Sheshbazzar

Actually a divinely inspired writing can contain nothing but errors and still be divinely inspired, the term "divinely inspired" does not equate with absolutely correct, but that the writing was composed and penned under the perceived influences of a divine being with an express purpose to be accomplished.
In the case of the Bible, with all of its erroneous, fabricated old stories, myths, and fables, parables and impossible events ("miracles") what was (is) intended to be accomplished by these, was set into motion, and is STILL being played out, and we are all of us participants.
It generally being recognized that it is impossible for Yahweh to lie, however it is shown by Scripture that He has methods to deliberately deceive whomsoever ever He will. here are a few examples;

21. "And there came forth a spirit, and stood before Yahweh, and said I will persuade him.
22. And Yahweh said unto him, Wherewith? And he said I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.
And He said, thou shalt persuade him and prevail also: go forth, and do so.
23. Now therefore, Behold, YAHWEH hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and Yahweh hath spoken evil concerning thee." (1 kings 22:21-23)

"I also will choose their delusions..." (Isa. 66:4)

"I gave to them statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live;" Ez. 20 25

"And for this cause Yahweh shall send them a strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:" (by HIS WORDS) (2 Thess. 2:11)

[At this point I accidentally hit "send", whereas I would normally employ spell-check and "Preview Post" before sending, I have taken this opportunity to correct a few spelling and punctuation errors, Thanks]

John A. Broussard

That's a fascinating view. So it can be full of errors and still be divinely inspired.

Boggles the mind.


You have certainly changed my view of the biblical god. Now I find that that god doesn't lie, but just deceives.

I'm puzzled. How can you quote these verses to prove anything if you don't know whether or not they are erroneous? For that matter, maybe god is simply "deceiving" the readers here. Right?

Sheshbazzar

Yes, I admit to the possibility that Yahweh is even now actively deceiving in some degree every single person living, also to the possibility that every word ever written in every religious text that has ever existed, and every news story that has ever been printed, that I've not personally been a witness to, was written as part of a plot to confuse and retard mankind's advancement, and that flying saucers and little green men forced J.E. Hoover to have the FBI assassinate the Kennedy's, because they knew that Saddam's WMD are sub-microscopic micro-chips implanted beneath his toenails, and the Kennedy's being Catholic prophets, would reveal the nefarious plot.
But even admitting to all of these possibilities, life goes on, and I sincerely hope and pray that none of the above is ever proved to be correct.
But then if you don't hold my view of the sense in which Scripture is inspired, these verses must actually mean what they appear to mean, that is, Yahweh is able to deceive whomsoever He will.
If He is not actually engaged in any deceiving, then these verses are deceiving, and yet they are His.

Chili

Not exactly true. The flood was not global but covered the entire world of Noah. We have replaced the flood parable with Advent that continues to flood the wold of Catholics away just prior to the Christ-mass whereafter new life is found in another world, Johhny, except that you need a white baptism candle to see that and not the measure of Christian geologists.

Sheshbazzar

It wouldn't boggle your mind, if you didn't buy into the Xtian view that the word "inspired" translates as "absolutely factual, literally true, and free from all error." a late invented apologetic position, which was quickly discredited and discarded even by most Xtian scholars.
You are making a forced argument against a Fundamentalist position that does not even represent the views ever held by the majority of believers.
In a previous post I made a statement that needs to be reiterated;
"I have never supported the view that, "inspired writings" (inclusive of ALL the sacred literature that has ever been written, not limited to Judeo-Christian) is to be taken as, or be understood as literal historical reporting."
To expand on this, whether the Book of The Dead, the Gita, the Koran, or the recorded dreams and visions of Native American shaman's or any other spiritual writing that has, or may yet come to attention, I do not require nor expect such to be "absolutely factual, literally true, and free from all error." Nor do I question the legitimacy of their inspiration, nor their ability to vitiate and inspire the thoughts and actions of men.
When the words or doctrines of these seem to disagree or contradict those of the Bible, I perceive it as an opportunity provided by Providence to weigh and judge those differences, and at every spiritual crossroads to choose the reading, doctrine and direction in which to continue. That I unto this day continue to "walk" in a certain path, is not a denial that other paths do exist, and that other men are likewise entitled to choose those other paths.
And again regarding spiritual writings other than the Bible, I am not denied to meditate upon their sayings, but rather, I am encouraged to meditate upon "whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; If there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things."
A good saying, whether coming from Muhammad, or from Sitting Bull, or from the Pope, or from Pat Robertson, is still, "a good saying",
I may fully enjoy their poetical compositions, their songs and dances;
How beautiful and spiritually uplifting I find the Pow-Wow to be!
None of these take anything away from my faith, no indeed, they enrich, and give greater depth and breadth to my convictions.

Chili

Lovely and true. I have never been to a Pow-Wow but take your word for it.

John A. Broussard

How do you know what things in the bible are "true?" Do you have some rule of thumb to go by?

If so, I'd appreciate knowing what the rule is.

Thank you.

Craigart14

By "group" do you mean species? If so, how can some members of a species be clean and others be unclean? (You didn't answer this question before, so I thought I'd give it another shot.)

So do you mean that God commanded Noah to bring sixteen animals of each species, but that Noah brought only two of each? Or do you mean that he brought in sixteen of each, but loaded them two at a time? Your idea that God commanded him to bring in sixteen is still idiotic because it depends on species containing both clean and unclean animals. (I've heard a lot of stupid Christian apologetics, but nothing quite as stupid as this one.) Besides, regardless of what was posted in the OP, there is a clear conflict between Gen. 7:2 and Gen. 7:8-9, and my contention is clearly supported by Gen. 6:19.

If you don't think this is an implied insult, then your comprehension is seriously in doubt. Now, stuff your implied insults, your condescension, and your refusal to answer direct questions where the moon don't shine. (That's a metaphor<edit>.)

Craig

Free Starboy!

Chili

When they come to rest in our soul, John, one after the other and not all at once or they would blow our minds (remember Plato's Cave on this). For this to be possible the bible must be prior to us by nature and second to us in its poetic form . . . as if we must live the prose and let the bible be the poetry to light up our lives as we sojourn into the unknown.

Sheshbazzar

Well first of all John, my quote was in reference to "writings other than the Bible"
But apart from that, there is no lack of "true" sayings in the Bible, that it pleases some atheists to attack those sayings that do not agree with our present scientific knowledge, or that are incapable of being proven to be either true or false by any present means, does not in any way discredit that large body of "sayings" that are indisputably truisms, and are "good" literature.
I would rather to think better of you, than that the concepts of "truth" and "good" are so alien to your ethics that you cannot recognize them.
But I do indeed think better of you, and believe that you do also see many of the things that are "true" and "good", but having an old ax to grind, willfully and pathetically close your eyes, ears, and heart even against the "good sayings".