Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was raised in a fundamental Christian household. Hellfire and brimstone - Black and White. I was taught from an early age that the Bible is the innerant, infallible Word of God. I was also taught that if you believe any parts of the Bible are not true word for word, in a literal sense, you might as well not even waste your time reading it because you are technically calling God a liar. So, my question is this:
Do you believe that an individual can read the Bible and believe some of the things in it but not others? And if this is the case, are they wasting their time and calling God a liar by doing so?
I bring this question to CD because of a conversation I had with my mother the other day. I told her that I just can't believe many of the stories in the Bible. Most of what I don't believe is in the Old Testament. I'm sorry, but people who get put into fiery furnaces burn up, people who are put into cages with lions get eaten, people who get swallowed by sea creatures don't live in their belly for days on end and survive, and cutting someone's hair off doesn't render them defenseless. The list can go on and on, but there is no need to write it. She says back to me "This is where faith comes into the equation". I guess I lack faith. I tend to lean towards common sense and reason. So, my second question is: Does faith in God and belief in other parts of Biblical scripture hinge entirely on whether or not you believe the whole Bible, literally, word for word?
If this is really true, it has done more to drive me away from Christianity than any other thing.
I was raised in a fundamental Christian household. Hellfire and brimstone - Black and White. I was taught from an early age that the Bible is the innerant, infallible Word of God. I was also taught that if you believe any parts of the Bible are not true word for word, in a literal sense, you might as well not even waste your time reading it because you are technically calling God a liar. So, my question is this:
Do you believe that an individual can read the Bible and believe some of the things in it but not others? And if this is the case, are they wasting their time and calling God a liar by doing so?
I bring this question to CD because of a conversation I had with my mother the other day. I told her that I just can't believe many of the stories in the Bible. Most of what I don't believe is in the Old Testament. I'm sorry, but people who get put into fiery furnaces burn up, people who are put into cages with lions get eaten, people who get swallowed by sea creatures don't live in their belly for days on end and survive, and cutting someone's hair off doesn't render them defenseless. The list can go on and on, but there is no need to write it. She says back to me "This is where faith comes into the equation". I guess I lack faith. I tend to lean towards common sense and reason. So, my second question is: Does faith in God and belief in other parts of Biblical scripture hinge entirely on whether or not you believe the whole Bible, literally, word for word?
If this is really true, it has done more to drive me away from Christianity than any other thing.
Is God so weak that He could not protect Shadrach, Meschach, and Abed-nego in the fiery furnace? Was the angel which God sent to protect Daniel from the lions in the den so powerless as to be unable to shut their mouths? Was not God within His rights to remove the enduement of the Holy Spirit from Samson because of his disobedience?
Do you not believe that God who created the heavens and the earth can perform miracles? Do you not believe in the supernatural?
Obviously, many people do pick and choose what they want to believe from the Scriptures and discard what they don't want to believe. And they are out of line for doing so because the Bible is the word of God and is inerrant. While divine inspiration applies only to the original autographs, God has nevertheless preserved His word so that no doctrine communicated to the writers of Scripture and recorded in writing has been lost to us today.
God's word is intended to communicate. As such, it is to be understood literally while understanding that there is symbolism and some allegory in the Bible. That which is literal is to understood as such. Symbolism must be recognized as such. But even the symbolism refers to that which is real.
The Bible is the absolute norm and standard for truth and is accurate in all that it says.
The problem is not with the Bible, but with your unbelief.
You'r right too...about yourself...you lack faith. If what is written in Scripture offends you, namely the Old Testament...something you do not understand as well....God is the same...yesterday...to day...and forever...He changeth not. >>>Hebrews 13:8 <<<the New Testament.
"...to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen." >>>Jude 1:25<<<the New Testament.
God's word is intended to communicate. As such, it is to be understood literally while understanding that there is symbolism and some allegory in the Bible. That which is literal is to understood as such. Symbolism must be recognized as such. But even the symbolism refers to that which is real.
The Bible is the absolute norm and standard for truth and is accurate in all that it says.
The problem is not with the Bible, but with your unbelief.
So Mike.... You believe that unicorns, cockatrices, talking donkeys and snakes, satyrs, among other mythical creatures, all existed in real life?
I must definitely be struggling with my unbelief for sure.
Are you saying that if I have trouble believing that these creatures really existed, I might as well not go any further with trying to understand the Bible?
I do not know how one could disbelief the OT yet not the NT.
If the miraculous events of the OT are unbelievable, what then of the NT which has far more?
Jesus said "Sanctify then through the truth, your word is truth" .... essentially you're saying "no it is not".
So Mike.... You believe that unicorns, cockatrices, talking donkeys and snakes, satyrs, among other mythical creatures, all existed in real life?
I must definitely be struggling with my unbelief for sure.
Are you saying that if I have trouble believing that these creatures really existed, I might as well not go any further with trying to understand the Bible?
With regard to the 'unicorn';
Excerpt:
The LXX (The Greek translation of the Old Testament done around 250 B.C.) says of Job 39:9, βουλήσεται δέ σοι μονόκερως δουλεῦσαι ἢ κοιμηθῆναι ἐπὶ φάτνης σου. The Greek word μονόκερως monokeros is what the Hebrews tranlsated the Hebrew word רְאֵם reym into. It is an unfortunate rendering. It literally means "one horn," and this is why the KJV rendered it as unicorn since it was using the LXX and not the original Hebrew here. Why does the Bible mention unicorn? | Are unicorns in the Bible? | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
As for the 'cockatrice';
Excerpt:
In 1611, when the KJV was produced, the translators used "cockatrice" in part of their translations from the Hebrew. A cockatrice is a mythical creature that does not exist. It was supposedly a serpent produced from a ****'s egg. So why would they use that word? They did so because they didn't know what the original Hebrew word meant, and not having a sufficient knowledge of biology they used an English word that wasn't appropriate. Today we have a much better understanding of the Hebrew, as well as biology. This is why modern translations use the words "viper" and "adder" and "poisonous snake" to translate the original Hebrew word, "tsepha". Why does the Bible mention mythical cockatrice? | What is a cockatrice | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
These are issues pertaining to translation.
God can certainly make a donkey talk.
And the 'talking snake' as you call it was originally a creature of some kind unknown to us but which walked upright and apparently could talk. Satan used this creature to deceive the woman who after the fall was called Eve.
You might make an honest effort to investigate rather than immediately dismiss these things as you do.
The Bible is the inerrant, infallible Word of God. However, you have to keep in mind that the Bible is NOT a book. The Bible is a library of many books of many different genres, and not all genres are to be taken literally. The Bible contains letters, poetry, songs, history, proverbs, genealogies, dreams, prophecies, and at least one play. You don't approach poetry or song the same you approach a history. When Bob Dylan sings about "blowin' in the wind," he isn't talking metereology.
Excerpt:
The LXX (The Greek translation of the Old Testament done around 250 B.C.) says of Job 39:9, βουλήσεται δέ σοι μονόκερως δουλεῦσαι ἢ κοιμηθῆναι ἐπὶ φάτνης σου. The Greek word μονόκερως monokeros is what the Hebrews tranlsated the Hebrew word רְאֵם reym into. It is an unfortunate rendering. It literally means "one horn," and this is why the KJV rendered it as unicorn since it was using the LXX and not the original Hebrew here. Why does the Bible mention unicorn? | Are unicorns in the Bible? | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
As for the 'cockatrice';
Excerpt:
In 1611, when the KJV was produced, the translators used "cockatrice" in part of their translations from the Hebrew. A cockatrice is a mythical creature that does not exist. It was supposedly a serpent produced from a ****'s egg. So why would they use that word? They did so because they didn't know what the original Hebrew word meant, and not having a sufficient knowledge of biology they used an English word that wasn't appropriate. Today we have a much better understanding of the Hebrew, as well as biology. This is why modern translations use the words "viper" and "adder" and "poisonous snake" to translate the original Hebrew word, "tsepha". Why does the Bible mention mythical cockatrice? | What is a cockatrice | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
These are issues pertaining to translation.
God can certainly make a donkey talk.
And the 'talking snake' as you call it was originally a creature of some kind unknown to us but which walked upright and apparently could talk. Satan used this creature to deceive the woman who after the fall was called Eve.
You might make an honest effort to investigate rather than immediately dismiss these things as you do.
Mike, thank you for clearing all of that up. I must say that it is quite refreshing to see a Christian admit that modern science really can have a positive bearing on infallible Biblical scripture. Too bad they haven't "fixed" Joshua 10:13 yet.
Last edited by ditchlights; 08-26-2012 at 10:40 AM..
Location: where people are either too stupid to leave or too stuck to move
3,982 posts, read 6,685,474 times
Reputation: 3689
there are certain parts like stoning your children for disobedience, marrying your rapist,gang rape and dismemberment of a concubine, and other parts that are quite alarming..that i don't know how to feel about
You'r right too...about yourself...you lack faith. If what is written in Scripture offends you, namely the Old Testament...something you do not understand as well....God is the same...yesterday...to day...and forever...He changeth not. >>>Hebrews 13:8 <<<the New Testament.
"...to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen." >>>Jude 1:25<<<the New Testament.
May God Bless you.
RESPONSE:
Regarding religious belief, there are two competing approaches neatly summarized by Wikipedia thus:
Rationalism holds that truth should be determined by reason and factual analysis, rather than faith, dogma, tradition or religious teaching.
Fideismholds that faith is necessary, and that beliefs may be held without evidence or reason, or even in conflict with evidence and reason.
(I was basically taught the second, but after many years and much reading found that the first system is the correct one).
Fundmentalists, of any religious persuasion, use the second approach. However, finding that there are many contradictions in scripture, they must fall back on "It's a mystery!" "You just have to believe." Or often come up with a rather absurd explanation. (Becoming more popular is the explanation that impossibilities in the bible are really only allegories).
The threshold question regarding the bible (or any religion's "Holy Book") is was it really authored by God or man. If the latter, fideism is not tenable.
It's not possible that contradictions are true. The "gift of faith" explanation side-steps that issue.
Last edited by ancient warrior; 08-26-2012 at 10:42 AM..
Reason: typo
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
