Evidence that Man wrote the Bible, not God.

[Kal'Stang]

I've never heard anyone say god wrote the bible. It's always called "the word of god written by man". The qu'ran is believed to have been God's exact words I think. Get your books right this whole thread is useless.

The only time that I have ever heard it phrased "the word of god, written by man" is when such arguements such as mine arise. Otherwise I have always heard just the phrase "the word of god". You certainly don't hear such phrasing as you have written when sitting in a church. And I've visited many a church from many different aspects of the Christian religion.

 

[LowDown]

And therein lies the problem.

Who has more faith, the person who follows a book written by men...or the person who believes without the same book or anything else?

Well, good luck with that. There's no telling where you'll end up. I assume you reject the other foundations of belief, i.e., reason, tradition and experience, also since they are man made. (You seem to have precluded even the possibility of divine inspiration, except, oddly enough, for yourself.) You're in danger of falling into solipsism.

 

[Kal'Stang]

Well, good luck with that. There's no telling where you'll end up. I assume you reject the other foundations of belief, i.e., reason, tradition and experience, also since they are man made. (You seem to have precluded even the possibility of divine inspiration, except, oddly enough, for yourself.) You're in danger of falling into solipsism.

Re Reason: Why would I reject reason? That is not man made, that is a simple extension of being Human. It is not man made like the bible.

Re Tradition: Yes, I do reject tradition as tradition is the reason used to enact lots of Rights violations. Thankfully the US is pulling away from tradition.

Re experiance: Experiance is not man made. It is a simple extension of being Human. It is not man made like the bible.

And no, I'm in no danger of solipsism. I'm quite aware that my mind is not the only one that exists. Otherwise...why would I be on a forum?

As for where I end up....thats up to God, not me.

 

[LowDown]

As for where I end up....thats up to God, not me.

So, apparently you're the only person in creation who is capable of recieving inspiration from God. Solipsism it is.

 

[Kal'Stang]

So, apparently you're the only person in creation who is capable of recieving inspiration from God. Solipsism it is.

:lamo So because I said that its up to God on where I end up you think that's solipsism? We were talking about where I'm going to end up weren't we? Wouldn't that sort of imply after I die? Also wouldn't my phrasing indicate that I have no clue as to where I'm going to end up? Hardly receiving inspiration from God there am I?

You assume too much young padawan. :mrgreen:

 

[Slyhunter]

The Bible is the spiritual core of Christianity. You can't dismiss the Bible as being purely a creation of men and be a Christian. Period.

The Bible was written by men inspired by God.

which man wrote the book of Mary?

 

[LowDown]

which man wrote the book of Mary?

Bad faith is duly noted.

 

[brothern]

The Bible is the spiritual core of Christianity. You can't dismiss the Bible as being purely a creation of men and be a Christian. Period.

The Bible was written by men inspired by God.

Err ... yes and no. To any particular flavor of Christian, their doctrinal views make the world go round. So in their self-centric view, "only Christians read the Bible." In those minds, Christianity is equated to their own views on God, and no one else can possibly be a Christian unless they agree with them (and only them).

However step outside of that purely subjective worldview, and well, we can see that the Christian religion as a whole has (1) numerous doctrines concerning the Bible's inspiration and (2) has actual substantively different Bibles floating around. I don't mean just different textual translations of scriptures, but Bibles with different constituent books as well.

It's no different than how Shia and Sunni Muslims refer to different scriptural authorities. Both religious communities are Muslims who follow Islam. There's always going to be that particular Muslim fundamentalist that refers to other Muslims as heathens and "non-Muslims" for their choice of literature, but anyone with an interest in studying religions can certainly say that Shia-Sunni are forms of Islam. Just as we can say that while there are differing Christian doctrines concerning Biblical inspiration in Lutheran vs. evangelical vs. UCC denominations; they're all still forms of Christianity that have legitimate claim to the word "Christian".

 

[ludin]

We all know today that there is no such thing as magic and there never has been. Despite what people believed 2000 years ago or even 200 years ago. And yet the bible, both new and old, mentions magic several times either by mentioning certain people (Egypts Pharoh who's magicians couldn't tell him the meaning of his dreams so he called for Joseph for instance) or by simply saying to not associate with such as practice "sorcery".

Why would God, who people say wrote the bible even mention sorcery if such a thing does not exist?

49 Bible Verses about Magic

Of course the bible was written by man. no one will argue that.
it was inspired by God for them to write the books though.

 

[Reformedfindlay]

The only time that I have ever heard it phrased "the word of god, written by man" is when such arguements such as mine arise. Otherwise I have always heard just the phrase "the word of god". You certainly don't hear such phrasing as you have written when sitting in a church. And I've visited many a church from many different aspects of the Christian religion.

Nope, the Jesuits always say the word of god and then tell us (I go to Jesuit private school) that the bible was written by people and not God.

It's the qu'ran which is the literal word God according to any of the Abrahamic religions.

 

[LowDown]

Err ... yes and no. To any particular flavor of Christian, their doctrinal views make the world go round. So in their self-centric view, "only Christians read the Bible." In those minds, Christianity is equated to their own views on God, and no one else can possibly be a Christian unless they agree with them (and only them).

However step outside of that purely subjective worldview, and well, we can see that the Christian religion as a whole has (1) numerous doctrines concerning the Bible's inspiration and (2) has actual substantively different Bibles floating around. I don't mean just different textual translations of scriptures, but Bibles with different constituent books as well.

It's no different than how Shia and Sunni Muslims refer to different scriptural authorities. Both religious communities are Muslims who follow Islam. There's always going to be that particular Muslim fundamentalist that refers to other Muslims as heathens and "non-Muslims" for their choice of literature, but anyone with an interest in studying religions can certainly say that Shia-Sunni are forms of Islam. Just as we can say that while there are differing Christian doctrines concerning Biblical inspiration in Lutheran vs. evangelical vs. UCC denominations; they're all still forms of Christianity that have legitimate claim to the word "Christian".

I think you over emphasize the differences in various versions of the Bible. They all tell the same basic story, are more alike than different. I don't know of any Christian sect that does not have the Gospel at its core. Even non-trinitarian sects like the Jehovah's Witnesses use what is essentially the same text with a few changes.

 

[Winchester]

IDK, I'm pretty cynical about holy books "inspired" by the divine. I lean more towards humans figuring out writing such books and convincing people they are divinely inspired is a pretty good gig to control people and amass wealth.

 

[Logicman]

I fully believe in God. I just don't believe that He wrote the Bible. Man did. Particularly greedy, power hungry men.

There's plenty of reasons to argue God inspired the writing of the Bible. But one of the most impressive reasons is fulfilled Messianic prophecies, at a rate far, far greater than chance. That's the signature of God.

 

[DDD]

We all know today that there is no such thing as magic and there never has been. Despite what people believed 2000 years ago or even 200 years ago. And yet the bible, both new and old, mentions magic several times either by mentioning certain people (Egypts Pharoh who's magicians couldn't tell him the meaning of his dreams so he called for Joseph for instance) or by simply saying to not associate with such as practice "sorcery".

Why would God, who people say wrote the bible even mention sorcery if such a thing does not exist?

My short answer: Because they did not know any better.

 

[zyzygy]

That's my problem, I believe the bible to be a work of fiction. But I hate to think this is all there is. Life sucks, I want an afterlife.

The afterlife might suck too. My life doesn't suck, I've had a great time.

 

[zyzygy]

But one of the most impressive reasons is fulfilled Messianic prophecies, at a rate far, far greater than chance.

That may a topic for another thread, but could you quote some of these prophecies? I've read the bible twice and have yet to come across a fulfilled prophecy. Indeed the prophecy about Jesus returning soon has proved to be a washout. One would think that the whole thing was fiction.

 

[Reaganite]

Jesus existed before mankind. You can take your commie evolution to soviet Russia.

 

[RabidAlpaca]

Jesus existed before mankind. You can take your commie evolution to soviet Russia.

If Jesus was born to Mary and Joseph how could he exist before mankind? I trust you have facts and evidence to back this statement up?

 

[RabidAlpaca]

And on top of that, even if it was fake, it was typically associated with imploring aid from supernatural beings that were not God, therefore a form of idolatry.

It isn't "magic". It's a difference in the manner in which some people are able to perceive and understand what is around them. Some of us who have religious inclinations believe that there is more to reality than what we can sense with the five senses, because we ourselves have experienced it. It is nothing that can be proven to you (or anyone else), but we don't all perceive the same reality, though most of us would be considered rational human beings.

I have a question for both of you, a question that pretty much prevents me from returning to christianity. God, by definition, is omnipotent, which means he can create, change or destroy anything in the universe as he pleases. He decided to make the punishment for not choosing christianity to be eternal hellfire and torture. He could stop or change this condition at any minute, but he doesn't. My question is, if we're playing for such extreme consequences, why is it that he won't provide one shred of undeniable evidence? There is absolutely ZERO way to prove one religion over the other, so we have hundreds of religions to choose from and any wrong choice will be greeted with torture and no mercy for all of eternity.

How can you call god a just and loving god that would do such a horrible thing? Is it too unreasonable to ask for one piece of factual evidence instead of relying entirely on 'faith', which by its very nature is extremely subjective and non-fact based. Why is the only thing between us and eternal hellfire a subjective faith based opinion about which religion is right and which is wrong?

War is Hell.

Non-believers just make a mess of things when they try to interpret the Bible. Suffice to say that a believer's understanding of God doesn't necessarily come from a literal reading of such passages in the Bible. When Christians hear non-believers huffing and puffing about things like that they usually just roll their eyes and walk away, which is perhaps what I should be doing.

So wait, you accept such stories of god commanded rape and murder as "It must've been god's will and who am I to question it?", and anyone who questions it must be reading the bible too literally? If the bible is the 100% word of god and infallible, what other interpretation can there be other than the literal one?

If you don't read it literally you're saying you make up your own interpretation of the story, which is inherently subjective to every reader and you're admitting that it's not fact.

 

[Paleocon]

We all know today that there is no such thing as magic and there never has been. Despite what people believed 2000 years ago or even 200 years ago. And yet the bible, both new and old, mentions magic several times either by mentioning certain people (Egypts Pharoh who's magicians couldn't tell him the meaning of his dreams so he called for Joseph for instance) or by simply saying to not associate with such as practice "sorcery".

Why would God, who people say wrote the bible even mention sorcery if such a thing does not exist?

49 Bible Verses about Magic

Really? There is no one and has never been anyone who has so much as attempted to perform magic?

You're free to hold such anti realist views, but don't expect anyone else to.

 

[Kal'Stang]

Really? There is no one and has never been anyone who has so much as attempted to perform magic?

You're free to hold such anti realist views, but don't expect anyone else to.

There is a HUGE difference between attempting magic, and being a magician, sorc, witch etc etc. I'm sure millions of people have attempted to use magic...but I'm also sure that no one has ever suceeded. Otherwise there would be evidence of it being real. That is far more realistic than following a book written and designed by man to gain power and money.

 

[Paleocon]

There is a HUGE difference between attempting magic, and being a magician, sorc, witch etc etc. I'm sure millions of people have attempted to use magic...but I'm also sure that no one has ever suceeded. Otherwise there would be evidence of it being real. That is far more realistic than following a book written and designed by man to gain power and money.

All those who attempt magic fall under the biblical prohibitions. It matters not if they were successful.

What book are you referring to?

 

[lizzie]

I have a question for both of you, a question that pretty much prevents me from returning to christianity. God, by definition, is omnipotent, which means he can create, change or destroy anything in the universe as he pleases. He decided to make the punishment for not choosing christianity to be eternal hellfire and torture. He could stop or change this condition at any minute, but he doesn't. My question is, if we're playing for such extreme consequences, why is it that he won't provide one shred of undeniable evidence? There is absolutely ZERO way to prove one religion over the other, so we have hundreds of religions to choose from and any wrong choice will be greeted with torture and no mercy for all of eternity.

How can you call god a just and loving god that would do such a horrible thing?

I can't answer for Goshin, who I suspect has different thoughts on the subject of God from my own thoughts.

For starters, find any example of my saying that God is just and loving, or that God is fair, or that it punishes, or that it damns people to anything bad. Find me the examples you accuse me of, and we will have the discussion. I really get tired of being accused of saying something which I did not state.

Second, I never have asked you to believe ANYTHING whatsoever. What you believe makes no difference to me, just as what I believe should make no difference to you.

 

[Manc Skipper]

All those who attempt magic fall under the biblical prohibitions. It matters not if they were successful.

What book are you referring to?

Anyone who prays is invoking a superpowerful supernatural being to help them in their life in some way. That's magic.

 

[lizzie]

If Jesus was born to Mary and Joseph how could he exist before mankind? I trust you have facts and evidence to back this statement up?

You know as well as I, that there are no facts to back such statements up. When people have beliefs that souls exist as the lasting part of humanity (which I do loosely believe), it is fairly common to believe that we exist outside of time itself- not as incarnate people, but as "souls" or as some form of mental or emotional energy. I essentially see the body as a step in the evolution of an individual soul, and I see the soul as the permanent expression, and the body as a temporary housing, so that we may learn. If there is actually spirit or soul, I believe it to exist before birth of a human individual, and to go on existing after the death of that individual.