The Divinity of Scripture

[Khatru]

But you said:
There was no gospels in the OT. and you said Timothy referring to OT and we both know ONLY THE OT was referred to as scripture by God, Jesus Christ, the Prophets  and the Apostles.  As the NT not in the Jewish bible. I asked which RELIGION they had been omitted from. So can we start again...

I'm talking about the Bible as a whole.  Over the years I've heard many a believer refer to the Bible as God's divine words. 

You're saying that only the OT comes from God.

Interesting.

[Khatru]

Had to think very carefully about what you meant by the 'divinity' of Scripture, especially as it isn't a Christian concept, let alone a Biblical one.  Regarding 'God-breathed', it isn't talking about the material being given word for word by God, it's referring to the fact that it is inspired by God.

By the time that 2 Timothy was written (between 90 and 140 according to the majority of scholars) all of the 3 Synoptic Gospels would have been written and possibly John's Gospel, as well as all of Paul's acknowledged epistles (as opposed to those that scholars regard as pseudoeponymous), so I'm not sure that your comment about the term only referring to the OT is true.

As for why 'so many scriptures (are) left out of the Bible', there are a number of reasons  Whilst the Canon of the New Testament wasn't finalised until the 7th century, it was largely finalised as early as the early 4th century, and early church fathers seemed to feel that authorship pre-150 AD was the cut-off point.  If you look at Bart Ehrman's book 'Lost Christianities' you will find that the majority of the material he deals with in the book date from the 3rd century on.  If you read some of the other material you will find that it says much the same as the earlier material that is included in the Canon and, understandably, the early church fathers probably decided that - if there were two or more documents that said the same thing - it would be best to go with the earliest.

Seems to me that the Christian god worshipped by so many is the result of centuries of theological gerrymandering.

[Khatru]

Depends a lot on how you translate that passage. Traditionally, the Christian translators have chosen the biased option of translating 'graphe' as "scripture" -with its implication of 'holy writing', though in fact both words could just as well be translated as "writing".

That would give us "all writing inspired by God". Okay, how do you determine what writing was and is inspired by God?
The glib answer is "what got into the present day Bible" - except a lot of what's in modern Bibles wasn't always there earlier in history. As for restricting "writing inspired by God" to what is now the Old Testament - well what we know as the OT depends on the post-A.D. Masoretic Text, which took quite a while to exist in such a form. The Dead Sea Scrolls tell us that there were a number of versions of the OT available, each version indicating different lines of development.
Even in the earliest versions of the NT we see two synoptic evangelists responding to the earlier text of Mark, and deliberately changing it, because the earlier text does not accord with their idea of Jesus. A typical example of this is Mark stating that "Jesus was angry"*. Matthew and Luke obviously didn't like the implication of this**.

*Mark 1:41
**Nor did many translators. The NIV is honest enough to translate this "Jesus was indignant", though early texts prefer to skew the Greek to mean "Jesus was moved by pity". Since Jesus has just been asked by a leper to be cured, it's easy to see why from the earliest times the text has caused translators and commentators a degree of confusion. After all, Jesus has just informed the assembled crowds, via a text from Isaiah, that he has come to "heal the sick" and all kinds of other wonderful things.

Well said

Theological gerrymandering right enough!   

[ippy]

Oh, don't worry, Walter; it was often as I was studying other stuff - such as Applied Linguistics, education, politics, geology, ornithology, and a whole host of other stuff, that what you call 'nonsense' became so relevant to me.  In other words, without said 'nonsense', I wouldn't have studied as much as I have.

Pity you didn't study living in an evidenced based real world as well Hope.

ippy

[Khatru]

Right. I'm sure no atheist here has ever said (or even implied) that religious belief is wrong or that an individual is wrong to believe. It's never happened in the history of this forum?

Religious belief is fine by me.

It doesn't really matter who the person's god of choice might be.

It doesn't even matter if someone wants to nail a dead chicken to their bedpost and dance around naked while howling at the moon if it brings meaning to their life.

[ippy]

Really? Then please present your proof.
Worthwhile stuff like your proof perhaps, or can I only imagine what that will be like? 

I note we're back into the negative proof fallacy zone Sword, you're in the minor league with NPF compared to hope.

ippy

[floo]

People can believe what they like as long as they don't practise it in such a way it impinges adversely on the lives of others.

[Khatru]

Christianity is the fulfillment of the Jewish faith.

Such arrogance

Judaism exists and it is its own religion and not (as you would have it be) a dress rehearsal for Christianity.

The scriptures and miracles of Judaism are in their books, not yours.  Who are you to tell the Jews that they have got it wrong and they are interpreting their own scriptures incorrectly?

How about Mormonism being the fulfilment of the Christian faith?

[floo]

Such arrogance

Judaism exists and it is its own religion and not (as you would have it be) a dress rehearsal for Christianity.

The scriptures and miracles of Judaism are in their books, not yours.  Who are you to tell the Jews that they have got it wrong and they are interpreting their own scriptures incorrectly?

How about Mormonism being the fulfilment of the Christian faith?

Or the unpleasant JW cult, for that matter?

[Khatru]

Or the unpleasant JW cult, for that matter?

Indeed!

[Owlswing]

People can believe what they like as long as they don't practise it in such a way it impinges adversely on the lives of others.

Now I wonder if anyone can guess which monikers from this forum instantly popped into my mind when I read this?

[Owlswing]

Such arrogance

Judaism exists and it is its own religion and not (as you would have it be) a dress rehearsal for Christianity.

The scriptures and miracles of Judaism are in their books, not yours.  Who are you to tell the Jews that they have got it wrong and they are interpreting their own scriptures incorrectly?

How about Mormonism being the fulfilment of the Christian faith?

Khatru

I no longer respond to Sassy, but I was interested to learn, from her post above, that the Jewish faith existed prior to 25,000 - 23,000 BCE (the authenticated date of the Venus of Willendorf).

Being one of the more erudite on the subject of religious history, do you have any knowledge of this "fact". please. I have Googled over 100 sites and cannot find any such evidence.

I am loath to ask any of the Christian fraternity as I know I will only get a string of prevarication, lies, waffle and bulldust a mile long.

[Brownie]

Not from me.
I don't know, had to google Venus of Willendorf.

[ad_orientem]

The scriptures and miracles of Judaism are in their books, not yours.  Who are you to tell the Jews that they have got it wrong and they are interpreting their own scriptures incorrectly?

Every right. The Jews lost any divine inheretence they might have dad when they put their own Lord and God to death. The Church is the inheretor of the promise made to Abraham and the scriptures belong to the Church.

[Anchorman]

Khatru

I no longer respond to Sassy, but I was interested to learn, from her post above, that the Jewish faith existed prior to 25,000 - 23,000 BCE (the authenticated date of the Venus of Willendorf).

Being one of the more erudite on the subject of religious history, do you have any knowledge of this "fact". please. I have Googled over 100 sites and cannot find any such evidence.

I am loath to ask any of the Christian fraternity as I know I will only get a string of prevarication, lies, waffle and bulldust a mile long.

Probably not even Hancock or his pale imitation, Icke, wiould suggest those dates for Judasm, Owl.
The first mention of 'JAH' that I can find in literature occurs on the walls of a pylon built by Nebmaatre Amenhotep III at Karnak, around 1380 BC (that's not to say earlier mention occurs - we simply haven'yt found it yet)

[Owlswing]

Every right. The Jews lost any divine inheretence they might have dad when they put their own Lord and God to death. The Church is the inheretor of the promise made to Abraham and the scriptures belong to the Church.

So YOU say!

They put him to death because they did not recognise him as their "Lord and God". Just because you see him as YOUR Lord and God does not mean that everyone else has to,

[Owlswing]

Probably not even Hancock or his pale imitation, Icke, wiould suggest those dates for Judasm, Owl.
The first mention of 'JAH' that I can find in literature occurs on the walls of a pylon built by Nebmaatre Amenhotep III at Karnak, around 1380 BC (that's not to say earlier mention occurs - we simply haven'yt found it yet)

Agreed - but 23,620 to 21,620 years in a rather large gap to fill!

But there again, when it comes to the antiquity of pagan beliefs Sassy has a huge inferiority complex that just has to deny that antiquity and thus she has blinded herself to any pagan belief before 1952 and the resurgence after the repeal of the Witchcraft Acts and their replacement with the fraudilent Mediums Act that let Gerald B Gardner loose!

[Brownie]

Ad_o, Jesus was executed by the Romans!  You know that very well.  Sure, some of his fellow Jews were against him but most of his followers were Jews.

[ad_orientem]

Ad_o, Jesus was executed by the Romans!  You know that very well.  Sure, some of his fellow Jews were against him but most of his followers were Jews.

Read the gospel. Read the words of St. Peter on Pentecost and the words of St. Stephen who the mob murdered.

[Owlswing]

Ad_o, Jesus was executed by the Romans!  You know that very well.  Sure, some of his fellow Jews were against him but most of his followers were Jews.

Give it up, Brownie.

Ad_O is one of those who, in order to change their minds, you would have to perform a brain transplant.

[Khatru]

You really are . . . . (insert expletive of your own choice)!

How many more times do I have to say this before it finally sinks into that 2.5 to 3 pounds of cold and stagnant porridge that you fondly imagine operates as a brain.

I have never claimed that I have any proof tht my deities/gods/goddesses exist anywhere but in my belief - they are a matter of faith, not of fact.

It is your pathetic Christian insistence that your deity and his witch/magician son are real that cause the friction between  them and atheists and pagans.

If there comes "a time when the Christians, like all other people of religion, have left this forum leaving pagans and salivating atheist(s)", the forum will get back to proper discussions that are not constantly derailed by specious arguments about possibly non-existent dieties.

Zeus, Thor, Odin, Herne, Cernunnos, Cerydwyn, Freya, send that day soon, please!

Christian: The bible is the word of God.
Atheist: How do you know that?
Christian: The bible says it is.
Atheist: How do you know the bible is right?
Christian: Because it is the word of God.

II
Atheist: How do you know humans didn't just make it up?
Christian: Because of the prophecies.
Atheist: The vague generalities that can be interpreted many different ways, or the post-dictions that were written after the events?
Christian: A fool says in his heart there is no God.

III
Atheist: Other religions have holy books too. How do you know that your book is true and the others, such as the Quran, are false?
Christian: The bible has Jesus Christ who died for our sins, and the others do not.
Atheist: The other holy books have their own scenarios for eternal life, how do you know their stories are false while the bible is true.
Christian: A fool says in his heart there is no God.

[Khatru]

Khatru

I no longer respond to Sassy, but I was interested to learn, from her post above, that the Jewish faith existed prior to 25,000 - 23,000 BCE (the authenticated date of the Venus of Willendorf).

Being one of the more erudite on the subject of religious history, do you have any knowledge of this "fact". please. I have Googled over 100 sites and cannot find any such evidence.

I am loath to ask any of the Christian fraternity as I know I will only get a string of prevarication, lies, waffle and bulldust a mile long.

Hi Owlswing

I like to look at the camels.

In Genesis we read of the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, Joseph, etc).  These tales often mention camels and in Joseph we read how camels were used as beasts of burden in the caravan trade.

The earliest dates we have for the domestication of camels are around 1200 BCE with the practice making it to Canaan by around 930 BCE

I think that Abraham is regarded as the father of the Jewish faith and if he was using camels as described in the Bible that would put him living around 1000 BCE.

Which doesn't make the Jewish faith very old at all and certainly nowhere near the age claimed by Sass.

Have a look here for more info....

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/02/140210-domesticated-camels-israel-bible-archaeology-science/

http://archaeology.tau.ac.il/ben-yosef/pub/Pub_PDFs/Sapir-Hen&Ben-Yosef13_CamelAravah_TelAviv.pdf

[Khatru]

Every right. The Jews lost any divine inheretence they might have dad when they put their own Lord and God to death. The Church is the inheretor of the promise made to Abraham and the scriptures belong to the Church.

No, that's what your schism claims.

The messiah you claim is Jesus is not the messiah that the Jews have been waiting for.

[ad_orientem]

No, that's what your schism claims.

The messiah you claim is Jesus is not the messiah that the Jews have been waiting for.

Oh, he is. Yet being stiffnecked they denied it.

[Nearly Sane]

Oh, he is. Yet being stiffnecked they denied it.

They are just all liars then?