwide human communities does command a bit more respect than someone on the street coming up with something last night.

 

[Smoke]

I've looked up bilocate. Not found except in wikipedia and that explanation doesn't make sense with your comment. Please explain what you have stated thanks. I can't comment on your comment until I understand it.

I might have made it up. Bilocation is the ability to be in two places at once. Some saints are reputed to have had this ability. I have just as much reason to believe you can be in two places at once as I have to believe in Jesus' empty tomb.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

That's what the Bible is for. To show us God's perspective. Problem is, we're too stuck looking at it from our own perspectives that we miss the point entirely.

JC Masters

But how do we read the Bible from God's perspective rather than our own?

Too much writing and not enough reading I suspect is the problem here.

 

[Francine]

I might have made it up. Bilocation is the ability to be in two places at once. Some saints are reputed to have had this ability. I have just as much reason to believe you can be in two places at once as I have to believe in Jesus' empty tomb.

Jesus would be turning over in his grave to hear such unbelief.

 

[kadzbiz]

But the Bible is not in that context. The enduring antiquity of the Bible and its role in worldwide human communities does command a bit more respect than someone on the street coming up with something last night.

And if someone having spoken to God last night wrote it down in a diary and that diary was around in another 1000 years, does that make it more credible?

I might have made it up. Bilocation is the ability to be in two places at once. Some saints are reputed to have had this ability. I have just as much reason to believe you can be in two places at once as I have to believe in Jesus' empty tomb.

I have been known to be in two places at once.

 

[Gaddock]

JCMasters wrote:
"Put yourself in God's place for a moment for this example. Let's say you wanted to get your message out to your creation. Time has no meaning for you, and you want your message to come from different angles, different sources, and different times but the final product be congruent enough upon perfunctory cursory inspection."

This is all very well but when we come up with blatent contridictions in the Bible this does represent a problem for those who want to use it as a source of Gods teachings to mankind. If the Bible contains errors that are the product of the human beings whixh write it then we have to ask whether it is also wrong about doctrine - whether the teachings are also the culturally influenced too. Many none fundamentalist Christians do beleive this is the case in regards to issues such as the role of women and homosexuality.

Gaddock

 

[jcmasters]

Firstly, welcome. Secondly, I'm not talking about perspectives, I'm talking about completely different series of events or actions. And it doesn't matter what cops believe, we don't do the judging in a case, the court does. A cops duty is just to collect evidence, whether it's true or false.

Ok, kadzbiz, thanks for the welcome. Twice.

What completely different series of events or actions are you referring to, in a biblical context, of course.
And yes, I am familiar with police and the court system, but the cops duty was not what I was referring to. You know as well as I do that attorneys (and juries and judges) view perfectly congruent testimonies extremely suspiciously. This is because, as you yourself pointed out, it doesn't happen very often.

What remains is where do you see conflicting testimonies?

Love the back and forth, as always,

JC Masters

 

[jcmasters]

You cannot, simple as that.



This is my whole point. The bible was written by men, not God. Men who wanted to tell people "how it is". The bible may have some historical value as a book (put aside what is may do psychologically for one's spiritual well-being as I've got nothing against the bible with respect of how it may help people in their daily lives) but it is only as book. What is written in the bible as far as what God said or did should be taken in the same context as any living person today coming up to you in the street and telling you that God sat down with them last night and had a chat.

I respectfully disagree, kadzbiz. I think you can see things from God's point of view by studying his word.

You say that the human authors of the bible wanted to tell people "how it is", but many of the authors were extremely reluctant to be involved. Moses and Paul were very good examples.
And I would give a modern day prophet nearly zero credibility because his/her words have not stood the test of time, like the Bible has.

I'm not asking this to be rude, or disrepectful, but how much of the Bible have you studied?

Yours,

JC Masters

 

[jcmasters]

But how do we read the Bible from God's perspective rather than our own?

Too much writing and not enough reading I suspect is the problem here.

First off, I don't think I ever addressed you in an insulting or disrepectful manner, and I would appreciate you extending me the same courtesy.

I have read the bible, cover to cover, 9 times, in dutiful studying for a quarter of a century. Twice I read it in Classical Hebrew and Koine Greek (which I know). It's not a reading problem.

To your question, how do you read it from His perspective? Simple, remove yourself from the equation. It's simple, not easy.

JC Masters

 

[jcmasters]

JCMasters wrote:
"Put yourself in God's place for a moment for this example. Let's say you wanted to get your message out to your creation. Time has no meaning for you, and you want your message to come from different angles, different sources, and different times but the final product be congruent enough upon perfunctory cursory inspection."

This is all very well but when we come up with blatent contridictions in the Bible this does represent a problem for those who want to use it as a source of Gods teachings to mankind. If the Bible contains errors that are the product of the human beings whixh write it then we have to ask whether it is also wrong about doctrine - whether the teachings are also the culturally influenced too. Many none fundamentalist Christians do beleive this is the case in regards to issues such as the role of women and homosexuality.

Gaddock

Ok, Gaddock, first let's see where you believe the "blatant contradictions" are. I've had more than a few folks send me to websites and parrot what some believe are blatant contradictions, but I've yet to see any that didn't have logical explanations.

Can we try that first? Post a blatant contradiction that somehow changes the validity or overall message of the bible, and let's handle them one at a time. You game?

JC Masters

 

[Gaddock]

Hi JC,

Well I'm certainly game to talk about contradictions, and I think its important to think a little about what we mean by effecting the validity of the overall Bible message. When we look at how the Bible was put together an indepenent historian might expect that stories about the life of Jesus for example as exemplified in the gospels might be the result of a range of things - some aspects of a persons life combined with myth that we often find forming around people and accounts created later to deal with prophecy. In support of this view we would expect to find aspects of Jesus life being filled in later on in order to 'flesh out' developing mythology. Contradictions that point to this may not in themselves 'compromise the overall Bible message' but they do point to a view of how key elements of the Bible were formed that would not give us cause to think this is an adequate historical account to base our faith on.

An initial example of this that springs to mind is the differing genealogies of Jesus we find in Luke and Matthew. They are found in the core Biblical texts (the Gospels) but would lead us to understand that the story of Jesus life was being fleshed out retrospectively rather than being based on histoircal knowledge.

Regards

Gaddock

 

[angellous_evangellous]

First off, I don't think I ever addressed you in an insulting or disrepectful manner, and I would appreciate you extending me the same courtesy.

I have read the bible, cover to cover, 9 times, in dutiful studying for a quarter of a century. Twice I read it in Classical Hebrew and Koine Greek (which I know). It's not a reading problem.

To your question, how do you read it from His perspective? Simple, remove yourself from the equation. It's simple, not easy.

JC Masters

Fantastic. Can you do it without a lexicon?

 

[sojourner]

That's what the Bible is for. To show us God's perspective. Problem is, we're too stuck looking at it from our own perspectives that we miss the point entirely.

JC Masters

I disagree. The Bible is about humanity's take on the realtionship between God and humanity.

 

[kadzbiz]

....What completely different series of events or actions are you referring to, in a biblical context, of course.....

....I'm not asking this to be rude, or disrepectful, but how much of the Bible have you studied?......

I have read it. I have not studied it. I have read many books and I have not had to study them in order to understand the meaning of what the author has put across. I read the bible 6 months ago (NKJV); I can't recall conflicting accounts of specific events now. I can't recall where I put my watch just yesterday either.

Fantastic. Can you do it without a lexicon?

I just love the word lexicon.

I disagree. The Bible is about humanity's take on the realtionship between God and humanity.

Indeed it is.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I just love the word lexicon.

Me too. Reading the Bible is not the same thing as studying it, and claiming to have read it in both Hebrew and Greek is a bit fantastic (in the sense that it's not very realistic to believe a claim that someone has done it). I do know folks who have mastered both languages and have done it, but these are remarkable people who don't need the lexicon. I am weening myself off of the Greek lexicons, but I have no intention of learning Hebrew that well.

Reading both languages without one would be impressive. Reading the Bible nine times is not.