Divine Inspiration

[Drich]

Having read the first and last page of this thread, I'm confused. Drich was open to erring in his understanding of the bible on page one, but by page four is quibbling over translational issues with the bible.

So even if you can't necessarily understand it correctly the bible is still a perfect, inerrant gift from God?

The bible is as God intended for it to be, Without error. However, our understanding of it is not without error, and said contradictions are a result of a flawed understanding.

---

Nice try, but no. The Vaticanus codex is one high used example of A (orginal text) Bible. but is not the only one. We may not have any older complete (OT and NT) bibles avaiable but we do have indivisual manuscripts of indivisual books that are as old if not older than what is found in that particual codex. Outside of the R/C Church Christianity is not bound by any specific codex or version of the bible. So to say this codex is not consistant with your particular version of the bible therefore the bible is flawed is a logical fallacy. For again not all bibles not all versions/translations conform to the single source you have listed.

It took us a while, but you finally admitted the Bible has been edited. You may have said it implicitly, but I'll take it.

I just find this whole concept of humanity being a piece of scum (which was the whole plan all along, otherwise there's no need for Jesus) and needing redemption which can be read about in a book edited so much to be rather tedious and ludicrous. Really? My 'soul' can only be saved through a procedure that is found within the pages of a book written by fallible men, which then has undergone absolute chaos in translation, which produced 30 000+ ways of explaining the truth (note, SINGULAR) and somehow this is all ok to you?! How can you possibly say any of this has been 'divinely inspired'?

Because Christianity is not a method based religion. That is biblical Christianity does not hinge on Methodistic worship. The Focous of biblical Christianity is based on ones personablities and what that person has been exposed to. a primise that is repeated over and over again. Only those who look to the method of Christian worship as having to be a certain way or follow a certain formula would have issue with what you are trying to point out. If you take issue then you do not understand the bible.

---

Ahhh...I think I see what you're getting at.
Why is 'thou shall not kill' a commandment when god repeatedly orders his followers to exterminate other groups? (and animal sacrifices)

Thoushalt kill is not a commandment. If one looks at the orginal hebrew you will see the command is thou or you shall not Murder. Murder is the unsanctioned taking of life. Meaning God has not commanded the taking of life, and yet you did so anyway. The act of killing someone has no intrinisic righteous/moral value in of itself. It is the circumstance that justify or condemn that act.

This is the first 'contradiction' I could find: this page only talks about one particular contradiction.[/url] If you re-interpret something enough, almost any contradiction can be resolved.

Exactly. why? Because the bible was not written in english nor was it written in this time. Meaning it is subject to interpertation, for there were all manner of issues that have to be taken into consideration. that are not appearant in a litteral translation.

But the ten commandments are clearly incomplete, and they place extra emphasis on worshipping god.

Indeed.

If morality is not a valid standard for earning eternal life, then what is? Accepting Jesus?

That is just it one can not ever "Earn" eternal life. It is a gift ("So no man can boast") All anyone must do is humbly accept what has been offered.

It reminds me of the saying "When I was a child, I prayed to god for a bike. But I quickly found out he didn't work that way, so I stole a bike and prayed for his forgiveness".

Unfortunatly it does not work that way either. More religious nonsense.