Freethought & Rationalism Archive

George S · 01-09-2008, 03:23 AM

Here is the Word of God (you know it to be true because this sentence proclaims it to be the Word of GOD): You're wrong in everything you think because no human has even a remote inkling of what God wants.

It is true, of course, because it claims to be true, just like the scriptures do.

rhutchin · 01-09-2008, 03:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by makerowner

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Since this thread is about inerrancy, if you can provide evidence that God inspired and preserved the Bible, we can look at it. You are an inerrantist. Inerrantists assert that the Bible is inerrant. It is up to them to reasonably prove that God inspired and preserved the Bible. Inerrancy is an absurd claim. It cannot be reasonably proven. Why would God want to provide Christians with an inerrant Bible? What is the Bible, the Protestant version, the Roman Catholic version, or some other version? Is the Gospel of Thomas part of the Bible or not?

The claim of inerrancy arises from the view that God is the author of that which we find in the Bible.

I'm sure you can see why internal claims of divine inspiration are unsatisfactory. Otherwise, why don't you believe in the Qur'aan, the Bhagavad Gita, etc.?

If there is more than one claim of divine inspiration, then a person would accept those that were consistent with each other and choose what to accept among those that were not consistent. In your example, a person would choose which of the claims to believe.

Quote:

Originally Posted by makerowner

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

It is based on such verses as--

2 Timothy 3
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

There was no canonized Bible at the time this was written, and in fact the Gospels had not even been written yet.

Which means that Paul was primarily referring to the OT and any future writings for which divine inspiration was claimed and accepted by the church.

Quote:

Originally Posted by makerowner

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

2 Peter 1
21 ...prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

I don't think any NT authors other than John in Revelation claimed to be a prophet (though I may be remembering wrong).

Paul, as did most of the NT writers, claimed to be an apostle of Christ and to teach that which he received from Christ. That was what the OT prophets did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by makerowner

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

That is the evidence that God inspired the writings that have been collected and preserved in the Bible.

So no evidence at all you mean.

The writings were preserved by those who received them and collected by the church. Someone thought that they were inspired.

Quote:

Originally Posted by makerowner

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

That which the church recognizes as the inspired writings are that which can be considered as the Bible. Both Catholics and Protestants agree on a common list of inspired writings so these can, at the least, be considered to comprise the inspired writings from God.

So your church accepts 1&2 Maccabees, Tobit, Ben Sira, etc. as "inspired writings from God"? I highly doubt that.

My church accepts that which both Catholics and Protestants agree on. Since Protestants do not agree that 1&2 Maccabees, Tobit, Ben Sira, etc. are inspired, then those are not included.

rhutchin · 01-09-2008, 03:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Hathaway

Here is the Word of God (you know it to be true because this sentence proclaims it to be the Word of GOD): You're wrong in everything you think because no human has even a remote inkling of what God wants.
It is true, of course, because it claims to be true, just like the scriptures do.

That just means that we now choose whether to believe the testimony of the above or to believe the testimony of the Biblical writers.

rhutchin · 01-09-2008, 03:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dogfish

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

OK. You don't have to be pleased. Despite your feelings, you can always act in your self-interest even with just two choices, neither of which pleases you.

So all that crap in the original post about "why should'nt you be happy with the choices" and such was just that - rhetorical crap?

You can be happy that you have a choice.

rhutchin · 01-09-2008, 03:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dogfish

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dogfish

Surely you see the goofiness of saying the bible is the word of god because the bible is th word of god?

I don't think I understand your point. The Bible is the collection of writings of men who were closely associated with Jesus. They wrote of the things that they were taught and of their experiences. If these writers independently wrote that Scripture was inspired by God, I do not understand why that would necessarily be "goofy."

Because there is nothing to support their claims outside of their claims?

I think you understand. You just want to think otherwise.

The Biblical writers provide much information to support their claims so that a person has a wealth of information on which to base any decision he makes. I still don't see why it is necessarily goofy to consider the testimony of the Biblical writers based on the credentials they present.

George S · 01-09-2008, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Hathaway

Here is the Word of God (you know it to be true because this sentence proclaims it to be the Word of GOD): You're wrong in everything you think because no human has even a remote inkling of what God wants.
It is true, of course, because it claims to be true, just like the scriptures do.

That just means that we now choose whether to believe the testimony of the above or to believe the testimony of the Biblical writers.

Why would I have to choose the Bable (Bible, Koran, Torah) as the alternative? All of them make the claim to being the Word of God just as that sentence does. Hindu mythology has its scripture. Jain mythology has its scripture. All of them make the same claim: this scripture is true because it says it is dictated by God. Just like Joseph Smith. Just like....

The issue is how to choose.

How do you know you have made the correct leap of faith? I hope it is not because the scripture says it is correct due to revelation. There have been too many contradictory revelations to trust revelation as a source of truth.

God spoke to me in a dream (details on request) and said He saves everyone. Do you trust this revelation? If not, why not? It has just as much basis as any other revelation. He also told me to follow these rules and be loving and honorable.

1. Respect for all life, but especially human life, is moral.

2. Aggressive (not defensive) first use of force is immoral.

3. Taking unearned value --theft -- is immoral.

4. Threat of use of force for gain of unearned value is immoral.

5. Deceit for gain of unearned value or to cause harm is immoral.

You and everyone else is equally saved.

How am I not as able to have a revelation as any prophet. My moral rules are sound. Be honorable and loving and follow the rules. You are saved anyway, so make a life that feels good to you and all others you come in contact with.

How do you know that ancient revelation is any more valid than current revelation. Why not join my church? It has no priests and is free.

rhutchin · 01-09-2008, 03:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Hathaway

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

That just means that we now choose whether to believe the testimony of the above or to believe the testimony of the Biblical writers.

Why would I have to choose the Bible (Bible, Koran, Torah) as the alternative? All of them make the claim to being the Word of God just as that sentence does. Hindu mythology has its scripture. Jain mythology has its scripture. All of them make the same claim: this scripture is true because it says it is dictated by God. Just like Joseph Smith. Just like....

The issue is how to choose.

How do you know you have made the correct leap of faith? I hope it is not because the scripture says it is correct due to revelation. There have been too many contradictory revelations to trust revelation as a source of truth.

God spoke to me in a dream (details on request) and said He saves everyone. Do you trust this revelation? If not, why not? It has just as much basis as any other revelation. He also told me to follow these rules and be loving and honorable.

1. Respect for all life, but especially human life, is moral.

2. Aggressive (not defensive) first use of force is immoral.

3. Taking unearned value --theft -- is immoral.

4. Threat of use of force for gain of unearned value is immoral.

5. Deceit for gain of unearned value or to cause harm is immoral.

You and everyone else is equally saved.

How am I not as able to have a revelation as any prophet. My moral rules are sound. Be honorable and loving and follow the rules. You are saved anyway, so make a life that feels good to you and all others you come in contact with.

How do you know that ancient revelation is any more valid than current revelation. Why not join my church? It has no priests and is free.

OK. Now we have your claim that God spoke to you that we add to all the other claims. It's one more claim that people have to choose from.

Your claim is that all are saved. That makes it unnecessary to attend your church and it seems that many people believe you and are already following you.

George S · 01-09-2008, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Hathaway

Why would I have to choose the Bable edited back to original (Bible, Koran, Torah) as the alternative? All of them make the claim to being the Word of God just as that sentence does. Hindu mythology has its scripture. Jain mythology has its scripture. All of them make the same claim: this scripture is true because it says it is dictated by God. Just like Joseph Smith. Just like....

The issue is how to choose.

How do you know you have made the correct leap of faith? I hope it is not because the scripture says it is correct due to revelation. There have been too many contradictory revelations to trust revelation as a source of truth.

God spoke to me in a dream (details on request) and said He saves everyone. Do you trust this revelation? If not, why not? It has just as much basis as any other revelation. He also told me to follow these rules and be loving and honorable.

1. Respect for all life, but especially human life, is moral.

2. Aggressive (not defensive) first use of force is immoral.

3. Taking unearned value --theft -- is immoral.

4. Threat of use of force for gain of unearned value is immoral.

5. Deceit for gain of unearned value or to cause harm is immoral.

You and everyone else is equally saved.

How am I not as able to have a revelation as any prophet. My moral rules are sound. Be honorable and loving and follow the rules. You are saved anyway, so make a life that feels good to you and all others you come in contact with.

How do you know that ancient revelation is any more valid than current revelation. Why not join my church? It has no priests and is free.

OK. Now we have your claim that God spoke to you that we add to all the other claims. It's one more claim that people have to choose from.

Your claim is that all are saved. That makes it unnecessary to attend your church and it seems that many people believe you and are already following you.

Edit to add: Do not, in the future, change my post when responding. The word "Bable" was to combine the Bible, Torah and Qu'ran collectively.

You did not answer my "how" questions with this response. You entirely missed the point of my post.

How do you know that ancient revelation is any more valid than current revelation.

How do you know you have made the correct leap of faith?

Dogfish · 01-09-2008, 05:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dogfish

So all that crap in the original post about "why should'nt you be happy with the choices" and such was just that - rhetorical crap?

You can be happy that you have a choice.

But I don't. I can't make myself believe - short of an icepick behind my eye.

Dogfish · 01-09-2008, 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dogfish

Because there is nothing to support their claims outside of their claims?

I think you understand. You just want to think otherwise.

The Biblical writers provide much information to support their claims so that a person has a wealth of information on which to base any decision he makes. I still don't see why it is necessarily goofy to consider the testimony of the Biblical writers based on the credentials they present.

Because nothing that would even HINT at a supernatural origin is corroborated by an outside source. And I think the only "credentials" you accept is that they were inspired by god. Another circular argument.

Just remember to "point" during you're spinning - you won't get as dizzy.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-09-2008, 03:23 AM	#111
George S Contributor Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Austin Posts: 16,498	Here is the Word of God (you know it to be true because this sentence proclaims it to be the Word of GOD): You're wrong in everything you think because no human has even a remote inkling of what God wants. It is true, of course, because it claims to be true, just like the scriptures do.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.