1. Standard memberthesonofsaul
    King of the Ashes
    Trying to rise ....
    Joined
    16 Jun '04
    Moves
    63851
    22 Apr '05 19:12
    Well? Did God actually write the Bible, in the opinion of the Christians posting in this forum, or did he only inspire its writing? And if the latter, how does the inspiration of the Bible differ from other works of literature and art that are "inspired"?

    And come on everyone, try to stick to the subject. I'm sure I'm not alone in not wanting another thread arguing Bible verses.

    ... --- ...
  2. Standard memberDarfius
    The Apologist
    Joined
    22 Dec '04
    Moves
    41172
    22 Apr '05 19:24
    Originally posted by thesonofsaul
    Well? Did God actually write the Bible, in the opinion of the Christians posting in this forum, or did he only inspire its writing? And if the latter, how does the inspiration of the Bible differ from other works of literature and art that are "inspired"?

    And come on everyone, try to stick to the subject. I'm sure I'm not alone in not wanting another thread arguing Bible verses.

    ... --- ...
    When I say 'God wrote the Bible.' I am essentially saying that all of the human beings who moved the pen were being directed by God. Either through images in their minds, general ideas, and sometimes verbatim.

    Not a word on the original manuscripts was superfluous.
  3. Standard memberNemesio
    Ursulakantor
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Joined
    05 Mar '02
    Moves
    32455
    22 Apr '05 19:29
    Originally posted by Darfius
    When I say 'God wrote the Bible.' I am essentially saying that all of the human beings who moved the pen were being directed by God. Either through images in their minds, general ideas, and sometimes verbatim.

    Not a word on the original manuscripts was superfluous.
    Care to explain the contradictions I repeatedly raise?

    Nemesio
  4. Standard memberDarfius
    The Apologist
    Joined
    22 Dec '04
    Moves
    41172
    22 Apr '05 19:37
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    It's one thing to be be directed by God. I know alot of people who I think are directed by God. (You're not one of them.) It's another thing altogether to have God take over your mind and body a la the lightning girl in "Revelations" and ACTUALLY dictate to a person. So you're admitting in there that while God may have influenced some(?) writi ...[text shortened]... message, and that human translation may have been imperfect because of its very nature. Right?
    God took over no one's body. Those who were faithful to God asked for His inspiration, and He gave it to them in those manners.

    I'm 'admitting' that God influenced every single word on the original manuscripts and that copyists later made some errors, though I believe somewhere around 99% of the text still has integrity to the originals and the mistakes are largely dealing with numbers and nothing to do with salvation.

  5. Standard memberDarfius
    The Apologist
    Joined
    22 Dec '04
    Moves
    41172
    22 Apr '05 19:39
    Originally posted by Nemesio
    Care to explain the contradictions I repeatedly raise?

    Nemesio
    Nemesio, please don't interpret this as me being rude, but are you familiar with the term 'mutually exclusive'? Merely giving two differing eyewitness accounts is not 'mutually exclusive'. It is telling a story from your eyes that doesn't relate 100% of the facts because we all don't share an objective mind. You may respond that God inspired the writings, but He wasn't concerned with making 4 copies of the Gospel, but rather each writer's viewpoint of Jesus, as each He deemed important for man to see.
  6. Standard memberthesonofsaul
    King of the Ashes
    Trying to rise ....
    Joined
    16 Jun '04
    Moves
    63851
    22 Apr '05 19:41
    Originally posted by Darfius
    When I say 'God wrote the Bible.' I am essentially saying that all of the human beings who moved the pen were being directed by God. Either through images in their minds, general ideas, and sometimes verbatim.

    Not a word on the original manuscripts was superfluous.
    Three possibilities, huh? Who decides which is which? I mean, could the resurection of Christ be a general idea, or an image? A metaphor that God wished upon his people perhaps?

    Paul claimed to be the voice of Christ. Does that mean that everything that Paul wrote needs to be taken as God's voice verbatim?

    ... --- ...
  7. SubscriberAThousandYoung
    Just another day
    tinyurl.com/y8wgt7a5
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    24791
    22 Apr '05 20:44
    Originally posted by Darfius
    Nemesio, please don't interpret this as me being rude, but are you familiar with the term 'mutually exclusive'? Merely giving two differing eyewitness accounts is not 'mutually exclusive'. It is telling a story from your eyes that doesn't relate 100% of the facts because we all don't share an objective mind. You may respond that God inspired the w ...[text shortened]... ospel, but rather each writer's viewpoint of Jesus, as each He deemed important for man to see.
    Which two people were present at Creation such that they could give different eyewitness accounts of whether humans were created before or after vegetation?
  8. Standard memberNemesio
    Ursulakantor
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Joined
    05 Mar '02
    Moves
    32455
    22 Apr '05 20:51
    Originally posted by Darfius
    Nemesio, please don't interpret this as me being rude, but are you familiar with the term 'mutually exclusive'? Merely giving two differing eyewitness accounts is not 'mutually exclusive'. It is telling a story from your eyes that doesn't relate 100% of the facts because we all don't share an objective mind. You may respond that God inspired the w ...[text shortened]... ospel, but rather each writer's viewpoint of Jesus, as each He deemed important for man to see.
    So was the rock rolled away before or after the women got to the
    tomb?

    Nemesio
  9. Standard memberColetti
    W.P. Extraordinaire
    State of Franklin
    Joined
    13 Aug '03
    Moves
    21735
    22 Apr '05 20:51
    Originally posted by thesonofsaul
    Well? Did God actually write the Bible, in the opinion of the Christians posting in this forum, or did he only inspire its writing? And if the latter, how does the inspiration of the Bible differ from other works of literature and art that are "inspired"?

    And come on everyone, try to stick to the subject. I'm sure I'm not alone in not wanting another thread arguing Bible verses.

    ... --- ...
    The Bible says it is inspired.

    All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
    (2Ti 3:16 NASB)

    But a more specific interpretation of the Greek is that it is "God breathed."

    All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
    (2Ti 3:16 ESV)

    It was not dictated, but it contains the information that God intended.
  10. Standard memberNemesio
    Ursulakantor
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Joined
    05 Mar '02
    Moves
    32455
    22 Apr '05 20:581 edit
    Originally posted by Coletti
    The Bible says it is inspired.

    All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
    (2Ti 3:16 NASB)

    But a more specific interpretation of the Greek is that ...[text shortened]... t dictated, but it contains the information that God intended.
    The Bible says that 'All Scripture is inspired,' not that itself is inspired.

    The Bible fails to define what precisely Scripture is.

    That was decided at a council in the 4th century.

    The Protestants later removed some books in the 16th century,
    claiming that over a thousand years' worth of acceptance as inspiration
    was invalid.

    So, precisely, the Bible does not say that it is inspired.

    Nemesio
  11. Standard memberfrogstomp
    Bruno's Ghost
    In a hot place
    Joined
    11 Sep '04
    Moves
    7707
    22 Apr '05 21:16
    Originally posted by thesonofsaul
    Well? Did God actually write the Bible, in the opinion of the Christians posting in this forum, or did he only inspire its writing? And if the latter, how does the inspiration of the Bible differ from other works of literature and art that are "inspired"?

    And come on everyone, try to stick to the subject. I'm sure I'm not alone in not wanting another thread arguing Bible verses.

    ... --- ...
    No , and there's enough proof for that in the bible itself.
    and much more in clay tablets written long before Abram so therefore much earlier than Moses.
  12. Standard memberColetti
    W.P. Extraordinaire
    State of Franklin
    Joined
    13 Aug '03
    Moves
    21735
    22 Apr '05 21:26
    Originally posted by Nemesio
    The Bible says that 'All Scripture is inspired,' not that itself is inspired.

    The Bible fails to define what precisely Scripture is.

    That was decided at a council in the 4th century.

    The Protestants later removed some books in the 16th century,
    claiming that over a thousand years' worth of acceptance as inspiration
    was invalid.

    So, precisely, the Bible does not say that it is inspired.

    Nemesio
    The Bible is Scripture. The words in the Bible are not talking about some other writings when it refers to Scripture.

    The Bible is not a dictionary. I don't think you will find the word definition of define in the Scriptures. Nor will you find the word Bible. But you can figure out what the word "Scripture" means by reasoning through the propositional truths found in the Bible regarding Scripture, inspiration, knowledge, revelation, the Word, etc. You put all that together to figure out what the term Scripture means. And "Bible" is just a synonym for Scripture. It's not difficult to understand.

    The question has to do with what Christians believe about the inspiration of Scripture - what does that mean. And a Christian must turn to the Scriptures to see what it says about the issue. There is no greater authority on Scripture than Scripture itself.
  13. Standard memberNemesio
    Ursulakantor
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Joined
    05 Mar '02
    Moves
    32455
    22 Apr '05 21:352 edits
    Originally posted by Coletti
    The Bible is Scripture. The words in the Bible are not talking about some other writings when it refers to Scripture.

    The Bible is not a dictionary. I don't think you will find the word definition of define in the Scriptures. ...[text shortened]... There is no greater authority on Scripture than Scripture itself.
    When that passage in I Timothy was composed, there was no Bible.

    He didn't know that Revelation would be at the end, and St Mark
    would be after St Matthew. The Bible as it exists now did not exist.
    He didn't even know what books would later be viewed as Scripture.

    It was compiled by a Council in the 4th century, during which there was
    great debate about what should and shouldn't be included -- that is,
    what is and is not deemed Scripture is not wholey delineated by the
    NT.

    To use that passage to justify that Revelation is 'Scripture' is
    anachronistic to say the least.

    You are taking for granted the book which you call 'The Bible' is a
    complete text, when it is, in fact, a bunch of books compiled together.

    And, if you want to argue that God guided the council, then you will
    have to argue that the Protestants desecrated that canon when they
    excised the seven books from their version.

    Nemesio
  14. Not Kansas
    Joined
    10 Jul '04
    Moves
    6405
    22 Apr '05 21:42
    Originally posted by Darfius
    God took over no one's body. Those who were faithful to God asked for His inspiration, and He gave it to them in those manners.

    I'm 'admitting' that God influenced every single word on the original manuscripts and that copyists later made some errors, though I believe somewhere around 99% of the text still has integrity to the originals and the mistakes are largely dealing with numbers and nothing to do with salvation.

    As an aside, JS Bach is said to have written his works for the glory of God. Whether he was Divinely inspired or inspired by his belief is moot; we are lucky to have his music.
    Just two cents from the peanut gallery­čśŤ

    http://www.johann-sebastian-bach.org/
  15. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36061
    22 Apr '05 21:51
    Originally posted by thesonofsaul
    Well? Did God actually write the Bible, in the opinion of the Christians posting in this forum, or did he only inspire its writing? And if the latter, how does the inspiration of the Bible differ from other works of literature and art that are "inspired"?

    And come on everyone, try to stick to the subject. I'm sure I'm not alone in not wanting another thread arguing Bible verses.

    ... --- ...
    Most Christians (I hope!) would argue that God inspired the writing of the Bible - though some [parts] of the Prophetic books may have been based on direct Revelation.

    How does it differ from other works of literature and art that are inspired? I'll come to that in a moment - but first let me focus on the similarity. Like any piece of literature, the authors would've used language, metaphor, symbols, literary forms & structure etc. that would reflect the era of composition and the direct audience it was intended for. The composition of books like the Psalms may also involve the literary creativity of the author.

    The difference, of course, is the authors of the Bible were not penning down their own message but, rather, a message from God to humanity (whether they were aware of it or not). Given such factors as era, literary forms, ability of author etc., God would have prevented them from adding to / taking away from the message he intended to reveal to mankind.

    Now don't ask me to prove all this. You wanted to know what Christians believe about the Bible - I think my answer covers the major bases.
Back to Top