If the Bible has any significant flaws..

[Elijah John]

Assuming for this topic that there is a God, some questions for debate :*

1) If the Bible has any significant flaws, could you still believe that Jesus is God?

2) Does your belief that Jesus is God depend entriely on the perfection of the Bible?

3) Beyond the Bible, is there any other reason to believe that Jesus is God?

4) Does the Bible even tell us so, that "Jesus is God"?

--------------

* addressed primarily to those who worship Jesus, but also to those who for the sake of argument at least accept the premise that God exists.

[JJ50]

I lost my faith when I seriously started to question it having read the Bible from cover to cover. I realised most of what is written in the that book lacks any credibility and reads like a badly constructed fairy tale.

[ttruscott]

Assuming for this topic that there is a God, some questions for debate :*

1) If the Bible has any significant flaws, could you still believe that Jesus is God?

Yes. I would first attribute the flaw to a misunderstanding of the meaning of the word. If it can be proven as a true flaw with absolutely NO interpretation being true then I would assume that the flaw was written in on purpose to weed out the tares, those who know theology but not GOD HIMself, from the community of GOD.

2) Does your belief that Jesus is God depend entriely on the perfection of the Bible?

Not in the least. It depends entirely on the knowledge of His presence and who He says He is...the bible just fills in why and how.

3) Beyond the Bible, is there any other reason to believe that Jesus is God?

The ongoing personal connection with HIM spiritually.

4) Does the Bible even tell us so, that "Jesus is God"?

Of course but only in a way that allows others to interpret it as something else. The Bible can be denied; the awareness of His presence with you cannot be denied.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 3 by ttruscott]

Ted, is it Jesus or the Holy Spirit's presence who you experience? Also either way that is subjective. Is there any objective way to determine whether Jesus is God? The Bible, at best, is ambiguous on the matter.

[bjs]

Assuming for this topic that there is a God, some questions for debate :*

1) If the Bible has any significant flaws, could you still believe that Jesus is God?

Yes.

2) Does your belief that Jesus is God depend entriely on the perfection of the Bible?

No.

3) Beyond the Bible, is there any other reason to believe that Jesus is God?

Yes. There are the large number teachings, doctrines, and written accounts which all combine together to make up what we normally call church tradition.

4) Does the Bible even tell us so, that "Jesus is God"?

Yes, often. The Gospels usually rely on the "show, don't tell" approach to narrative. The Epistles come right out and say it directly.

[tigger2]

BJS wrote: "The Epistles come right out and say ['Jesus is God'] directly."

Please list these 'Jesus is God' direct statements.

[Mithrae]

4) Does the Bible even tell us so, that "Jesus is God"?

Yes, quite obviously so:

• John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

The fourth gospel of course is the only one which purports to have been written by a disciple of Jesus (which is also supported by earlier and broader attestation of authorship than the other gospels). On the other hand it's also the one which is most overt in its creative liberties and revisionism in the interests of conveying the apostle's theological message.

[Elijah John]

4) Does the Bible even tell us so, that "Jesus is God"?

Yes, quite obviously so:

• John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

The fourth gospel of course is the only one which purports to have been written by a disciple of Jesus (which is also supported by earlier and broader attestation of authorship than the other gospels). On the other hand it's also the one which is most overt in its creative liberties and revisionism in the interests of conveying the apostle's theological message.

Scholars doubt very much that the GoJ was written by the apostle John. For one thing the Greek was too lofty for a rough Gallilean fisherman. Or is it a case of special pleading, a miracle which made this possible?

[ttruscott]

[Replying to post 3 by ttruscott]

Ted, is it Jesus or the Holy Spirit's presence who you experience? Also either way that is subjective. Is there any objective way to determine whether Jesus is God? The Bible, at best, is ambiguous on the matter.

I am a Trinitarian and I don't always know which divine Person is in attendance, so to speak. Sometimes it is the Holy Spirit, sometimes it is Jesus... I don't often let it make any difference to me as they are all my GOD. Jesus attested to me that He was YHWH and the Holy Spirit attested to me that Jesus was YHWH so what am I to do...my faith is what it is.

You want objectivity? In a site about spirituality? I dunno.....

[Mithrae]

Scholars doubt very much that the GoJ was written by the apostle John. For one thing the Greek was too lofty for a rough Gallilean fisherman. Or is it a case of special pleading, a miracle which made this possible?

It would hardly be a miracle for someone who had spent all their vocational time for the past forty-odd years communicating their good news to become proficient in the common language of their region Sadly, that quality of argumentation is pretty much par for the course for what I've seen regarding authorship of the fourth gospel, dubious speculation taking priority over the historical evidence of both internal and external attributions of authorship. For the three earlier gospels the first clear attributions come from proto-orthodox Irenaeus c. 180CE, from memory - which is somewhat weak, but not all that bad compared to many other ancient works - whereas the fourth gospel is explicitly attributed to John by multiple disparate sources, the unorthodox Valentinians Ptolemy and Heracleon, a decade or two before Irenaeus; to say nothing of the 'appendix' to the gospel itself explicitly confirming authorship by the beloved disciple much earlier still!

In any case John's Greek is among the most Semitic/vulgar in the NT, alongside the likes of Mark and Revelation. Some of the concepts may sound lofty, but that hardly implies anything about authorship... and in any case perhaps it's just convoluted, needlessly circular and repetitive to dazzle and befuddle the plebs.