[Pete Svarrior]

It doesn’t. That’s humans you’re thinking of

You've lost me. Who, in your opinion, wrote the Bible?

[xasop]

We all know the bible was supposedly written several thousand years ago by a bunch of goat fu... ahh, herders in long lost dialects of ancient languages of various kinds, cherry picked, translated, then re-translated, then subject to multiple interpretations.  So we have proof it is complete BS without even having to open the covers.  Then when we do open it up we find, to no surprise, it is incoherent, inconsistent and self contradicting.

That's not entirely fair. The Bible is a fine historical document and contains many fine works of literature, as well as being a fascinating case study in how ancient texts changed over time before the printing press was able to standardise copies. The problem is not the Bible; it is the reverence that humans give to the Bible, usually while ignoring the bits of it that they don't wish to revere. You would have exactly the same problem if somebody decided that Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone was a holy book and should be studied deeply and followed to the letter.

Incidentally, being "re-translated" is not exactly accurate either. Almost all modern translations of the Bible are from the original languages, with very few exceptions for books and passages for which the original language has no surviving manuscripts, or for which the text in the original language is unclear or an obvious scribal error. But this doesn't actually matter very much because of the aforementioned phenomenon of ancient texts changing over time on the whims of scribes ­— there is no reason to believe that the 11th-century Masoretic Text in Hebrew is a better representation of the original than the 4th-century Septuagint manuscripts in Greek.

Whether to favour the original language or the older manuscripts is an ongoing topic of debate in Biblical scholarship, with no clear consensus. The good news is that they agree most of the time, so this only matters for very small portions of the Bible.

[BillO]

You would have exactly the same problem if somebody decided that Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone was a holy book and should be studied deeply and followed to the letter.

Better that than the Bible.  At least we know it has not changed since it's creation, we know who wrote it and we are familiar with the language it was written in.  It is also more consistent and more coherent.

I will give to the Bible that it is literature.  If you don't try to take it too seriously or in whole, it's not a bad read.

[AATW]

It doesn’t. That’s humans you’re thinking of

You've lost me. Who, in your opinion, wrote the Bible?

“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness”

So yes, it was obviously written by humans but the Christian belief is that it was inspired by God.
And the above exchange is talking about purgatory which I don’t believe is a Biblical concept. Tom talks about the “rumoured limbo”. That elicited the response which I then replied to. Any rumour about that is of human origin.

[xasop]

“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness”

So yes, it was obviously written by humans but the Christian belief is that it was inspired by God.

Which scripture are we talking about here? Different Christian denominations have different accepted canons. Are the deuterocanonical books only partially inspired by God? Inspired by a different God? Is one side wrong and going to hell for either claiming God inspired something he didn't, or claiming he didn't inspire something he did, and how do we know which is which?

This doesn't even start getting into the minefield of Isaiah 7:14 and its quotation in Matthew 1:23, which requires God to have inspired writing in Hebrew that means something other than what he intended to say, knowing that it would be mistranslated into Greek to render the correct meaning centuries later.

[BillO]

“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness”

So yes, it was obviously written by humans but the Christian belief is that it was inspired by God.

Which scripture are we talking about here? Different Christian denominations have different accepted canons. Are the deuterocanonical books only partially inspired by God? Inspired by a different God? Is one side wrong and going to hell for either claiming God inspired something he didn't, or claiming he didn't inspire something he did, and how do we know which is which?

This doesn't even start getting into the minefield of Isaiah 7:14 and its quotation in Matthew 1:23, which requires God to have inspired writing in Hebrew that means something other than what he intended to say, knowing that it would be mistranslated into Greek to render the correct meaning centuries later.

And let's not forget that most of Isaiah 7 was edited a century or so after it was originally written.

[WTF_Seriously]

It doesn’t. That’s humans you’re thinking of

You've lost me. Who, in your opinion, wrote the Bible?

“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness”

So yes, it was obviously written by humans but the Christian belief is that it was inspired by God.

The Mormon belief is that Joseph Smith was inspired by God.  Why aren't you Mormon?

[WTF_Seriously]

God throws his hands up and says, "Meh.  Free will." then turns around a walks out while closing the door behind Him.

Actually that is not what the Bible says happens to people who are evil.

WHOOSH!!!!!  And there goes the point right over your head.  It has nothing to do with punishing evil.  It has to do with God's pleasure in punishing innocence.

[Pete Svarrior]

So yes, it was obviously written by humans but the Christian belief is that it was inspired by God.

How would you, personally, describe this "inspiration"? Is it a Qu'ranic kinda deal where the supposed deity dictated it word for word? Or is it something more relaxed? To what extent do you think humans may have corrupted the intended message?

To be clear, I'm really asking for your personal take here (and the personal takes of anyone else who feels like sharing). I already know the "right" answer for at least some denominations of Christianity, but I also don't really care what they think.

[xasop]

To be clear, I'm really asking for your personal take here (and the personal takes of anyone else who feels like sharing)

Since you asked, my view is that if there is a God, then the Bible is the words of human beings trying their best to describe their interactions with a divine being, with all the flaws that humans have when they write about things. This explains all of the inconsistencies and difficulties in interpretation, while being perfectly consistent with a supernatural deity who created all of us and everything around us.

I also believe that if there is a God, he would want us to use the brains he gave us and analyse the Bible critically instead of taking it at face value (either what it contains or what others tell us it contains). He should be pleased when we find faults in it, because that means our understanding of the moral issues it addresses has developed beyond that of our ancestors. A God who gave us free will, but expects us not to apply it in our interpretation of scripture, is no God I would want to worship.

[Iceman]

Since you asked, my view is that if there is a God, then the Bible is the words of human beings trying their best to describe their interactions with a divine being, with all the flaws that humans have when they write about things. This explains all of the inconsistencies and difficulties in interpretation, while being perfectly consistent with a supernatural deity who created all of us and everything around us.

I feel like I agree with this, but I also can’t help but feel like there are elements in the Bible that are there only to benefit people in positions of power. There are too many things left out in not the OT and NT for it to be just the attempts of a few people to describe and catalog their brushes with the divine.

[xasop]

I feel like I agree with this, but I also can’t help but feel like there are elements in the Bible that are there only to benefit people in positions of power. There are too many things left out in not the OT and NT for it to be just the attempts of a few people to describe and catalog their brushes with the divine.

Well, yes, the Bible is a collection of many different types of literature, by many different authors with many different motivations over many centuries. My previous post was specifically replying to the way in which God inspired the Bible, not necessarily an attempt to describe all of its contents.

[Tom Bishop]

No, I'm looking for some hard evidence for your, or any other, God.

The method of obtaining evidence was already explained to you. The Bible says that you will go to hell if you do bad things. So go do some really bad things and then end your life in suicide and you can find out first hand whether it is true.

And the above exchange is talking about purgatory which I don’t believe is a Biblical concept. Tom talks about the “rumoured limbo”. That elicited the response which I then replied to. Any rumour about that is of human origin.

Incorrect. The people who believed in limbo or purgatory got that idea from the books of the Bible. They didn't make it up outside of the biblical texts. See Maccabees here -

https://www.aboutcatholics.com/beliefs/where-is-purgatory-in-the-bible/

The first mention of Purgatory in the Bible is in 2 Maccabees 12:46: “Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be freed from sin.”

Some people do not accept Maccabees as book of the Bible. This is unfortunate since it is that their Bibles have been edited and are missing books.

Apparently the dead may go to some state where they are not freed from sin and there is a secondary process.

In Chapter 12 of Second Maccabees we read Scriptural proof for Purgatory and evidence that the Jews had sacrifices offered for those of their brothers who had lost their lives in battle. That the Jews prayed for the dead shows that they believed in a place where they could be helped (which we now call purgatory) and that the prayers of their living brothers and sisters could help them in that place. This is closely related to the Catholic doctrine of the communion of saints.

Both Macabees 1 and 2 are listed as deuterocanonical books -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterocanonical_books

The deuterocanonical books (from the Greek meaning "belonging to the second canon") are books and passages considered by the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Oriental Orthodox Churches, and the Assyrian Church of the East to be canonical books of the Old Testament, but which Protestant denominations regard as apocrypha.

...

The deuterocanonical texts held as canonical for the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church are:

Tobit
Judith
Baruch
Sirach
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees
Wisdom

Elsewhere in the Bible there is clearly reference of going to another realm of existence that is neither heaven or hell -

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/is-purgatory-in-the-bible

I Corinthians 3:11-15 may well be the most straightforward text in all of Sacred Scripture when it comes to Purgatory:

"For no other foundation can any one lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any one builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble—each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire."

No Christian sect I know of even attempts to deny this text speaks of the judgment of God where the works of the faithful will be tested after death. It says our works will go through “fire,” figuratively speaking. In Scripture, “fire” is used metaphorically in two ways: as a purifying agent (Mal. 3:2-3; Matt. 3:11; Mark 9:49); and as that which consumes (Matt. 3:12; 2 Thess. 1:7-8). So it is a fitting symbol here for God’s judgment. Some of the “works” represented are being burned up and some are being purified. These works survive or burn according to their essential “quality” (Gr. hopoiov – of what sort).

What is being referred to cannot be heaven because there are imperfections that need to be “burned up” (see again, Rev. 21:27, Hab. 1:13). It cannot be hell because souls are being saved. So what is it? The Protestant calls it “the Judgment” and we Catholics agree. We Catholics simply specify the part of the judgment of the saved where imperfections are purged as “Purgatory.”

[BillO]

The method of obtaining evidence was already explained to you. The Bible says that you will go to hell if you do bad things. So go do some really bad things and then end your life in suicide and you can find out first hand whether it is true.

Okay, I see.  So you have no evidence of your God. Nice.  So what kind of person enslaves themselves to a thing that cannot be shown to exit?  Is that  a dupe?  Yeah, that is pretty much the definition of a dupe.

[Tom Bishop]

The method of obtaining evidence was already explained to you. The Bible says that you will go to hell if you do bad things. So go do some really bad things and then end your life in suicide and you can find out first hand whether it is true.

Okay, I see.  So you have no evidence of your God. Nice.  So what kind of person enslaves themselves to a thing that cannot be shown to exit?  Is that  a dupe?  Yeah, that is pretty much the definition of a dupe.

It's not "my" God, and nor have I "enslaved" myself to anything. You asked for evidence for the Bible that you could see for yourself and I have shown you that in a few actions you could get evidence. To get evidence for something you need to be willing to perform the experiment. It is not an experiment that other people can perform for you. The Bible makes a direct prediction on what will happen, and the only way to see if it will happen is to do it.  If you are unwilling to perform the experiment the fault lies with you for opting out on unscientific excuses like personal morality and fear.

[BillO]

It's not "my" God, and nor have I "enslaved" myself to anything.

So are you an atheist?

You asked for evidence for the Bible ...

No.  I asked for evidence of God.  Your suggestion is non compos mentis.  Like someone asks for evidence of electricity and you tell them to go grab those two wires and if you die there is electricity.   If you want to be an asshole, that's fine.  However, my question stands.  Present some evidence for the existence of God.

[Tom Bishop]

So are you an atheist?

Athiests say that they know the truth of the matter and that there is no God and that religion is false.

In my case I have stated that there are experiments which one can perform to determine the spiritual nature of the Bible. This is clearly not athiesm.

No.  I asked for evidence of God.

God doesn't live anywhere on Earth. The Bible says God and other supernatural beings are generally in other realms in the afterlife, so it only makes sense to go there. The Bible says that you can get there and experience these supernatural beings first hand with only a few actions necessary on your part. People have committed suicide for worse reasons than an effort to prove the Bible.

If you lack the determination to do the experiment yourself, you can alternatively gather lesser forms of evidence by reading books like "Proof of Heaven: A Neurosurgeon's Journey into the Afterlife" which relays a Neurosurgeon's account of his near death experience and finds that it was similar to other accounts over hundreds of years; of out of body experience, going towards a light, entering an earthy realm which smells and tastes of dirt, and meeting their guardian angel which tends to be a deceased family member.

[BillO]

Thanks Tom, you have affirmed my suspicions.  It's all a matter of blind faith.  And this is fairly damming evidence that you recently lied.  You say the only way to determine if there is God or not it to commit an offence according to da book then kill yourself to see if you end up in hell or not.  I'm guessing you won't do that, so yes you have, through blind faith, enslaved yourself to an entity you are not willing to prove to yourself exists.  Dupe.

[Tom Bishop]

Thanks Tom, you have affirmed my suspicions.  It's all a matter of blind faith.

Actually I have stated neither that religion is true or false, or that you should believe or disbelieve it. I have stated that there is an experiment to determine the truth of the matter.

And this is fairly damming evidence that you recently lied.  You say the only way to determine if there is God or not it to commit an offence according to da book then kill yourself to see if you end up in hell or not.

I did not say "only". I postulated that you should commit some sins before you kill yourself to avoid the possibility of being trapped in limbo or purgatory and experiencing nothing or having an indeterminable experience. Suicide is generally frowned on in the Bible. If you have led a morally ambiguous life it is possible that they won't send you to either heaven or hell and choose to put you on ice or recycle your essence. In the Maccabees passage it suggested that some of the dead were stuck somewhere between heaven and hell.

I'm guessing you won't do that.

Correct. I won't do that. I'm not demanding evidence or feel that it is critical to know this. But to say that there is no possible evidence on this subject is false.

[stack]

Actually I have stated neither that religion is true or false, or that you should believe or disbelieve it. I have stated that there is an experiment to determine the truth of the matter.

It's not really clear how your experiment would work. Because if you die and that's just it, lights out, there's nothing left of you to know whether there was another place to go or not. Someone living would have to observe the fact that you're just lights out.

In the Maccabees passage it suggested that some of the dead were stuck somewhere between heaven and hell.

Maccabees seems to be only a Catholic thing. KJV got rid of it. Are you going by Catholic rules only?