Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Can we trust what God says?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Mr. Black View Post
    The Author of Genesis is God. A human was the scribe that God used to physically write it down. Whether or not the human scribe had a comprehensive revelation of man and his post-physical life dwellings is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that God---the Author of Genesis, as well as the rest of the Bible---did. So yes, Seer's point is relevant.
    Uhhh... I don't know how many people go for that view of inspiration. He didn't dictate word for word!
    If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
      Uhhh... I don't know how many people go for that view of inspiration. He didn't dictate word for word!
      I don't see where Mr. Black claimed what you said. He merely said that God is ultimately the author. He didn't speculate on the method God used to get His message across.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
        I don't see where Mr. Black claimed what you said. He merely said that God is ultimately the author. He didn't speculate on the method God used to get His message across.
        The scribe that wrote it down part. Sorry if I misinterpreted it.
        If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
          I don't see where Mr. Black claimed what you said. He merely said that God is ultimately the author. He didn't speculate on the method God used to get His message across.
          "A human was the scribe that God used to physically write it down."

          If it's not word for word, the obvious question is "why not?" What's being omitted from the original message?

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
            Uhhh... I don't know how many people go for that view of inspiration.
            That, in and of itself, is irrelevant. Truth is not decided by doing a nose count.

            Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
            He didn't dictate word for word!
            Cerebrum123 saw my point.
            But just so we're clear, what do you mean by "dictate word for word"? Are you talking about God audibly speaking to the scribe?
            Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? (1 Corinthians 1:20)

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Mr. Black View Post
              That, in and of itself, is irrelevant. Truth is not decided by doing a nose count.



              Cerebrum123 saw my point.
              But just so we're clear, what do you mean by "dictate word for word"? Are you talking about God audibly speaking to the scribe?
              I know, it's just that I couldn't quite get what you meant. Yeah, I suppose I thought you were refering to God audibly telling the writer exactly what to write. I wonder what the scholarly view is?
              If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
                I know, it's just that I couldn't quite get what you meant. Yeah, I suppose I thought you were refering to God audibly telling the writer exactly what to write.
                Yeah, that's not what I meant, lol. I took my claim from verses like 2 Peter 1:21 & 2 Timothy 3:16. In 2 Timothy 3:16 the words "inspired by God" are translated from the Greek theopneustos (literally "God-breathed"), which means the words which the scribe wrote were God's very words, whether He spoke them audibly, or moved the scribe via the Holy Spirit to write them down.


                Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
                I wonder what the scholarly view is?
                I've heard different views over the years from different scholars. If a view can't be supported by Scripture I see no reason to accept it.
                Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? (1 Corinthians 1:20)

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Mr. Black View Post
                  Yeah, that's not what I meant, lol. I took my claim from verses like 2 Peter 1:21 & 2 Timothy 3:16. In 2 Timothy 3:16 the words "inspired by God" are translated from the Greek theopneustos (literally "God-breathed"), which means the words which the scribe wrote were God's very words, whether He spoke them audibly, or moved the scribe via the Holy Spirit to write them down.




                  I've heard different views over the years from different scholars. If a view can't be supported by Scripture I see no reason to accept it.
                  Okay, sorry for misunderstanding you, brother! And yes we can trust what God says. Otherwise, we couldn't trust anything or anyone. Descarte anyone?
                  If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Doug Shaver
                    I might think that was relevant to an understanding of Genesis, if I thought the author of Genesis was a Christian theologian.
                    Originally posted by Mr. Black View Post
                    The Author of Genesis is God.
                    You say so. Genesis doesn't say so.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      2 Peter 1:20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, 21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.


                      ?? Where does it say that everything in the Bible is inspired by God?
                      sigpic1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Mr. Black
                        Yeah, that's not what I meant, lol. I took my claim from verses like 2 Peter 1:21 & 2 Timothy 3:16. In 2 Timothy 3:16 the words "inspired by God" are translated from the Greek theopneustos (literally "God-breathed"), which means the words which the scribe wrote were God's very words,whether He spoke them audibly, or moved the scribe via the Holy Spirit to write them down.
                        Bold mine. Please tell me the difference between the description above and revelation being a "word for word" translation. Also, audibility isn't the point. Whether the revelation stimulates the scribe's ear bones or is only in the scribe's head, the issue is whether it's verbatim. You've said nothing that explains what the difference is.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by whag View Post
                          "A human was the scribe that God used to physically write it down."

                          If it's not word for word, the obvious question is "why not?" What's being omitted from the original message?

                          We're discussing whether or not dictation was used, not whether anything was omitted or not. God doesn't have to verbally dictate things to give His message to a human author.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post

                            We're discussing whether or not dictation was used, not whether anything was omitted or not. God doesn't have to verbally dictate things to give His message to a human author.
                            See post above. Audibility has nothing to do with it. Dictation of a purely mental transmission would still require translating the received units of information--God's words--into spoken words. Also, you're forgetting the scribe isn't the original receiver. The scribe merely wrote down the oral tradition that his illiterate ancestors told for centuries.

                            Presumably God speaks through words, yes?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by whag View Post
                              See post above. Audibility has nothing to do with it. Dictation of a purely mental transmission would still require translating the received units of information--God's words--into spoken words. Also, you're forgetting the scribe isn't the original receiver. The scribe merely wrote down the oral tradition that his illiterate ancestors told for centuries.

                              Presumably God speaks through words, yes?
                              Given that an orally transmitted report can be just as inspired as a written one, your comment about "illiterate ancestors" appears to be just a way for you to . Literacy, or lack there of is entirely irrelevant to this matter. Please tell me you don't think that literacy is some kind of prerequisite for intelligence.

                              Words, while often reported as a means of communication, are not the only way to communicate. Except in certain circumstances(usually prophets, whom I would expect a form of dictation), there wasn't exactly an order to "go out and write x". In the cases not concerning prophets, I can admit that I do not fully understand how inspiration works.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
                                Given that an orally transmitted report can be just as inspired as a written one, your comment about "illiterate ancestors" appears to be just a way for you to . Literacy, or lack there of is entirely irrelevant to this matter. Please tell me you don't think that literacy is some kind of prerequisite for intelligence.
                                Where did you get that from? I meant "illiterate" to describe the pre-transcribed revelation passed down to non-reading and non-writing Israelites (there, is that better?) and propogated from generation to generation. IOW, the initial receivers of God's transmission had no quills and papyrus.

                                Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
                                Words, while often reported as a means of communication, are not the only way to communicate. Except in certain circumstances(usually prophets, whom I would expect a form of dictation), there wasn't exactly an order to "go out and write x". In the cases not concerning prophets, I can admit that I do not fully understand how inspiration works.
                                I don't understand how revelation works, either. That does not preclude me from asking what you mean by "it's not a word-for-word dictation." Such an argument is meaningless if you don't explain what a non-verbatim translation of the divine message entails.


                                If it's not verbatim, the translation has changed. The question is what's changed from the original transmission?

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by tabibito, 09-14-2021, 05:15 AM
                                23 responses
                                174 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by seer, 08-30-2021, 09:03 AM
                                244 responses
                                1,299 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post eider
                                by eider
                                 
                                Started by seer, 08-30-2021, 07:35 AM
                                1 response
                                25 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post eider
                                by eider
                                 
                                Started by seer, 08-28-2021, 05:41 PM
                                10 responses
                                78 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Stoic
                                by Stoic
                                 
                                Started by MehdiR, 08-25-2021, 01:44 PM
                                9 responses
                                122 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Bill the Cat  
                                Working...
                                X