Is there proof that the Bible is divinely inspired? (apostles, witnesses, Deism)
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.
Galileo, how does one determine what parts of anything they read are inspired? Inspired -- breathed in by a spirit. As I see it, one must first determine what "spirit" you want to listen to. I want to listen to things that produce fruit that is good ... love, patience, kindness, gentleness, etc. If what I read is likely to produce that fruit in me and my life when I accept it and act on it, then I know it is good and noble and true, and I want to take heed. If, rather, I read something and it engenders fear or anger or selfishness or anything at odds with a spirit of love, then I consider it to be uninspired (or inspired by a "spirit" I want nothing to do with).
RESPONSE:
Are you then saying that it is not possible to tell if a writing is divinely inspired?
I suggest the following criteria. If the writing contains errors and contradictions, it is not inspired by God unless God is responsible for those errors and contradictions.
For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God, which also performs its work in you who believe.
2 Tim. 3
16 All Scripture is inspired by Godand profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
2 Peter 3
4 Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless, 15 and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, 16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.
RESPONSE:
Your reply is using circular reasoning. In short, if any writing says it is divinely inspired, it is divinely inspired.
An factious example would be my friend writing his own version of the Bible in which he includes the statement "This writing is inspired by God." Does that establish the fact that it is divinely inspired?
And there is the yarn about the old preacher who announced that in his next sermon he was going to prove God's existence. The next Sunday he addressed a packed church. He raised a Bible and announced that the Bible said God exists. That was his proof!
How exactly would one go about proving this, assuming it were even possible?
Where the Bible presents something as fact, it may be possible to determine if it is correct. But even if we showed a passage to be false, that wouldn't necessarily mean it was not inspired. It might make God a liar, though - which the Bible claims He is not.
So we can determine whether scripture agrees with the nature of God as we believe him to be based on the rest of the Bible, but that neither proves nor disproves its divine inspiration.
The person who claims the Bible (or any scripture) is 100% divinely inspired is acting on faith, as is the person who claims it is not inspired at all.
RESPONSE:
I pretty much agree with your comments. If a writing contains errors and contradictions, it really can't be considered divinely inspired unless one is willing to admit that God's nature allows him to be untruthful.
I pretty much agree with your comments. If a writing contains errors and contradictions, it really can't be considered divinely inspired unless one is willing to admit that God's nature allows him to be untruthful.
Or... the reader can admit that maybe they do not have a full understanding of the text, and even though it may not make sense now, the reader could commit to further study.
Most of the world's major religions have their Holy Book which they claim is inspired by God. Obviously contradictory, they all cannot be.
For example, a Muslim would consider the Koran to be of divine origin. A Christian would consider the Bible as of divine origin. Because the books are quite different, both views cannot be true, can they?
Your reply is using circular reasoning. In short, if any writing says it is divinely inspired, it is divinely inspired.
An factious example would be my friend writing his own version of the Bible in which he includes the statement "This writing is inspired by God." Does that establish the fact that it is divinely inspired?
And there is the yarn about the old preacher who announced that in his next sermon he was going to prove God's existence. The next Sunday he addressed a packed church. He raised a Bible and announced that the Bible said God exists. That was his proof!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galileo2
Many consider that the Bible contains the inspired word of God.
But can this view be proven or is it held only by faith alone?
1. Rationalism holds that truth should be determined by reason and factual analysis, rather than faith, dogma, tradition or religious teaching.
2. Fideism holds that faith is necessary, and that beliefs may be held without evidence or reason, or even in conflict with evidence and reason.
Most of the world's major religions have their Holy Book which they claim is inspired by God. Obviously contradictory, they all cannot be.
For example, a Muslim would consider the Koran to be of divine origin. A Christian would consider the Bible as of divine origin. Because the books are quite different, both views cannot be true, can they?
But one of them can be, and by extension the god described within.
Or... the reader can admit that maybe they do not have a full understanding of the text, and even though it may not make sense now, the reader could commit to further study.
RESPONSE:
However, there are a number of texts for which we do have a full understanding.
For example, in the NT Matthew has Jesus sending apostles to get two animals on which he rode into Jerusalem so he could fulfill a prophecy (which Matthew misunderstood).
Mark, Luke, and John have Jesus sending his apostles for only one animal which he rode into Jerusalem in the conventional manner.
So here we have a clear numerical contradiction which can be understood.
However, there are a number of texts for which we do have a full understanding.
For example, in the NT Matthew has Jesus sending apostles to get two animals on which he rode into Jerusalem so he could fulfill a prophecy (which Matthew misunderstood).
Mark, Luke, and John have Jesus sending his apostles for only one animal which he rode into Jerusalem in the conventional manner.
So here we have a clear numerical contradiction which can be understood.
Assuming you are accounting for the proper Scripture references... There is no problem here. Each author wrote what they witnessed. Should Mark, Luke, and John write about two animals - even though they only saw one?
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.
