Is the bible the divine word of god?

wildtimes
reply to post by Tindalos2013

 

Try doing a reload/backpage and retrieve what you wrote...sometimes you can c/p what got truncated and put it in a new 'post' (just say "continued from previous post"). This happens sometimes, I'm not sure why.

reply to post by Woodcarver

 

Who here thinks that every word in the bible is the divinely inspired words of god? Old and new testament.

I don't, but it appears that you are only inquiring of the people who do.

That said, I'm an "Agnostic Deist" - as in: I don't know if there's a 'God', but I'm inclined to think that there is an "Overforce" (heh, just made that up) that is emanated in everything we 'see' in the Universe.

I think science is letting go of "strict materialism" and is recognizing that the "paranormal" is just as bona fide as any 'theory.'

From the time I was a little girl reciting the Nicene Creed, I had problems believing it...
eventually I left the Episcopal church - because I just couldn't wrap my head around the 'I believes'. I didn't, and still don't, 'believe' the creed.

Nevertheless, I think it's possible that IF there was actually a Jesus, AND he actually recuperated from his dismal demise, it might well have been "mind over matter" as the Ancients and Gurus tell us.

But, no. I don't think the Bible is anything more than Men's ideas of things they didn't understand. Kind of like the "King Arthur" legends. The stories are just too similar across the known history of our current status as "civilization."

Anyway, back to the corner to read.

Wishing all of ATS the best of the season,
~wild

i attribute this "overforce" as the physical laws of chemistry which make up all matter in the universe. I think the words paranormal, and supernatural are misnomers attributed to things which we dont understand. ( both of them meaning "something which is not a natural occurance. I believe every thing that happens in this universe is a natural occurance based on physical laws of chemistry and that science is able to demonstrate this better as time goes by)

Our understanding of what a natural occurance is, is getting better and deeper, not the other way around.
Thanks for participating.

Aphorism
If the Bible is the divine word of God, one might suppose that it could have been written better and with more valuable insight.

The gospels were written by humans inspired by God…not by God himself.

Humans are fallible.

As far as the lack of knowledge you gleaned from the bible (presuming you’ve studied it), keep studying. There are certainly worse things you could do with your time. LOL

zedy63
reply to post by Woodcarver

 

thanks i will read them

If you're serious about that Zedy, I'd start with this one.
Bhagavad Gita
I've read it 4 times now and need to do it again - Great Story.
In saying that, I also need to study the bible more.
One of the most inspiring classes I ever took in High-School was 'Mass Media and Religion' - What a pair...

The site that I linked to has all of the religious texts that were referenced. You may find the glaring similarities between them that some have spoken about. I love their page title no matter which religion you are studying. "I Love God".

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

Jesus and God are not the same entity. Jesus makes it clear in his teachings and he never claimed to be God.

I know that it's not in your Koran, Skorp, but he certainly did.

I and the Father are one. (John 10:30 NIV)

superluminal11
reply to post by Woodcarver

 

Depends what your interpretation of Di and vine are.
di-
A prefix that means "two," "twice," or "double." It is used commonly in chemistry, as in dioxide, a compound having two oxygen atoms.

vine:
a : a plant whose stem requires support and which climbs by tendrils or twining or creeps along the ground;


Consider all you college de-(greed) and successful in this New World System ensnared permanently.
In order to see the gods and not be manipulated by them you must be one or at least think like one.
DE- DE
abbreviation for
(Government, Politics & Diplomacy) (formerly in Britain) Department of Employment
de- de1, De before a vowel, d', D' [də]
of; from: occurring as part of some personal names and originally indicating place of origin

greed- greed (grd)
n.
An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth:
1. excessive consumption of or desire for food; gluttony
2. excessive desire, as for wealth or power.



Well of course you think I'm an idiot and crazy.

Actually, i love what you just did there. I am of the thought that words hold the descriptions of what they mean inside of themselves. However, one can make themselves crazy trying to understand them. cheers

reply to post by adjensen


Ok so you do believe that the bible states that jesus and god are the same?

You just dont believe the bible.

If so then we agree completly.

My point earlier was that if the bible states that they are the same then why shouldnt believers, attribute the old test to jesus?

reply to post by seabag

The gospels were written by humans inspired by God…not by God himself.

Humans are fallible.

As far as the lack of knowledge you gleaned from the bible (presuming you’ve studied it), keep studying. There are certainly worse things you could do with your time. LOL

Well to be fair, humans have merely claimed they were inspired by God; but remember, humans are fallible.

I enjoyed Ecclesiastes personally.

seabag

Aphorism
If the Bible is the divine word of God, one might suppose that it could have been written better and with more valuable insight.

The gospels were written by humans inspired by God…not by God himself.

Humans are fallible.

As far as the lack of knowledge you gleaned from the bible (presuming you’ve studied it), keep studying. There are certainly worse things you could do with your time. LOL

So do you believe the bible is fallible?

reply to post by Woodcarver

Ok so you do believe that the bible states that jesus and god are the same?

You just dont believe the bible.

When did I say that I didn't believe the Bible?

As a Catholic, I am not a literalist -- I see the Bible for what it is, a text that was written over 1,500 years by men, and which includes literal historical events, myths, poetry, prophecy and prose that tells the story of God's relationship to a people, and their relationship to him.

I read the Bible holistically, not literally, and I believe that is how it was intended to be read.

adjensen
reply to post by Woodcarver

 

Ok so you do believe that the bible states that jesus and god are the same?

You just dont believe the bible.

When did I say that I didn't believe the Bible?

As a Catholic, I am not a literalist -- I see the Bible for what it is, a text that was written over 1,500 years by men, and which includes literal historical events, myths, poetry, prophecy and prose that tells the story of God's relationship to a people, and their relationship to him.

I read the Bible holistically, not literally, and I believe that is how it was intended to be read.

Ok fair enough, but if you read it that way, arent you just interpreting it to fit your personal beliefs? And wouldnt you then have to accept every other interpretation of it? What about it dont you agree with?

No, the bible is not the divine word of God, but it was inspired by God. It was inspired by God in the same way that a lie is inspired by truth in my opinion, they used the truth then twisted it into a lie through misinterpretation, interpolation, and editing.

The numerous contradictions throughout the bible and the contradictions between doctrine and the word are proof enough for me. One example of doctrine contradicting what is written is the idea of original sin put forth by the Catholic church.

Ezekiel 18
20 The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them.

If the child shall not share the guilt of the father or vice versa, why does all of mankind share the guilt of Adam as Christian doctrine states?

The bible certainly is NOT the word of god, but a counterfeit version of it.

Woodcarver

seabag

Aphorism
If the Bible is the divine word of God, one might suppose that it could have been written better and with more valuable insight.

The gospels were written by humans inspired by God…not by God himself.

Humans are fallible.

As far as the lack of knowledge you gleaned from the bible (presuming you’ve studied it), keep studying. There are certainly worse things you could do with your time. LOL

So do you believe the bible is fallible?

I don’t believe every word of the bible should be taken literally. I believe sometimes God intended a literal meaning, sometimes a figurative meaning, and occasionally both.

To answer your question, I do believe mistranslations and intentional omissions do call into question the accuracy of the stories. The bible is full of different viewpoints, several obvious discrepancies, and in some cases irreconcilable contradictions.

Does that make the bible fallible? I guess so! As fallible as the people who wrote the gospels.

No, the god in the bible is described as a truly evil git, whereas Jesus sounds like a pretty cool guy. Plus even in the Bible, the various contributors disagree with each other at times on accounts - and that's before you have the multiple translations and versions to content with.

They were stories written down 100s of years after the event so the Chinese whisper effect means that if they ever did have any basis in reality, by the time they were put on paper it bore no resemblance to the original.

One thing I never got is why god didn't just write it himself to avoid all the confusion.

reply to post by Woodcarver

Ok fair enough, but if you read it that way, arent you just interpreting it to fit your personal beliefs? And wouldnt you then have to accept every other interpretation of it?

Here is what "holistically" means:

ho·lis·tic adjective \hō-ˈlis-tik\
: relating to or concerned with complete systems rather than with individual parts (Source)

By that, it means that you read any part of it in the context of all of it, interpreting the text through itself. As I said, I believe that this is the way that the text was intended to be read.

What about it dont you agree with?

I don't know that I "disagree" with any of it, but I likely view the term in a different fashion than you do.

@adjensen--- user woodcarver asked a valid question. You dodged it by seperating Jesus from the Ot. Then you say Jesus is the same as God. You can read the bible any way you want, but if, like you say, Jesus is God, then Jesus is accountable for the nasty bits in the Ot.

Woodcarver
Who here thinks that every word in the bible is the divinely inspired words of god? Old and new testament.

Even if there was such a thing as "God," which is so poorly defined as to be essentially incomprehensible, it's unlikely that he/she/it would use something as crude and easily misconstrued as a book to get a message across. This God is an all-powerful being, supposedly. Rather than use vague words and stories, it might want to just impart or bestow a message to each of us right into our own heads, so there would be no misinterpretation or misunderstanding.

The problem with God is that it always seems to do things the hard way.

@adjensen...''I and the Father are one.'' _________________________________________ Its not the same as Jesus saying ''I am God''. One who reads the Bible holistically would weigh that verse with all those other verses where Jesus and God are mentioned as seperate entities.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

You can read the bible any way you want, but if, like you say, Jesus is God, then Jesus is accountable for the nasty bits in the Ot.

I believe that I have made it abundantly clear, in both this discussion and others that you and I have had, that I am not a literalist, so I do not obsess over "the nasty bits in the Ot" (or the Old Testament, in general.)

@woodcarver.... ''Then how can you tell which words are divine, and which are to be seen as metaphor, or symbolic?
'' __________________________________________ This question deserves its very own thread Imo. According to some polls, many Christians read the bible in a non-literal way. What the polls DONT reveal is exactly what parts are considered 'metaphorical' or 'symbolic'. I guess its open ended allowing Christians to decide for themselves. That way, I guess a christian could read the Bible as saying that Jesus only metaphorically died for peoples sins and was only symbolically raised from the dead.

sk0rpi0n
@woodcarver.... ''Then how can you tell which words are divine, and which are to be seen as metaphor, or symbolic?
'' __________________________________________ This question deserves its very own thread Imo. According to some polls, many Christians read the bible in a non-literal way. What the polls DONT reveal is exactly what parts are considered 'metaphorical' or 'symbolic'. I guess its open ended allowing Christians to decide for themselves. That way, I guess a christian could read the Bible as saying that Jesus only metaphorically died for peoples sins and was only symbolically raised from the dead.

Which can only result in one hell of a screwy interpretive mess. Seems a tad self-defeating, really. Particularly given the billions of people being "saved" through a "narrow gate" that has taken on myriad shades of color and meaning worldwide. None can wholly agree on the process or the result except in the most vague and unhelpful of senses. This is, of course, an observation made from where I'm sitting.