Paddy

This may be an old question, however, I would like to know on what grounds to Christians believe that the bible is the divinely inspired, absolute, innerant, objective word of god? Why do you believe this notion as oppossed to the notion of the bible being a subjective, primative, exagerated interpretation of events that transpired?

I am not arguing that the bible is a fairy tale, just that over time events may have been embellished and interpreted using the endemic cultural perspective of that epoch.

What seems more likely, that Jonah was literally transported inside a giant fish, or that this was an embellishment of an event that may have been a little less hard to swallow (no pun intended)?


cheers,
Paddy

Peter Kirby

Hi Paddy, you are in good company here. True blue inerrantists are scarce around these here parts. So don't be too disappointed if you don't get an answer... not even considering that there really is no reasonable answer.

best,
Peter Kirby

j-ogenes

I'll try to jump in here. I'm not a fundamentalist nor a christian but I was raised in a christian fund family--seventh-day Adventist. I think that for those who take the Bible completely literally, they probably think that to not do so would to throw the whole idea of God out the window--that is, they aren't aware of the option of saying, well, some of this stuff was true, some embellished, some a metaphor, etc.
Also, once you already believe in God, why not believe he helped Samson kill a thousand Phillistines with the jawbone of a donkey? Or that the Red Sea was parted? It's no fun believing in a God who doesn't do cool stuff! And, really, people simply do not think about it in a lot of cases. A lot of people in the world simply don't have the inclination to deconstruct a story and say, wait, how could ALL the species on Earth fit in a damn boat or how could Jesus have bled water when the soldiers pierced his side? A belief in the omniscient prepares people to believe those things. The answer to any question on believibility is "well, God performed a miracle." To the question of why things like these no longer happen, they sometimes say, the way the world is today, no one would believe it was God's doing. Why that would stop him from doing so is beyond me...

hingers

Hi,
It's a largely circular argument in parts. The Bible sort of argues its own validity, there's a passage in 2 Timothy 3:16 which says "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness," .. Which for many, is proof enough. The Bible says it's true, so it must be. Also, in Revelation 22:18 : 18I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

.. . But on a more pragmatic level. If you were in charge of The Bible or what not, chances are you would be a fairly religious person, and wouldn't want what you believed to be The Word of God to be tainted. So you'd entrust copying it to someone who shared your passion and respect for such a document. Thus, you'd hope that they wouldn't change what was written.

And even further, on a more spiritual level, the Bible in my experience and personal testimony has been far more inspirational in my life than any other text, and it speaks to me in a way other texts never have. That said, I can see the change it has made in my life, and the logical assumption through my own thinking is that God existance is 'proved' through the changes in my own life and once you see God, there's very little reason to doubt the Bible as his direct word.

I guess it's one of those thing one should read and make his or her own mind up about.

Paddy

Hingers,

".. . But on a more pragmatic level. If you were in charge of The Bible or what not, chances are you would be a fairly religious person, and wouldn't want what you believed to be The Word of God to be tainted. So you'd entrust copying it to someone who shared your passion and respect for such a document. Thus, you'd hope that they wouldn't change what was written."

I wasn't implying that scholars throughout the years have added their own twist to the scriptures as they have reproduced them. I was questioning as to whether we should regard the original texts as representing an objective series of events, given that the authors were a) attempting to augment their own religion/beliefs, b) living in a superstitious/religious epoch, c) living in an age of limited scientific knowledge, and d) living in an age where legend, myth, and embellishment were rampant.

All this leads me to question the validity, veracity, and authority of the bible. Especially as the scripture seem to satisfy all the criteria of being a fabricated representation of events.


Cheers,

Paddy

Darth Dane

God also speaks in India and greenland, in fact I'm inclined to believe that only God speaks at all!





DD - Love Spliff