Christians: Did God Write the Bible?

[angellous_evangellous]

I believe it is inspired through special revelation. However, it must be filtered as Scuba Pete said through the prejudices and ignorances of those writing it.

And "filtered" again through our own prejudices and ignorances.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Think about it, if it had to be perfectly rendered, God would have done it just like on Mt Arafat... WITH HIS FINGER!

... or his nose...

 

[SoyLeche]

Think about it, if it had to be perfectly rendered, God would have done it just like on Mt Arafat... WITH HIS FINGER!

I find that assumptions of what God "would have" done are completely baseless. If it were possible for it to be perfectly rendered by a human then God could have chosen that route as easily as doing it with his own finger.

(Note - I do not believe the Bible to be perfectly rendered, nor do I believe that we have a perfect translation into any language. I'm just going for logic here)

 

[Scott1]

What is your view?

"Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit."

God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit."

God inspired the human authors of the sacred books. "To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while he employed them in this task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though he acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more."

 

[Scuba Pete]

I find that assumptions of what God "would have" done are completely baseless.

"Would have"? That's what God DID. What happened when Moses broke those tablets? Did he let Moses try to remember what was written? Nope, he xeroxed another set of STONES in his hand writing. Not Moses' handwriting. Not Aaron's handwriting.

If it were possible for it to be perfectly rendered by a human then God could have chosen that route as easily as doing it with his own finger.

Romans 3:22 This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. NIV

This would include any and all authors of the Scriptures.

(Note - I do not believe the Bible to be perfectly rendered, nor do I believe that we have a perfect translation into any language. I'm just going for logic here)

You agree with the logic of reality, as do I.

 

[dawny0826]

I believe the Bible to be God-inspired. And in that sense, I consider it infallible. Man wrote it but God's hand guided man.

 

[joeboonda]

2 Timothy 3

14But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Exactly Joe... it never says that the scriptures are infallible OR that they were written by God: only that they are inspired and are useful.

 

[kiwimac]

God used human beings in all the weakness and prejudice to write as they were inspired. That mean's we got what God wanted plus a whole lot of 'other' stuff.

 

[SoyLeche]

"Would have"? That's what God DID. What happened when Moses broke those tablets? Did he let Moses try to remember what was written? Nope, he xeroxed another set of STONES in his hand writing. Not Moses' handwriting. Not Aaron's handwriting.

I'm just not willing to say that what God chose to do in this particular situation is what God would choose to do in all situations - that's all.

Romans 3:22 This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. NIV

This would include any and all authors of the Scriptures.

I never said that the authors of the scripture would be perfect - just that the end product (the scriptures they wrote down) would be.

You agree with the logic of reality, as do I.

I do what I can

 

[Scuba Pete]

I'm just not willing to say that what God chose to do in this particular situation is what God would choose to do in all situations - that's all.

I see, you have a finicky God. A God who changes from one moment to the next. Interesting!

I never said that the authors of the scripture would be perfect - just that the end product (the scriptures they wrote down) would be.

Of course you claim that in the absence of any support from those self same scriptures.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I see, you have a finicky God. A God who changes from one moment to the next. Interesting!

Instead of "finicky" I prefer "wild" and "unpredictable." God has shown that he can do whatever he wants when he wants to do it. That's terrible and scary.

 

[SoyLeche]

I see, you have a finicky God. A God who changes from one moment to the next. Interesting!

Nope, just one that recognized a need to do things differently under different circumstances.

Of course you claim that in the absence of any support from those self same scriptures.

No I don't. I don't believe that the scriptures are infalible. I just accept that it is within the realm of possibility.

 

[SoyLeche]

Instead of "finicky" I prefer "wild" and "unpredictable." God has shown that he can do whatever he wants when he wants to do it. That's terrible and scary.

I'm not sure that "terrible and scary" have ever precluded "possible" or even "true" - but I could be wrong.

BTW, I don't necessarily believe that God can do "whatever he wants whenever he wants" - at least not without consequences. I'm not sure I know how to go any further down that train of thought though.

I hope you all recognize that I don't disagree with your conclusions, just with the arguments that get you there.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I'm not sure that "terrible and scary" have ever precluded "possible" or even "true" - but I could be wrong.

BTW, I don't necessarily believe that God can do "whatever he wants whenever he wants" - at least not without consequences. I'm not sure I know how to go any further down that train of thought though.

I hope you all recognize that I don't disagree with your conclusions, just with the arguments that get you there.

Depends on what is "possible" or "true." A God weilding cosmic power who can do whatever he wants is pretty scary and terrible in my humble opinion.

 

[SoyLeche]

Depends on what is "possible" or "true." A God weilding cosmic power who can do whatever he wants is pretty scary and terrible in my humble opinion.

Yes - as you said before. I'm not sure what that has to do with what I responded to what you already said though. Repeating your stance doesn't do much beyond increasing postcount.

 

[Luke_17:2]

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." -II Timothy 3:16-17

I believe all scripture is inspired (God puts the words in the man's mouth), and there are probably times where it is directly dictated: the Prophets. For example, "Thus saith the Lord".

Now, if it isn't inspired by God, what are we basing our faith on? Something that is no different then Plato's Republic, and Marx's Communist Manifesto. Why? Because it's written by man, and man makes mistakes, and certainly can't be trusted to formulate doctrine that will save my soul.

So, by the very basis of our faith, it must be God-inspired, and true. So, that means that is must be historically accurate because God was there throughout history, and would certainly know the conditions. Except in cases of divine intervention (that is where God decides the transcend the laws of science which He created), the Bible can't say things in violation of scientific law.

It doesn't violate either.

Suggesting that it's not historically, or scientifically accuarate means that we can't trust a single part.

We can't pick and choose, people. Either it's God's Word, and therefore factually accuare; or it's not factually accurate and not God's Word. We can't see Romans 10, and believe that; but reject Genesis 1.

It just doesn't work that way.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Suggesting that it's not historically, or scientifically accuarate means that we can't trust a single part.

We can't pick and choose, people. Either it's God's Word, and therefore factually accuare; or it's not factually accurate and not God's Word. We can't see Romans 10, and believe that; but reject Genesis 1.

It just doesn't work that way.

Your logic is completely flawed here. There is no reason whatsoever to completely reject everything in the Bible as God's word because one little peice (or several portions) of the Bible are scientifically inaccurate.

What it means is that your interpretation is wrong. Your faulty reasoning dictates that the entire Bible should be rejected as God's word if there is anything inaccurate in it, and not the Bible itself or any rule of interpretation (except for assuming that the Bible is absolutely perfect in everything that it says in the first place, which the Bible does not claim).

It would be more correct to say:

"If the Bible is not completely scientifically accurate according to my interpretation, then my interpretation of what the Bible is (a scientific textbook) must be incorrect."

 

[Scuba Pete]

So, by the very basis of our faith, it must be God-inspired, and true.

You have some scriptural support for this contention?

Can you find ANYWHERE in scripture where it claims to be perfect?

Herein lies the problem and the solution: The Spirit of God.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." -II Timothy 3:16-17

[...]

We can't pick and choose, people. Either it's God's Word, and therefore factually accuare; or it's not factually accurate and not God's Word. We can't see Romans 10, and believe that; but reject Genesis 1.

It just doesn't work that way.

Except if you're using 2 Timothy as your basis for believing that the Bible is God's Word, you have to acknowledge that Paul couldn't have been referring to anything that he wouldn't have considered "scripture" at the time.

IIRC, when the Epistles were written, the Gospels were still being passed along orally and could not have been considered "written scripture"; at the very least, the Epistles seem to indicate Paul's lack of familiarity with the four Gospels as we have them today. And things that were wholly created and written after 2 Timothy would definitely not be referred to in Paul's statement. The first source I Googled claims that the following books might have been written after 2 Timothy:

- Matthew*
- Mark*
- Luke*
- John*
- Acts*
- Ephesians**
- Philippians**
- Colossians**
- Philemon**
- Hebrews
- 1 Peter
- 2 Peter
- 1 John*
- 2 John*
- 3 John*
- Jude
- Revelation

*possibly - range of dates given.
**possibly - same year given as for 2 Timothy.

So... given that it's quite likely that Paul wasn't referring to the New Testament at all when he talked of "Scripture", and given that the books above likely weren't even written when he wrote the quote you cited, why should we take 2 Timothy as any sort of statement of validity about the books I listed above?