The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums:
Religion & Philosophy

The Bible isn't mentioned in the Bible.

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2 3 4 5
AmberB On May 24, 2010




,
#61New Post! Dec 16, 2009 @ 13:55:27
@buffalobill90 Said

If there was something divine about those ones, and they were inspired by God - they were God's 'chosen books', you might say - then the authors, who were divinely inspired messengers of God, would presumably have known that and would have mentioned it explicitly. But they didn't. The authors were unaware of the opinions of the other Biblical authors, and this is illustrated by the inconsistency in the Bible, not just in its message but in its form - in some places poetry, others myth, or correspondence or history or sermon.



You keep coming back to this point, but I still don't see how it proves anything one way or another about the divinity of the books in question. The authors were telling their own story; why would they care about the others? That god didn't command them to include prophecies about other books that would be written and should be combined together to make the bible really says nothing about whether or not they were inspired by god. Perhaps the bible wasn't the goal of god. Perhaps many of the books left out of the bible were also inspired by god; they simply weren't chosen for the bible. Or perhaps, as you say, none (or at least not all) of them were inspired by god. I just don't see how that can be determined or supported by the fact that they don't mention other books written in the name of god.
jonnythan On August 02, 2014
Bringer of rad mirth


Deleted



Here and there,
#62New Post! Dec 16, 2009 @ 14:03:45
The point is that there's nothing overly special about the books that were selected for the Bible versus the ones that weren't. It was a bunch of corrupt greedy guys in a room who picked out the ones they wanted.
AmberB On May 24, 2010




,
#63New Post! Dec 16, 2009 @ 14:24:50
Buffalobill's point seems to be that it supports the argument that the books actually aren't divinely inspired. That's the only part I can't agree with.
buffalobill90 On July 12, 2013
Powered by tea





Viaticum, United Kingdom
#64New Post! Dec 16, 2009 @ 15:39:36
@AmberB Said

You keep coming back to this point, but I still don't see how it proves anything one way or another about the divinity of the books in question. The authors were telling their own story; why would they care about the others? That god didn't command them to include prophecies about other books that would be written and should be combined together to make the bible really says nothing about whether or not they were inspired by god. Perhaps the bible wasn't the goal of god. Perhaps many of the books left out of the bible were also inspired by god; they simply weren't chosen for the bible. Or perhaps, as you say, none (or at least not all) of them were inspired by god. I just don't see how that can be determined or supported by the fact that they don't mention other books written in the name of god.



I can't be bothered writing the the same thing all over again and I don't know how to make it clearer. But I'll try.

So the Church selected these 66 books to be the Holy Bible - they are supposedly the right books to be at the absolute centre of Christian scriptural authority. Christian literalists will assert that they are divinely inspired because their authors were the specific people through which God wished to transmit his sacred message to humanity. The other books which were not included are heretical, false, not the work of God but of men (or possibly Satan).

Now, if these authors and their books are so phenomenally important to Christianity, if they are the ones which God specifically chose to spread his word and make himself known to humans, then you would expect this to be mentioned somewhere in the scripture itself. God supposedly used the scripture and its authors to let prophecies be revealed, so that no one would be able to doubt that certain events were destined to happen. So why wasn't it planned, right from the beginning, that these books would be the Bible? Why didn't God reveal that to his prophets?

You say that they were concerned about spreading their own message and not about the works of other people. In which case, there didn't appear to the different authors of the canonised books to be some special connection between them. They were unaware that they were writing for the Bible - from my perspective, that doesn't fit with the purported spiritual importance of the Bible. It implies that they weren't all receiving their message from the same divine source, which explains the presence of disagreements and inconsistencies between books.
AmberB On May 24, 2010




,
#65New Post! Dec 16, 2009 @ 15:50:06
@buffalobill90 Said

I can't be bothered writing the the same thing all over again and I don't know how to make it clearer. But I'll try.



Me neither, but I'm not going to try again; I'm bored of the repetition.
Johnny_shade On October 28, 2011




Casper, Wyoming
#66New Post! Dec 18, 2009 @ 02:34:17
@AmberB Said

Buffalobill's point seems to be that it supports the argument that the books actually aren't divinely inspired. That's the only part I can't agree with.



What's wrong with it? It makes sense Unless you have some sort of bias against what he's saying, then it would perfectly make sense why you can't understand it. Because you don't want to!

So, do you have a bias against what he is saying?
Bhav On April 12, 2011




, United Kingdom
#67New Post! Dec 18, 2009 @ 07:27:03
The Bible fails right at the start where it states that the earth, man, plants and animals were all created before the sun.

Anyone who believes anything else they read beyond that point must not be very intelligent.
deal1 On May 06, 2011
SECRET SQUIRREL





not of this earth,
#68New Post! Dec 18, 2009 @ 07:36:01
@Bhav Said

The Bible fails right at the start where it states that the earth, man, plants and animals were all created before the sun.

Anyone who believes anything else they read beyond that point must not be very intelligent.



Genesis-Chapter and verse please?
AmberB On May 24, 2010




,
#69New Post! Dec 18, 2009 @ 23:35:40
@Johnny_shade Said

What's wrong with it? It makes sense Unless you have some sort of bias against what he's saying, then it would perfectly make sense why you can't understand it. Because you don't want to!

So, do you have a bias against what he is saying?



No, I don't have a bias. At least, I'm fairly certain that I don't; I suppose I could subconsciously.

I've already mentioned the problems I've found with it, and then gone back and forth with other posters repeating our arguments. That's the only flaw that I see, but it is enough that I don't put much stock in the op's view, as interesting as it initially seemed.
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2 3 4 5

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Be Respectful of Others

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   Religion & Philosophy
Mon May 28, 2012 @ 23:46
3 881
New posts   Religion & Philosophy
Thu Feb 02, 2012 @ 12:23
115 5901
New posts   Religion & Philosophy
Sun Sep 04, 2011 @ 11:19
27 10958
New posts   Religion & Philosophy
Mon Dec 15, 2008 @ 15:39
48 3010
New posts   Religion & Philosophy
Mon Aug 11, 2008 @ 17:43
200 12307