Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

is the bible reliable on questions of faith?

linate
Posts: 1,137
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2018 9:56:51 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
we should all know the story of noah is not literal, yet it was taken as so by the apostles in the new testament. we can see that the bible says the sun stood still for a day, when there is no explanation for this in the evidence, and looks like the bible was being literal.

is it reasonable to just say these were questions of science, or history..... and not faith? in a sense you can't pick it apart like that, but in a sense you can.
picking it apart is the only way i could give the bible the benefit that it is infallible on faith and morals. i could just say the bible isn't always reliable, period, and leave it at that. but the christian in me is afraid of what would happen if we can't say there is a firm truth that can't be questioned from the bible. i mean, it can all be true, and the bible as not reliable.... but something in me wants to believe there's more to it than that.

i know there are a lot of non fundamentalist christians out there, and i wonder what your views are? eternal view i would be especially curious about. i suspect a lot of these people just don't have the scruples i do. do you think i should change or that i'm rationalizing too much? i could see others who aren't fundamentalists yet still christian thinking i'm being unreasonable.
janesix
Posts: 8,233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2018 9:59:01 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 5/29/2018 9:56:51 PM, linate wrote:
we should all know the story of noah is not literal, yet it was taken as so by the apostles in the new testament. we can see that the bible says the sun stood still for a day, when there is no explanation for this in the evidence, and looks like the bible was being literal.

is it reasonable to just say these were questions of science, or history..... and not faith? in a sense you can't pick it apart like that, but in a sense you can.
picking it apart is the only way i could give the bible the benefit that it is infallible on faith and morals. i could just say the bible isn't always reliable, period, and leave it at that. but the christian in me is afraid of what would happen if we can't say there is a firm truth that can't be questioned from the bible. i mean, it can all be true, and the bible as not reliable.... but something in me wants to believe there's more to it than that.

i know there are a lot of non fundamentalist christians out there, and i wonder what your views are? eternal view i would be especially curious about. i suspect a lot of these people just don't have the scruples i do. do you think i should change or that i'm rationalizing too much? i could see others who aren't fundamentalists yet still christian thinking i'm being unreasonable.
What are" questions of faith"?
linate
Posts: 1,137
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2018 10:10:12 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 5/29/2018 9:59:01 PM, janesix wrote:
At 5/29/2018 9:56:51 PM, linate wrote:
we should all know the story of noah is not literal, yet it was taken as so by the apostles in the new testament. we can see that the bible says the sun stood still for a day, when there is no explanation for this in the evidence, and looks like the bible was being literal.

is it reasonable to just say these were questions of science, or history..... and not faith? in a sense you can't pick it apart like that, but in a sense you can.
picking it apart is the only way i could give the bible the benefit that it is infallible on faith and morals. i could just say the bible isn't always reliable, period, and leave it at that. but the christian in me is afraid of what would happen if we can't say there is a firm truth that can't be questioned from the bible. i mean, it can all be true, and the bible as not reliable.... but something in me wants to believe there's more to it than that.

i know there are a lot of non fundamentalist christians out there, and i wonder what your views are? eternal view i would be especially curious about. i suspect a lot of these people just don't have the scruples i do. do you think i should change or that i'm rationalizing too much? i could see others who aren't fundamentalists yet still christian thinking i'm being unreasonable.
What are" questions of faith"?

it's a distinction some christians use. the catholic church for instance believes it's doctrine s are accurate on questions of 'faith and morals'. some noncatholics use that reasoning for the bible too. if the bible says one plus one is five.... people like us dont think it means the bible is all out unreliable. it just means it wasn't a question of faith being talked about. sometimes the example isn't so clear cut as arithmetic v faith though.... sometimes stories can seem like an aspect of faith, and an aspect of somehting else, like science or history.
saint77
Posts: 278
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2018 10:20:29 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 5/29/2018 9:56:51 PM, linate wrote:
we should all know the story of noah is not literal, yet it was taken as so by the apostles in the new testament. we can see that the bible says the sun stood still for a day, when there is no explanation for this in the evidence, and looks like the bible was being literal.

is it reasonable to just say these were questions of science, or history..... and not faith? in a sense you can't pick it apart like that, but in a sense you can.
picking it apart is the only way i could give the bible the benefit that it is infallible on faith and morals. i could just say the bible isn't always reliable, period, and leave it at that. but the christian in me is afraid of what would happen if we can't say there is a firm truth that can't be questioned from the bible. i mean, it can all be true, and the bible as not reliable.... but something in me wants to believe there's more to it than that.

i know there are a lot of non fundamentalist christians out there, and i wonder what your views are? eternal view i would be especially curious about. i suspect a lot of these people just don't have the scruples i do. do you think i should change or that i'm rationalizing too much? i could see others who aren't fundamentalists yet still christian thinking i'm being unreasonable.

One of my experiences when I became born again was seeing literal spirits. If you are able to look at reality more like in that movie "the matrix" which had lots of hidden symbolism from the bible (zion, trinity, vineyard etc though it was of course fake, twisted and made into something negative) maybe the story of Noah is not so hard to imagine. I don't care if you believe me or not, but try to picture God operating in this material universe in ways that will blow your mind if you had the slightest clue, if you believe in the bible you also believe he indeed created the entire universe. The Christian view on reality IS supernatural, and if reality is supernatural then the story of Noah is possible because God can do ANYTHING.

However you don't Have to believe it, lots of Christians believe in Darwin etc and don't take the bible litteral but that things there is a symbol of something, however based on what I have experienced - not because I'm so smart but because unexpected things happened to me - I do believe most of it is litteral. And there are no such thing as a "fundamentalist christian" if it's used in a negative way, that means his faith is polluted with garbage from OUTSIDE christianity. A fundamentalist Christian would be one with a high expectation of what God can do, because God responds to faith, so I do believe you can get healing from God and that you literally can get God to raise someone from the dead, like Jesus was raised from the dead, I therefor also think the story of Noah is fully possible and I don't think scientists are so smart they like to portray themselves. Who gets to see or experience miracles is up to God.
saint77
Posts: 278
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2018 10:37:07 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 5/29/2018 10:10:12 PM, linate wrote:
At 5/29/2018 9:59:01 PM, janesix wrote:
At 5/29/2018 9:56:51 PM, linate wrote:
we should all know the story of noah is not literal, yet it was taken as so by the apostles in the new testament. we can see that the bible says the sun stood still for a day, when there is no explanation for this in the evidence, and looks like the bible was being literal.

is it reasonable to just say these were questions of science, or history..... and not faith? in a sense you can't pick it apart like that, but in a sense you can.
picking it apart is the only way i could give the bible the benefit that it is infallible on faith and morals. i could just say the bible isn't always reliable, period, and leave it at that. but the christian in me is afraid of what would happen if we can't say there is a firm truth that can't be questioned from the bible. i mean, it can all be true, and the bible as not reliable.... but something in me wants to believe there's more to it than that.

i know there are a lot of non fundamentalist christians out there, and i wonder what your views are? eternal view i would be especially curious about. i suspect a lot of these people just don't have the scruples i do. do you think i should change or that i'm rationalizing too much? i could see others who aren't fundamentalists yet still christian thinking i'm being unreasonable.
What are" questions of faith"?

it's a distinction some christians use. the catholic church for instance believes it's doctrine s are accurate on questions of 'faith and morals'. some noncatholics use that reasoning for the bible too. if the bible says one plus one is five.... people like us dont think it means the bible is all out unreliable. it just means it wasn't a question of faith being talked about. sometimes the example isn't so clear cut as arithmetic v faith though.... sometimes stories can seem like an aspect of faith, and an aspect of somehting else, like science or history.

regarding credibility of the bible text there are a small amount of dates, numbers and passages In the bible text in question and a modern bible usually has those passages in question marked and referenced on the bottom of each page even if the fact is they are irrelevant for what you read. allmost every accusation against the bible on errors or contradictions aren't error or contradictions at all if you care to investigate it, they reveal deeper truths or are witness accounts of people that have noticed different things of the same event. And when you link what's described there up with passages in the old testament that's when it really starts to get interesting. everything in the bible is there for a reason.
SecularMerlin
Posts: 7,228
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2018 12:20:02 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 5/29/2018 9:56:51 PM, linate wrote:
we should all know the story of noah is not literal, yet it was taken as so by the apostles in the new testament. we can see that the bible says the sun stood still for a day, when there is no explanation for this in the evidence, and looks like the bible was being literal.

is it reasonable to just say these were questions of science, or history..... and not faith? in a sense you can't pick it apart like that, but in a sense you can.
picking it apart is the only way i could give the bible the benefit that it is infallible on faith and morals. i could just say the bible isn't always reliable, period, and leave it at that. but the christian in me is afraid of what would happen if we can't say there is a firm truth that can't be questioned from the bible. i mean, it can all be true, and the bible as not reliable.... but something in me wants to believe there's more to it than that.

i know there are a lot of non fundamentalist christians out there, and i wonder what your views are? eternal view i would be especially curious about. i suspect a lot of these people just don't have the scruples i do. do you think i should change or that i'm rationalizing too much? i could see others who aren't fundamentalists yet still christian thinking i'm being unreasonable.

As you've already pointed out many fundamentalist christians do believe that the bible is inerrant. That the flood was a real geological event, that the earth is less than ten thousand years old and that evolution is a hoax. As far as I can tell faith does not require evidence or even truth just a belief. If you are in the unenviable position of trying to justify your faith when you also want to believe as many true things as possible and as few false things as possible my condolences. That is exactly how I lost my own faith.
The only true wisdom lies in knowing that you know nothing.
-Socrates

Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality
-Lewis Carrol
Casten
Posts: 2,510
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2018 12:27:27 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 5/29/2018 9:56:51 PM, linate wrote:
we should all know the story of noah is not literal, yet it was taken as so by the apostles in the new testament. we can see that the bible says the sun stood still for a day, when there is no explanation for this in the evidence, and looks like the bible was being literal.

is it reasonable to just say these were questions of science, or history..... and not faith? in a sense you can't pick it apart like that, but in a sense you can.
picking it apart is the only way i could give the bible the benefit that it is infallible on faith and morals. i could just say the bible isn't always reliable, period, and leave it at that. but the christian in me is afraid of what would happen if we can't say there is a firm truth that can't be questioned from the bible. i mean, it can all be true, and the bible as not reliable.... but something in me wants to believe there's more to it than that.

i know there are a lot of non fundamentalist christians out there, and i wonder what your views are? eternal view i would be especially curious about. i suspect a lot of these people just don't have the scruples i do. do you think i should change or that i'm rationalizing too much? i could see others who aren't fundamentalists yet still christian thinking i'm being unreasonable.

Well I'm an atheist so giving my advice is probably asking to be booed offstage, but:

What inside of you wants to believe in the Bible, and why? When your doubts lead you away from it, what keeps tugging you back? I'd say the answer to that is your "firm truth". If it's Christ's love, the Christian message, or whatever -- focus on that, make it your anchor, and consider everything else up for examination. Follow what deeply resonates with you, and question what doesn't. And yes I realize this flies in the face of all orthodox doctrine and sola scriptura. But sometimes following your personal truth does that.
You'll always find me here: https://www.debateart.com...