Validity of the Bible

Author: Owen_T
Christianity
Religion
Bible

Posts

Total: 66
Topic's author
#1
Owen_T
Owen_T's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 587
3
2
9
Owen_T's avatar
Owen_T
3
2
9
This questions is mainly for use CatholicApologetics, though it would be great it anyone else wanted to contribute their opinion.

Grated, there is evidence for Christianity and the resurrection, but the Bible also has some pretty sexist things, as well as some messed up stuff about slavery, unbelievable stories about Noah's ark, and about the universe popping into existence, which has no scientific evidence, or how a loving god sends people to eternal suffering for being raised in a Muslim family. Not to mention all of the contradictions.

These are the main things that lead me away from the church.

The question is, how much of the bible do you think is the actual word of god, and how much of it do you think is flawed by the workings of man?


Topic's author
#2
Owen_T
Owen_T's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 587
3
2
9
Owen_T's avatar
Owen_T
3
2
9
-->
@CatholicApologetics
You seem very knowledgeable in your religion, and I would really appreciate your educated opinion.
#3
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Owen_T
The bible was made up by men.

And Catholicism is just another religious club, with it's own set of ideas and rituals.

Which isn't to say that such religious clubs and their associated wealth and power, were not greatly responsible for social and intellectual development over the past 2000 years or so.

Which isn't to say that some of their customary ideas and rituals are not a tad daft.


And then there was Father Ted to be thankful for.


Obviously one can never say with 100% certainty, but I suspect that Godo's mountain top visitations were somewhat fabricated.

And that Moses and similar shamanic types were typically off their heads on some plant based hallucinogen or another, attempting to reach a higher plain.

And gullible nitwits could easily be persuaded to believe anything...They still can actually...Such as the virgin Mary, and her subsequent ethereal visitations.

Which isn't to say that such visitations, do not present the catholic church with potentially huge business opportunities.

Pilgrims and their money are easily parted, as the saying goes.

Or is it fools.

You choose Owen.






#4
CatholicApologetics
CatholicApologetics's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 70
0
1
6
CatholicApologetics's avatar
CatholicApologetics
0
1
6
-->
@Owen_T
You have asked great questions. And though I would love to answer in as much detail as possible, for the sake of this post I will refrain from doing so. Rather, I will give a quick overview. Your concerns about certain elements in the Bible and aspects of Christian doctrine are shared by many people. I will try my best to answer.

SEXISM IN THE BIBLE

When reading the Bible, or a Bible verse, it is extremely important to read in context. The Bible contains passages that, when taken out of their respective context, may appear sexist by modern standards. However, the Bible actually displays the opposite - a profound respect for women. In the New Testament, Jesus' interactions with women were revolutionary for His time. He spoke with women publicly, had female disciples, and appeared first to women after His resurrection (John 20:14-18). Early Church leaders like St. Paul also emphasized the equality of all believers in Christ (Galatians 3:28).

SLAVERY IN THE BIBLE

Slavery in the ancient world was vastly different from the race-based chattel slavery of the modern era. For example, all workers under the Roman Empire were considered slaves of the state. The Bible contains regulations for slavery, but these were often meant to mitigate the harshness of the practice and protect slaves from mistreatment (e.g., Exodus 21:20-21). The seeds for the abolition of slavery can be found in the Christian doctrine of the inherent dignity and equality of every human being made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27).

UNBELIEVABLE STORIES

The Church teaches that the Bible contains different genres of literature, including historical narrative, poetry, allegory, and myth. The story of Noah's Ark, for instance, can be read as a theological and moral lesson about human sinfulness, divine judgment, and mercy, rather than a literal historical account.

ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE

The universe, "popping into existence," closely mirrors the Big Bang theory (which might have been obvious). The Big Bag theory was first proposed by Georges Lemaître, a Catholic priest and physicist. This scientific understanding of the universe having a beginning aligns with the theological concept of creation ex nihilo (creation out of nothing). The Church has long held that faith and reason are compatible. In fact, they were the primary driving source for scientific breakthroughs. They often funded many scientific thinkers and their projects. 

ETERNAL SUFFERING

This is the main issue I wanted to clarify. God desires all people to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4) and extends His grace to everyone. However, human beings have free will to accept or reject God's love. The Church teaches that God judges people based on the knowledge and grace they have received. The concept of invincible ignorance acknowledges that those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ but seek the truth and do God's will as they understand it, can be saved (Lumen Gentium 16).

A common misunderstanding is that God sends people to hell. However, it is us who send ourselves to hell through our choices. A byproduct of our free will is the ability to make decisions, which can go against God's divine laws. When this occurs, we sin. For instance, God commands us not to lie (Exodus 20:16, Leviticus 19:11). If we deliberately lie, we have committed a sin. Everyone falls short of the Kingdom of Heaven in one way or another because because of our sinful nature (Romans 3:23).

The condition to enter heaven is perfection, a state of being sinless. However, Jesus Christ, in His perfect nature, came down from Heaven to undergo the penalty of sin (hell) for our sake. Through His sacrifice, we are offered redemption and the possibility of eternal life with God in Heaven.

To answer your question, the notion that someone born into a Muslim household is "sent" to hell is not accurate. The Church believes in God's universal salvific will, meaning He desires everyone to be saved. Salvation is accessible to all, no matter what household they are born in. Ultimately, God's judgment is just and merciful, taking into account each person’s circumstances and intentions. Thus, the idea of automatic damnation for someone based on their background does not align with the Church’s understanding of divine justice and mercy. Let me know if I understood your question correctly.

CONTRADICTIONS

If you can give me any contradictions I will happily take them up.


How much of the bible do I think is the actual Word of God, and how much of it do I think is flawed by the workings of man?

I believe the Bible, in its entirety, is the Word of God.
#5
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,612
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Owen_T
Owen_T wrote @ CatholicApologetics: You seem very knowledgeable in your religion, and I would really appreciate your educated opinion.

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT!? How do you conclude that?   He's made only one post which amounted to ONLY 12 words HERE> #24 and a second post just only a few seconds ago HERE>> #4 and created no topics? 

Seems to me this is a case of one person/Pastor asking questions and the same person/Pastor answering them.
#6
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,612
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@CatholicApologetics
Owen_T asked :[ P1]How much of the bible do I think is the actual Word of God, [P2] and how much of it do I think is flawed by the workings of man?

CatholicApologetics wrote: I believe the Bible, in its entirety, is the Word of God.

It was a two part question. Or did you miss or forget what you wrote?

#7
CatholicApologetics
CatholicApologetics's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 70
0
1
6
CatholicApologetics's avatar
CatholicApologetics
0
1
6
-->
@Stephen
If the Bible is completely the Word of God it implies that there are no faults or flaws by the workings of man.
#8
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,612
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@CatholicApologetics
Owen_T asked :[ P1]How much of the bible do I think is the actual Word of God, [P2] and how much of it do I think is flawed by the workings of man?

CatholicApologetics wrote: I believe the Bible, in its entirety, is the Word of God.

It was a two part question. Or did you miss or forget what you wrote?


If the Bible is completely the Word of God it implies that there are no faults or flaws by the workings of man.

IF?  Sounds like doubt to me, unless of course you have lost track of the thread already.
And you are saying that mankind had no part in the bible's creation whatsoever?
#9
CatholicApologetics
CatholicApologetics's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 70
0
1
6
CatholicApologetics's avatar
CatholicApologetics
0
1
6
-->
@Stephen
And you are saying that mankind had no part in the bible's creation whatsoever?
The questions asks whether I think man has flawed the Bible, not whether they were involved in its creation. Hope this helps.
#10
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,612
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@CatholicApologetics
And you are saying that mankind had no part in the bible's creation whatsoever?
The questions asks whether I think man has flawed the Bible, not whether they were involved in its creation.


Owen_T wrote: #1 and how much of it [THE BIBLE] do you think is flawed by the workings of man?


So do you have an answer for that above?
#11
CatholicApologetics
CatholicApologetics's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 70
0
1
6
CatholicApologetics's avatar
CatholicApologetics
0
1
6
-->
@Stephen
Like I said, by saying the Bible is God's Word in its entirety, it implies there are no flaws by the workings of man. In other words, I do not think any part of the Bible is flawed by the workings of man, at least in the message it conveys.
#12
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,612
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
Owen_T wrote: #1 and how much of it [THE BIBLE] do you think is flawed by the workings of man?

So do you have an answer for that above?


CatholicApologetics wrote: Like I said, by saying the Bible is God's Word in its entirety, it implies there are no flaws by the workings of man. In other words, I do not think any part of the Bible is flawed by the workings of man, at least in the message it conveys.#11

So I am clear on your claim,  are you saying then that the bible is entirely flawless as it has came down to us through the millennia and that man had no part in its authorship? 
FLAWLESS:
perfect or without mistakes:



#13
CatholicApologetics
CatholicApologetics's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 70
0
1
6
CatholicApologetics's avatar
CatholicApologetics
0
1
6
-->
@Stephen
I believe the message conveyed in the Bible is pure and intact, and that it has not been corrupted by man. However, some of the authors of the Bible were illiterate and made spelling mistakes. These mistakes do not interfere with the overall message of the Scriptures. If you'd like I'd be more than happy to engage in a discussion with you in private messages.
#14
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,612
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@CatholicApologetics
So I am clear on your claim,  are you saying then that the bible is entirely flawless as it has came down to us through the millennia and that man had no part in its authorship? 
FLAWLESS:
perfect or without mistakes:


I believe the message conveyed in the Bible is pure and intact, and that it has not been corrupted by man.

Yes well we are not discussing "the message" at this stage. And I know what you only believe: you have expressed this a few times now.



However, some of the authors of the Bible were illiterate and made spelling mistakes.

Which authors were "illiterate"? 

Which authors made which spelling mistakes?




These mistakes do not interfere with the overall message of the Scriptures.

So then it is not flawless and without mistakes as you have claimed a few times now, then? 



If you'd like I'd be more than happy to engage in a discussion with you in private messages.

Well no. You have joined a conversation on the open religion forum to discuss religion, which to my knowledge includes the BIBLE, god and Jesus in its entirety.
Indeed, you have taken the time and responded in some depth to Owen_T #4 openly. Why do you wish to treat me any different?
#15
CatholicApologetics
CatholicApologetics's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 70
0
1
6
CatholicApologetics's avatar
CatholicApologetics
0
1
6
-->
@Stephen
Yes well we are not discussing "the message" at this stage
Owen asked me how much of the Bible I believe is the Word of God, I answered. I have been talking about the Bible's message since the beginning.

Which authors were "illiterate"? 
There were many illiterate authors. Notably: Moses, Amos, and many of Jesus' apostles, such as Peter.

Which authors made which spelling mistakes?
Letters attributed to Paul (who was literate), like those to the Corinthians or Ephesians, contain spelling and grammatical differences in various manuscripts. For instance, the spelling of certain Greek words. 

So then it is not flawless and without mistakes as you have claimed a few times now, then? 
The Bible, being the Word of God, is flawless and without fault. You keep asking the same question. I feel as if I have to tell you that since the beginning, I have not been talking about superficial things like grammatical mistakes. I'm sure, in his original question, Owen was asking me how much of the Bible I believed was the Word of God with the intent to focus on the message. Meaning by that, that he was asking me how much of the Bible's message was corrupted. The reason I say this is because before asking his question, Owen was primarily talking about things he deemed morally reprehensible (such as slavery and condemnation), relating to the Bible's message.

Why do you wish to treat me any different?
To me, and I apologize if I'm wrong, it feels as if you have some preconceptions about the Bible that I'd love to discuss.
#16
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,612
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
Yes well we are not discussing "the message" at this stage
Owen asked me how much of the Bible I believe is the Word of God, I answered. I have been talking about the Bible's message since the beginning.

Well that's not accurate is it? He didn't ask about the "message" the bible conveys at all. He simply asked a 2 part question. HERE> 

 Owen_T  wrote: The question is, how much of the bible do you think is the actual word of god, and how much of it do you think is flawed by the workings of man?#1

You replied:

"I believe the Bible, in its entirety, is the Word of God".#4 <<<< and in your entire reply at that stage, you hadn't even mentioned the message

You did though attempt to divert to the "message" but only when you responded to me  some 11 posts later HERE> #11 saying:

CatholicApologetics wrote: "I do not think any part of the Bible is flawed by the workings of man, at least in the message it conveys".

SO, regardless of all that: 



Which authors were "illiterate"? 
There were many illiterate authors. Notably: Moses, Amos, and many of Jesus' apostles, such as Peter.

Ok, lets take the apostles. You have mentioned Peter aka Simon which other of the 12 were "illiterate"? And why do you say they were "illiterate"?


Which authors made which spelling mistakes?
Letters attributed to Paul (who was literate), like those to the Corinthians or Ephesians, contain spelling and grammatical differences in various manuscripts. For instance, the spelling of certain Greek words. 

So the above mentioned works are flawed and remain flawed, then?


So then it is not flawless and without mistakes as you have claimed a few times now, then? 
The Bible, being the Word of God, is flawless and without fault. You keep asking the same question. I feel as if I have to tell you that since the beginning,

Well that will be because you have, on one hand claimed the bible is without flaws, while on the other have admitted to there actually being flaws i.e. mistakes. It is You that have caused the confusion.  Either the bible holds mistakes or it doesn't? 




I have not been talking about superficial things like grammatical mistakes. I'm sure, in his original question, Owen was asking me how much of the Bible I believed was the Word of God with the intent to focus on the message.

Well that remains to be seen. You have asked him for examples of the contradictions that he's mentioned and offered to "take them up" HERE>#4. he hasn't got back to you on those yet as he hasn't even mentioned "the message".




Meaning by that, that he was asking me how much of the Bible's message was corrupted.

[A] Maybe. But that is for Owen to make clear because he mentions nothing about the "corrupted message", does he?


The reason I say this is because before asking his question, Owen was primarily talking about things he deemed morally reprehensible (such as slavery and condemnation), relating to the Bible's message.


See [A] above. And in my opinion, Owen has simply pointed to and  highlighted  what he finds uncomfortable about the bible, indeed he says some  things are "unbelievable stories"  although he claims that there is  "evidence for the resurrection". #1<< on which I will maybe challenge him on.

I am still hoping that Owen will produce the "contradictions" he mentions and I am looking forward to your replies to which you say that you "will happily take them up". HERE>> #4


If you'd like I'd be more than happy to engage in a discussion with you in private messages.

Well no. You have joined a conversation on the open religion forum to discuss religion, which to my knowledge includes the BIBLE, god and Jesus in its entirety.
Indeed, you have taken the time and responded in some depth to Owen_T #4 openly. Why do you wish to treat me any different?
To me, and I apologize if I'm wrong, it feels as if you have some preconceptions about the Bible that I'd love to discuss.

I see.  "Preconceptions" you say.  I shall watch this- Owen-T's - thread developed and your responses in particular.




#17
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 396
Posts: 1,801
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@Owen_T
So you don't believe in the Bible because of what you believe as contradictions and of course personal disagreements.

I believe the scripture say there is a way that seemeth right unto man.
#18
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,436
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Owen_T
This questions is mainly for use CatholicApologetics, though it would be great it anyone else wanted to contribute their opinion.
I don't know why this question is for CatholicApologetics.  With respect it seems a naive question to ask a Catholic. Although the Catholics indeed claim to have written the Bible.  With all of their nonsense about various things. The Catholic on the other hand - DOES NOT agree with the REFORMATION principle of Sola Scriptura. They hold to the view that the traditions of the church, including church dogma and the pope overrides the Bible. 

Grated, there is evidence for Christianity and the resurrection, but the Bible also has some pretty sexist things, as well as some messed up stuff about slavery, unbelievable stories about Noah's ark, and about the universe popping into existence, which has no scientific evidence, or how a loving god sends people to eternal suffering for being raised in a Muslim family. Not to mention all of the contradictions. 
The Catholic church does not disagree with your argument here. Hence while it is futile. Protestants will of course. Me included. For example, I think that almost every reason you provide is one of ignorance and not much thought.  There are not GENUINE contradictions in the Bible. Indeed, if one could prove one, then one would be a millionaire. 

These are the main things that lead me away from the church.
Respectfully, such contradictions lead you away from the church?  Pray tell, and where are you headed, that is so lacking in contradictions? People are inconsistent EVERYWHERE.  LOL @ you. Evolution and Atheism teach that in the beginning there was nothing and then nothing exploded, for no particular reason. That's reasonable to you?  Really? 

The question is, how much of the bible do you think is the actual word of god, and how much of it do you think is flawed by the workings of man? 
Personally, I think EVERY part of the BIble is God's WORD. And I also think that EVERY part is written by flawed and SINFUL humans.  that is in my view one of the greatest and best reasons to understand and appreciate the Bible. It is God - perfect and beautiful using the sinful parts of humanity for God's glory. 


#19
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 396
Posts: 1,801
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Why do you believe the bible was made up by man?

Why would man write so many things that's not in his favor?

The Bible discourages sex before marriage.

Man rebels against that.

It discourages homosexuality. Man rebels against that.

It discourages corrupt, evil communication, stealing, telling lies, murder, etc.

All these things that man will do.
#20
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 396
Posts: 1,801
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@CatholicApologetics
You communicate that humans have it in them to accept or reject God.

Do believe the scripture teach all reject God?
#21
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 396
Posts: 1,801
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@Tradesecret

" It is God - perfect and beautiful using the sinful parts of humanity for God's glory. "

Just as the scripture says or teach, the use or through the foolishness of preaching.
#22
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 356
Posts: 10,597
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Mall
Why would man write so many things that's not in his favor?
So laws of Bible are completely useless for men, governments and society?

I dont usually see Christians making such a good argument against themselves, but here we are.

#23
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 356
Posts: 10,597
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Mall
It discourages homosexuality. Man rebels against that.
Do you rebel against that? 😁

#24
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Mall
It wasn't written yesterday afternoon Mall.

And it was written by pious men who sought to control the lives of others.

Other people write other books relevant to their interests, which may well be based upon the freedom to enjoy sexual relationships, when they want, and with who they want.

And I do not need to believe, what is patently obvious.

Why would a GOD write a mythical tome, concerning the lives and fortunes of people from one specific region of Planet Earth.

I don't remember him giving the Inuit People of the Arctic or Australian Aborigines much of a mention.

Strange when one considers Mr Omni's supposed knowledge.


Nope, the bible was obviously written by blokes with limited knowledge.
#25
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
@Owen_T
Good fun Stephen.

Well done Owen_T.

Something to get ones teeth into as an appetizer to Sunday Lunch.


#26
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,612
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Best.Korea
It discourages homosexuality. Man rebels against that.
Do you rebel against that? 😁

Why do they always have to bring the subject matter  back to homosexuality#19 when the OP has clearly set out his own concerns HERE>>> #1
They seem so fixated on the subject, don't you think, BK?

#27
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 396
Posts: 1,801
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@Best.Korea
If the Bible was just all man's ideas, why would he write it so opposing to himself as in comparison to many other things he'll make that truly reflects him?
#28
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 396
Posts: 1,801
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@zedvictor4
So your saying it was written by pious men and these men had faith and beliefs, is that right?
#29
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 356
Posts: 10,597
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Stephen
They seem so fixated on the subject, don't you think, BK?
Yes. Its strange.
#30
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 5,446
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
the Bible also has some pretty sexist things, as well as some messed up stuff about slavery, unbelievable stories about Noah's ark, and about the universe popping into existence, which has no scientific evidence, or how a
These are the main things that lead me away from the church.

Because you want God to agree with the morality of man?

He is infinitely intelligent and you cannot begin to understand his reasoning. It's like if you tried to explain our moral code to an ant. 

loving god sends people to eternal suffering for being raised in a Muslim family.
The October 7th attacks would just never stop coming if Israel laid down their Arms. We all intuitively know that if every last Israel citizen laid down their arms, they would be slaughtered overnight, but if every single Muslim nation, completely disarmed than Israel would leave them to live in peace. We know the peaceful side. 

However. Hell is not fire and brimstone. It is merely separation from God, or as far away as you can get from an omnipresent entity. Basically you have been lied to about what hell is. There is less pain and suffering in hell than there is on earth. 

The question is, how much of the bible do you think is the actual word of god,
All of it

and how much of it do you think is flawed by the workings of man?

The understanding of it is not clear cut. I would watch Jordan Peterson's lecture on Genesis.

Basically you have 3 philosophies for interpreting truth according to all the main branches of philosophy.

1. Those who know we separate everything into categories in our brain and that these categories are merely human constructs so truth is whatever we decide it is. 

2. Those who do not believe in categories but believe what we see is what we get. They believe that it is possible to see precision in the words of the bible, not really understanding that cultural ecperiences, the ideals floating around at the time, the individuals understandings of the words they say, can all be misunderstood by the modern mind. 

If I tell you the apple doesn't fall too far from the tree, we know that usually it means a son is like his father. In 1 million years people may interpret that to mean the son Jesus is not too far from the father in heaven or some other thing I cannot even conceive.  

3. The understand of pragmatic philosophers who know that truth is real. It is a very real thing and that categories help us understand the truth, but are not the truth within themselves. There is an objective truth, despite our subjective experiences with objective truth.

So yes the bible is real, but it is with the 3rd understanding of what truth is. 

This is mostly where you see intelligent left-wing and right wing people disagree. The left operates with definition 1, the right with definition 3 of truth