The Word of God or the Word of Man?

[sylvan3]

In some previous threads, I have taken the position that much in the Bible reflects the large probability that it was written through human inspiration as opposed to divine inspiration. If one thinks about this, there are only two possibilities--either the Bible was divinely inspired or humanly inspired.

Please read the following verse and comment, if you are wont to, about whether it is rational for a person to believe--as I do--that this verse is the product of human imagination (i.e. human inspiration) as opposed to divine inspiration from an omnibenevolent, omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent deity. (Please note the instruction to "kill").

Deuteronomy 22: 28-29 NAB

"As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you."

Once again, is it rational for me to believe that this is not the work of a "four omni" God?

[Bob1234375]

I will take something out of an NIV Text Note. The word "kill" here means to fully devote to God, often by destroying it. It is quite rational to think that this is not from God, however, we must think deeper, into what caused this harsh punishment. The people living in Canaan before Isreal were evil. They committed all kinds of sins, even sacraficing their children, and it angered God. By killing them, they were punished, and also rescued from further sinning. If they were allowed to live, they would poison Isreal, causing them to worship other gods and idols. Since Isreal did not obey God and drive out all the Canaanites, later this did happen to them, leading to the fall of the Northern Kingdom (Isreal) and the exile of Judah.

Also, God is Just, so he will deal fairly with them at Judgement Day. Shortening their lives probobly helped them out on that day.

[sylvan3]

I will take something out of an NIV Text Note. The word "kill" here means to fully devote to God, often by destroying it. It is quite rational to think that this is not from God, however, we must think deeper, into what caused this harsh punishment. The people living in Canaan before Isreal were evil. They committed all kinds of sins, even sacraficing their children, and it angered God. By killing them, they were punished, and also rescued from further sinning. If they were allowed to live, they would poison Isreal, causing them to worship other gods and idols. Since Isreal did not obey God and drive out all the Canaanites, later this did happen to them, leading to the fall of the Northern Kingdom (Isreal) and the exile of Judah.

Also, God is Just, so he will deal fairly with them at Judgement Day. Shortening their lives probobly helped them out on that day.

Wow..with all due respect, I have to say this is some twisted logic. I don't think that "thinking deeper" can remove the negative aspect of this verse.

Thanks for your response, though.

[EricH]

In some previous threads, I have taken the position that much in the Bible reflects the large probability that it was written through human inspiration as opposed to divine inspiration. If one thinks about this, there are only two possibilities--either the Bible was divinely inspired or humanly inspired.

Please read the following verse and comment, if you are wont to, about whether it is rational for a person to believe--as I do--that this verse is the product of human imagination (i.e. human inspiration) as opposed to divine inspiration from an omnibenevolent, omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent deity. (Please note the instruction to "kill").

Deuteronomy 22: 28-29 NAB

"As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you."

Once again, is it rational for me to believe that this is not the work of a "four omni" God?

Why would you have problems believing that God commanded this?

[RND]

I will take something out of an NIV Text Note. The word "kill" here means to fully devote to God, often by destroying it. It is quite rational to think that this is not from God, however, we must think deeper, into what caused this harsh punishment. The people living in Canaan before Isreal were evil. They committed all kinds of sins, even sacraficing their children, and it angered God. By killing them, they were punished, and also rescued from further sinning. If they were allowed to live, they would poison Isreal, causing them to worship other gods and idols. Since Isreal did not obey God and drive out all the Canaanites, later this did happen to them, leading to the fall of the Northern Kingdom (Isreal) and the exile of Judah.

Also, God is Just, so he will deal fairly with them at Judgement Day. Shortening their lives probobly helped them out on that day.

Wow..with all due respect, I have to say this is some twisted logic. I don't think that "thinking deeper" can remove the negative aspect of this verse.

Thanks for your response, though.

I actually think Bob answered very thoughtfully, and correctly. Bob!

[SoulGrind]

In some previous threads, I have taken the position that much in the Bible reflects the large probability that it was written through human inspiration as opposed to divine inspiration. If one thinks about this, there are only two possibilities--either the Bible was divinely inspired or humanly inspired.

I'm going to omit posting on the described verse because it was already addressed, and quite eloquently too I might add.

However, I would like to give you this food for thought regarding the Bible and then you can decide for yourself whether it is divine or pure human madness.

I am going to quote an essay here... I will EMPHASIZE particular areas and I will [augment with my own thoughts] as such.

Quoting from "Answers To Tough Questions Skeptics Ask About The Christian Faith", written by Josh McDowell and Don Stewart, Living Books, Pages 17-20.

[bEGIN QUOTATION...]

What makes the Bible so special?

Christianity believes and teaches that the Bible alone is the revealed Word of God. Even though it was written by men, the ultimate author was God Almighty. THIS CLAIM WAS NOT INVENTED BY THE CHURCH [prior to Christ's crusifiction upon the cross, there was no "church" as we know it today], BUT IS THE CLAIM THE BIBLE MAKES FOR ITSELF.

"The word of the Lord endures forever" (1 Peter 1:25, The Modern Language Bible).

"All Scripture is God-breathed" (2 Timothy 3:16, MLB). "

"For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost" (2 Peter 1:21, KJV).

Over 2000 times in the Old Testament alone there are clauses such as, "And God spoke to Moses, " "the word of the Lord came unto Jonah," and "God said." Moreover, the Bible claims to be a record of the words and deeds of God, thus the Bible views itself as God's Word.

THE MERE FACT THAT THE BIBLE CLAIMS TO BE THE WORD OF GOD DOES NOT PROVE THAT IT IS SUCH, FOR THERE ARE OTHER BOOKS THAT MAKE SIMILAR CLAIMS. THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT SCRIPTURES CONTAIN CONVINCING EVIDENCE AS BEING THE WORD OF GOD.

One reason that the Bible is different from other books is its unity. Although this book was composed by men, its unity reveals the hand of the Almighty. The Bible was written over a period of about 1,500 years by more than forty different human authors. The authors came from a variety of backgrounds, including Joshua (a military general), Daniel (a prime minister), Peter (a fishermen), and Nehemiah (a cupbearer).

The authors of the various books wrote in different places, such as the wilderness (Moses), prison (Paul), exile on the Isle of Patmos (John). The biblical writings were composed on three different continents (Africa, Asia, and Europe), and in three different languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek).

The contents of the Bible deal with many controversial subjects. Yet, the Bible is a unit. From beginning to end, there's one unfolding story of God's plan of salvation for mankind. This salvation is through the person of Jesus Christ (John 14:6). Jesus Himself testified that He was the theme of the entire Bible.

"Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. . . . For had ye beleived Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" (John 5:39, 46, 47, KJV).

Jesus said in another place: "And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself" (Luke 24:27, KJV; see also Luke 24:44).

The Old Testament is the preparation (Isaiah 40:3). The Gospels are the manifestation (John 1:29). The Book of Acts is the propagation (Acts 1:8). The Epistles give the explanation (Colossians 1:27). The Book of Revelation is the consummation (Revelation 1:7). The Bible is all about Jesus.

The entire Bible is a unity with each part needing the others to be complete. Dr. W.F. Albright puts it this way: "To the writers of the New Testament, the Hebrew Bible [the Old Testament] was Holy Scripture and they were the direct heirs of its prophets. It is, accordingly, quite impossible to understand the New Testament without recognizing that its purpose was to supplement and explain the Hebrew Bible.

"Any attempt to go back to the sources of Christianity without accepting the entire Bible as our guide is thus doomed to failure" (cited by Roger T. Forster and V. Paul Marston, That's a Good Question, p.67).

LEST ANYONE THINK THIS ISN'T SOMETHING MARVELOUS, WE'D LIKE TO GIVE YOU THIS CHALLENGE. Find ten people from your local area having similar backgrounds, who speak the same language, and are all from basically the same culture. Then seperate them and ask them to write their opinion on only one controversial subject, such as the meaning of life.

When they have finished, compare the conclusions of these ten writers. Do they agree with each other? Of course not. But the Bible did not consist of merely ten authors, but forty. It was not written in one generation, but over a perion of 1,500 years; not by authors with the same education, culture and language, but with different cultures, from three continents and three different languages, and finally, not just one subject but hundreds.

And yet the Bible is a unity. There is complete harmony, which cannot be explained by coincidence or collusion. The unity of the Bible is a strong argument in favor of its divine inspiration.

THE UNITY OF THE SCRIPTURES IS ONLY ONE REASON AMONG MANY WHICH SUPPORTS THE BIBLE'S CLAIM TO BE THE DIVINE WORD OF GOD. Others which could be explained in detail are the testimony of the early church, the witness of history and archaeology, and the evidence of changed lives throughout the centuries, to name but a few.

The factors led the great archaeologist, W.F. Albright, to conclude, "The Bible towers in content above all earlier religious literature; and it towers just as impressivly over all subsequent literature in the direct simplicity if its message and the catholicity of its appeal to men of all lands and times" (The Christian Century, Novemeber 1958).

The Bible is special. It is unique. No other book has any such credentials. No other book even comes close. "England has two books, the Bible and Shakespeare. England made Shakespeare, but the Bible made England" (Victor Hugo).

[END OF QUOTATION]

[anti-hillbilly]

In some previous threads, I have taken the position that much in the Bible reflects the large probability that it was written through human inspiration as opposed to divine inspiration. If one thinks about this, there are only two possibilities--either the Bible was divinely inspired or humanly inspired.

Please read the following verse and comment, if you are wont to, about whether it is rational for a person to believe--as I do--that this verse is the product of human imagination (i.e. human inspiration) as opposed to divine inspiration from an omnibenevolent, omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent deity. (Please note the instruction to "kill").

Deuteronomy 22: 28-29 NAB

"As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you."

Once again, is it rational for me to believe that this is not the work of a "four omni" God?

In my opinion that verse is the word of lustful, greedy men who needed to blame their misdeeds and perversion on God to try and justify it with the people. In other words, I think they did it but that they're lying when they say it was kosher with God that they did it.

Since I probably just put myself out on a limb by saying that I might as well go out a little further lol. I think it's wrong for people to try and rationalize "away" these barbaric murders and rapes (yes we know those women were raped). We don't know if the Cannanites did all those things, the victors get to write the history. Also I find it ironic that people say it's okay that the Cannanites were massacered in such a way because "they were making their children pass thru the fire" , a horrendous thing if it is true yet at the same time we're taught that if we don't make the final cut on judgement day we'll have to "pass thru the fires of hell" eternally but that's okay. -- I see a double standard here.

You ask some very head-scratching questions Sylvan3.

Edited July 12, 2006 by anti-hillbilly

[SoulGrind]

Deuteronomy 22: 28-29 NAB

"As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you."

I do not know where you got that verse or from which Bible, but something's not right.

I have run a search through my Bible and cannot find this passage anywhere - Ran it against the KJV and the ASV versions as well. No joy.

But here is what Deuteronomy 22:28-29 say...

"If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days."

[Deuteronomy 22:28-29 - KJV]

"If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, that is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty [shekels] of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he hath humbled her; he may not put her away all his days...."

[Deuteronomy 22:28-29 - ASV]

"If a man find a lady who is a virgin, who is not pledged to be married, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

then the man who lay with her shall give to the lady's father fifty [shekels] of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has humbled her; he may not put her away all his days."

[Deuteronomy 22:28-29 - BBE]

"If a man find a damsel, a virgin, who is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found,

then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty [shekels] of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he hath humbled her; he may not put her away all his days."

[Deuteronomy 22:28-29 - Darby]

"If a man shall find a damsel [that is] a virgin, who is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

Then the man that lay with her shall give to the damsel's father fifty [shekels] of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days."

[Deuteronomy 22:28-29 - Websters]

"`When a man findeth a damsel, a virgin who is not betrothed, and hath caught her, and lain with her, and they have been found,

then hath the man who is lying with her given to the father of the damsel fifty silverlings, and to him she is for a wife; because that he hath humbled her, he is not able to send her away all his days."

[Deuteronomy 22:28-29 - Youngs]

Edited July 12, 2006 by SoulGrind

[sylvan3]

In some previous threads, I have taken the position that much in the Bible reflects the large probability that it was written through human inspiration as opposed to divine inspiration. If one thinks about this, there are only two possibilities--either the Bible was divinely inspired or humanly inspired.

Please read the following verse and comment, if you are wont to, about whether it is rational for a person to believe--as I do--that this verse is the product of human imagination (i.e. human inspiration) as opposed to divine inspiration from an omnibenevolent, omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent deity. (Please note the instruction to "kill").

Deuteronomy 22: 28-29 NAB

"As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you."

Once again, is it rational for me to believe that this is not the work of a "four omni" God?

I don't know what you are quoting but it is not Deuteronomy 22:28,29

28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

I have no problem believing these verses are the direct words of God. As for the verses you mentioned, I know there are some similar to them in scripture and have no problem believing God spoke them either.

I stand corrected (actually, I sit corrected). The verses were Deuteronomy 20: 10-14. Thanks for calling this to my intention--I think accuracy is important.

[sylvan3]

In some previous threads, I have taken the position that much in the Bible reflects the large probability that it was written through human inspiration as opposed to divine inspiration. If one thinks about this, there are only two possibilities--either the Bible was divinely inspired or humanly inspired.

Please read the following verse and comment, if you are wont to, about whether it is rational for a person to believe--as I do--that this verse is the product of human imagination (i.e. human inspiration) as opposed to divine inspiration from an omnibenevolent, omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent deity. (Please note the instruction to "kill").

Deuteronomy 22: 28-29 NAB

"As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you."

Once again, is it rational for me to believe that this is not the work of a "four omni" God?

Why would you have problems believing that God commanded this?

Are you serious? Voices from God telling people to "kill"? Don't they put people in mental institutions for this? Didn't Andrea Yates say that God told her to kill her children? This is rational?

Explain to me why a perfect, omniscient, onmipotent, and omnipresent God needs to tell people to "kill".