Myth - The Bible claims to be inspired by God

by gubberningbody 15 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Olin Moyles Ghost

  Gubbering body: Olin, Paul's trivial letter which makes passing reference to "scripture" doesn't qualify as anything other than Paul's meandering opinion. Not only does Paul (aka Saul) go back and forth at times sometimes he thinks he has Gods spirit (1 Co. 7:39), and sometimes he can't remember where he read something (Heb. 2:6), but his endorsement doesn't even begin to address just what books he was talking about? If he was with the camp of the pharisees, then he believed in a whole lot more than just the books we have at present. You simply can't take one joker's opinion as an endorsement of the whole.

  Looks like you're "moving the goalposts" on us. You said that the Bible doesn't claim to be inspired. I pointed out that it does, and gave a citation to the chapter/verse. Now you're saying that doesn't count for some reason. That hardly seems fair. ;)

  But if I was put in the position of having to defend the nonsense that are in the pages of the Bible, I would probably try to come up with some kind of rationalization like you've done.
• 

  Olin Moyles Ghost

  Undercover--you have a PM.
• 

  sir82

  Ok, so what does 2 Tim 3:16 mean when it says "all scripture is inspired of God"?

  Isn't an alternate translation of that verse something more like:

  "All scripture that is inspired of God is beneficial for teaching etc...."

  That is, some of what is called "scripture" is inspired by God, some is not. But the pieces that are inspired, well, that's good stuff.
• 

  undercover

  OMG... got it...and returned
• 

  The Scotsman

  ((( Myth - the bible claims to be inspired by God.)))

  Tricky one this - no-one can prove this claim is a myth. But also no-one can claim absolutely that the claim is true.

  It boils down to opinion and faith.

  To me passages of the bible seem to demonstrate an intelligence higher than human - the bible is truly unique.
• 

  gubberningbody

  No Olin, you need to understand that the set of books gathered together and called "The Bible" is an artificial social construct, not a natural one. As an artificial construct you also have to understand that not all the pieces which have been made to cohere make reference to inspiration, nor do they comment on all those which have been cobbled together and called "the Bible".

  "The Bible" is a straw man made flesh and words have been put into his mouth.

  You can legitimately speak of each "book" in isolation, but not as a whole, because, as, I've already pointed out this thing called "the Bible" is a social, not a natural construct.

  I suspect that you didn't attend carefully to what I'd said, because if you did you'd have understood that I'm not an apologist for that construct.