1
   

SURVEY: IS the BIBLE RELIABLE?

 
 
Reply Thu 2 Nov, 2006 05:41 am
Care to participate in a philosophy class survey?

1) How do we know the bible really came from god?
2) Didn't the authors just say whatever they wanted to say? (Yes/No)
3) Did god inspire every word or just the ideas? (Y/N)
4) How do we know that we have all of God's truth in the bible?
5a) How do we know we have all the inspired writings?
5b) Were some lost? (Y/N)
6) Were the bible writers stenographers who wrote down what god told them? (Y/N)
7) With so many translations, how do we know what the bible says?
8) Can I get help in understanding what the bible says? (Y/N)
9) Is everyone's individual interpretation of the bible equally true, or reliable? (Y/N)
10) If we are going to rely on god's word as the authority in our lives, should we have answers to questions like these? (Y/N)

----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------
If you are going to participate, could you please reveal your:

AGE (18 above only)
SEX
MARITAL STATUS
EDUCATION (Up to High school/ Bachelor's degree/ Master's degree/Ph. d, or none)
----------------------------------------------------------------------- -------
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,931 • Replies: 45
No top replies

 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Nov, 2006 06:47 am
Is the bible reliable? Smile

Is the Pope Jewish?

reliable as what? ok I'll bite

1. before anyone can answer, you have to define what you mean by the word 'god'

2. authors usually say what they want to say so Yes

3. see 1. above

4. see 3. above

5. what is a piece of inspired writing? As a matter of fact the bible as you know it was cobbled together from a wide range of sources, deliberately leaving out many more. e.g. gospel according to Thomas.

6, No

7. Why does this matter?

8. I dont know, can you? Why you asking me?

9. Yes particularly where they are in conflict

10. I sincerely hope you do not take the old testament God as your role model. This is what Prof Richard Dawkins said recently in his book The God Delusion
Quote:
The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant characterr in all fiction: jealous and proud of it: a petty, unjust unforgiving control freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomanical, sado masochistic, capriciously malevolent bully. Those of us schooled from infancy in his ways can become desensitized to their horror. A naif blessed with the perspective of innocence ha a clearer perception. Winston Churchill's son Randolph somehow contrived to remain ignorant of scripture until Evelyn Waugh and a brother officer, in a vain attempt to keep Churchill quiet when they were posted togetehr during the war, bet him he couldnt read the entire Bible in a fortnight: "Unhappily it has not had the result we hoped. He has never read any of it before and is hideously excited; keeps reading quotations aloud "I say I bet you didn't know this came in the Bible..." or merely slapping his side and chortling "God, isnt God a ****!"
Thomas Jefferson - better read - was of a similar opinion: 'The Christian God is a being of terrific character - cruel, vindictive, capricious and unjust'



I am male and university educated...thats all
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Nov, 2006 08:05 am
some of your questions are flawed, they deal with doubt, yet you want definite aswers (Y/N), not the best situation

1) How do we know the bible really came from god?
we don't
2) Didn't the authors just say whatever they wanted to say? (Yes/No)
quite possibly
3) Did god inspire every word or just the ideas? (Y/N)
quite possible we will never know
4) How do we know that we have all of God's truth in the bible?
see answer above
5a) How do we know we have all the inspired writings?
see answer above
5b) Were some lost? (Y/N)
probably
6) Were the bible writers stenographers who wrote down what god told them? (Y/N)
not primarily
7) With so many translations, how do we know what the bible says?
it says what it says, the different interpretations suit the users needs
8) Can I get help in understanding what the bible says? (Y/N)
certainly you can, but peoples perceptions of truths can be very different
9) Is everyone's individual interpretation of the bible equally true, or reliable? (Y/N)
see answer above
10) If we are going to rely on god's word as the authority in our lives, should we have answers to questions like these? (Y/N)
IF, we are going to rely, then yes


43, male, high school graduate
0 Replies
 
megamanXplosion
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Nov, 2006 11:50 am
Quote:
1) How do we know the bible really came from god?


We do not know such a thing. I do think it is highly unlikely.

Quote:
2) Didn't the authors just say whatever they wanted to say? (Yes/No)


Yes.

Two different authors created two different stories of creation, Genesis chapters 1 and 2, which vary quite distinctly, and this certainly points toward the conclusion that the authors were making up things.

There is also a gap of 40+ years between the time Jesus supposedly was crucified, 30 A.D., and the time Mark wrote the first gospel, sometime after 70 A.D. The information given about this time comes from Paul. However, nobody told Paul about Bethlehem, Mary, Joseph, Herod, the ministry of Jesus, the miracles, and the only things he did know about the story was the crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension and he never places those on Earth—Paul never considered Jesus to be a person like ourselves and the events he spoke of all happened in a mythical realm. If Paul is the source of Mark’s information, then where did the story of Bethlehem, Mary, Joseph, etc. come from? This also points to the conclusion that the authors were making up things.

Now, take into consideration the culture of the time the New Testament was written. The culture had many allegorical stories, such as the so-called wisdom texts. The Gnostics were a competing religion during these times and they had many of the same kind of stories as we have in Christianity, and they thought it all allegory. It is quite possible the story was filled in to bring the allegories down to Earth so it were more applicable to their peoples’ daily lives. There is also the fact that Hercules was one of the most recent deities of the culture and he was the first deity to be considered god and man at the same time. As soon as Hercules started to lose favor with the people, a deity very familiar to him showed up. The culture of the time points to the conclusion that the authors wrote whatever they wanted to.

The story of the Ark of Noah certainly points to the conclusion that the authors wrote whatever they wanted to. This subject has been discussed rigorously on these forums and the information is still there. As such, I shall not both writing about it.

Quote:
3) Did god inspire every word or just the ideas? (Y/N)


This is a false dichotomy. It prevents the person from saying a god character had nothing to do with it.

Quote:
4) How do we know that we have all of God's truth in the bible?


You do not know such a thing.

Quote:
5a) How do we know we have all the inspired writings?


You do not know such a thing. The first and second books of Adam and Eve, for example, are not included. I suppose the reasoning behind this decision was that it portrayed god as someone who was not forgiving.

Quote:
5b) Were some lost? (Y/N)


Yes, but not enough of them.

Quote:
6) Were the bible writers stenographers who wrote down what god told them? (Y/N)


No.

Quote:
7) With so many translations, how do we know what the bible says?


Most people do not have the slightest idea of what the Bible says. For example, the word Hell is translated from four distinct languages from two distinct cultures at two distinct times: Sheol, Gehenna, Hades, and Tartarus. Sheol referred to graves, pits, and the general idea of death but it is translated as Hell many times. Gehenna was a pit of fire along the south side of Jerusalem where Pagans sacrificed children during the Old Testament times and where Israel’s Supreme Court (Sanhedrin) executed criminals. Hades is the Greek translation of the Hebrew word Sheol, and refers to the same things: graves, pits, and the general idea of death. Tartarus is used only one time in the Bible and refers to the dark and cold prison for angels, and nothing about humans is said. Thus, the Bible does not support the notion of an afterlife of eternal punishment for unrepentant sinners. How many Christians actually understand this? It is doubtful whether anybody has an accurate idea of what the Bible actually says.

Quote:
8) Can I get help in understanding what the bible says? (Y/N)


I suppose so… the Internet is available to you, isn’t it?

Quote:
9) Is everyone's individual interpretation of the bible equally true, or reliable? (Y/N)


No.

Quote:
10) If we are going to rely on god's word as the authority in our lives, should we have answers to questions like these? (Y/N)


If there is a god then you probably can rely on its words. However, the Bible is, from all the available evidence, not the words of any god.

Quote:
AGE (18 above only)
SEX
MARITAL STATUS
EDUCATION (Up to High school/ Bachelor's degree/ Master's degree/Ph. d, or none)


21, Male, Single, high school with two years of college.
0 Replies
 
cyphercat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Nov, 2006 04:55 pm
Re: SURVEY: IS the BIBLE RELIABLE?
1) How do we know the bible really came from god?
We don't
2) Didn't the authors just say whatever they wanted to say? (Yes/No)
Yes.
3) Did god inspire every word or just the ideas? (Y/N)
Neither.
4) How do we know that we have all of God's truth in the bible?
We don't.
5a) How do we know we have all the inspired writings?
None of them are "inspired" if by that you mean dictated by a god.
5b) Were some lost? (Y/N)
I'm sure things have been lost in the many versions of it and numerous translations.
6) Were the bible writers stenographers who wrote down what god told them? (Y/N)
No.
7) With so many translations, how do we know what the bible says?
We don't.
8) Can I get help in understanding what the bible says? (Y/N)
???
Does this mean can you get someone to tell you what "god" was saying in the bible? No to that. Or does it mean, can you find people who can explain the history of it, the disagreements on translations, the theories about the background of it, etc? Then yes to that.
9) Is everyone's individual interpretation of the bible equally true, or reliable? (Y/N)
No.
10) If we are going to rely on god's word as the authority in our lives, should we have answers to questions like these? (Y/N)
Yes, IF, but I certainly disagree with using a human conception of "god" as an authority.

AGE (18 above only) 26
SEX yes please <hahahahaha> female
MARITAL STATUS married
EDUCATION (Up to High school/ Bachelor's degree/ Master's degree/Ph. d, or none) AA, Bachelor's in progress...
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Nov, 2006 11:05 pm
The list of questions may be pared down somewhat by considering Paul's words at 2Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is inspired of God. . ."

I'm an old married geezer with a masters' degree.
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Nov, 2006 01:26 am
neologist wrote:
The list of questions may be pared down somewhat by considering Paul's words at 2Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is inspired of God. . ."


But that brings up questions 3, and 2.

3) Did god inspire every word or just the ideas?

2) Didn't the authors just say whatever they wanted to say?

38 (Hell, 39 in a couple of weeks.)
male
single
BA
0 Replies
 
echi
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Nov, 2006 02:20 am
"My turn!!"

AGE 31
SEX M
MARITAL STATUS S
EDUCATION GED


1) How do we know the bible really came from god? [unanswerable]
2) Didn't the authors just say whatever they wanted to say? Probably.
3) Did god inspire every word or just the ideas? [trick question]
4) How do we know that we have all of God's truth in the bible? N/A
5a) How do we know we have all the inspired writings? We don't.
5b) Were some lost? Yes.
6) Were the bible writers stenographers who wrote down what god told them? No.
7) With so many translations, how do we know what the bible says? [pass]
8) Can I get help in understanding what the bible says? Probably.
9) Is everyone's individual interpretation of the bible equally true, or reliable? No.
10) If we are going to rely on god's word as the authority in our lives, should we have answers to questions like these? If we had answers to questions like these, we wouldn't rely on God's word for anything.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Nov, 2006 03:06 am
Re: SURVEY: IS the BIBLE RELIABLE?
1) How do we know the bible really came from god?
That presupposes there be a god. Now, while that is a point to which some may stipulate, never has it been demonstrated.

2) Didn't the authors just say whatever they wanted to say? (Yes/No)
If you want a straight yes/no, then the answer would have yto be "Yes"; ine must assume they wrote as they did because what they wrote is what they wanted to say.

3) Did god inspire every word or just the ideas? (Y/N)
We're right back to that undemonstrated first premise - what god?


4) How do we know that we have all of God's truth in the bible?
Now you're just going in circles.

5a) How do we know we have all the inspired writings?
5b) Were some lost? (Y/N)

To conclude that no scriptural writings were "lost" is absurd ... in fact, it is beyond highly likely that some words and/or phrases that had existed even in one or another formal canon have been "lost" - thats just the way that stuff goes. We know from references in other ancient works that we don't have all of Homer's writings, and we don't even know who wrote Beowulf.

6) Were the bible writers stenographers who wrote down what god told them? (Y/N)
And we come 'round the circle once more - what god?

7) With so many translations, how do we know what the bible says?
Actually, thats both a good point and a not-so-good point. The Qumran texts, for example, indicate the Septuagint of today may be at least in part very like the Septuagint of 2 millenia ago - but that's all they indicate. There are differences, major ones, and when one includes Masoretic texts, even more differences glare at the critical examiner. The one thing we have for certain is uncertainty.

8) Can I get help in understanding what the bible says? (Y/N)
Why might I suspect you are just the person to see for help in understanding your version of whatever translation of whichever canon of the bible you endorse?

9) Is everyone's individual interpretation of the bible equally true, or reliable? (Y/N)
Going back to that undemonstrated first premise, and taking into account the myriad canons, translations, and traditions from whence derive today's various bibles, the answer to this one has to be "Yes, all individual interpretations of the bible are equally true and reliable" - which is to say, "neither necessarilly true nor reliable" with reference to anything but themselves

10) If we are going to rely on god's word as the authority in our lives, should we have answers to questions like these? (Y/N)
And we come once more around that undemonstrated first premise circle - what god? Adding to that, what authority? And going further, by what criteria may it be demonstrated "we" need rely on any "word as authority in our lives"? Society, and its child, Civilization, are but developments of the pack order instinct - what's good for the pack is good for the individual who partakes of the pack's benefits and thrives well enough to pass genes to succeeding generations. The notion that morality proceeds from religion is absurd; religion expropriated morality, twisting it as convenient to whatever agenda any given religion at any given time sought to press. If humankind's inherrent nature were selfich, avaricious, bloodthirsty, and driven by lust and gluttony, not even the forerunners of clans would have arisen ... and the odds humankind would have progressed from the savannahs to this point are exceedingly slim.

-

AGE - Over 60
SEX - Male - with some recollection of sex
MARITAL STATUS Very - and from what I understand, she sorta recalls sex, too.
EDUCATION Some Post Graduate Arts & Sciences, some advanced technical training, civilian and military - and plenty of hard knocks.
0 Replies
 
material girl
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Nov, 2006 05:29 am
Re: SURVEY: IS the BIBLE RELIABLE?
cor2nguy wrote:
Care to participate in a philosophy class survey?

1) How do we know the bible really came from god?
WE DONTKNOW, UNLESS THE AUTHORS HAD A DIRECT LINE TO TALK TO GOD AND HE DICTATED WHAT HE WANTED WRITTEN.
2) Didn't the authors just say whatever they wanted to say? (Yes/No) YES
3) Did god inspire every word or just the ideas? (Y/N) CANT REPLY YES OR NO TO 2 QUESTIONS,JUST THE IDEAS THEN THE AUTHORS ADAPTED IT TO SUIT POSITIVE MANIPULATION
4) How do we know that we have all of God's truth in the bible? WE DONT.
5a) How do we know we have all the inspired writings? WE DONT, ITS JUST A BOOK.
5b) Were some lost? (Y/N) OVER 2,000 YEARS ITS LIKELY.ESPECIALLY IF SOME PEOPLE 'ACCIDENTLY' LOST THEM.
6) Were the bible writers stenographers who wrote down what god told them? (Y/N) YES, OR THEY WOTE DOWN WHAT PEOPLE WHO THOUGHT THEY WERE GOD TOLD THEM.
7) With so many translations, how do we know what the bible says? WE DONT, ITS ADAPTED TO SUIT POSITIVE MANIPULATION.
8) Can I get help in understanding what the bible says? (Y/N) YOU WILL GET AN ANSWER FROM SOMEONE WHO HAS ADAPTED WHAT IT SAYS TO SUIT THEM.
9) Is everyone's individual interpretation of the bible equally true, or reliable? (Y/N) ITS AN INTERPRETATION, NEITHER TRUE NOR FALSE.
10) If we are going to rely on god's word as the authority in our lives, should we have answers to questions like these? (Y/N) YES, BUT WE SHOULDNT LIVE OUR LIVES BY GODS OR ANYBODY ELSES RULES.WE KNOW WHAT IS GOOD AND BAD,WE SHOULD LIVE BY THOSE RULES, NOT RELIGION.

----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------
If you are going to participate, could you please reveal your:

AGE (18 above only) 31
SEX YES PLEASE(HOHO)FEMALE
MARITAL STATUS VERY SINGLE
EDUCATION (Up to High school/ Bachelor's degree/ Master's degree/Ph. d, or none) ENDED AT COLLEGE BUT I AM STILL LEARNING ON A DAILY BASISTHROUGH LIFE ITSELF.
----------------------------------------------------------------------- -------
0 Replies
 
Iasion
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Nov, 2006 05:55 pm
Greetings,

Quote:
The list of questions may be pared down somewhat by considering Paul's words at 2Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is inspired of God. . ."


Well,
Timothy is a FORGERY, not by Paul.
Do you think a FORGED letter is a good proof?

And,
the Greek is ambiguous, it can also be translated as :
"all inspired scripture is suitable for teaching..."
Which means very different to what you posted.

Furthermore, when this letter was forged (early 2nd Century) the NT did NOT even exist yet, so it is only talking about the Tanakh (the OT.)
Which means it has NOTHING to do with the NT.

So,
this passage FAILS to prove anything, for 3 seperate reasons.


Iasion
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Nov, 2006 07:01 pm
Welcome to the forum, las.

You have much to say; but have offered little proof.

Carry on.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Nov, 2006 02:17 am
I'm curious, Iasion - on what do you base your assessment of Timothy - Marcion, perhaps, or Baur's Tübingen school of exegetical thought and its adherents, or something else entirely?
0 Replies
 
Iasion
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Nov, 2006 04:51 pm
Greetings,

timberlandko wrote:
I'm curious, Iasion - on what do you base your assessment of Timothy - Marcion, perhaps, or Baur's Tübingen school of exegetical thought and its adherents, or something else entirely?


On the consensus of modern NT scholars. The reasons include:

* They were not included in Marcion's canon of ten epistles assembled c. 140 CE.

* there is no certain quotation of these epistles before Irenaeus c. 170 CE.

* Vocabulary.
While statistics are not always as meaningful as they may seem, of 848 words (excluding proper names) found in the Pastorals, 306 are not in the remainder of the Pauline corpus, even including the deutero-Pauline 2 Thessalonians, Colossians, and Ephesians. Of these 306 words, 175 do not occur elsewhere in the New Testament, while 211 are part of the general vocabulary of Christian writers of the second century. Indeed, the vocabulary of the Pastorals is closer to that of popular Hellenistic philosophy than it is to the vocabulary of Paul or the deutero-Pauline letters. Furthermore, the Pastorals use Pauline words ina non-Pauline sense: dikaios in Paul means "righteous" and here means "upright"; pistis, "faith," has become "the body of Christian faith"; and so on.

* Literary style.
Paul writes a characteristically dynamic Greek, with dramatic arguments, emotional outbursts, and the introduction of real or imaginary opponents and partners in dialogue. The Pastorals are in a quiet meditative style, far more characteristic of Hebrews or 1 Peter, or even of literary Hellenistic Greek in general, than of the Corinthian correspondence or of Romans, to say nothing of Galatians.

* The situation of the apostle implied in the letters.
Paul's situation as envisaged in the Pastorals can in no way be fitted into any reconstruction of Paul's life and work as we know it from the other letters or can deduce it from the Acts of the Apostles. If Paul wrote these letters, then he must have been released from his first Roman imprisonment and have traveled in the West. But such meager tradition as we have seems to be more a deduction of what must have happened from his plans as detailed in Romans than a reflection of known historical reality.

* The letters as reflecting the characteristics of emergent Catholocism.
The arguments presented above are forceful, but a last consideration is overwhelming, namely that, together with 2 Peter, the Pastorals are of all the texts in the New Testament the most distinctive representatives of the emphases of emergent Catholocism. The apostle Paul could no more have written the Pastorals than the apostle Peter could have written 2 Peter.

It is fairly firm conclusion that the Pastorals were not written by Paul.


Iasion
0 Replies
 
Iasion
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Nov, 2006 05:16 pm
Greetings,

Please, my name is Iasion.

neologist wrote:
Welcome to the forum, las.
You have much to say; but have offered little proof.
Carry on.


Well,
see my post above for why Timothy is considered a forgery.

Secondly,
it is absolutely certain that the "scriptures" refered to cannot incude the NT - the NT did NOT even exist yet. How can a book call ITSELF "scripture"?

Thirdly,
the Greek is ambiguous - any Greek scholar can confirm that. There is no "the" before the word scriptures. So the meaning could be :

"All inspired scripture is suitable for..."
which does NOT mean all scripture is inspired.


Have a look at these various translations of 2Tim.3:16 for comparison :

Versions with :
"All scripture is inspired..."


(2 Tim 3:16 KJV) All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

(2 Tim 3:16 KJV 1611 ed.) All Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God, & is profitable for doctrine, for reproofe, for correction, for instrution in righteousnesse, [yes, my copy says "instrution"]

(2 Tim 3:16 NASB) All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;

(2 Tim 3:16 NRSV) All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

(2 Tim 3:16 CEV) Everything in the Scriptures is God's Word. All of it is useful for teaching and helping people and for correcting them and showing them how to live.

(2 Tim 3:16 NET) Every Scripture passage is inspired by God. All of them are useful for teaching, pointing out errors, correcting people, and training them for a life that has God's approval.

(2 Tim 3:16 Gaus) All the scripture is divinely inspired and useful for teaching, pointing out faults, giving correction and offering guidance along the paths of justice

(2 Tim 3:16 NIV) All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

(2 Tim 3:16 NAB) All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

(2 Tim 3:16 NJB) All scripture is inspired by God and useful for refuting error, for guiding people's lives and teaching them to be upright.

(2 Tim 3:16 Phillips) All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching the faith and correcting error, for resetting the direction of a man's life and training him in good living.

(2 Tim 3:16 TEV) For all Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching the truth, rebuking error, correcting faults, and giving instruction for right living.

(2 Tim 3:16 NWT) All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness

(2 Tim 3:16 Moffatt) All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for amendment, and for moral discipline,

(2 Tim 3:16 AMP) Every Scripture is God-breathed (given by His inspiration) and profitable for instruction, for reproof and conviction of sin, for correction of error and discipline in obedience, [and] for training in righteousness (in holy living, in conformity to God's will in thought, purpose, and action),

(2 Tim 3:16 MSG) Every part of Scripture is God-breathed and useful one way or another--showing us truth, exposing our rebellion, correcting our mistakes, training us to live God's way.

(2 Tim 3:16 NLT) All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It straightens us out and teaches us to do what is right.

(2 Tim 3:16 ESV) All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

(2 Tim 3:16 NKJV) All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

(2 Tim 3:16 KJ21) All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

(2 Tim 3:16 WE) All that is written in the holy writings comes from the Spirit of God. The holy writings are good for these things: to teach people, to show them when they are wrong, to make them see what is right, to teach them to do what is right.

(2 Tim 3:16 3rd Millenium) All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

(2 Tim 3:16 NCV) All Scripture is given by God and is useful for teaching, for showing people what is wrong in their lives, for correcting faults, and for teaching how to live right.

(2 Tim 3:16 God's Word) Every Scripture passage is inspired by God. All of them are useful for teaching, pointing out errors, correcting people, and training them for a life that has God's approval.

(2 Tim 3:16 Wesley) Every Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for convincing, for correction of error, and for instruction in right doing;

Versions with
"All inspired scripture ..."


(2 Tim 3:16 REB) All inspired scripture has its use for teaching the truth and refuting error, or for reformation of manners and discipline in right living,

(2 Tim 3:16 Lamsa) All scripture written by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness;

(2 Tim 3:16 NEB) Every inspired scripture has its use for teaching the truth and refuting error, or for reformation of manners and discipline in right living,

(2 Tim 3:16 ASV) Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness.

(2 Tim 3:16 YLT) every Writing [is] God-breathed, and profitable for teaching, for conviction, for setting aright, for instruction that [is] in righteousness,

(2 Tim 3:16 Darby) Every scripture [is] divinely inspired, and profitable for teaching, for conviction, for correction, for instruction in righteousness;

(2 Tim 3:16 WYC) For all scripture inspired of God is profitable to teach, to reprove, to chastise, [for] to learn in rightwiseness,

(2 Tim 3:16 Douay-Rheims) All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice:

(2 Tim 3:16 Webster's) All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

(2 Tim 3:16 Inspired Version) And all scripture given by inspiration of God, is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness;

(2 Tim 3:16 Brown and Comfort Interlinear) ALL SCRIPTURE [IS] GOD-BREATHED AND USEFUL FOR TEACHING, FOR REPROOF, FOR CORRECTION FOR TRAINING IN RIGHTEOUSNESS,


Note that the more recent, accurate and literal versions have : "all inspired scripture".

NOT the version that is endlessly quoted by apologists.


Here is a transliteration of the Greek (I don't know how to do Greek properly here yet.)

pasa grafh qeopneustoV kai wfelimoV proV didaskalian, proV elegmon, proV epanorqwsin, proV paideian thn en dikaiosunh,

Note there is no definite article.


Iasion
0 Replies
 
Mindonfire
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Nov, 2006 03:02 pm
Re: SURVEY: IS the BIBLE RELIABLE?
cor2nguy wrote:
Care to participate in a philosophy class survey?

1) How do we know the bible really came from god?
2) Didn't the authors just say whatever they wanted to say? (Yes/No)
3) Did god inspire every word or just the ideas? (Y/N)
4) How do we know that we have all of God's truth in the bible?
5a) How do we know we have all the inspired writings?
5b) Were some lost? (Y/N)
6) Were the bible writers stenographers who wrote down what god told them? (Y/N)
7) With so many translations, how do we know what the bible says?
8) Can I get help in understanding what the bible says? (Y/N)
9) Is everyone's individual interpretation of the bible equally true, or reliable? (Y/N)
10) If we are going to rely on god's word as the authority in our lives, should we have answers to questions like these? (Y/N)

----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------
If you are going to participate, could you please reveal your:

AGE (18 above only)
SEX
MARITAL STATUS
EDUCATION (Up to High school/ Bachelor's degree/ Master's degree/Ph. d, or none)
----------------------------------------------------------------------- -------


How does one know if it is reliable if they do not know how to read it?

How does one know if it is reliable if they do not even understand it?
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Nov, 2006 03:18 pm
its gospel of course its rellyible
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Nov, 2006 12:21 am
Iasion wrote:
Greetings,

timberlandko wrote:
I'm curious, Iasion - on what do you base your assessment of Timothy - Marcion, perhaps, or Baur's Tübingen school of exegetical thought and its adherents, or something else entirely?


On the consensus of modern NT scholars. The reasons include:

* They were not included in Marcion's canon of ten epistles assembled c. 140 CE.

* there is no certain quotation of these epistles before Irenaeus c. 170 CE.
* Vocabulary.
While statistics are not always as meaningful as they may seem, of 848 words (excluding proper names) found in the Pastorals, 306 are not in the remainder of the Pauline corpus, even including the deutero-Pauline 2 Thessalonians, Colossians, and Ephesians. Of these 306 words, 175 do not occur elsewhere in the New Testament, while 211 are part of the general vocabulary of Christian writers of the second century. Indeed, the vocabulary of the Pastorals is closer to that of popular Hellenistic philosophy than it is to the vocabulary of Paul or the deutero-Pauline letters. Furthermore, the Pastorals use Pauline words ina non-Pauline sense: dikaios in Paul means "righteous" and here means "upright"; pistis, "faith," has become "the body of Christian faith"; and so on.

* Literary style.
Paul writes a characteristically dynamic Greek, with dramatic arguments, emotional outbursts, and the introduction of real or imaginary opponents and partners in dialogue. The Pastorals are in a quiet meditative style, far more characteristic of Hebrews or 1 Peter, or even of literary Hellenistic Greek in general, than of the Corinthian correspondence or of Romans, to say nothing of Galatians.

* The situation of the apostle implied in the letters.
Paul's situation as envisaged in the Pastorals can in no way be fitted into any reconstruction of Paul's life and work as we know it from the other letters or can deduce it from the Acts of the Apostles. If Paul wrote these letters, then he must have been released from his first Roman imprisonment and have traveled in the West. But such meager tradition as we have seems to be more a deduction of what must have happened from his plans as detailed in Romans than a reflection of known historical reality.

* The letters as reflecting the characteristics of emergent Catholocism.
The arguments presented above are forceful, but a last consideration is overwhelming, namely that, together with 2 Peter, the Pastorals are of all the texts in the New Testament the most distinctive representatives of the emphases of emergent Catholocism. The apostle Paul could no more have written the Pastorals than the apostle Peter could have written 2 Peter.

It is fairly firm conclusion that the Pastorals were not written by Paul.


Iasion


Well, if you're going to accept Marcion as an authority, you have to discard the entire OT and the limit the NT to just a heavily redacted Luke and Marcion's uniquely interpreted/interpolated/redacted, blatantly ant-Jewish Apostolikon - Galatians, the two Corinthians and the two Thessalonians, Romans, a version of Ephesians edited particularly heavily by Marcion and retitled Laodiceans, Colossians, Philemon, and Philippians - no Matthew, Mark, or John, no Revelation, no Epistle to the Hebrews, no Epistle of James, nor either of Peter's Epistles or any of John's three Epistles, nor Jude's Epistle. Doesn't leave you much to work with.

Actually, all that may be drawn from Marcion's canon is that the books he accepted were known to the contemporary Christian community - which larger community, BTW, anathematized Marcion, excommunicated him and his followers, rejected his writings, and not only repudiated his teachings but condemned them, bringing about the Marcionite Heresy. In fact, all we know of Marcion's works, of which nothing original survives, comes from the writings of those who opposed him and his ideas, chiefly Tertullian, but including Ignatius, Polycarp, Valentinius, Justyn Martyr, Hippolytus, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius, Athanasius, and Didymus, among many others.

Then too one must somehow excuse away Jerome's unquestioning inclusion of the Pastoral Epistles when he compiled his Vulgate, and likewise dismiss the Muratorian Fragment and the Syriac Peshita. Marcion is weak tea indeed for any legitimate canonical historiography.

Turning to your later scholars, all that may be said of them and their essentially Tübingen School criticisms is that they and their criticisms are anti-Catholic. For instance, using hapax legomena, vocabulary, and the stylistic arguments, it can be "proved" different authors penned A Midsummer's Night Dream and MacBeth, or A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court and Huckleberry Finn.

Finally, hardly is there, as you allege, any "... consensus of modern NT scholars ... It is fairly firm conclusion that the Pastorals were not written by Paul." ... that POV is not exclusive to evangelical Protestant exegetes, but is concentrated therein, while considerable debate, conjecture, argument, and counter-argument swirl about energetically in the broader world of academic biblical studies.

See:

The Biblical Studies Center



The Journal for the Study of Rhetorical Criticism of The New Testament


Midwestern Journal of Theology
Wilder, T. (© 2003): A Brief Defense of the Pastoral Epistles' Authenticity (5 page .pdf)


The Early Church
Hill, C. (© 1995): The Debate Over the Muratorian Fragment and the Development of the Canon (15 page .pdf)


TEKTON Apologetics Ministry
Holding, J. (© 1998): A defense of the Authenticity of the Pastoral Epistles


New Advent
Aherne, C. (© 2003): Epistles to Timothy and Titus

Now, just to resolve any potential ambiguity, I wish to point out I reference only the question of consensus pertaining to Pauline authorship for the Pastoral Epistles; consensus alone without other consideration and most emphatically without offering endorsement of the content or context of any scriptural writings.
0 Replies
 
sandspider
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Nov, 2006 01:08 pm
the bible is reliable...sort of.
The bible was written by primitive people for primitive people. people have had to much influence on the bible to rely on it word for word. the message is real! how you interpret the details or symbolism is your business. the essential message is to love eachother as you love yourself. if we did that there would be nothing wrong with the world. If you love someone do you steal from them? If you love someone would you kill them? if you love someone would you risk their life by driving impared? The message is perfect, but the interpretations cause trouble. lol
0 Replies
 
dilbert
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Nov, 2006 12:55 pm
Re: SURVEY: IS the BIBLE RELIABLE?
cor2nguy wrote:
Care to participate in a philosophy class survey?

1) How do we know the bible really came from god?


How does one know anything at all?

Answer that question and it will go a long way towards answering the rest.

-- dilbert
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
  1. Forums
  2. » SURVEY: IS the BIBLE RELIABLE?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/03/2024 at 08:20:10