Is everything the bible says 100% true?

[nobspeople]

Granted, here, we are to avoid using the Bible as the sole source to prove that Christianity is true, this isn't about the bible being the source, but rather or not it's entirely true, from beginning to end.

Are the words in the bible God's words, the words of God's follower(s) only, God speaking through his follower(s) or are they a mix?
If they ARE God's words, how do you know?
If they're NOT God's words, why all the emphasis on it at all (at least more so than other religious works)?
If they're a MIX of God's words and the words of his follower(s), how do you KNOW the difference? And how do you convince others you're right in your view? Or is that even necessary?

[1213]

...
Are the words in the bible God's words, the words of God's follower(s) only, God speaking through his follower(s) or are they a mix?
If they ARE God's words, how do you know?
If they're NOT God's words, why all the emphasis on it at all (at least more so than other religious works)?
If they're a MIX of God's words and the words of his follower(s), how do you KNOW the difference? And how do you convince others you're right in your view? Or is that even necessary?

I think Bible tells it directly many times, is it from God or someone else. For example, this is how Luke begins:

Since many have undertaken to set in order a narrative concerning those matters which have been fulfilled among us, even as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having traced the course of all things accurately from the first, to write to you in order, most excellent Theophilus; that you might know the certainty concerning the things in which you were instructed.
Luke 1:1-4

Gospels are witness testimonies, what the people saw and experienced. But they also include for example teachings that are credited to Jesus, who by his own words told what God had commanded him to say:

Jesus therefore answered them, "My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me. If anyone desires to do his will, he will know about the teaching, whether it is from God, or if I am speaking from myself.
John 7:16-17

In that there is also one way to see is it from God.

I believe Bible is formed in the guidance of God, for example because if it would be from people, atheist would not have so many difficulties to understand it. And I believe it has teachings from God, because I think people are too evil and ignorant to make it on their own.

[Miles]

Granted, here, we are to avoid using the Bible as the sole source to prove that Christianity is true, this isn't about the bible being the source, but rather or not it's entirely true, from beginning to end.

Are the words in the bible God's words, the words of God's follower(s) only, God speaking through his follower(s) or are they a mix?
If they ARE God's words, how do you know?
If they're NOT God's words, why all the emphasis on it at all (at least more so than other religious works)?
If they're a MIX of God's words and the words of his follower(s), how do you KNOW the difference? And how do you convince others you're right in your view? Or is that even necessary?

First of all, of course not everything the Bible says is 100% true.

Secondly, until someone provides convincing evidence that god exists none of the questions involving him are meaningful. As they presently stand, "God's words" are the concoctions of religious autocrats out to sell their brand of theism.


.

[Tcg]

I believe Bible is formed in the guidance of God, for example because if it would be from people, atheist would not have so many difficulties to understand it.

A quick review of the posts and claims in this sub-forum and others reveals the fact that many of those who aren't atheists have a great deal of trouble understanding the Bible. The problem lies with the Bible not with those, atheists and theists alike, who recognize the near endless fallacies in the Bible itself.


Tcg

[TRANSPONDER]

On the face of it, a simple answer. No, of course it isn't 100% true. Not the way it should be if micromaganged by a deity. Few or none of the believers would try to argue that it is 100% inerrant, cover to cover. Those who say so are making a faith -claim to impress the believers, who send them money.

No, rather they argue that such errors are permissible (eyewitness error) or the text is metaphorically true as a message, even if not factually true.

I don't do the OT much, but I have done some discussion and debate on Genesis and Exodus and Genesis was clearly wrong for anyone who isn't a science -denier. I also came to the conclusion that Exodus is a tall story, too, despite Wyatt and his followers trying to make a case for historicity. We have certain historical markers, such as the use of Chariots. That limits it to the New Kingdom as Egypt didn't use them until after the expulsion of the Hyksos. But there is a reference to the Israelites going into Sinai to avoid the land of the Philistines. Well, Philistia didn't exist until after the defeat of the Sea Peoples and the Merneptah stele suggest that Israel existed before that time.

I'm also interested in the mentions in the OT of the Assyrian siege of Jerusalem. Sennacherib himself attests to this in his palace carvings and his engraved propaganda -stones describing his triumph. The OT has mentions in various places, one suggesting that the Assyrian army was smitten by God and vanished, but another depicting Hezekiah waving the white flag and offering to pay tribute, which is what the Assyrians say. The Bible is telling of an actual event, sure enough, but doing what we call 'spin'.

Another bit that interests me is Daniel. A favourite "fulfilled prophecy" as the believers present it. In fact, there are clues that show it to be, rather than a document written in Babylon before the Persian invasion in the 5th c BC, a 2nd c BC retrospective history presented as a prophecy that panned out and adding on some predictions needed to inspire the Maccabean revolt. It can even be dated to the year that the Daniel history (presented in oracular language) fails and goes wrong, just before the Hasmonean rebellion. That means of course that the reference to the 'cutting off of the Messiah' (1) is dated in the Greek rule of Judea, years before Jesus and is nothing to do with him.

Thus, Daniel, like much of the OT, has to understood in historical context and can be shown not to be the Inerrant word of God, but the very errant words of man. And the only thing the believers and those who make their living out of them can do is ignore this information and hope we won't be listened to. It's the reason I'm here - to get this information out there and see it spread as countering the ongoing disinformation that the Bible is reliable and pretty much accurate, even if it does have a few errors.

(1) Messiah of course is generally misunderstood as referring to God's promised redeemer of the world and a one -off, fulfilled in Jesus. It rather refers to any anointed authority (and not necessarily Jewish, either) such as a king or High Priest. It of course also becomes applied to anyone who usurps or seizes power in a revolt or coup and is successful enough to be anointed. There is a quite interesting discussion regarding 'failed messiahs', such as in the Bar Kochba revolt..

[nobspeople]

[Replying to 1213 in post #2]

I think Bible tells it directly many times, is it from God or someone else

The burning bush. Real, metaphor, lie, misunderstanding, or something else?
How do you believe this?
Additionally, 'many times' would indicate not all the time. How do you differentiate? How would anyone else differentiate?

Gospels are witness testimonies, what the people saw and experienced. But they also include for example teachings that are credited to Jesus

Seems it take faith to think a witness can get the words of Jesus exactly correct, not to mention those who translated it into X language and those who edited it. Seems like that a whole lotta' faith for that.

I believe Bible is formed in the guidance of God

Guidance seems to suggest that the writer(s) was 'pushed' to write something specifically, not forced. With guidance, that wouldn't eliminate something being wrong, misunderstood, wrote incorrectly or an out right lie.

And I believe it has teachings from God, because I think people are too evil and ignorant to make it on their own.

Many religious texts exist outside the christian religion - some are very similar. Are you saying all those people that wrote those religions - even the ones so very similar to christianity- were evil and ignorant and only the christians weren't? That takes a lot of faith and, to a degree, cognizant dissidence.
But hey: it's only a belief system. Can't be right all the time!

[POI]

Gospels are witness testimonies, what the people saw and experienced.

That which can be asserted without evidence can be discarded without evidence. The onus is on you to demonstrate that the Gospels were from eyewitness testimonies.

How do we know the Gospels were not taken from preexisting already circulating oral tradition?

In that there is also one way to see is it from God.

I believe Bible is formed in the guidance of God, for example because if it would be from people, atheist would not have so many difficulties to understand it.

I think I already touched on this, with you, before. Regardless of believing what it asserts, or not, we could still agree/disagree on what the book asserts. But as it stands, there exists a seemingly infinite amount of infighting; as to what the book itself even claims. We have no consistency among the believers themselves. I will demonstrate this fact, when I soon bring up the topic "Salvation".

It would be little different, going to a book club meeting, and discussing the authors intent in differing spots. Hence, the reason for the book club

And I believe it has teachings from God, because I think people are too evil and ignorant to make it on their own.

Are you sure about this? A human cannot come up with ambiguous prophecy, failed prophecy, getting events wrong (i.e.) Adam and Eve or an Exodus? Or, how about endorsing/instructing a how-to for slavery, expressing homophobia, introducing levels of misogyny, etc etc etc?

[Eloi]

To answer the question on the topic, two points must be analyzed:

1) the different types of information that the Bible contains;
2) what does mean that the Bible was inspired by God.

For example, Paul probably mentions a scripture from the book of Job here:

1 Cor. 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God, for it is written: “He catches the wise in their own cunning.”

It is about something told by Eliphaz, one of Job's "friends":

Job 5:13 He catches the wise in their own cunning,
So that the plans of the shrewd are thwarted.

BUT, a big BUT, Eliphaz was a practitioner of spiritism as we can verify in Job 4:15-17, and we know perfectly well that this religious practice consists of communication with spirits that are disobedient to God and condemned by God himself. In fact, at the end of the debates with Job, Jehovah shows his disapproval to Eliphaz:

Job 42:7 After Jehovah had spoken these words to Job, Jehovah said to Elʹi·phaz the Teʹman·ite:
“My anger burns against you and your two companions, for you have not spoken the truth about me as my servant Job has. 8 Now take seven bulls and seven rams and go to my servant Job, and offer up a burnt sacrifice for yourselves. And my servant Job will pray for you. I will surely accept his request not to deal with you according to your foolishness, for you have not spoken the truth about me as my servant Job has.”

Then: Did Paul quote Eliphaz because he considered his words to be inspired by God?

The truth is that Jehovah caused Eliphaz's words to be recorded for another purpose. And what is the purpose for which certain things were written and reaffirmed under inspiration?

2 Tim. 2:16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.

Rom. 5:4 For all the things that were written beforehand were written for our instruction, so that through our endurance and through the comfort from the Scriptures we might have hope.

1 Cor. 10:11 Now these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for a warning to us upon whom the ends of the systems of things have come.

[Tcg]

To answer the question on the topic, two points must be analyzed:

1) the different types of information that the Bible contains;
2) what does mean that the Bible was inspired by God.

For example, Paul probably mentions a scripture from the book of Job here:

1 Cor. 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God, for it is written: “He catches the wise in their own cunning.”

It is about something told by Eliphaz, one of Job's "friends":

Job 5:13 He catches the wise in their own cunning,
So that the plans of the shrewd are thwarted.

BUT, a big BUT, Eliphaz was a practitioner of spiritism as we can verify in Job 4:15-17, and we know perfectly well that this religious practice consists of communication with spirits that are disobedient to God and condemned by God himself. In fact, at the end of the debates with Job, Jehovah shows his disapproval to Eliphaz:

Job 42:7 After Jehovah had spoken these words to Job, Jehovah said to Elʹi·phaz the Teʹman·ite:
“My anger burns against you and your two companions, for you have not spoken the truth about me as my servant Job has. 8 Now take seven bulls and seven rams and go to my servant Job, and offer up a burnt sacrifice for yourselves. And my servant Job will pray for you. I will surely accept his request not to deal with you according to your foolishness, for you have not spoken the truth about me as my servant Job has.”

Then: Did Paul quote Eliphaz because he considered his words to be inspired by God?

The truth is that Jehovah caused Eliphaz's words to be recorded for another purpose. And what is the purpose for which certain things were written and reaffirmed under inspiration?

2 Tim. 2:16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.

Rom. 5:4 For all the things that were written beforehand were written for our instruction, so that through our endurance and through the comfort from the Scriptures we might have hope.

1 Cor. 10:11 Now these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for a warning to us upon whom the ends of the systems of things have come.

Using claims from the Bible to support claims about the Bible is a fail. It'd be like asking a kid why he thinks his dad is the strongest man in the neighborhood and believing him when he states he knows it true because his dad told him so. It's circular reasoning which is a logical fallacy.




Tcg

[Eloi]

To answer the question on the topic, two points must be analyzed:

1) the different types of information that the Bible contains;
2) what does mean that the Bible was inspired by God.

For example, Paul probably mentions a scripture from the book of Job here:

1 Cor. 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God, for it is written: “He catches the wise in their own cunning.”

It is about something told by Eliphaz, one of Job's "friends":

Job 5:13 He catches the wise in their own cunning,
So that the plans of the shrewd are thwarted.

BUT, a big BUT, Eliphaz was a practitioner of spiritism as we can verify in Job 4:15-17, and we know perfectly well that this religious practice consists of communication with spirits that are disobedient to God and condemned by God himself. In fact, at the end of the debates with Job, Jehovah shows his disapproval to Eliphaz:

Job 42:7 After Jehovah had spoken these words to Job, Jehovah said to Elʹi·phaz the Teʹman·ite:
“My anger burns against you and your two companions, for you have not spoken the truth about me as my servant Job has. 8 Now take seven bulls and seven rams and go to my servant Job, and offer up a burnt sacrifice for yourselves. And my servant Job will pray for you. I will surely accept his request not to deal with you according to your foolishness, for you have not spoken the truth about me as my servant Job has.”

Then: Did Paul quote Eliphaz because he considered his words to be inspired by God?

The truth is that Jehovah caused Eliphaz's words to be recorded for another purpose. And what is the purpose for which certain things were written and reaffirmed under inspiration?

2 Tim. 2:16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.

Rom. 5:4 For all the things that were written beforehand were written for our instruction, so that through our endurance and through the comfort from the Scriptures we might have hope.

1 Cor. 10:11 Now these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for a warning to us upon whom the ends of the systems of things have come.

Using claims from the Bible to support claims about the Bible is a fail. (...) Tcg

I guess you are not very good to be a lawyer.