Did God write the Bible?

Originally posted by thesonofsaul
That is exactly NOT was is being said. Your argument is being fueled by your feelings of being attacked. Nemisio is merely saying that what you call scripture is not what the author of Timothy called scripture, for what you call scripture was not collected into a single volume at the time. Therefore when that said author says that scripure is inspire ...[text shortened]... fearing people, perhaps his own personal list of "good" writings and letters.

... --- ...

I was beginning to think that no one was listening. Thank you
SonofSaul for reinforcement.

Colletti: let me ask you this: Do you believe that the Book of Enoch
is Scripture? Or the Assumption of Moses? Most people call these
books apocryphal.

Not St Jude. He thought that they were Scripture. Read his shor
letter to refresh yourself. The relevant verses are 1:9 and 1:14-15.

Do you feel that St Jude was in error in believing that these things
were important revelation? Or is it possible that early Christians did
not have a united front on what was and was not Scripture?

Nemesio

Originally posted by frogstomp
The author of Timothy is , of course, Paul.

FYI: Most modern Biblical scholars (except literalists) reject the Pauline
attribution on the basis of vocabulary, topic, and the very developed
depiction of Church organization which would have been highly unlikely
in St Paul's time.

Not a major point, but I figured I'd throw that in.

Nemesio

Originally posted by Nemesio
I was beginning to think that no one was listening. Thank you
SonofSaul for reinforcement.

Colletti: let me ask you this: Do you believe that the Book of Enoch
is Scripture? Or the Assumption of Moses? Most people call these
books apocryphal.

Not St Jude. He thought that they were Scripture. Read his shor
letter to refresh yourself. The rele ...[text shortened]... that early Christians did
not have a united front on what was and was not Scripture?

Nemesio

Do you always answer questions with questions? I know I do. 😉

So I'm hoping you will answer my questions first because you attacks on my views seem to contradict what you posted earlier. I'm hoping you will clarify your views for me by answering my questions.

I'm curious if we have any common ground. There are things you posted that I agree with, and it's a little easier to have some dialog when you know what you have in common. Most of your attacks I've also heard from atheist. But I don't think you are an atheist. I just can't figure what you are beside anti-coletti. So...

Do you believe we can say any books of the bible are inspired by God? Can any book of the bible be considered scripture? And what does scripture mean?

Originally posted by Nemesio
FYI: Most modern Biblical scholars (except literalists) reject the Pauline
attribution on the basis of vocabulary, topic, and the very developed
depiction of Church organization which would have been highly unlikely
in St Paul's time.

Not a major point, but I figured I'd throw that in.

Nemesio

Written by a Paul pretender?

Now isn't that just peachy?

Originally posted by Coletti
Do you always answer questions with questions? I know I do. 😉

So I'm hoping you will answer my questions first because you attacks on my views seem to contradict what you posted earlier. I'm hoping you will clarify your views for me by answering my questions.

I'm curious if we have any common ground. There are things you posted that I agree with ...[text shortened]... ired by God? Can any book of the bible be considered scripture? And what does scripture mean?

I certainly think that the bits about Jonathan the warrior hero is inspired and in turn should be an inspiration to us all! 😀

Originally posted by thesonofsaul
I certainly think that the bits about Jonathan the warrior hero is inspired and in turn should be an inspiration to us all! 😀

The kids book about the mouse? - those are great! 😀

Certainly inspirational. 😉

Originally posted by frogstomp
Written by a Paul pretender?

Now isn't that just peachy?

Maybe it was John....or Ringo.

John wrote some really deep stuff.

Originally posted by frogstomp
Written by a Paul pretender?

Now isn't that just peachy?

did i hear my name?

Originally posted by Peachy
did i hear my name?

Did you write Timothy?


edit a ststuddered

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.

... --- ...

After 8 years of Catholic schooling I was left with more questions than answers. So I went to a rabbi to discuss the Old Testament. Going to the source, so to speak.
He explained that the books Christians call the OT were passed down orally for hundreds of years before being written down and as such were viewed by Jews as definitely NOT the verbatim "word of God".
He pointed out many mistranslations contained in the OT. Old Hebrew to new Hebrew to old Greek to new Greek.

If the Bible is the word of God then God is an evil being who tortures his own people and consorts with Satan.

Since the 1890's even the myth of Noah has been known to have been taken from a Babylonian myth.

In Love there is Life
Angela

Originally posted by Coletti
Do you believe we can say any books of the bible are inspired by God? Can any book of the bible be considered scripture? And what does scripture mean?

1) I cannot answer this question unless you define what you mean by 'inspired by God.'
In your definition (which I will explore before answering this question), please let me
know if you see any difference between the Gospels's having been inspired by God and
(e.g.) Mozart's 40th Symphony.

2) Yes, but that depends on what you mean by Scripture (see 3 below). As I understand it,
you do not seem to be discerning between Scripture and 'inspired by God.' That is, is it necessary
for something to be 'inspired by God' in order to be Scripture, and is the fact that something
is 'inspired by God' sufficient for being called Scripture.

This question is part of the reason why I object to your claim that the Bible 'states that itself
is inspired.' The early Christians used the Septuagint (this we know), yet you reject seven
books of the Septuagint even though the formed 1500 years of tradition. Also, even though
I Timothy says that 'All Scripture is God-breathed,' if you believe that it was written by St
Paul (which I don't), the later texts (at least the Gospels and certainly Revelation) wouldn't
have even been written down yet and couldn't possibly be the referent for such a claim. The
body the ratified the current canon did so in the 4th century. Believing that the current canon
is correct necessitates believing that the people who ratified the Bible were acting under God's
direct influence (and, if you believe that, then how can you dismiss the notion that Roman
Catholics have that the Council still acts under such an influence?).

3) It can mean two things, I suppose. In a purely functional sense, it can mean any body of
writing which defines the official canon of a faith -- the Jewish Scripture, the Christian Scripture,
the Moslem Scripture, the Mormon Scripture. The second definition would be that which you
find to be 'inspired by God,' (i.e., worthy of a capital 'S' in your mind).

For my part, any production of human-kind has the potential to be revelatory and is
worthy of Scriptural consideration. Of course (obviously) I turn to canons like any other person,
and (obviously) the Christian canon is the one I know best. However, I think it is a damn shame
for someone to exclusively see God's revelation in a single corpus (whichever one). I think there
are many ways to get close to God -- studying only one body of Scripture limits your field of
vision and closes your mind to the infinite wisdom, beauty, majesty, and wonder of the Divine.

That is not to say that one body of Scriptural literature may speak most immediately and clearly
to you; naturally, it is very probably that one would. However, I do not believe that any human
being is sufficiently qualified to say 'Corpus X is defintely and wholey the Word of God, and Corpus
Y is definitely not,' and, as such, I find such claims to be arrogant, meaningless, and unsupportable.
I have no objections to someone's saying 'I find Corpus X communicates more about the Divine
than Corpus Y to me.' However, such opinions are rare and definitive, declarative
statements are commonplace.

Nemesio

P.S., What precisely did you feel that I was making contradictory statements about? Please cite
my specific sentences where you feel that my statements were equivating.