Are we really asking questions...

[Guest LAW]

Let's remember Romans 1: 18-20

"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,

since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."

Paul's telling us that God's qualities are clearly seen in nature, so that those who are pagans and have turned to idol worship (or, in our case, worship of self-sufficiency, our own intellect, our limited, fallible science, etc.), have no excuse. they have been shown the truth already--even without the Bible.

But the Bible is the history of Christianity--and the testimony of other believers to those who come after. I believe that it is the infallible word of God. But i also believe that the glory God is clearly etched in His creations and we can see Him if we look.

[secondeve]

Well, the Bible being what it is, would never have been produced by men. The Bible by virtue of its claims concerning humanity is an offense to human nature. Human nature could not have produced the Bible, and even it could, it never would. The Bible simply could not have been invented by human beings.

I don't think you can actually back this up. More religions than Christianity have claimed that man is inherently flawed - in fact, I can think of several ancient myths offhand in which the world starts out as perfect but in which the error of man brings death and suffering. There's a West Indian creation myth, an African one, Pandora's Box - it really doesn't take a genius to work out that human beings aren't perfect, and so to say that a religion must be divinely authored because it points this out seems wildly sensational, not to say unfounded. If you're talking about the fact that people would never have invented the Bible because of the restrictions it imposes on mankind or the standard it provides to live up to, that still isn't uniquely Christian. The Ancient Egyptians believed that all human deeds would be weighed in the afterlife - good people went to heaven, while the wicked had their souls devoured by the monster Amamut. Islam is also a good example of humans coming up with difficult restrictions to place on themselves - Muslims are called to prayer five times a day, but only after Muhammad bargained with Allah, saying that the original number of times, something like thirty, was too many for his poor servants. Also think here of the ancient Mayan religion, which believed that the gods required blood in order for the sun to come up. Victims were taken from every caste of that society - which is hardly in people's interests - and yet humans came up with that religion, too. Or consider Moloch and the killing of children; or the incredible complexities of Hindu castes. To me, these are on par with the 'why would humans invent such laws for themselves' question as the example of the Mosaic law in Torah. The point I'm making is, human beings could certainly have invented the Bible, and human nature could most certainly have produced it.

[Joshua-777]

wow does anyone see the ridiculousness of this?

"The Bible simply could not have been invented by human beings."

See there is no way you can say this. Look at it from a different point of view, say someone who has never heard of christianity. they might take it as a story of fiction. You cannot say that because you were not there.

Now I am not advocating the idea that the Bible is a work of fiction. But you CANNOT say with any evidenced statement that God wrote the Bible. bear with me here...

Also, those who say the PEOPLE who wrote the Bible were not divinely inspired are also stating what they cannot prove.

who actually wrote the Bible? Well, man. We physically transcribed it therefore man wrote the Bible. HOWEVER! Where did the ideas come from?

Man or God? There is no way to prove either, unless we invent a time machine which is highly unlikely.

I think that the Bible is divinely inspired.

But I do have a question to go along with this:

Why, if the Bible is 100% divinely inspired does the OT reflect the culture of the time when it was written? (like sexism towards women, children suffering for the sins of their parents, etc)

Also, why does God kill MILLIONS if not mroe of innocent children for the errs of their parents, which happens more than once in the Bible. This issue GREATLY bothers me. I know the answer is "well they got eternal life"...If you hold this viewpoint, then, logically how can you oppose abortion? If your answer is "God created us, he can kill us anytime, it's his right" then I have to ask why did he bother creating us if we would eventually grieve him so, to the point of violating the commandments he gave down to us to adhere to?

Ya know, this was a good answer, One thing I have noticed about the Bible, Those who know Jesus know the word is divine, because they grow deeper in the Lord, and in knowledge of the bible, Evidence comes from eyewitness standpoints, Now one thing I notice is that a world that doesnt believe that we even have a spirit ignore millions and millions of eye witness statements, saying that the bible is divinly inspired, Now can we saw that we saw the bible written? no but we as Christians can say from personal experiences how the Lord used the bible in our lives, and eye witness what he's done in our lives. Now accuracy in the bible, I have met many once aithiests who accepted the Lord in there heart after studying the bible, and the evidence in the bible.

As far as God killing millions of innocent children, I've seen this arguement too many times, I do need to study this topic some more, because the only place I remember was in Joshua, and judges, but that was for the promise land, Isreal, when it was inhabited by wicked men, and pagan Gods, which I understand this. Here is an awesome site I found that answers this better than I ever could, http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/notkill.html Please take a look at the site.

[Floatingaxe]

Also, those who say the PEOPLE who wrote the Bible were not divinely inspired are also stating what they cannot prove

Can you prove they were not? You'd have to be divinely inspired to do that. Hmmm.

[Guest shiloh357]

QUOTE(shiloh357 @ Jan 23 2007, 04:43 PM)

Well, the Bible being what it is, would never have been produced by men. The Bible by virtue of its claims concerning humanity is an offense to human nature. Human nature could not have produced the Bible, and even it could, it never would. The Bible simply could not have been invented by human beings.

I don't think you can actually back this up. More religions than Christianity have claimed that man is inherently flawed - in fact, I can think of several ancient myths offhand in which the world starts out as perfect but in which the error of man brings death and suffering.

Of course I can back it up. I realize that many other religions claim that man is inherently flawed. The difference is that the Bible says that you are not good enough to do anything about it, and that you can never become good enough on your own to do anything about. The Bible in many places teaches that man is not only inherently evil, morally depraved, but also teaches that man cannot make himself good enough to be acceptable to God. From spiritual perspective God declares that man is evil, wretched, and morally completely impotent to do anything about it. The Bible teaches that that you can do all kinds of good things, but that you cannot change your heart before God. All of the charity, all of the prayers, chanting, offers no hope according to the Bible.

If you're talking about the fact that people would never have invented the Bible because of the restrictions it imposes on mankind or the standard it provides to live up to, that still isn't uniquely Christian. The Ancient Egyptians believed that all human deeds would be weighed in the afterlife - good people went to heaven, while the wicked had their souls devoured by the monster Amamut. Islam is also a good example of humans coming up with difficult restrictions to place on themselves - Muslims are called to prayer five times a day, but only after Muhammad bargained with Allah, saying that the original number of times, something like thirty, was too many for his poor servants. Also think here of the ancient Mayan religion, which believed that the gods required blood in order for the sun to come up. Victims were taken from every caste of that society - which is hardly in people's interests - and yet humans came up with that religion, too. Or consider Moloch and the killing of children; or the incredible complexities of Hindu castes. To me, these are on par with the 'why would humans invent such laws for themselves' question as the example of the Mosaic law in Torah. The point I'm making is, human beings could certainly have invented the Bible, and human nature could most certainly have produced it.

Well you missing quite a bit. The Bible does present commandments, but the purpose for those commandments are entirely different than what you see in other religions. The Torah or the Law, was given in the Bible, not to make you better but to reveal where you don't measure up. You see, the Bible teaches that while it is possible to keep all the commandments, our inherent sinful nature taints our deeds. I may keep the deed perfectly from a ritualistic or external perspective, but the sin that is still in my heart makes the good deed worthless in the eyes of God. It is like giving someone a $30,000 Rolex watch and is covered in tar, bile, blood and feces.

The Bible strikes at man's pride because it reveals that there is a problem and the problem comes from us. Since the problem comes from us, the answer does not come from us. The answer must lie somewhere outside of us. In other religions, the drive is to do more to make yourself better, to be more holy, do more good deeds, to help more people, to finally reach that point where they are acceptable. The Bible teaches that such views are foolishness.

The Bible teaches that man needs to turn to Jesus and let Jesus cleanse him from sin, and stop trying depend on useless works to make himself better. So, no, the Bible would never have been written by men. It offensive to human nature, and human pride.

[Joshua-777]

QUOTE(shiloh357 @ Jan 23 2007, 04:43 PM)

Well, the Bible being what it is, would never have been produced by men. The Bible by virtue of its claims concerning humanity is an offense to human nature. Human nature could not have produced the Bible, and even it could, it never would. The Bible simply could not have been invented by human beings.

I don't think you can actually back this up. More religions than Christianity have claimed that man is inherently flawed - in fact, I can think of several ancient myths offhand in which the world starts out as perfect but in which the error of man brings death and suffering.

Of course I can back it up. I realize that many other religions claim that man is inherently flawed. The difference is that the Bible says that you are not good enough to do anything about it, and that you can never become good enough on your own to do anything about. The Bible in many places teaches that man is not only inherently evil, morally depraved, but also teaches that man cannot make himself good enough to be acceptable to God. From spiritual perspective God declares that man is evil, wretched, and morally completely impotent to do anything about it. The Bible teaches that that you can do all kinds of good things, but that you cannot change your heart before God. All of the charity, all of the prayers, chanting, offers no hope according to the Bible.

If you're talking about the fact that people would never have invented the Bible because of the restrictions it imposes on mankind or the standard it provides to live up to, that still isn't uniquely Christian. The Ancient Egyptians believed that all human deeds would be weighed in the afterlife - good people went to heaven, while the wicked had their souls devoured by the monster Amamut. Islam is also a good example of humans coming up with difficult restrictions to place on themselves - Muslims are called to prayer five times a day, but only after Muhammad bargained with Allah, saying that the original number of times, something like thirty, was too many for his poor servants. Also think here of the ancient Mayan religion, which believed that the gods required blood in order for the sun to come up. Victims were taken from every caste of that society - which is hardly in people's interests - and yet humans came up with that religion, too. Or consider Moloch and the killing of children; or the incredible complexities of Hindu castes. To me, these are on par with the 'why would humans invent such laws for themselves' question as the example of the Mosaic law in Torah. The point I'm making is, human beings could certainly have invented the Bible, and human nature could most certainly have produced it.

Well you missing quite a bit. The Bible does present commandments, but the purpose for those commandments are entirely different than what you see in other religions. The Torah or the Law, was given in the Bible, not to make you better but to reveal where you don't measure up. You see, the Bible teaches that while it is possible to keep all the commandments, our inherent sinful nature taints our deeds. I may keep the deed perfectly from a ritualistic or external perspective, but the sin that is still in my heart makes the good deed worthless in the eyes of God. It is like giving someone a $30,000 Rolex watch and is covered in tar, bile, blood and feces.

The Bible strikes at man's pride because it reveals that there is a problem and the problem comes from us. Since the problem comes from us, the answer does not come from us. The answer must lie somewhere outside of us. In other religions, the drive is to do more to make yourself better, to be more holy, do more good deeds, to help more people, to finally reach that point where they are acceptable. The Bible teaches that such views are foolishness.

The Bible teaches that man needs to turn to Jesus and let Jesus cleanse him from sin, and stop trying depend on useless works to make himself better. So, no, the Bible would never have been written by men. It offensive to human nature, and human pride.

Amen.

[artsylady]

Most 'contradictions' in the Bible can be reconciled if one decides to be open minded. For example: the two geneologies of Jesus. One by Matthew and one by Luke. It seems obvious to the non believer that this is a glaring error, yet everyone of us can have two separate geneological accounts from our two parents. Those who have no faith are wanting to see these as errors, I believe.

It seems the same of most contradictions I've seen. I beleive at this time, there is really only one 'contradiction' that I haven't been able to reconcile easily. I believe that there IS an answer for that and a logical one at that, but I don't know the answer, only God knows. We're not as smart as God. Just like some of the medical discoveries in the Bible that never made sense until much later, to the person of faith, the answers will eventually come.

It always does come down to a question of faith though. Faith is something that God WANTS us to have. He never meant to spell it out completely (although he DID give us a whole lot of answers to everything we really NEED to know).

So you either have faith or you don't. But it IS a requirement of a believer.

It's kind of a weird thing with me. The more I get to know God, the less faith I feel I have because there are so many answers with Christianity and it all makes so much sense. So is this process making my faith weaker or stronger? I'm not sure. It's kind of like wondering if my daughter exists or not I suppose. It seems ridiculous to think that I need to have faith in that fact when I can see her and talk to her daily. In the same way, it seems weird to think that I have a lot of faith to beleive that He exists. He's so very real I feel it requires little of my faith to beleive in Him. Anyone know what I mean? I hope I'm explaining it well. I'm sure I'm confusing the athiests here. Sorry.

[billie]

Artsy, I know exactly what you mean.

[Guest shiloh357]

Why, if the Bible is 100% divinely inspired does the OT reflect the culture of the time when it was written? (like sexism towards women, children suffering for the sins of their parents, etc)

Well the Bible doesn't really reflect the contemporary culture. For one thing, contemporary culture worshipped the sun and placed a great deal of value upon it. Had the Bible been written by people who behaved according to what was the "norm" of that day, the Sun would have been created first. Yet the Bible makes the appearance of the sun and the luminaries seem rather obscure occuring on the fourth day.

Secondly, the Bible does not reflect the culture, because the Bible presents a God who is radically different than any god of the polytheistic cultures that were contemporary with the biblical writers. Unlike the gods of the polythesists who were beset with problems of their own, not be able to trust other gods, for example, these gods also suffered from human foilables, and in some cases required human assistance. Each "god" had his limitations, his own boundaries. You had god of wine, a god of harvest, a god of fertility, a god of sea, a god of war, and so on.

The Bible presents a God who is

1. Untouched by human character flaws

2. All knowing

3. Completely sovereign over the entire creation

4. Has no need of human assistance

5. Is separate from creation

6. Stands as a moral law giver.

Now whether you believe in those claims made about God by the Bible are true is not the issue. The issue is that those are the claims the Bible makes, and in that way it is completely unique to the surrounding culture.

You bring up the issue about women... The Bible honors women much more than the ancient culture that surrounded the biblical writers.

1. Even though Eve was the first the eat of forbidden fruit, the Bible blames Adam and not Eve for the fall of man. According to the Bible sin came though the male gender, not the female gender.

2. The first person Jesus showed himself to after his resurrection was Mary Magdeline, who was in the eyes of many an outcast. Had the New Testament been written solely by human impulse, that account would have been omitted, and Jesus would be recorded as having firt appeared to Peter or John or one of the other male disciples. Yet, Mary of Magdeline was the first to see him and the first to proclaim his resurrection. You could say that Mary of Magdaline was the first New Testament believer, and the first "missionary."

3. Even in Judaism which still retains at least a residual resemblance to the OT, women are highly honored. Every Friday night the father of the family wraps his tallit, prayershawl around himself and his wife and recites the Aisheit Chayil "Woman of valor." The festival of the New Moon known as "Rosh Chodesh" is a special time to honor the mother in a Jewish home. Every Friday night for the Sabbath, the woman is honored with the privilege of welcoming the light of the Sabbath. Jews teach that the Bible is replete with how honored women are to be.

4. The highest most valued character attributes mentioned in the Bible, such as WISDOM is portrayed as a woman. The book of Proverbs teaches children to respect and honor their mothers and to listen to their mother's wisdom.

The Bible is not the product of the surrounding culture. The Torah which was contemporary with the Code of Hammurabi differed in many ways but one thing that differs most glaringly is that unlike Hammurabi's code, the Torah offers mercy, and Hammurabi didnt.

There are lots of other ways that the Bible defies the culture surrounding it. But I don't have time to delve into all of it.

[secondeve]

Of course I can back it up. I realize that many other religions claim that man is inherently flawed. The difference is that the Bible says that you are not good enough to do anything about it, and that you can never become good enough on your own to do anything about. The Bible in many places teaches that man is not only inherently evil, morally depraved, but also teaches that man cannot make himself good enough to be acceptable to God. From spiritual perspective God declares that man is evil, wretched, and morally completely impotent to do anything about it. The Bible teaches that that you can do all kinds of good things, but that you cannot change your heart before God. All of the charity, all of the prayers, chanting, offers no hope according to the Bible.

I know the point you're attempting to make here - that because the Bible arguably sees humans as being more sinful and wretched than any other faith, this perception couldn't have been generated by humans. The fact of the matter is that the idea of human failings and evils is not exclusively Christian - and even if there was a consensus on the idea that the Biblical perception of humanity's faults was the most extreme and unforgiving (although I doubt this to be the case), it still wouldn't prove anything except that one religion had taken a common theme to a different level.

The most important point here, though, is the idea of salvation. Such a dark view of Christianity as you've described can and does work as a human construction precisely because of the element of redemption offered by belief. If you can teach that humans really are corrupt at the same time as providing a ray of hope, you've got yourself a mixture for success shared by every religion: the idea that devotion and belief alone will save you. If the hope of heaven is there, then the potentates of the faith can pretty much say what they like about how weak, viscious, damned and otherwise lowly humans are - it only helps their cause, which is getting people to obey and believe. In this respect, it isn't a coincidence that throughout history, religious power has equated to social power. Look at it this way: religion couldn't command any authority if it couldn't convince people, in some fashion, form or extremity, that they needed it. If religion taught that humans were all born as wonderful lambs of goodness and were capable of getting themselves into heaven without any official doctrine, code or other structure, there'd be little point to it. As it is, and as I said before, it doesn't take a genius to work out that humans are capable of terrible things. All you have to do to capitalise on it is say that this wickedness is inherent rather than learned in ever instance, and that people need to do what you say (and incidentally, follow your rules, give money to your institutions and elevate your status) if they want to survive. It's no surprise that all religions focus on the afterlife as the time of these rewards being delivered, either - trying to claim that it would happen in this world is clearly not a pragmatic or true statement in any case, and because we don't know what happens next, all humans tend to fear death.

The point I am making: it doesn't matter that Christianity says humans are sinful to any extreme, because they can still be saved. No matter how exclusive the club, it still provides hope, and is therefore no proof whatever that humans didn't come up with the idea.

Well you missing quite a bit. The Bible does present commandments, but the purpose for those commandments are entirely different than what you see in other religions. The Torah or the Law, was given in the Bible, not to make you better but to reveal where you don't measure up. You see, the Bible teaches that while it is possible to keep all the commandments, our inherent sinful nature taints our deeds. I may keep the deed perfectly from a ritualistic or external perspective, but the sin that is still in my heart makes the good deed worthless in the eyes of God. It is like giving someone a $30,000 Rolex watch and is covered in tar, bile, blood and feces.

Why does the different purpose of the commandments matter? What we're trying to establish here is whether or not man could have come up with the idea. And as I've just said above, there is still hope of salvation. So the Bible can say all it wants about wickedness - humans could still have written it. If you are going to give people laws which give you power, you need to give people a reason why they need to behave. And if that reason is getting into heaven and avoiding hell - well! The worse you make people out to be, the more they need the religion for their only chance at survival. It makes sense - human sense. It doesn't need to be divine in order to work. So I say, it's not impossible for man to have written the Bible.