Whose Bible is THE Bible ...?

StuartJ · Post by **StuartJ** » Sat Sep 22, 2018 3:41 pm

The Samaritan THE Bible has 5, and sometimes 6, booklets.

The Hebrew THE Bible has 24 booklets.

The Protestant THE Bible has 66 booklets.

The Roman Catholic THE Bible has 73 booklets.

The Greek Orthodox THE Bible has 79 booklets.

The Ethiopic THE Bible has 81 booklets.

They can't all be THE Bible.

Supposedly, all Scripture comes from "God" - God being the various versions of the mythological Jewish god Yahweh when it comes to the Bibles.

What are the objective criteria for determining "scripture" ...?

Are you accepting your version of THE Bible as the Word of Yahweh, or Jesus, or even the Holy Ghost without actually checking ...?

Religions are full of charlatans who brainwash you into accepting all manner of unsupported miracle and mystery as God's own TRUTH.

It's beneficial to your mind and your money to check.

Post by **Tcg** » Mon Sep 24, 2018 8:33 am

Tart wrote:
StuartJ wrote: [Replying to post 26 by Tart]

You gave no demonstration of any sort regarding Gen 1:1.

If it's "scripture", it's supposed to come from "God".

Please do demonstrate.

If you can't - and no one else here has even tried to - it looks rather like no one can demonstrate that so much of a single verse of anyone's THE Bible is actually "scripture" from anyone's version of "God".

Surely someone has checked that the collection of writings they hold in their hand really did come from whichever version of "God" they believe in ...?
Ok so you have no objections to my "objective criteria" for scripture interpretation?

You were asked to demonstrate the use of your "objective criteria" to determine whether or not Gen. 1:1 is scripture. None of your replies have done so.

Interpretation of scripture would come after one has determined what writings would be considered scripture. You've skipped that step.

I believe Genesis is "inspired" by God.

This is a statement of faith, not a method of any kind. If you were asked to demonstrate your faith that Genesis is "inspired" by God", this would be a relevant reply. This isn't what you were asked and therefore isn't relevant

And Jesus as the risen Messiah would be proof of that.

This is nothing but another statement of faith and once again is not a demonstration of a method to determine what is or is not scripture.

bjs · Post by **bjs** » Mon Sep 24, 2018 11:18 am

[Replying to post 8 by StuartJ]

Moderator removed one-line, non-contributing post. Kindly refrain from making posts that contribute nothing to debate and/or simply express agreement / disagreement or make other frivolous remarks.

For complimenting or agreeing use the "Like" function or the MGP button. For anything else use PM.

Tart · Post by **Tart** » Mon Sep 24, 2018 11:22 am

brunumb wrote: [Replying to post 23 by Tart]

This is a method of interpretation, which everyone should agree on.
So, what criteria do you apply to determine if a biblical passage is allegory, literal, a parable, a proverb, fiction or history? There seems to be a lot of division about what should be considered as literal and what is not. The criteria should give the same outcome regardless of who applies them. Perhaps you could illustrate with an example.

The same criteria we would apply interpreting anything... It would be to evaluate the evidence as is. To make sense of these books... Hermeneutics...

"A divine message must be received with implicit uncertainty regarding its truth...." "Only one who possesses a rational method of interpretation (i.e., a hermeneutic) could determine the truth or falsity of the message."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics

To determine whether something is allegorical, or a parable, historical, fictional, myths, lies, or whatever, we would just need to do the best we can at making sense out of the evidence... Where these books came from, who might had wrote them, why they wrote them, their motives, etc...

Determining scripture, and scripture interpretation, would be taking into consideration all these methods...

Does anyone disagree with this approach? It would simply be trying to understand, and make sense out of the evidence...

What methods would you choose to interpret scripture?

And is this question meant to undermine scriptural value by suggesting we cant interpret the Bible? Or are you guys really trying to make sense of how to interpret scripture?

Tart · Post by **Tart** » Mon Sep 24, 2018 11:47 am

Tcg wrote:
Tart wrote:
StuartJ wrote: [Replying to post 26 by Tart]

You gave no demonstration of any sort regarding Gen 1:1.

If it's "scripture", it's supposed to come from "God".

Please do demonstrate.

If you can't - and no one else here has even tried to - it looks rather like no one can demonstrate that so much of a single verse of anyone's THE Bible is actually "scripture" from anyone's version of "God".

Surely someone has checked that the collection of writings they hold in their hand really did come from whichever version of "God" they believe in ...?
Ok so you have no objections to my "objective criteria" for scripture interpretation?

You were asked to demonstrate the use of your "objective criteria" to determine whether or not Gen. 1:1 is scripture. None of your replies have done so.

Interpretation of scripture would come after one has determined what writings would be considered scripture. You've skipped that step.

Why "after"?

And i suppose we should dive into Genesis 1 then... So from what we know, the Torah (which includes Genesis) have many historically confirmed aspects. Like for instances, many of the places in Genesis are confirmed real places. In fact we just rediscovered the City of Ramesses, which was abandoned around 1100BC, and its mentioned in Genesis... The kingdoms and tribes in Genesis are real kingdoms and tribes. There are specific Pharaohs throughout the Torah, that are real Pharaohs... There is certainly historical value to the Torah.

Who wrote these books? We dont really know. We have clues that Moses may have written much of the content within them, but other then that? Maybe we can conclusively say it came from the Hebrews...

The Semite languages, may have began to take form around 2500-2000BC, perhaps around Genesis 10 is talked about, where they list the kingdoms of the world...

So how did Adam and Eve, and creation story, come to be?

Personally i think the best explanation of the evidence is that these stories were passed down by word of mouth, or were inspired by the authors who wrote them down. The creation story deals with many things humanity faces, like sin, consciousness, power, knowledge of right and wrong, God, and created in Gods image, reason, meaning, origins... Certainly metaphysical subjects that humanity deals with, which we to this day cant fully explain (without God)...

An inspired story, yes.. God inspired? Id likely say so... That is my brief interpretation of Genesis creation story...

What do you think about Genesis 1? How would you interpret it?

StuartJ · Post by **StuartJ** » Mon Sep 24, 2018 3:41 pm

Tart wrote:
Tcg wrote:
Tart wrote:
StuartJ wrote: [Replying to post 26 by Tart]

An inspired story, yes.. God inspired? Id likely say so...
"I'd likely say so ..."

That's the best anyone can ever do.

"I'd likely say so ..." is nothing to base a supposed religion of truth on.

No one ever - to the best of my knowledge - demonstrates that so much as a verse of "scripture" emanates from any version of "God".

Tart · Post by **Tart** » Mon Sep 24, 2018 4:53 pm

StuartJ wrote:
Tart wrote:
Tcg wrote:
Tart wrote:
StuartJ wrote: [Replying to post 26 by Tart]

An inspired story, yes.. God inspired? Id likely say so...
"I'd likely say so ..."

That's the best anyone can ever do.

"I'd likely say so ..." is nothing to base a supposed religion of truth on.

No one ever - to the best of my knowledge - demonstrates that so much as a verse of "scripture" emanates from any version of "God".
Well i say that to leave room open for discussion with nonbelievers... To suggest it is reasonable to believe so... Personally I think it is without a doubt inspired by God, and if anyone knew what i know they'd believe it too..

But the discussion is about scripture interpretation, do you have any objections to the method that i suggested. And would you rather discuss the divinity of the scripture, it being inspired by God?

Willum · Post by **Willum** » Mon Sep 24, 2018 5:00 pm

[Replying to post 36 by Tart]

When it is in your belief system, it is "divinely inspired."
When it is from someone elses' beliefs, they are fairy tales.

How would an outside observer tell the difference?

Tart · Post by **Tart** » Mon Sep 24, 2018 5:11 pm

Willum wrote: [Replying to post 36 by Tart]

When it is in your belief system, it is "divinely inspired."
When it is from someone elses' beliefs, they are fairy tales.

How would an outside observer tell the difference?

Well that would rest on what is objectively true... Is it inspired by God, or is it not?

And id like to suggest to you, my beliefs are not what tells us it IS inspired by God, that is a default position and the Christian claim...

In this debate, there are two sides... The question would be, what is the reasonable conclusion?

Im still looking for that conclusion from you guys...

Willum · Post by **Willum** » Mon Sep 24, 2018 6:22 pm

[Replying to post 38 by Tart]

The reasonable conclusion is that it was written so everybody could pick and choose what they believe is right, and their opinion can be inarguable.

This means they are all just a trick, and none are right.

Is that conclusion refutable? or unreasonable?

StuartJ · Post by **StuartJ** » Mon Sep 24, 2018 6:26 pm

[Replying to post 39 by Willum]

Quite agree that "scripture": is often deliberately written to appeal to different factions who will "interpret" it in ways that suit them best.

Quite intentional, in my view.