Do you believe the Bible is the inspired word of God? (page 5)

seattleniceguy

I have found no good reason to believe it is, and I tried exceedingly hard to believe when I was a Witness. In fact, the main reason I left the organization was because I felt that belief in the Bible (at least in the manner required by the WTS) was intellectually dishonest.

The main reasons I felt that I could not honestly believe in the Bible is because it simply does not reconcile with science and history in many respects. But I certainly agree with what Bubbamar wrote above. If God really did communicate with humans, and if God were a loving God, wouldn't we expect to have a book that painted a picture of really great, warm, loving person? And for God's sake, shouldn't it make sense? Why all the riddles? Why all the double-speak, contradiction, and just plain gibberish? When I was a Witness I felt like I was constantly making excuses for God. "Well, yeah, that seems kind of rough, but, see, God had to do that because...." Like when Moses has to talk God out of destroying Israel at Mount Sinai. Or how about the wholesale destruction of entire cities and nations? "Well, God gave the Canaanites 400 years to repent." Nevermind the fact that - even if individuals did receive clear indication of exactly what the requirements for life were - which I don't think anyone can demonstrate that the Bible portrays - there were still innocent children mercilessly crushed by the invading Israelites whose eyes were not to feel sorry for "old man or virgin."

What actual book from God would require so much defending of the description that God himself supposedly wrote? Couldn't God paint a flattering picture of himself?

I mean, really. When you're honest, you have to agree that you really have to search to find scriptures where God seems nice. If God's such a great guy and he did inspire the Bible, shouldn't you be able to just flip it open and feel the love flow? I actually find the Bible to be incredible in that, it seems as though collecting writings together at random, you'd stand a better chance of getting something from which you'd be able to wring some good, loving quotes. We've got 1500 pages of 6-point type, and the "God is a Nice Guy" collection amounts to a very small Greatest Hits album of like 25 scriptures.

So my conclusion is that, either God did inspire the Bible and he happens to be schizophrenic with a decidedly angry streak and a penchant for arbitrarily punishing humans and livestock, or that the Bible was written by people bent on controlling their fellowmen by claiming to be the divine channel. Seeing that the Bible has consistently been used the the latter, I find it quite probable that that was the original purpose as well.

Seattle

hooberus

I would if someone could explain why by bible chronology says man is only 6,000 years old, and yet we have found human remains well over 30,000 years old.
Doesn't jive.
Bryan

Yeah Bryan I was wondering along those same lines also. No where in the bible does it speak of dinosaurs or cavemen. I don't believe Adam/Eve were cave people but scientific evidence gives proof that they existed, so where do they actually fit into this timelime after adam/eve??? or somewhere before adam/eve???

For a response to issues such as this the following site provides a biblical and scientific perspective http://www.answersingenesis.org

Robdar

I believe that the Bible is the inspired word of man; born by his desire to achieve goodness, to become "civilized". Whatever civilized means.

Rob

JCanon

Explain carnivorous dinosaurs, and why the Bible says that Adam & Eve
were in a paradise, when these dinosaurs were around the same time amen!s

The Biblical reference to dinosaurs is verse 21: "And God proceeded to create the great sea monsters and every living soul that moves about..." Great sea monsters = dinosaurs. Now the JW traditional view is that these creatures were created first to help create the topsoil layer and obviously later create massive oil reserves which has to come from organic matter. This was created by the fifth day. Each day was 7,000 years long. These massive creatures, of course would create lots of "fertilizer" to make for a rich organic topsoil for the future. After their purpose, they became extinct. No problem. As far as a skull of some man being dated 30,000 years, it is far more likely that scientists are misinterpreting some form of inadquate dating method. You should note how archaeologists even now argue among themselves about carbon dating of certain things when only a couple thousand years are involved. 30,000 years? Doubtful. Besides who knows how reliable the methods are or if there was some phenomenon that could account for some misreading? Maybe something that accelerated the half life or something. In the meantime, the "hard evidence" of mankind's "written history" is completely consistent with the Bible and those people who were building pyramids and castles don't look any more ape-like than we do now. The most ancient civilizations we know of, the Incas, the Babylonians and Egyptians, evidence we can actually reliably date don't go past the Bible's chronology and these people were intelligent and had written language and knew about astronomy and all that! Not much different from us, and maybe in some ways more advanced with some wild people claiming they must have gotten their information from extraterrestials. Of course, there are "extra terrestials"...the Bible calls them angels! People will believe what a they need to, not that I'm less biased, but I just think it's all too convenient that out of those alleged 30,000 years or more that man was ape-like and living in caves as hunter-gatherers and then all of a sudden he started writing and building pyramids and zygurats, all within the Bible's timeline. Sorry, but inadequate dating methods by ever-changing science is not sufficient to dismiss the Bible as a book of truth...let alone "inspiration". JC

Gretchen956

The Biblical reference to dinosaurs is verse 21: "And God proceeded to create the great sea monsters and every living soul that moves about..." Great sea monsters = dinosaurs.

huh? Dinasaurs were not aquatic for the most part, and those that were lived in swampy areas. Not the sea.

As for carbon dating, the WTS has been spouting that same tired line for years. If you can't dispute something try to discredit it. So carbon dating has been unreliable by some couple thousand years. When you are talking about 30,000 years whats a couple of thousand either way? Still doesn't come anywhere near 6,000.

Its pretty hard to stuff all that hard science back into the bag to fit your biblical worldview. Amazing how often it happens, though. Its usually called denial.

Sherry

AlanF

Sherry, I hope you know that JCanon is a complete whack-job, thinking he's literally the returned Messiah.

That said, JCanon's remarks are typical of the totally screwy lengths to which YECs (Young-Earth Creationists) must go to maintain their fairy tale. They'd reject evidence that bit them in the ass if it contradicted their religious myths.

AlanF

gumby

Do I believe the bible god inspired the bible? Ummmmm .......no.

I've never found anywhere in the N.T. where it said anything such as god saying....... " I want different men to record information about my son, carefully record it, then add it to the O.T., and make sure this book gets into the hands of everyone on the planet and make sure they live by all that you write, or they will all die". There is no refrence of god commanding such an idea.......why should I believe that was his intent?

Gumby

Gretchen956

Thanks for the heads up!

DaCheech

JCannon:

If Adam was given the assignment of naming ALL animals, then he should have

also have named the dinosaurs. Then if so, then why has there been no other mention of their name until

scientists found them & named them to todays understanding?

onacruse

AlanF:

Sherry, I hope you know that JCanon is a complete whack-job, thinking he's literally the returned Messiah.
That said, JCanon's remarks are typical of the totally screwy lengths to which YECs (Young-Earth Creationists) must go to maintain their fairy tale. They'd reject evidence that bit them in the ass if it contradicted their religious myths.

Tell me it ain't so! LOL

As far as self-honesty is concerned: As exJWs, having been conditioned as we were, it's only natural that we would blindly accept the inspiration of the Bible as a "given." In the converse, it's up to us, personally, to either face the facts, or at least, to face the fact that we don't want to face the facts.

Oddly, I have more respect for someone who openly admits to the last, than for those who adamantly insist that they are facing the facts; a syndrome I myself played out for a few decades.

Do you believe the Bible is the inspired word of God?

Share this