Is the bible really god's inspired word? (page 3)

mP

the bible particularly the ot is about obedience to god via his represemtatives the priests. they want sacrifices, money, the best of the best and if you poor barstards dont pay up god will kill you. its obvious the jews thsemselves got sick of this scam because few returned from babylon most chose to stay and avoid the tyrants in jerusalem, in short they are part of the protoypescam religion which still exists today in buildings painted different colours.

thetrueone

in short they are part of the protoypescam religion which still exists today in buildings painted different colours.

Got to remember that one

thetrueone

"If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read." — Japanese proverb.

WTWizard

I will make it simpler: The LIE-ble is the Jews' inspired word (inspired by Jews) to enslave Gentiles. Notice they are ruthless in destroying artifacts that could be used in outside religions, and they slaughter anyone that is experienced in practicing such religions. They want the magic to themselves, so they can use black magic on the Gentiles and enslave them all. (Which is even more unethical than using debt to enslave us all. At least, with debt slavery, you don't get forced to worship some fictitious or embellished Nazarene, some Almighty Lowlife Scumbag, his filthy angels, or his unholy spirit.

Knowsnothing

Read Numbers 5:11-22

jws

Even if it were God's inspired word, doesn't mean it would or should contain an entire history of the past and mechanics of the universe. It's like reading a book on C++ programming and asking why it doesn't fully explain the history of C++, how it developed, what types of machines and operating systems were used in it's development. Out of scope. It *could* reveal a bit more to prove God really wrote it, but it doesn't. And what it does reveal about the physical universe is often wrong.

Is it inspired by God? In a sense, you could say that. The people who wrote it may have had been inspired in the same way Van Gogh was inspired by a the night sky. Not that the night sky spoke to him and told him what to paint. But that he saw something he wanted to paint. In the same way, probably, the authors of the Bible wanted to write about their beliefs. Or they were just writing something devisive to control people. Either one.

As far as the Jehovah's Witness interpretation that humans were basically secretaries jotting down what was dictated to them. That's impossible. The Bible contradicts itself as well as has innaccurate information that a God should know the truth about. That leaves us with the conclusion that men wrote the Bible. If men wrote it without God's assitance, why should we believe it to be the truth any more than the books of J.R.R. Tolkien or J.K. Rowling? Much less to pattern our lives after.

glenster

"what important point do we learn from the link?"

I make dauntingly long posts and you want me to make more? OK. As it bears
on these posts:

The Evangelicals share the JWs leaders' stance of an inerrant Bible, but it's
not the common stance among Christians otherwise. Most Christians, if not all
progressive/reform as I'd recommend for an Abrahamic faith, understand faith as
such to some degree: a hope in a possible God beyond the known things.

Understanding that isn't even Faith 101--it's more like the introduction to
the course which just goes over definitions of the most common terms to be used
in it.

(A Biblical confirmation--Jesus said to doubting Thomas: "Blessed are they who
did not see, and yet believed." NASB John 20:29 A major NT teaching is salva-
tion by faith.)

For philosophy about a possible basic God concept I recommend "How To Think
About God," Mortimer Adler.

Yet some people get lost in proving God is or isn't in the known things and
have more in common than they realize. It's like neither can interpret the
Bible or understand how to believe in a possible God beyond the known things any
better than a Fundamentalist Literalist/Orthodox Muslim, it's just that the
Literalist/Orthodox believes it and the disbeliever rejects it. But both stink
at the ground rules of how to have faith in perspective related to the known
things. (I'd recommend a progressive/ reform stance, but even conservatives
usually see certain things as allegorical, etc.).

Looking for it all in the known things God is possible beyond misses the
point of what faith is like staring into the west to see the sun come up. (I'm
going to prove where the ark landed and prove is/I'm going to dig fossils from
the hill and prove isn't.)

The JWs leaders train followers to have an unrealistic perspective of proving
or disproving with the known things. They force the choice that you should
agree with the JWs leaders' version, including every distinctive misinterpreta-
tion of theirs, of an inerrant NWT or you don't really believe in God. That's
more like the purview of the Orthodox majority of Islam--profess that the
writing of the Qur'an is the miracle of Islam or you don't honor Allah--than
the stance of many Christians.

I've written before about the problems that stagnated misunderstanding can
lead to (refusing the medical use of blood/major blood products, bigotry about
women and homosexuals, shunning or execution of outspoken apostates, etc.). If
there is a God, it insults Him.

(I made homosexuals the way they are and want you to kill them. What do you
think I made them for--target practice? That's messed up. What's your Inquisi-
tion for? You think I had Jesus tell followers to look for people who are
different and beat them up? Oy, goyim.)

It can also cause some disbelievers to look down on all believers as people
who must misunderstand the known things instead of people with a hope for a
possible God beyond them, which allows the healthy development of it as the
things known grow. To make an analogy with music--the known things/the objec-
tive math of music, faith/subjective reactions to music--it's like warning you
have to not like music or you'll play the wrong notes and off the beat, which
isn't true.

yalbmert99

Why would god need humans mediators to tell us his word? Why can't god talk to us directly without using mediators? It doesn't make sense. Why does god need us to preach his word? Can't he do it himself, he who is almighty?

Heaven

God wouldn't need a book.

Is the bible really god's inspired word?

Share this