Post
ala9ala ala9ala 46-50, M 7 Answers Dec 22, 2013 in Doing Good

Your Response

Cancel

I don't think it was a mistake.. just a lie to force others to conform

Best Answer

It would only be a mistake if it weren't true.

Best Answer

Their mistake is not worshiping Great Dozer the Magnificent. He will plow them under. He will bury them. Only Dozer the Magnificent can bring salvation and pave all roads before them.

Best Answer

I personally believe that it's not very respectful towards God to believe that the bible is literally His word. That would be like saying that God can't do math, or remember things clearly....for starters...

Best Answer

And what day to worship him

Best Answer

CHRISTIANS MISTAKEN !?

Best Answer

No.

Best Answer

The bibles made up of ancient stories, like Job, and Hebrew laws, letters from various followers of christianity, accouts of what prophets did. Jesus even quotes scripture that has been lost. Paul wrote all the New Testament anti-feminine scripture. There's too much subjective materila for it to be considered the "Word of God". When Jesus refers to the "Word of God" he is referring to himself or what he says only

Best Answer

You mixed a bunch of theories into one. None of them however is demonstrated by evidence, rather contested by scholars.

Best Answer

Scholars have been so wrong many times. Predestination or free choice has been debated for centuries by scholars when, within Christianity, posing that question whether it is one or the other is stupid.

Best Answer

All your points were proposed by scholars.

Best Answer

Yet we have so many people accepting things in the bible as the Word of God, yet they don't live their lives as though what is said in the bible is true.

Best Answer

You suddenly switch points completely. First you say that the Bible is a conglomeration of sorts, and then suddenly you switch over to hypocrisy. I don't even see how a hypocritical follower demonstrates the weakness of the text of which he fails.

Best Answer

Think a little harder. If the followers aren't following the text that they believe to be the word of God then they, in their hearts, don't believe it is the word of god either. Why don't you enter the discussion rather than make deaparate lame attempts to find holes in my unprepared thoughts.

Best Answer

Looks more like you went one direction, realized it wasn't going to work, and changed direction.

Best Answer

Not at all. I mentioned initially a few of many reasons why it is difficult to accept that God wrote the bible or ordained others to do so. there are a multitude of errors (Judas' death), strong evidence of change and texts added centuries later - never before seen in complete copies from centuries before (end of Mark). There are texts that are obviously (to someone not indoctinated or unable to accept other than that what is written is the truth from god) the biases or societal leaings of an individual. Scholars often have often, in history, had an agenda. If you have doubts about something, its not wrong to trust yourself.

Best Answer

History is actually based on a scientific process. It's reasonable and sound, a good path to truth. We find manuscripts and we criticize them in all sorts of reasonable and legitimate ways. For example. older manuscripts get more weight than younger ones. You do know that the New Testament enjoys many more manuscripts than any other ancient work?

Best Answer

...and many were left out. Did God decide what was included?

Best Answer

This was determined scientifically through a process called Textual Criticism.

Best Answer

If you want to call it that. Anyone deciding what letters or gospels to add could declare they used "textual criticism" which they say is a science. Doesn't mean it is sound science or unbiased textual criticism.

Best Answer

Science is by nature unbiased.

Best Answer

That is why it was not science that chose the content of the bible and Christians don't claim it to have been a scientific process.

Best Answer

Textual Criticism is a scientific process, and it wasn't Christians that did it. It was historians.

Best Answer

Beautiful, then you've agreed with my original question. The bible is not the word of god and Christian were mistaken to claim it as such. It is a scientifically compiled group of remaining historical texts, although I would have argued their addition of John's gospel in place of Thomas'.

Best Answer

I don't think the evidence would lend itself to your claim of the Bible. Textual Criticism just determines what the original letters were. You confusing this with canonization.

Best Answer

My original question is is a response to Christians feeling the obligation to defend the bible as the word of God. This is, a large part, due to the canonization of the texts we see today. I think it would be far more credible if it were not considered as the utterance of god, but rather as part of a collection of texts from that time that tell of earlier believers and a report of their experiences. Being in a faith like Christianity and stating that your book is the word of God ets Christians up for hipocracy and criticism of the text which otherwise could be accepted as having faults.

Best Answer

I think you haven't a clue what you're talking about.

Best Answer

...interesting, maybe you haven't been around evangelical Christians

Best Answer

Maybe you haven't been around apologists.

Best Answer

I've been around lots of apologists, maybe more than yourself. I never saw any value in it. In my opinion it required the memorizing of others arguments without analysing the information based on self-reflection, trusting your doubts, and coming to a conclusion based on this.

Best Answer

Have you ever examined the evidence of which the exhibit?

Best Answer
21 More Responses

Related Questions