Is the Bible God-inspired?

[otseng]

Is the Bible God-inspired? What support do you have that it is or is not?

[anontheist]

[Replying to post 1 by otseng]

There are people who believe whole-heartedly and honestly that the Koran is the Word of God. There are those who believe the Book of Mormon is a book from God as translated by Joseph Smith Jr. Now we know not everything we believe is true, how do we determine what is true and what is not true about our beliefs?

This is my understanding of the terms I am using.

Truth is that which is the case. If what you believe corresponds to reality, existence, or the universe, then what you believe is true. So, if a belief is true then that belief corresponds to that which is the case.

Now if I want to believe only what is true. How do I do that? It seems to me that facts provide evidence, evidence provides reasons, and reasons are what I need to come to a belief that is most likely true.

A fact is something that exists, is made, or is an action done.

Now my New Oxford American Dictionary says, about Truth: is that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality.

My Oxford Writer's Thesaurus says about Truth: truthfulness, verity, sincerity, candor, honesty; accuracy, correctness, validity, factuality, authenticity.

Something can be a fact and you not believe it. But you cannot believe a fact and it not be true.

I tend to think truth and fact are closely related. A fact represents the state of the world. Truth is a statement or belief about the world. They are not always the same thing. But, if what you believe about the world is true, then what you believe is a fact.

The Bible?

How do we know the Bible is not simply a human product?

Or, perhaps a better question is how do we know that this book is from God, and not simply a form of mythology?

Now it seems to me that if I do not want to deceive myself, it would be best to approach this subject with as few, if any, assumptions as possible, because my assumptions may be wrong as well.

What that would mean is not approaching the Bible with any sense of faith. It also seems that to assume there is a God would be a preconceived idea.

With this in mind, how do you find that the Bible is anything other then simply a human product?

[JehovahsWitness]

Is the Bible God-inspired? What support do you have that it is or is not?

My belief is that the bible is the Word of God. By this I mean that it contains the throughts, ideas, instructions, laws and directives of God, penned by humans (much like a secretary writes the ideas of his or her boss). These ideas were transmited to the minds or the writers through holy spirit.

We can have confidence that the bible is the word of God because it contains information that can only be of divine origin.

Further information : How can we be sure the bible is true?

[youtube][/youtube]


Further reading
https://www.jw.org/en/publications/book ... rd-of-god/

[liamconnor]

[Replying to post 1 by otseng]

What does one mean by Divinely-Inspired in a definitional sense?

I submit that the question means nothing, or admits so many nuances that it is unhelpful.

For instance:

Does it contain the words of God in the sense that its contents explain everything from how to poach an egg to the most difficult questions of mathematics?

Is the Bible the product of various works of literature produced over time by various authors sharing a culture truly formed by a supernatural entity? In this case, the human and divine elements would mingle. Even blur at times. Perhaps there would be no way of separating the two, saying, "at this point, the divine is speaking; at this, the human".

I find both extremes (All God, parts god parts man) to be philosophically inadequate.

The real question for me is historical. As documents of history what can we discern from them when placed in their historical context?

[liamconnor]

[Replying to post 11 by anontheist]

Now it seems to me that if I do not want to deceive myself, it would be best to approach this subject with as few, if any, assumptions as possible, because my assumptions may be wrong as well.

What that would mean is not approaching the Bible with any sense of faith. It also seems that to assume there is a God would be a preconceived idea.

With this in mind, how do you find that the Bible is anything other then simply a human product?

As few assumptions as possible:

But for you the fewest assumptions is: God does not exist. Correct? For to disbelieve in God would be a preconceived idea. Even to place the burden of proof on belief in God would involve a preconception of reality; so would placing the burned of proof on no God.


It seems you have really gotten no where.

[JehovahsWitness]

The real question for me is historical. As documents of history what can we discern from them when placed in their historical context?

Well for me there's nothing in the bible that can be proven to be historically incorrect and imho it does present an accurate picture of the people and historical context within which it was written.

JW

[polonius]

[Replying to BoatRocker]

To prove divine authorship a text must contain information which is beyond human ability to provide. Two things I would accept as meeting that standard would be (1) proven fulfilled prophecy and (2) being identified as divine by one who has divine credentials-- one who rose from the dead.

OBSERVATIONS

1. So somebody claims a prophecy and that it was "fulfilled" Anybody can do that.

2. But aside from the legend, what real evidence do you have for the story that Jesus rose from the dead?

NB. Actually the synoptic gospels say that Jesus was raised from the dead, like Lazarus.

[polonius]

[Replying to post 6 by Angel]

If the Bible was not God-inspired, then all that we Christians have lived for would be for nothing. Yet, through everything I've seen, there is no way that anyone would be able to get me to say I don't. If the Bible in not inspired by God, then (because in the Bible its self, it says it is) then God would would not be real. But then, how would you explain all the radical miracles?

RESPONSE: My friend is writing a book which he says is divinely inspired. Should we believe him because he writes in the book "This is divinely inspired"?

For example:

When people who are blind can see

When a person who is missing a leg, and you prayand,all of the suden, they grow a leg

When people are dead for three days, and then, rise from the dead (i know a man at my church who was daed for three day, but then came alive)

RESPONSE: If my friend includes these stories in his book, will you believe him that it's God- inspired because he says so?

How can God not be real when all around you these things are happening?

RESPONSE: Please stick to the topic being discussed. It is NOT about the existence of God. It's "Is the Bible God-inspired."

[polonius]

The real question for me is historical. As documents of history what can we discern from them when placed in their historical context?

Well for me there's nothing in the bible that can be proven to be historically incorrect and imho it does present an accurate picture of the people and historical context within which it was written.

JW

RESPONSE:

So you are saying that Jesus being born during the life of King Herod [d 4 BC] in Matthew, and Jesus being born during Quirinius's census of Judea [6 AD] in Luke are both correct?

What about Jesus sending for and riding two animals of different sizes to fulfill a prophecy (Matthew) verses sending for and riding one animal (Mark, Luke, and John)?

And what about him ascending on the day he was raised from the dead (Luke) and again 40 days later (Acts of the Apostles)?

Nothing in the bible that cannot be proven historically you say?????

[JehovahsWitness]

So you are saying that Jesus being born during the life of King Herod [d 4 BC] in Matthew

Could you show me the verse that says the words 4BC in Matthew or is that just an assumption on your part?

[JehovahsWitness]

Nothing in the bible that cannot be proven historically you say?

No, I did not say that, I said ...

there's nothing in the bible that can be proven to be historically incorrect

JW