The Bible as the word of God

[rockytriton]

I'm just wondering what reasoning people use for this. Does anyone here have a reason that they believe that the Bible is given to men by God other than that someone told them it was? I'm not saying its right or wrong, I'm just wondering the reasoning.

[cwes99_03]

I'm just wondering what reasoning people use for this. Does anyone here have a reason that they believe that the Bible is given to men by God other than that someone told them it was? I'm not saying its right or wrong, I'm just wondering the reasoning.

 

Well I can think of three verses that say that the Bible was given to man by God.

 

1) 2 Tim. 3:16

 

2) 1 Thes 2:13

 

3) 2 Peter 1:20,21

 

Most websites will also cite the idea that the Bible though written by oer 40 different men including 66 books written over the course of about 1600 years, yet it is maintains unity ( pyro and others on this site will say otherwise, but there are a number on this site that agree with that statement ).

They will also site the example of the many different prophecies that were written hundreds of years in advance of their fulfillment that were incredibly specific (such as Cyrus being the one to defeat Babylon and free the Jews held captive there, or Jesus being born in Bethlehem but hailing from Nazareth, and Daniel's prophecies about the rise and fall of the medo-persian, greek, roman, and other world powers and how alexander would die and his empire would be divided among his 4 generals.)

Taken separately many try to pick these apart, saying that the books were all written by one person about 100 AD, but then how did all the Jews know about them. Others will say that in translating the books, the context and wording was changed to make things fit together, but enough experts have worked on this and produced enough different translations, that one should be able to determine fairly well whether this is true or not.

Still others would say that the prophecies were as broad as those of Nostradomus, and that anyone could bend or twist them to apply to what eventually happened. This I say is purely wishful thinking to those who don't want to believe.

No one can say that the Bible itself doesn't claim divine inspiration.

[rockytriton]

Ok, but this is like trying to use a word to describe itself in the dictionary...

 

happy:

adj. to be happy

 

It seems to me that it still just comes down to the only reason to believe it is because someone told you to believe it.

[HydrogenBond]

The bible is the word of God in the sense that it outlines a philosophy which was created anew near the time of Chirst. It may have had some precidence, but its unique ideas for that time were created from within. Christ left behind the inner spirit which would guide one to all truth. In this sense, the creativity came from within the minds and imagination of the authors and were not something originally stemming for education. Therefore these ideas figuratively or literally came from within, via the inner spirit of God.

 

Another thing that is unique about the Bible, is that was not a flash in the pan novel, i.e., here today and gone tomorrow. It survived and flourished for 2000 years and influenced the course of western history. One can look at Christmas music and how much beauty and creativity it has spawned. This implies that the bible has had an evolutionary effect on the human mind, heart, and culture. It philosophy led to the magna carta, age of enlightenment (many of the early pioneers were clergy lookng for truth), the constitution and finally western culture becoming the leading influence for humanity on the earth.

 

Associated with this growing/evolving process were a lot of dark behavior. This was not due to the bible, as it was due to human nature twisting the teaching for its own selfish purposes. In spite of these constant set backs, the bible's evolutionary potential pushed humanity forward to this day.

[rockytriton]

Thanks, good answer.

 

The reason I'm asking is because we know it was written by men, and then people say that God inspired them to write it so it's his words and he used them to write it. So this just makes me wonder if you can say that about other books. For instance, Darwin's book "Evolution of the Species". One could say that it has influenced science and technology and thereby influeced society very much. I'm not saying its the word of God, but who's to say that God didn't put those ideas into Darwin's head?

[cwes99_03]

The bible is the word of God in the sense that it outlines a philosophy which was created anew near the time of Chirst. It may have had some precidence, but its unique ideas for that time were created from within. Christ left behind the inner spirit which would guide one to all truth. In this sense, the creativity came from within the minds and imagination of the authors and were not something originally stemming for education. Therefore these ideas figuratively or literally came from within, via the inner spirit of God.

 

Another thing that is unique about the Bible, is that was not a flash in the pan novel, i.e., here today and gone tomorrow. It survived and flourished for 2000 years and influenced the course of western history. One can look at Christmas music and how much beauty and creativity it has spawned. This implies that the bible has had an evolutionary effect on the human mind, heart, and culture. It philosophy led to the magna carta, age of enlightenment (many of the early pioneers were clergy lookng for truth), the constitution and finally western culture becoming the leading influence for humanity on the earth.

 

Associated with this growing/evolving process were a lot of dark behavior. This was not due to the bible, as it was due to human nature twisting the teaching for its own selfish purposes. In spite of these constant set backs, the bible's evolutionary potential pushed humanity forward to this day.

I actually disagree with just about every part of this statement. The idea that the Bible was inspired by the " the inner spirit which would guide one to all truth" isn't founded in the Bible. The Bible says that the scriptures were inspired by God. He of course could do this in any way he wanted, but looking at how prophets say they saw visions, or heard voices, or spoke with an angelic mouthpiece, His holy spirit there is no reason to believe that God didn't have some direct means in causing these men to write all the books of the Bible.

 

So unless you can explain the Biblical backing you have for the idea of the "inner spirit of God", you are aptly describing your own methods "This was not due to the bible, as it was due to human nature twisting the teaching for its own selfish purposes. In spite of these constant set backs, the bible's evolutionary potential pushed humanity forward to this day" . IE, the idea of an internal spirit of God is what some people use to explain their belief that they can do whatever their conscience tells them is ok, simply because they have taken Jesus into their lives, a completely unscriptural belief.

 

Unless directly found in the Bible, it is merely speculation. There is some understanding of what is found in the Bible, but that takes more than just a topical understanding of a couple of verses. It takes one years of study of all of the scriptures to understand the different methods that were used (directly spoken of in the Bible) to begin to expound on what methods might have been used when it was not directly explained how the words were inspired.

 

Also what do you mean by evolutionary potential? Are you implying that the teachings of the Bible should be adaptive to the current day? Should the teaching on homosexuality be adapted simply because now there are condoms that can successfully prevent the transmission of std's, or maybe simply because if it isn't then the memberships of some church's will go down and that means less people will hear the word of God?

 

BTW, this is not a philosophy that was created anew around the time of Christ. If it had been then what is the Old Testament?

 

My point here is that, one can only determine whether the Bible truely is the word of God, if that person studies the Bible. Through a true study of scripture, even with the assistance of someone who has studied it extensively, one can see the prophecies I spoke of before, and see how they were fulfilled, or are currently being fulfilled, and how the Bible is full of truth (or if you go the other way, how none of these prophecies were accurate, or all the lies in the Bible, just for you Pyro.)

Either way, you can only determine it through study. One only determines the veracity of physics, chemistry, algebra, through study of books and teachers.

[HydrogenBond]

John I: 2:27, and as for you, the anointing that you have received abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you; but as his annoiting teaches you about all things, and is true and not a lie,

 

Cor. I: 3:16, Do you know that you are the temple of God and that the spirit of God dwells in you.

 

Cor I: 12:4-7 Now there are a variety of gifts, but the same spirit. And there are a variety of ministries and the same God. And there are a variety of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons. But to each is given the manifestation of the spirit for the common good.

 

James 1:5-6, But if any lacks wisdom, let him ask of God who gives to all men generously and without reproach and it will be given to him. But let him ask in faith without doubting,

[cwes99_03]

Ok, before we get into using scripture to defend our points. Let's first clarify what it is you mean by

Christ left behind the inner spirit which would guide one to all truth. In this sense, the creativity came from within the minds and imagination of the authors and were not something originally stemming for education

I ask this because I realize it may be possible for me not to have understood what you meant by it, and I didn't give enough time to figuring out what you were trying to say.

 

Are you saying that these men were given something that allowed them to write original works of their own? Or, are you saying that they were given the job of writing down God's words as His holy spirit guided them to write it?

What is this inner spirit you mention?

 

Also, what do you mean by

The bible is the word of God in the sense that it outlines a philosophy which was created anew near the time of Chirst.

the creativity came from within the minds and imagination of the authors and were not something originally stemming from education

italics represent an edit by cwes99_03

Are you saying that the words in the Bible are not God's thoughts recorded by men? Why do you call it a philosophy, as philosophy springs from mens minds, whereas religion springs from a non-human source? What do you mean not stemming from education? Education in the scriptures, or secular education?

 

Therefore these ideas figuratively or literally came from within, via the inner spirit of God.

? Which is it? What do you mean by literally?

One can look at Christmas music and how much beauty and creativity it has spawned. This implies that the bible has had an evolutionary effect on the human mind, heart, and culture.

What does this have to do with the Bible being the word of God? Did you just get off subject or something, or is there more of a point here?

 

Another thing that is unique about the Bible, is that was not a flash in the pan novel, i.e., here today and gone tomorrow. It survived and flourished for 2000 years

I can see how this might be important. If you are saying that God must have had a hand in protecting this work largely(though for some translations, not completely) unaltered in written form. Of course many other literary works have been also kept throughout the last 2000 years, so there is much to argue there.

[Southtown]

There are a million little reasons why I believe it. I see multiple layers of allegory throughout, and every aspect of life is rightly explained by it. Also the consistency of the message: even though Jewish clergy contaminated the religion as laid out in the OT, Jesus cleared up the mess and exposed the heart of the first covenant. Though, Christians have surely contaminated it again.

 

The most convincing argument that comes to my mind would be the Daniel prophesies. I made a little write-up about it.

 

http://homeofmercy.com/discussionboard/index.php?showtopic=1040#entry14450

 

Keep in mind when reading his prophesy that the book of Daniel was written around 530 B.C.

 

http://www.tektonics.org/guest/danielblast.html

[HydrogenBond]

The first two quotes talk about the Spirit of God being within and that it can teach one about truth. This does not necessarily imply that it is just the biochemistry of the brain performing the creative synthesis. Although the brain could be the means by which the spirit could reach consciousness,sort of like an antenna. I take this position because it is a possible bridge between religion and science.

 

After the time of Christ and his disciples, most interaction with the spirit God was not through the external sensory organs, i.e., Moses style, but rather stemmed from internal inspiration, just like Jesus said. The problem with internal inspiration is, how does one know if it is inspired truth, inspired misinformation, or the workings of a clever mind? This confusion led to the church disregarding the inner voice of the spirit to play it safe, and anyone claiming an inner connection was a heretic.

 

Instead, one was left the option to look for the spirit outside instead of the within. Most of the prophets after Moses up to Christ used the inner voice but were perscecuted by the establishment because the inspirations were often critical and they wanted to see visual proof. But visual prood poses the same set of problems with respect to the source of the sign. It can be a subjective interpretation like Jesus's face on a piece of toach, the workings of the spirit of God, or the workings of other spirits. It also makes one want expect to find truth from only external agenices, rather than one's own common sense (good source of truth).

 

Science as come along enough to know that the brain is the source of consciousness. It also knows that the human ego only uses about 10% of the brain's capacity. The other 90% isn't brain dead, but may be a source of higher human potential that still needs to be developed. Part of this higher potential may be a link to higher expressions of consciousness such as the spirit of God. I am not saying it is or isn't, but it does provide a rational link to what Jesus promised; the spirit within.

[rockytriton]

this is what is really annoying about these forums. I don't recall asking ANYTHING about the spirit of God whether it be in people or whatever..... sheesh...

[cwes99_03]

this is what is really annoying about these forums. I don't recall asking ANYTHING about the spirit of God whether it be in people or whatever..... sheesh...

 

I'm just wondering what reasoning people use for this. Does anyone here have a reason that they believe that the Bible is given to men by God other than that someone told them it was? I'm not saying its right or wrong, I'm just wondering the reasoning.

 

The bible is the word of God in the sense that it outlines a philosophy which was created anew near the time of Chirst. It may have had some precidence, but its unique ideas for that time were created from within. Christ left behind the inner spirit which would guide one to all truth. In this sense, the creativity came from within the minds and imagination of the authors and were not something originally stemming for education. Therefore these ideas figuratively or literally came from within, via the inner spirit of God.

 

Thanks, good answer.

 

The reason I'm asking is because we know it was written by men, and then people say that God inspired them to write it so it's his words and he used them to write it. So this just makes me wonder if you can say that about other books. For instance, Darwin's book "Evolution of the Species". One could say that it has influenced science and technology and thereby influeced society very much. I'm not saying its the word of God, but who's to say that God didn't put those ideas into Darwin's head?

 

Care to check that last post? You asked what reasoning people have. Hydro is explaining his reasoning that you said was a good answer, because I don't understand it and seem to disagree with it.

 

And to answer your question on Darwin. I believe if you could ask Darwin he would laugh and slap you in the face for suggesting such a thing, because he was trying to fly in the face of creationism. He was an atheist, who believed that only science could be the truth and anything religious was nothing but good stories and morals (not surprising that many here share his view.)

 

Hydro, you haven't explained yet what you believe. What do you believe the "Spirit of God" is? With an explanation of that, what would it mean to be within?

I do understand what you mean by wondering if you could trust the source of any such supernatural influence, as those of us who believe in God also believe that there are wicked spirit forces that have much the same ability to influence/inhabit/possess things.

[HydrogenBond]

The forum topic is the bible as the word of God. The NT was not inspired Moses style with God writing the Ten Commandments or NT on tablets of stone. Rather, each writer of the NT used memory recall, a little creative liberty and wisdom to write these versus. This implies the word of God appearing within their imaginations as they wrote. This inner rapport with God, within the imagination is the spirit within.

 

This is not in contradiction to the belief, by many, of external spirtual phenomena. But the external phenomena are hard for the scientific community to swallow, because these should be subject to scientific proof. The inner spirit is different in the sense that the output result, such as the NT, has had a lasting impact. It has influenced the course of human history for 2000 years and has led to a scientific rational human mind that can question it own creation.

[cwes99_03]

Well, Hydro, I'm still not clear on your stance as to how this inner spirit acts.

 

It appears that there are two possible ways you are saying this internal spirit works/is defined.

 

1) Everyone has a bit of the inner spirit, in the sense that the inner spirit is the persons own imagination and memory put together, and therefore everything that occurs is in some way part of God's plan. (Hope you can see the problems with this line of logic.)

 

2) God's spirit is an active force that is capable of causing people to remember things, as well as to influence their writing.

 

Moses only wrote a portion of the OT. It was not written on stone tablets and just recopied by a Bible scribe named Moses (again this is all according to the writings themselves as was pointed out in the original content of this thread). The only things ever penned by a supernatural power and recorded in the Bible were the 10 commandments and the writing on the wall recorded in Daniel (if I have missed something, please feel free to correct me.)

 

One way to see this is the gospel of Luke. Luke was a doctor who decided to record the history of Jesus' life. He had no training as a historian (as you have pointed out most of these men didn't ever have training in religion or writing) but his "inspired" account makes no statements that are irreconcileable to the other accounts. Now he received his information, not directly as a witness to these things, but through 1st hand witnesses of these things. Do you suppose he interviewed anyone who might have gotten the events wrong? Not being trained as a historian, he would most likely have gotten at least something wrong. But, if we use the second idea above, God would have caused him to write things down in the proper and accurate way.