Spirituality
22 Apr 05
22 Apr 05
Well? Did God actually write the Bible, in the opinion of the Christians posting in this forum, or did he only inspire its writing? And if the latter, how does the inspiration of the Bible differ from other works of literature and art that are "inspired"?
And come on everyone, try to stick to the subject. I'm sure I'm not alone in not wanting another thread arguing Bible verses.
... --- ...
22 Apr 05
Originally posted by thesonofsaulWhen I say 'God wrote the Bible.' I am essentially saying that all of the human beings who moved the pen were being directed by God. Either through images in their minds, general ideas, and sometimes verbatim.
Well? Did God actually write the Bible, in the opinion of the Christians posting in this forum, or did he only inspire its writing? And if the latter, how does the inspiration of the Bible differ from other works of literature and art that are "inspired"?
And come on everyone, try to stick to the subject. I'm sure I'm not alone in not wanting another thread arguing Bible verses.
... --- ...
Not a word on the original manuscripts was superfluous.
22 Apr 05
Originally posted by DarfiusCare to explain the contradictions I repeatedly raise?
When I say 'God wrote the Bible.' I am essentially saying that all of the human beings who moved the pen were being directed by God. Either through images in their minds, general ideas, and sometimes verbatim.
Not a word on the original manuscripts was superfluous.
Nemesio
22 Apr 05
Originally posted by sasquatch672God took over no one's body. Those who were faithful to God asked for His inspiration, and He gave it to them in those manners.
It's one thing to be be directed by God. I know alot of people who I think are directed by God. (You're not one of them.) It's another thing altogether to have God take over your mind and body a la the lightning girl in "Revelations" and ACTUALLY dictate to a person. So you're admitting in there that while God may have influenced some(?) writi ...[text shortened]... message, and that human translation may have been imperfect because of its very nature. Right?
I'm 'admitting' that God influenced every single word on the original manuscripts and that copyists later made some errors, though I believe somewhere around 99% of the text still has integrity to the originals and the mistakes are largely dealing with numbers and nothing to do with salvation.
22 Apr 05
Originally posted by NemesioNemesio, please don't interpret this as me being rude, but are you familiar with the term 'mutually exclusive'? Merely giving two differing eyewitness accounts is not 'mutually exclusive'. It is telling a story from your eyes that doesn't relate 100% of the facts because we all don't share an objective mind. You may respond that God inspired the writings, but He wasn't concerned with making 4 copies of the Gospel, but rather each writer's viewpoint of Jesus, as each He deemed important for man to see.
Care to explain the contradictions I repeatedly raise?
Nemesio
22 Apr 05
Originally posted by DarfiusThree possibilities, huh? Who decides which is which? I mean, could the resurection of Christ be a general idea, or an image? A metaphor that God wished upon his people perhaps?
When I say 'God wrote the Bible.' I am essentially saying that all of the human beings who moved the pen were being directed by God. Either through images in their minds, general ideas, and sometimes verbatim.
Not a word on the original manuscripts was superfluous.
Paul claimed to be the voice of Christ. Does that mean that everything that Paul wrote needs to be taken as God's voice verbatim?
... --- ...
22 Apr 05
Originally posted by DarfiusWhich two people were present at Creation such that they could give different eyewitness accounts of whether humans were created before or after vegetation?
Nemesio, please don't interpret this as me being rude, but are you familiar with the term 'mutually exclusive'? Merely giving two differing eyewitness accounts is not 'mutually exclusive'. It is telling a story from your eyes that doesn't relate 100% of the facts because we all don't share an objective mind. You may respond that God inspired the w ...[text shortened]... ospel, but rather each writer's viewpoint of Jesus, as each He deemed important for man to see.
22 Apr 05
Originally posted by DarfiusSo was the rock rolled away before or after the women got to the
Nemesio, please don't interpret this as me being rude, but are you familiar with the term 'mutually exclusive'? Merely giving two differing eyewitness accounts is not 'mutually exclusive'. It is telling a story from your eyes that doesn't relate 100% of the facts because we all don't share an objective mind. You may respond that God inspired the w ...[text shortened]... ospel, but rather each writer's viewpoint of Jesus, as each He deemed important for man to see.
tomb?
Nemesio
22 Apr 05
Originally posted by thesonofsaulThe Bible says it is inspired.
Well? Did God actually write the Bible, in the opinion of the Christians posting in this forum, or did he only inspire its writing? And if the latter, how does the inspiration of the Bible differ from other works of literature and art that are "inspired"?
And come on everyone, try to stick to the subject. I'm sure I'm not alone in not wanting another thread arguing Bible verses.
... --- ...
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
(2Ti 3:16 NASB)
But a more specific interpretation of the Greek is that it is "God breathed."
All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
(2Ti 3:16 ESV)
It was not dictated, but it contains the information that God intended.
22 Apr 05
1 edit
Originally posted by ColettiThe Bible says that 'All Scripture is inspired,' not that itself is inspired.
The Bible says it is inspired.
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
(2Ti 3:16 NASB)
But a more specific interpretation of the Greek is that ...[text shortened]... t dictated, but it contains the information that God intended.
The Bible fails to define what precisely Scripture is.
That was decided at a council in the 4th century.
The Protestants later removed some books in the 16th century,
claiming that over a thousand years' worth of acceptance as inspiration
was invalid.
So, precisely, the Bible does not say that it is inspired.
Nemesio
22 Apr 05
Originally posted by thesonofsaulNo , and there's enough proof for that in the bible itself.
Well? Did God actually write the Bible, in the opinion of the Christians posting in this forum, or did he only inspire its writing? And if the latter, how does the inspiration of the Bible differ from other works of literature and art that are "inspired"?
And come on everyone, try to stick to the subject. I'm sure I'm not alone in not wanting another thread arguing Bible verses.
... --- ...
and much more in clay tablets written long before Abram so therefore much earlier than Moses.
22 Apr 05
Originally posted by NemesioThe Bible is Scripture. The words in the Bible are not talking about some other writings when it refers to Scripture.
The Bible says that 'All Scripture is inspired,' not that itself is inspired.
The Bible fails to define what precisely Scripture is.
That was decided at a council in the 4th century.
The Protestants later removed some books in the 16th century,
claiming that over a thousand years' worth of acceptance as inspiration
was invalid.
So, precisely, the Bible does not say that it is inspired.
Nemesio
The Bible is not a dictionary. I don't think you will find the word definition of define in the Scriptures. Nor will you find the word Bible. But you can figure out what the word "Scripture" means by reasoning through the propositional truths found in the Bible regarding Scripture, inspiration, knowledge, revelation, the Word, etc. You put all that together to figure out what the term Scripture means. And "Bible" is just a synonym for Scripture. It's not difficult to understand.
The question has to do with what Christians believe about the inspiration of Scripture - what does that mean. And a Christian must turn to the Scriptures to see what it says about the issue. There is no greater authority on Scripture than Scripture itself.
22 Apr 05
2 edits
Originally posted by ColettiWhen that passage in I Timothy was composed, there was no Bible.
The Bible is Scripture. The words in the Bible are not talking about some other writings when it refers to Scripture.
The Bible is not a dictionary. I don't think you will find the word definition of define in the Scriptures. ...[text shortened]... There is no greater authority on Scripture than Scripture itself.
He didn't know that Revelation would be at the end, and St Mark
would be after St Matthew. The Bible as it exists now did not exist.
He didn't even know what books would later be viewed as Scripture.
It was compiled by a Council in the 4th century, during which there was
great debate about what should and shouldn't be included -- that is,
what is and is not deemed Scripture is not wholey delineated by the
NT.
To use that passage to justify that Revelation is 'Scripture' is
anachronistic to say the least.
You are taking for granted the book which you call 'The Bible' is a
complete text, when it is, in fact, a bunch of books compiled together.
And, if you want to argue that God guided the council, then you will
have to argue that the Protestants desecrated that canon when they
excised the seven books from their version.
Nemesio
22 Apr 05
Originally posted by DarfiusAs an aside, JS Bach is said to have written his works for the glory of God. Whether he was Divinely inspired or inspired by his belief is moot; we are lucky to have his music.
God took over no one's body. Those who were faithful to God asked for His inspiration, and He gave it to them in those manners.
I'm 'admitting' that God influenced every single word on the original manuscripts and that copyists later made some errors, though I believe somewhere around 99% of the text still has integrity to the originals and the mistakes are largely dealing with numbers and nothing to do with salvation.
Just two cents from the peanut gallery😛
http://www.johann-sebastian-bach.org/