Does faith excuse serious problems with the bible? (page 5)

GreenhornChristian

Punkofnice: read all seven pages of that thread. Have you contined your search outside of JWN?

tec

As Seraphim stated, one does not have to believe in a literal or error-free bible, to have faith in Christ and God.

I constantly read that having faith is the answer to knowing that god (or in most cases, Jesus) exists. But to me it's quite clear there are serious difficulties in believing the bible.

For instance... these two statements are not speaking about the same thing. One is speaking about God and faith (and Christ)... and the second is speaking about the bible. The bible is a tool; a finger pointing to Christ... who Himself is the Image and Word and Truth of God.

So the bible is A source to learn something about God, and something about the people who wrote about God... though these accounts are often interpreted in various ways, as we know.

But Christ is THE source to know God... Christ being the Truth, Word, Image of God.

Can you just ignore these and many other serious problems with the bible?

Well, yes, actually... though there aren't as many serious problems as some make out to be... some of those "serious problems" are simply serious misinterpretation due to serious misunderstanding... from NOT listening to and looking at Christ for the truth.

The bible is not a perfect source. It is not inerrant, nor inspired in entirety.

Christ is the One God gave us to know Him by. The LIVING Word of God.

If your faith is built upon Christ, who is alive, then your faith is built upon a firm foundation: the Truth.

If your faith is dependent upon an inerrant bible as the word of god... well, that foundation is not so firm.

Peace,

tammy

GreenhornChristian

MP: I have zero proof. I am in the pool of the great majority of humankind that has to rely on the efforts of the few. Someone else is digging up history. Others are examining and authenticating the find. Then someone else expounds on what the find is and how it relates to the era it belonged to. I get to comfortably lie on my couch, causually read and biasly weigh the information.

Jeffro

5go:

That and if a soldier raped a woman in battle he could marry her to make it right.

A Roman soldier having sex with some Jewish girl (but without the battle or marriage) sure makes more sense than 'the holy spirit overshadowed Mary'.

Jeffro

jgnat:

The story of Adam and Eve is an allegory.

Indeed, religious people who understand that the story of Adam and Eve isn't real are a lot less stupid than those who insist it literally happened.

iCeltic

Tec - ok, when I say knowing god I should have been more specific, I meant the god of the bible (as opposed to the many other gods that have been worshipped by man), the place where the vast, vast majority of Christians learned about god.

i have trouble believing in that god due to the source. Rather than arguing semantics, the absolute fact of the matter is that the god of the bible is incredibly violent. Leaving Jesus aside for a moment and how you clearly feel about Jesus, there are things in the bible that are disgusting, taking woman against their will, murdering children (aside from killing most of mankind, twice)

then we get to other things like Adam and Eve, the vast majority of bible scholars believe that there was no literal Adam and Eve, so how then do we account for original sin? Etc? Belief in god asks more questions than it answers, I feel.

also, if its Christ you have to put faith in, where did you find that out? The bible? To me its far too convenient to say the bible has mistakes but I know the parts that are true.

Jeffro

tec:

The bible is not a perfect source. It is not inerrant, nor inspired in entirety. Christ is the One God gave us to know Him by. The LIVING Word of God. If your faith is built upon Christ, who is alive, then your faith is built upon a firm foundation: the Truth.

That's ridiculous. You can't claim to know special magical 'truth' either about or from 'Jesus' independent from the only available source of information. All the stories about Jesus (most of them contradictory) originate from the Bible (including stories that were arbitrarily rejected when the Bible was 'canonised' nearly 1700 years ago that were previously regarded as 'scripture'). It's not a "firm" foundation at all. It's no foundation. It's just your imagination. That's why your view of Jesus happens to accord so well with your own personal opinions.

But you are right about the Bible not being inerrant or 'inspired' (whatever that means).

mP

Jeffro:

Are you saying i cant invent my own Jesus just like all the other 50000 christian religions ?

TEC might not be aware of this but when the Spanish went to the Americans and started to teach them about Jesus, the natives told them similar stories in reverse. The monks and priests couldnt explain this, which is why they tried their best to completely destroy all written material from the maya etc. We can see the same pattern with the RCC, where they tried their best to destroy all the written material from the other christianities. They pretty much worked until the Nag Hamadi jars were found.

mP

TEC:

Besides loving and compassionate Jesus what else do you know about him and from where ?

tec

Tec - ok, when I say knowing god I should have been more specific, I meant the god of the bible (as opposed to the many other gods that have been worshipped by man), the place where the vast, vast majority of Christians learned about god.

I understand.

This is one of the reasons why I try to emphasize God, the Father of Christ. He IS the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob... and also Ishmael... true. But He is known through Christ... His Image. The bible just gives us a glimpse, a partial picture, and not all of that is accurate. I mean, there is so much more than what is held within the pages of that book... which is actually many, many books, and not even all of them. So "it" acts as a witness, but if you want to verify the witness account... you go to the source, right?

i have trouble believing in that god due to the source.

Understood. I might also, if I thought the bible was the source of knowing God. Or that the bible was the Image of God. I mean, it can't be... because it conflicts with itself... so yeah, I see your dilemma if that is what you are using to know God.

Rather than arguing semantics, the absolute fact of the matter is that the god of the bible is incredibly violent. Leaving Jesus aside for a moment and how you clearly feel about Jesus, there are things in the bible that are disgusting, taking woman against their will, murdering children (aside from killing most of mankind, twice)

In some places, yes. It depends on which parts of the bible you are looking at and believing though, right? If you follow the bible to its conclusion... then it is Christ who is the Truth of God, and anything that contradicts Christ is in error (or you are missing something in understanding/translation/interpretation/etc).

As well, just because man did something does not mean that God did it... even if man credited it TO God.

then we get to other things like Adam and Eve, the vast majority of bible scholars believe that there was no literal Adam and Eve, so how then do we account for original sin? Etc? Belief in god asks more questions than it answers, I feel.

I don't tend to listen to biblical scholars. Or myself for that matter, in interpreting the bible. They get it wrong; I have and will get it wrong; etc, etc... if we do it according to our own understanding, over listening to the One who DOES know: Christ.

also, if its Christ you have to put faith in, where did you find that out? The bible?

For most, probably the bible... or word of mouth. Remember though, that there was no bible for quite some time after Christ lived in the flesh. Though very few, I think, would have the faith to put their faith in someone they had not first heard about from someone/somewhere else.

However, if you take away the bible... you still have God, and Christ. Prophets (including Abraham) had faith in the one they KNEW... and then their accounts were written down. God first, then the writing. Christ first, then the accounts written about Him.

To me its far too convenient to say the bible has mistakes but I know the parts that are true.

Perhaps so.

I don't know the parts that are true on my own, though, as I said above.

It is not that hard though, if you put your faith in Christ. Christ is Truth. Anything that contradicts Him, is either wrong... untrue... misinterpreted/mistranslated/misunderstood.

Peace,

tammy

Does faith excuse serious problems with the bible?

Share this