Is the Bible........?

Post Reply New Topic

Hmm... probably Orthodox, you aren't talking about the glories of other people suffering for your own glory.

ROTFLOL!! !

I think it’s really good that you are asking questions, as the truth, if you find it, sets you free. No offense taken here, if you’re wondering With that, here are my thoughts.

By career, Luke was a doctor, so investigation was probably in his blood (no pun intended). He describes his work as a "careful summary," so he probably took a lot of care in writing down details. I find his address to be a little interesting too; while Theophilus in Greek means “lover of God,” the phrase “most excellent” suggests, at least to me, a person of high importance, a possibility considering Theophilus was also a name, and the name of a high-ranking Sadducee at the same (Theophilus ben Ananus). That’s speculation which I will leave to history, but a possibility.

As for the witnesses themselves, we are talking about people who claim to have seen healings and miracles, to even have seen Jesus alive after He had been crucified. Witnesses may be a little hazy at times on events that have little impact on themselves, but when it comes to an experience that changes your life, like Christ did, you'll probably remember details a lot better, much like how a soldier vividly remembers events on the battlefield. I still remember where I was, what I was doing, what I was thinking, and things I said the day 9/11 happened. If an experience is unforgettable, you won’t forget it. If it encompasses a three-year span of your life, there’s only greater chance you’ll remember it. Having an education though, I imagine Luke would know what to include and what not to.

As for divine inspiration, it could simply mean that God had prodded the authors to write down the things they did, though that doesn’t mean that the writings inspired by God will not come by purely normal means.

Probably everything that Paul writes about is probably from what he had learned from the disciples (who were convinced even unto death that they had seen Christ raised from the dead), though Paul Himself certainly had close proximity to the events, as he was a student of Gamaliel, the highest-ranking Rabbi of his time, and Paul was far ahead of any student his age. Before he was saved, he was the most vehement in destroying Christianity, so even though we don’t know what he was up to during the time covered by the Gospels, there’s no doubt he was at least quite familiar with the events (Christ was a very hot button issue amongst the religious leaders). Whether or not Paul and Jesus had ever been face-to-face outside of the divine encounter on the way to Damascus, no one really knows.

As far as divine inspiration goes, have you considered his encounter with Christ on the road to Damascus? Paul (called Saul at the time) was blinded by a fierce light for three days, in that light, he heard a voice say, “Saul, why are you persecuting me?” to which he replied, “Who are you, Lord?” "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting," was the reply, who then told him, "Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do." When he came, a man named Ananias was told by God to go visit him and to cure his blindness (very scary thought for Ananias, as Saul was known for his intense hatred of Christians). After that , Saul changed his life completely around, changed his name to Paul, and followed Christ wholeheartedly, even when it cost him his life.

Paul did at times insert personal views, though that’s not to say that personal views had no merit. Looking at some of the things that Christ said, there’s probably a little harmony than you might think. Jesus one time mentioned how some give up marriage for the sake of the Kingdom of God, and Paul stated he believed celibacy was the better option because despite its benefits it saves a great deal of stress, and it allows a person to live in greater service to God. At the same time, he stated that there’s nothing sinful about getting married, and for some it simply is the thing they should do because of biology (this whole issue goes a bit deeper than what I present here). It’s an odd mix; God created marriage, though when He created it, the world was perfect and free from sin.. not so much the case now, and the sign of our imperfection is in how bitterly common divorce is nowadays, at least in the U.S.

Even if some of what he offered were opinions, Paul’s opinions were considered highly valuable, considering his high education, his strong spirit and determination, and his deep love and concern for the churches. Considering too that all of Paul’s writings in the New Testament are letters, letters addressed to specific churches with specific needs, it’d actually be surprising not to find at least a few opinions. No mistake though, he was concerned with, and did include, a lot of theological exposition too. Think about the opinion that a doctor offers you. You know that there’s a wealth of knowledge that is backing that opinion: Years in medical school, years of practice, and perhaps a very good practice record too. It may be an opinion, but you know that the chances are strong his opinion is correct. So it is with Paul, considering his high level of self-sacrifice, wealth of knowledge, proximity to the original apostles and eyewitnesses, as well as very strong faith. No doubt though, Paul wrote many things that would be considered by the recipient church and himself to be factual.

Hope that helps, and I hope I covered everything right, there's a lot to talk about in those questions though. Thank you for asking too

Last edited by Capriccio on 25 Jan 2009, 8:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Taken literally the Bible is mostly nonsense. If you read Genesis literally you will be convinced that the world is a rectangle. Four corners of the Earth indeed! And if you read the Flood story you will be convinced that the waters above the Heavens and the waters beneath the Earth welled up and flooded the place. Be assured any water more than ten kilometers below ground is steam.

ruveyn

Very clever, but you're not the first person to realize this. Anyone with a brain will come to the same obvious conclusion.

Well, even some of the church fathers interpreted parts of the bible more allegorically. Augustine believed that the 7 days or ages or whatever in Genesis were wrong, and that all things were created simultaneously.

Anyone with an adequate brain would also realise that whilst biblical accounts were written in an era of ignorance religion still relies upon this ignorance to continue in its merry path. Whilst we have an understanding on the evolution of the earth and its inhabitants religion has turned its creator tentacles to the great unknown of the Universe.

Seven days ... is that seven 24-hour cycles as we would experience them? Who here think God and man experience time the same way? Does time mean the same thing to God as it does to mere mortals? I think not.

So you don't really have an issue with anything else I wrote in my post?

There are just so many things in the Bible that could be interpreted numerous ways.

Genesis 1 mentions morning and evening in reference to these days.

Yes, but literally or symbolicaly? And who was even around back then, anyway? This is kind of like that riddle about the tree falling in the forest.

Doesn't the bible state that 1000 years on earth is but one day in heaven ?

Well, the first is a question, however, the morning/evening thing wouldn't make much sense as a symbol in and of itself, as it is a detail without need or reference. The entire tale could be symbolic, but evening/morning would actually be evidence towards literalism.

Who was around back then, does not add too much to the reading, I don't think. All that would seem to matter would be the social circumstances of the writing, and the supposed means of revelation.

I don't think it is like the riddle about the tree falling.

It's like the riddle of the tree falling because you're asking for conformation of something that can't possibly be confirmed.

I should certainly hope so.

ruveyn