Post Reply
Page 4 of 8  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Is Worshipping the Bible Idolatry?
2 years ago  ::  Jun 17, 2012 - 11:30AM #31
newsjunkie
Posts: 5,741

Jun 17, 2012 -- 10:53AM, Adelphe wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 9:45AM, newsjunkie wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 8:15AM, Adelphe wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 12:09AM, koolpoi wrote:


What if we were to find that a certain Bible passage was not the word of God?




Like what and/or how would you demonstrate that?




Why do Protestant Bibles exclude books such as Macabees that are in Catholic Bibles?




Not all of them do, for one:


The Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion of the Church of England lists the deuterocanonical books as suitable to be read for "example of life and instruction of manners, but yet doth not apply them to establish any doctrine." The early lectionaries of the Anglican Church (as included in the Book of Common Prayer of 1662) included the deuterocanonical books amongst the cycle of readings, and passages from them were used in the services (such as the Benedicite)


Readings from the deuterocanonical books are now included in most, if not all, of the modern lectionaries in the Anglican Communion, based on the Revised Common Lectionary (in turn based on the post-conciliar Roman Catholic lectionary).


And here's the EO position:


The Eastern Orthodox Churches have traditionally included all the books of the Septuagint in their Old Testaments. The Greeks use the word Anagignoskomena (Ἀναγιγνωσκόμενα "readable, worthy to be read") to describe the books of the Greek Septuagint that are not present in the Hebrew Tanakh. When Orthodox theologians use the term "deuterocanonical," it is important to note that the meaning is not identical to the Roman Catholic usage. In Orthodox Christianity, deuterocanonical means that a book is part of the corpus of the Old Testament (i.e. is read during the services) but has secondary authority. In other words, deutero (second) applies to authority or witnessing power, whereas in Roman Catholicism, deutero applies to chronology (the fact that these books were confirmed later), not to authority




So somebody had a way to determine which words are the word of God and which aren't, or at least thought they had a way to determine that, right? You asked how that would be done, and I'd say go look into how the folks who make those kinds of decisions did it. You can go all the way back to the folks who first decided on which books to include. But we can't pretend nobody has (or had) any idea about how to tell the difference.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 17, 2012 - 11:43AM #32
F1fan
Posts: 11,146

Jun 17, 2012 -- 7:50AM, jonny42 wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 2:53AM, koolpoi wrote:



When we believe someone's interpretation may well be wrong,are we entitled to question it?




I think you're free to do whatever you want.


But if you aren't willing to apply the application of your interpretation to your life, it may not be respected.




I would suggest the interpretation is respected IF it is consistent with what we know about reality.  For example, those who interpret the Genesis creation stories literally can't earn respect for their view since it goes contrary to what we know about geology, biology, paleontology, genetics, cosmology, etc.  If an interpretation is largely fiction and applied to life, how is one's life meaning not a fiction?  Illusions and fantasies are OK as long as the person knows what they are and are not.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 17, 2012 - 11:47AM #33
F1fan
Posts: 11,146

Jun 17, 2012 -- 8:15AM, Adelphe wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 12:09AM, koolpoi wrote:


What if we were to find that a certain Bible passage was not the word of God?




Like what and/or how would you demonstrate that?




The Nicean councils took it upon themselves to take the some 200+ books of the Bible and whittle it down to 66 or 72 books.  They must have know how.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 17, 2012 - 11:58AM #34
Adelphe
Posts: 28,705

Jun 17, 2012 -- 11:30AM, newsjunkie wrote:


So somebody had a way to determine which words are the word of God and which aren't, or at least thought they had a way to determine that, right?



To determine what was canonical (and for whom.)  Canonical doesn't necessarily translate to "word of God."


You asked how that would be done,




Not really, no--I asked "Like what and/or how would you demonstrate that" something wasn't "the word of God."  For example, there's really no doctrine that turns on the inclusion or exclusion of those books referred to as "deuterocanonical.  In the RCC, the inclusion of them supports the belief in the "immortality of the soul", for example, but other traditions believe that's spoken of clearly even without those books.



and I'd say go look into how the folks who make those kinds of decisions did it. You can go all the way back to the folks who first decided on which books to include. But we can't pretend nobody has (or had) any idea about how to tell the difference.




Between what and what?

Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason, my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not retract anything, for to go against conscience would be neither right nor safe.  Here I stand.  I can do no other.  God help me.  Amen.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 17, 2012 - 12:09PM #35
mainecaptain
Posts: 21,775

Jun 16, 2012 -- 9:15PM, Iwantamotto wrote:


If you post something critical of the bible, does someone blast you for criticizing God?


 


There you go ... :)




Excellent point!

A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side. Aristotle
Never discourage anyone...who continually makes progress, no matter how slow. Plato..
"A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives" Jackie Robinson
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 17, 2012 - 12:26PM #36
Eliascomes
Posts: 861

Jun 17, 2012 -- 10:30AM, newsjunkie wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 9:52AM, Eliascomes wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 9:45AM, newsjunkie wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 8:15AM, Adelphe wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 12:09AM, koolpoi wrote:


What if we were to find that a certain Bible passage was not the word of God?




Like what and/or how would you demonstrate that?




Why do Protestant Bibles exclude books such as Macabees that are in Catholic Bibles?




 There are a lot of books that are excluded from the Holy Bible, but they had believed that they have chosen the ones that are fitted for us.




Perhaps you could explain the methodology used to determine which books are not the word of God.




 You can feel God's present when He's here or in the word. I think that all of Abraham's speeches are Divinely inspired. Here's part of many divinely inspired speeches that he had written.


 Lincoln's second Inaugural Address



One eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the Southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was, somehow, the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union, even by war; while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war, the magnitude, or the duration, which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with, or even before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces; but let us judge not that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered; that of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has his own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!" If we shall suppose that American Slavery is one of those offences which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South, this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the offence came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a Living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope--fervently do we pray--that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether"


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 17, 2012 - 1:20PM #37
newsjunkie
Posts: 5,741

Jun 17, 2012 -- 11:58AM, Adelphe wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 11:30AM, newsjunkie wrote:


So somebody had a way to determine which words are the word of God and which aren't, or at least thought they had a way to determine that, right?



To determine what was canonical (and for whom.)  Canonical doesn't necessarily translate to "word of God."


So you're saying that everything in the Bible isn't necessarily the "word of God." Why did you put that in quotes? How do you tell what is the "word of God" and what isn't the "word of God?" Are you saying it's possible, or not possible?


You asked how that would be done,




Not really, no--I asked "Like what and/or how would you demonstrate that" something wasn't "the word of God."  For example, there's really no doctrine that turns on the inclusion or exclusion of those books referred to as "deuterocanonical.  In the RCC, the inclusion of them supports the belief in the "immortality of the soul", for example, but other traditions believe that's spoken of clearly even without those books.


So, if there's no doctrine that turns on inclusion or exclusion of certain material, it doesn't matter if it is or isn't the word of God, or if it is the word of God it doesn't matter whether or not it's included in the Bible? Do you agree with eliascombs that there are other divinely inspired utterances by people, such as his example that the speeches of Abraham Lincoln are also divinely inspired? If so, how is one to tell whether a particular speech is divinely inspired or not?



and I'd say go look into how the folks who make those kinds of decisions did it. You can go all the way back to the folks who first decided on which books to include. But we can't pretend nobody has (or had) any idea about how to tell the difference.




Between what and what?




Between what is the word of God, and therefore to be included in the sacred book, and what isn't. Are you saying there's no way to make such a determination? 


Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 17, 2012 - 1:29PM #38
newsjunkie
Posts: 5,741

Jun 17, 2012 -- 12:26PM, Eliascomes wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 10:30AM, newsjunkie wrote:


Perhaps you could explain the methodology used to determine which books are not the word of God.




 You can feel God's present when He's here or in the word. I think that all of Abraham's speeches are Divinely inspired. Here's part of many divinely inspired speeches that he had written.


 Lincoln's second Inaugural Address



One eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the Southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was, somehow, the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union, even by war; while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war, the magnitude, or the duration, which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with, or even before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces; but let us judge not that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered; that of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has his own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!" If we shall suppose that American Slavery is one of those offences which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South, this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the offence came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a Living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope--fervently do we pray--that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether"


 




So the criterion for determining what is divinely inspired is personal feelings.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 17, 2012 - 1:44PM #39
mainecaptain
Posts: 21,775

Jun 17, 2012 -- 1:29PM, newsjunkie wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 12:26PM, Eliascomes wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 10:30AM, newsjunkie wrote:


Perhaps you could explain the methodology used to determine which books are not the word of God.




 You can feel God's present when He's here or in the word. I think that all of Abraham's speeches are Divinely inspired. Here's part of many divinely inspired speeches that he had written.


 Lincoln's second Inaugural Address



One eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the Southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was, somehow, the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union, even by war; while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war, the magnitude, or the duration, which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with, or even before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces; but let us judge not that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered; that of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has his own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!" If we shall suppose that American Slavery is one of those offences which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South, this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the offence came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a Living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope--fervently do we pray--that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether"


 




So the criterion for determining what is divinely inspired is personal feelings.




That covers it well.

A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side. Aristotle
Never discourage anyone...who continually makes progress, no matter how slow. Plato..
"A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives" Jackie Robinson
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 17, 2012 - 2:55PM #40
Eliascomes
Posts: 861

Jun 17, 2012 -- 1:29PM, newsjunkie wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 12:26PM, Eliascomes wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 10:30AM, newsjunkie wrote:


Perhaps you could explain the methodology used to determine which books are not the word of God.




 You can feel God's present when He's here or in the word. I think that all of Abraham's speeches are Divinely inspired. Here's part of many divinely inspired speeches that he had written.


 


 




So the criterion for determining what is divinely inspired is personal feelings.




 You can say that..., You can feel something extraordinary about someone behavior or their actions that they've performed. Lincoln was considered to be Public enemy number one. The people of the North called him a murderer of children and his very own co-workers had criticised him for the war which he had started. Eventhough what was said about him, but the people felt something inside of them to had him to be re-elected for his second term in office. God inspired us all, so when we are not for sure about something, God will intervene to make sure what ever happens, it'll be His will. The delayed of the books that weren't part of the orignal text is starting to come to light. God probably didn't want us to have them until we are ready for them, or that there's someone that can help you understand them.

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 4 of 8  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook