Is the Bible equal to GOD?

[William]

Sometimes in interacting with Christians and observing Christians interacting with each other, I get the impression that what they refer to as 'the word of God' is GOD because it is the only thing on earth that is claimed by them to 'speak for, or on God's behalf' and they use their preferred interpretations of it to argue against other, differing interpretations.

Q: Is it right to treat a man-made object in this manner, or should such be considered - in truth - to be a form of idolatry?

Q: Is the bible used in this manner because people do not know how to commune with GOD any other way?

Q: Is GOD incapable of communion with individuals without the use of mediums, or is it a matter of most humans being incapable of communion with GOD without the use of mediums?

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 5 by 2timothy316]

Is the Bible equal to GOD?
No.

Then why is it used as the medium between GOD and the individual?

That's the way He wants it. There has to be something. If Jehovah used sign language would you be upset saying, 'are God's hands equal to God'? If He spoke directly, would you say, 'is the air that carries the sound to our ears equal to God'? Would you like to add the light that carries the words from paper or computer screen to our eyes as trying to be equal to God?

The Bible is communication from God in letter and word form. All communication is accomplished by some 'medium' as you put it. A person that doesn't like what another person writes, signs or speaks can attack the means of communication all they want. It doesn't change what was written, signed or said.

[2timothy316]

The Bible is equal to God's Word.

Are you saying that the Gods word is not equal to the God?

No more than what you just typed is equal to you. What you type is code on some server somewhere. That is not you is it? But does that saved code reflect what you want to communicate?

[2timothy316]

It can be viewed just like Jehovah God wrote a personal letter to each person on the Earth.

No doubt, but is this the way it should - in truth - be viewed? Why would the God wish to communicate with the individual in that fashion when he could (as is apparent in the stories) do so directly?

For the word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of the soul and spirit, and of the joints and their marrow, and is able to discern the thoughts and intentions of the heart."Heb. 4:12.

According to the scripture above, the way He communicates wouldn't matter in order to reveal a person's heart. I am sure you have read in the Bible where God spoke from a pillar of cloud and fire directly to the Hebrews. Did they stick to what they heard directly? Nope.

What people think of the Bible reveals a person's heart.

Yet on a more practical note. The written word has been the easiest and best way to find information for centuries. Even today, we text and email more than we speak to one another. Courts use transcripts to record cases. I could go on for a long time where the written word is the best form of communication. But lets to back to spiritual reasons the Bible was God's preferred way of communication. Who created us and who would know what way is best to at least begin to teach man the complexities of His will? The Bible is God's preference and we can either accept that or not. Who are we to determine what is best for Jehovah to communicate? I personally have not found anything better. But like the way the Law Code was explained through Jehovah's holy spirit and faithful priest, holy spirit is provided and as well as faithful men to explain the whole Bible today. That's the way He did it then and it appears that is the way Jehovah wants it done now.

[polonius]

Is the Bible equal to GOD?
No.

The Bible is equal to God's Word. It can be viewed just like Jehovah God wrote a personal letter to each person on the Earth.

A father writes a letter to instruct his sons what to do. The piece of paper, the letter, is not equal to person that wrote the letter. But what the letter says better be followed as if that father was standing right in front of them speaking.

RESPONSE: Not quite. The Bible was written by men, not God.

[William]

[Replying to post 11 by 2timothy316]

That's the way He wants it.

Who told you that, and why do you believe it is truth?

There has to be something.

What rational is behind this belief?

If Jehovah used sign language would you be upset saying, 'are God's hands equal to God'?

Are you forgetting where Jesus uses a parable which uses body parts as analogy to underscore the importance of avoiding elitism and separatism? "Is the hand greater than the head?"

If He spoke directly, would you say, 'is the air that carries the sound to our ears equal to God'?

Are you suggesting that GODs voice is not equal to GOD? Perhaps a voice in the sky might be an impostor? A being claiming to be GOD but isn't really GOD at all.

Would you like to add the light that carries the words from paper or computer screen to our eyes as trying to be equal to God?

What has that got to do with my argument? Why conflate my question with these absurd responses? Why avoid answering my questions put to you by creating these unnecessary responses?

If 'GOD is light" then is light equal to GOD?

The Bible is communication from God in letter and word form.

Who told you this and why do you believe it?

All communication is accomplished by some 'medium' as you put it.

MEDIUM is the word for it. That is where the word 'Media' derives. For example, the Watchtower booklets passed out by the members of the JWOrg, act as a medium.

Even that all communication is accomplished by some medium or another, it is the medium which is questionable when it comes to claims about that medium.

The claim is that the bible is the word of GOD, and the question is based upon how Christians use the bible as if it were GOD and have a relationship with the book, as if it were the same as (equal to) GOD.

A person that doesn't like what another person writes, signs or speaks can attack the means of communication all they want. It doesn't change what was written, signed or said.

That is not a subject the OP is investigating. It is not a matter of changing 'what is written' or even liking or disliking what is written. The focus is on how the bible is revered under the claim that it is 'the word of GOD' and whether that constitutes idol worship.

[Replying to post 12 by 2timothy316]

Are you saying that the Gods word is not equal to the God?

No more than what you just typed is equal to you.

You are going off on a tangent there. What I wrote is not being claimed by me to being 'the word of GOD'. THAT is the focus of the thread OP blurb.
The claim by Christians is that the bible is the word of GOD and this claim is also used to argue that what they believe from their interpretations of this alleged 'word of GOD' is 'the Truth'. Christians appear by and large to be having a relationship with the Bible, not with any GOD. They conflate the two, and in doing so, this can be regarded as idol worship.

What you type is code on some server somewhere. That is not you is it? But does that saved code reflect what you want to communicate?

Words are words. They communicate what they do. The claim by Christians is that the bible is the 'word of GOD' and they give it the same status (or even more so) of being irrefutable and without mistake or contradiction (easily enough shown not to be the case) yet they still hold it in the highest regard and do not question it at all. This can easily been understood as being idol worship.

Calling the bible the 'word of GOD' is claiming that it reflects what GOD wants to communicate, but there is no foundation for this being true.

The claim has never been substantiated. The book is simply an idol.

[Replying to post 13 by 2timothy316]

It can be viewed just like Jehovah God wrote a personal letter to each person on the Earth.

No doubt, but is this the way it should - in truth - be viewed? Why would the God wish to communicate with the individual in that fashion when he could (as is apparent in the stories) do so directly?

For the word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of the soul and spirit, and of the joints and their marrow, and is able to discern the thoughts and intentions of the heart."Heb. 4:12.

Again, this represents the idea of invoking 'life' to a dead thing, when identifying 'the word of GOD' with a book, like one would do with a golden calf. The idol is only 'alive' in the idolatrous minds of those who choose to belief that is fact.

Now it is very plausible to think that the writer you quoted was NOT referring to 'The bible' when he wrote that, as 'The bible' did not even exist at that time.
It is far more reasonable for me to think that 'the bible' was created to replace whatever 'the word of GOD' is, and sell it as an idol to those who think idol worship is acceptable, and that the bible is an alleged suitable substitute.

Ironic, wouldn't you agree? That what became the 'must have' book laundered as 'the word of GOD' among ones collection of books, becoming the worlds best selling book, when the alleged founder of Christianity told his followers that it was "better to give". This should in itself raise flags in those who are sincerely looking for the truth.

Sorting the chaff from the wheat enables one to identify the dependencies enough not to lend support to claims which create the circular argument to the question;

"How do you know that the bible is 'the word of GOD'?" and the answer is "because the bible tells me so."

At least the golden calf was never claimed to have spoken to those who worshiped it. But wait! The stone tablets DID speak through the words carved upon them, and the claim that the words were 'written by the finger of GOD' gives clear enough indication as to how idols can have words 'put in their mouths' so to speak, and indeed, one cannot help but notice how worshiped these idols became. Replacing one idol with another simply because 'words'...a pattern of idolatry emerges...

According to the scripture above, the way He communicates wouldn't matter in order to reveal a person's heart. I am sure you have read in the Bible where God spoke from a pillar of cloud and fire directly to the Hebrews. Did they stick to what they heard directly? Nope.

So the alleged actions of the alleged GOD can find no sure way in which to communicate with individuals, because individuals have some reason to doubt. Perhaps trickery could have been involved? You know how it is written that the "devil can come as an 'angel of light'. "

How is one to discern? How one communicates also reveals the person's heart. What is it the God of the pillars of cloud and fire was trying to communicate?

What people think of the Bible reveals a person's heart.

Indeed. I think it is not the 'word of GOD' and is really something human beings in elite positions decided to put together and claim it as 'the word of GOD' and profit from that. That does indeed 'revel my heart'.

Just as certainly as those who proclaim the bible to be 'the word of GOD' and their acts of idolatry, also reveal their hearts.

Yet on a more practical note.

More practical than what?

The written word has been the easiest and best way to find information for centuries. Even today, we text and email more than we speak to one another. Courts use transcripts to record cases. I could go on for a long time where the written word is the best form of communication.

Actual pictures are even better, but the point I am making isn't about how humans communicate with humans.

But lets to back to spiritual reasons the Bible was God's preferred way of communication.

Hang on. Why communicate spirituality through the written word. GOD is spirit, thus GOD can speak directly to the individual without the medium of the written word.

Who created us and who would know what way is best to at least begin to teach man the complexities of His will?

What in any way is complex about loving one another as we love GOD? The complexity comes in the form of human manipulation which sullies that word of GOD in order to confuse and confound, to elaborate rather than simplify.

Was it not Jesus who simplified 'the law'?

If one is focused on the idea that the bible is the 'word of GOD' then one automatically enters the realm of the complicated and relies upon that to 'be the voice of GOD' for the individual. We all KNOW where that leads. Well those of us who are not afraid to look, examine, investigate and question the validity of - all KNOW. We see plainly how the bible is used to created confusion through complication. We see how this affects the different sects of Christendom against one another, all claiming to have 'the truth'in their 'interpretations' of that which they proclaim is 'the word of GOD'.

What they do not have, is relationship with GOD. They have chosen rather to have a relationship with a BOOK they claim is 'the word of GOD. A poor substitute for the real thing.

The Bible is God's preference and we can either accept that or not.

I think one would find if one were to seriously question that assertion, that it is unsubstantiated. The better - more truthful way for one to express what you have, would of course be along the lines of "I have been taught to believe that the bible is God's preference and we can either accept that or not".

Then one can go about questioning if what one has been taught to believe is the truth of the matter, or not. Until then, one is simply being remiss.

'Missing The Mark', as the saying goes...

Who are we to determine what is best for Jehovah to communicate?

And yet this is exactly what you are doing - and those who do so - who call the bible 'the word of GOD' are determining what is the best way for GOD to communicate, and that is the bestseller - 'the bible'.

Going around the neighborhood claiming to speak for this God called 'Jehovah' and telling people that the bible is 'the word of this God' is simply a type of screen anyway. One is really occupied in promoting the bible as ones GOD and teaching people that they should study it and accept it as 'the word of GOD' and in that way they will connect with GOD and have relationship with GOD. The truth of the matter is one is promoting relationship with a book. GOD is absent from that relationship, having been replaced by a book.

I personally have not found anything better.

That is besides the point.

But like the way the Law Code was explained through Jehovah's holy spirit and faithful priest, holy spirit is provided and as well as faithful men to explain the whole Bible today.

Horse before cart. How is it that you declare such - that the Holy Ghost is for that purpose? To have a relationship with a book which didn't even exist in the time of the 'faithful priest'.

The Holy Ghost is for comforting. You have 'not found anything better' than the bible for that, or any other purpose. That is your confession.

That's the way He did it then and it appears that is the way Jehovah wants it done now.

Such imagery! The more your defend you love of the bible, the more you are showing your idolatry!.

Step back! Examine your beliefs! Where are they sourced? Through the teaching of humans. Through relationship with those teaches. Not through any relationship with any actual GOD. A book, yes indeed, no doubt! But not a GOD and not the 'word of GOD'.

[polonius]

William posted:
Quote:
For the word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of the soul and spirit, and of the joints and their marrow, and is able to discern the thoughts and intentions of the heart."Heb. 4:12.


Again, this represents the idea of invoking 'life' to a dead thing, when identifying 'the word of GOD' with a book, like one would do with a golden calf. The idol is only 'alive' in the idolatrous minds of those who choose to belief that is fact.

Now it is very plausible to think that the writer you quoted was NOT referring to 'The bible' when he wrote that, as 'The bible' did not even exist at that time.
It is far more reasonable for me to think that 'the bible' was created to replace whatever 'the word of GOD' is, and sell it as an idol to those who think idol worship is acceptable, and that the bible is an alleged suitable substitute. [/quote]

RESPONSE: Also: Among the reasons why Pauline authorship has been abandoned are the great difference of vocabulary and style between Hebrews and Paul's letters, the alternation of doctrinal teaching with moral exhortation, the different manner of citing the Old Testament, and the resemblance between the thought of Hebrews and that of Alexandrian Judaism. The Greek of the letter is in many ways the best in the New Testament. Introduction to Hebrews, New American Bible.

[tam]

[Replying to post 15 by William]

"How do you know that the bible is 'the word of GOD'?" and the answer is "because the bible tells me so."

Except that it does not actually tell anyone this.

The 'word of God' in that Hebrews quote cannot be referring to the bible because the bible is not alive. The Word of God who is alive is Christ, the living Word of God, who speaks the words the Father gave Him to speak (John 12:49).


Even written in the bible is the truth that Christ is the Word of God.


"And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us..." John 1:14


Peace to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[ttruscott]

Q: Is it right to treat a man-made object in this manner, or should such be considered - in truth - to be a form of idolatry?

Christians usually do not accept the bible as a man-made object...that is a major part of their faith.

Q: Is the bible used in this manner because people do not know how to commune with GOD any other way?

Many of those who do idolize it usually do not commune with GOD and are fearful of the revelations claimed to be given by GOD to others as suspect ...without ever looking clearly that the interpretations of the Bible they revere are ALL just as suspect or even more so, coming from men who often depend upon scholarly attitude and intellect and not on GOD.

Q: Is GOD incapable of communion with individuals without the use of mediums, or is it a matter of most humans being incapable of communion with GOD without the use of mediums?

Of course not...GOD communicates with anyone HE wants to in any way HE wants.

ImCo: Life is all about the separation of the sinful elect from the eternally evil reprobate. Every elect is different but every elect will be in communication with their GOD somehow, emotionally, intellectually or by a GOD given deep spiritual faith as part of their being led to become separate by becoming sanctified.

These questions would seem to be only asked by someone without any such exoerience themselves while those with the experience may not be especially articulate about that experience, depending upon clichs.

[ttruscott]

If we talking about the God of the Bible, (i.e. YHWH, Yahweh, Jehovah, Jealous, or Jesus), then the Bible is the only source of information we have about that God.

This is only considered true by those without faith; for those with faith it is like a child claiming that all the info about a country is only available in the map of the country. Iow, we have a different experience from unbelievers.

[ttruscott]

This is the crux of the matter, for sure. The idea that the medium between the God and the individual is 'The Bible' and 'it had better be treated as if it were the God standing in front of you, speaking' and 'you had better do as this effigy of God in the form of a book' tells you.

This is in itself the epitome of an idol.

...only IF it is NOT the word of GOD given given to HIS people. If it is HIS perfect word, then it is no more idolatry than following HIS audible voice when you hear it. It is ONLY idolatry if you follow your interpretation of what you think it means over and above the message GOD is trying to give to you at the time but is ignored for your focus on the bible. The Pharisees idolized their religion when they let it lead them to blaspheme their Messiah.