[leifweaver]

For those people that believe that the bible is the literal word of God, I have a couple questions.

1) Why do you believe that? Isn't it more likely that some man simply made it up and TOLD people that it was the word of god? And not to press this too much, but if it were the literal word of God, why did he not write it himself?

2) Why do you read and memorize a version that has been translated? I have been surprised by how few christians can read the bible in it's original languages. If it had meant to be in English, couldn't God have simply written it in English?

I hope that I have not been unintentionally disrespectful. I am hoping to understand your religion a little better.

[paraclete]

For those people that believe that the bible is the literal word of God, I have a couple questions.

1) Why do you believe that? Isn't it more likely that some man simply made it up and TOLD people that it was the word of god? And not to press this too much, but if it were the literal word of God, why did he not write it himself?

2) Why do you read and memorize a version that has been translated? I have been surprised by how few christians can read the bible in it's original languages. If it had meant to be in English, couldn't God have simply written it in English?

I hope that I have not been unintentionally disrespectful. I am hoping to understand your religion a little better.

Ok Let's take this step by step

The Bible includes recorded prophetic words, that is literally the word of God, the Bible records the words of Jesus, that is literally the word of God. Much of the Bible is inspired, I take that to be literally the word of God so what are we left with you can object to? Some statements regarding historical events which oddly enough contain object lessons. Some writings which oddly enough deal with spiritual matters. In Christianity the Holy Spirit inspires Christians to prophesy and to speak and write. For thirty years in early Christianity there was no written Scripture except the parts of the Jewish scriptures which Christians may have obtained so Christians know very well the inspiration of God. The Bible is a collection of Scriptures written over a fifteen hundred year period.

The english language didn't exist when the Bible was written, what did exist was hebrew, aramaic and greek, The Hebrew and aramaic sections had been translated into greek so there is a tradition of translating the Bible. The languages that the Bible was written in are dead languages, few people can read these original languages today so we use translations, but whatever translation we use if you get a parallel text you won't find great differences in them. God inspiried the writers to write down and preserve these words and they are prescious and holy and yes your questions are offensive because you are obviously a non-Christian and you should have asked the questions more respectfully

[leifweaver]

Ok Let's take this step by step

The Bible includes recorded prophetic words, that is literally the word of God, the Bible records the words of Jesus, that is literally the word of God. Much of the Bible is inspired, I take that to be literally the word of God

Sorry, but I am still not clear here. I am not sure what you mean by prophetic words and inspired words.

so what are we left with you can object to?

I am not objecting. I am trying to understand. I hear people say that the bible is the literal word of God, and it makes me think of the think (for example) of the story of Joseph Smith, of the Mormons, where he literally was given the written word of God and translated it into english. However, I have never heard of a similar story from Catholic and Reformation-branch churches, and have been wondering about what that story is.

In Christianity the Holy Spirit inspires Christians to prophesy and to speak and write.

I think I understand. Are you saying that God, through the voice of the Holy Spirit (or maybe that is the same thing?) tells the Christian what to write?

the english language didn't exist when the Bible was written, what did exist was hebrew, aramaic and greek,

No, I knew that, but I did not think that would have been a limitation if God were writing it. I see now (I think) from your explanation that because the Holy Spirit tells the person in their mind, then when they write it down, it will always be in their native language. So I assume, that is why there is no crisis of faith when it comes to translations - the translator is also inspired to pick exactly the words that keep the same meaning as the Holy Spirit intended.

Am I close here, or have I missed something important in what you are saying?

yes your questions are offensive because you are obviously a non-Christian and you should have asked the questions more respectfully

I am not a Christian; I am sorry that I offended you. It is always difficult when asking about core religious beliefs. I am not sure how I could have asked these questions more respectfully so that I do not unintentionally offend in the future.

Thank you.

[cdad]

I am not objecting. I am trying to understand. I hear people say that the bible is the literal word of God, and it makes me think of the think (for example) of the story of Joseph Smith, of the Mormons, where he literally was given the written word of God and translated it into english. However, I have never heard of a similar story from Catholic and Reformation-branch churches, and have been wondering about what that story is.

You are at a misunderstanding here. The Mormans "found" their religion. What was "found" was golden tablets that had writing on them. That was found by the man ( Joseph Smith ) while plowing a field. And then the rest of the tablets were revealed to him by an angel. Its is very different from the devine word given unto man. One is insperation the other is translation. That's why you don't see it when you look at both religions side by side. Mormanizm is a much newer religion.

[paraclete]

Sorry, but I am still not clear here. I am not sure what you mean by prophetic words and inspired words.

A prophetic word is a forthtelling given under the unction of God. The Bible records many such utterances given by prophets, holy men respected for the clarity and accuracy of such words. It also records the writings of the Apostles, men who had been with Jesus Christ and Paul, a learned convert who was obviously inspired by the Holy Spirit to write explanations on spiritual matters. In ancient times God used the prophets to correct and direct hebrews as they developed as a nation. In christian times God used prophets to help Christians to learn and grow in their knowledge and love of God

I am not objecting. I am trying to understand. I hear people say that the bible is the literal word of God, and it makes me think of the think (for example) of the story of Joseph Smith, of the Mormons, where he literally was given the written word of God and translated it into english. However, I have never heard of a similar story from Catholic and Reformation-branch churches, and have been wondering about what that story is.

Joseph Smith was a false prophet. Such people give prophecies which are untrue and don't line up with the Word of God. In Smith's case he concocted a whole book and called it Scripture but no part of it can be confirmed. God does not contradict himself, this is one of the reasons the Bible is respected. The places and events told of in the Bible can be confirmed. The reason that you haven't heard of God behaving in that manner is he hasn't chosen to reveal his word that way.

I think I understand. Are you saying that God, through the voice of the Holy Spirit (or maybe that is the same thing?) tells the Christian what to write?

The Holy Spirit speaks to the Christian. We call it the still small voice. We are told things we cannot know (word of knowledge) (word of wisdom) or utter prophecies, words from God. I heard of a man once who wrote these prophesies down until he decided the exercise was futile because he realised that he was repeating the Bible. The Holy Spirit is the counselor

No, I knew that, but I did not think that would have been a limitation if God were writing it. I see now (I think) from your explanation that because the Holy Spirit tells the person in their mind, then when they write it down, it will always be in their native language. So I assume, that is why there is no crisis of faith when it comes to translations - the translator is also inspired to pick exactly the words that keep the same meaning as the Holy Spirit intended.

I think you have reasoned this well, but it is not about reason. Yes the writers have been inspired, the translators have been inspired but what is inexplicable is that the writers, forty of them over fifteen hundred years, could have brought together writings which don't contradict but maintain and build upon the central theme of the greatness of God and his purpose of bringing forth the messiah Jesus Christ

Am I close here, or have I missed something important in what you are saying?

As I have said you are getting close. To help you understand more I suggest you obtain and read a book written by a person who was also a non Christian at one time. Evidence that demands a verdict by Josh Mcdowell

I

am not a Christian; I am sorry that I offended you. It is always difficult when asking about core religious beliefs. I am not sure how I could have asked these questions more respectfully so that I do not unintentionally offend in the future

.

I think you did much better the second time around

[leifweaver]

First, Thank you, paraclete, for your patience with my questions. I am sure that these seem like simple concepts to you but they are confusing to me.

You are at a misunderstanding here. The Mormans "found" thier religion. What was "found" was golden tablets that had writing on them. That was found by the man ( Joseph Smith ) while plowing a field. And then the rest of the tablets were revealed to him by an angel. Its is very different from the devine word given unto man. One is insperation the other is translation. Thats why you dont see it when you look at both religions side by side. Mormanizm is a much newer religion.

Darn, I thought I was getting it. :confused: I don't understand how the inspiration of translating a tablet that was written by God is different from the inspiration of translating the bible from one language to another, or really different from giving a sermon under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

I do understand that while the Mormons self-identify as Christian, most other branches of Christianity do not include them in their definition of Christian. But, leaving that aside, (I don't really want to start a discussion of which religions and prophets are true and which are false) I am more interested in understanding the IDEA of the literal word of God, rather than the test of whether something is or is not the word of the TRUE God (or the True word of God if that is different). My religion does not have a concept of the literal word of God, and I have a hard time imagining what that might be.

I can understand what it is to be inspired by god, but it seems like Christians are using the term a little differently when they talk about being inspired by God. For example, one can be inspired by the sea to write a poem, or give an inspired performance. But again, you seem to use the word a in a difference sense. Is this true? And, if so, can you explain the difference to me?

Likewise, looking up "Unction of the Holy Spirit", I find that unction is an anointing which in turn means to dab with oil as a symbol of divine connection. I assume the anointing here used metaphorically? Can other people see the unction happen? Clearly, I am confused. Can you explain this to me in simple language?

Thanks again for your patience and time,
Leif

[450donn]

For any word to be considered "inspired" or "the word of GOD" it must first be received by one person, then interpreted and confirmed by another, then and this is the most important, it MUST align exactly with the word of GOD, the Bible. Today, a word from God is generally for a single person or a group of people. REV 22:18-19 I testify to everyone who hears the words of this prophesy and adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of this book of this prophesy God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.

[paraclete]

Darn, I thought I was getting it. :confused: I don't understand how the inspiration of translating a tablet that was written by God is different from the inspiration of translating the bible from one language to another, or really different from giving a sermon under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

What you have yet to grasp is the concept of prophecy and how this is regarded as the litteral word of God. The prophet speaks things they cannot know. This is a gift from God, one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit has been inspiring people to speak for a very long time.

The tablets Joseph Smith claimed to find and translate are unknown, The language they are claimed to have been written is unknown, we don't know if they were written by God, and beyond his testimony whether they even existed. He claimed to have been assisted by an angel to translate them. There is a great deal of difference from words that have been spoken out and recorded in front of a number of people in a known language and which have been later translated. Prophecy is not a sermon, it is a fothtelling of what God is saying. God is speaking to us all the time, the question is whether we are hearing what he is saying.

I am more interested in understanding the IDEA of the literal word of God, rather than the test of whether something is or is not the word of the TRUE God (or the True word of God if that is different). My religion does not have a concept of the literal word of God, and I have a hard time imagining what that might be.

Here we come to a central part of the Christian experience, Faith and the question of whether we have the litteral word of God is a question of what we take on Faith and believe without further evidence and what we do not.
As I have said the words of prophecy recorded in the Bible are the litteral word of God, the words of Jesus recored in the Bible are the litteral word of God, The words inspired by the Holy Spirit recorded in the Bible are the litteral word of God. These are things God wanted us to know for his own purposes and so we are instructed.

When the Bible indicates that a prophet spoke forth words indicating that they were from God or that the words recorded are the words of Jesus we take that on Faith. We expect that we are being told the truth. When a apostle writes to us explaining a part of our belief we also take on Faith that such writings are inspired by the Holy Spirit. Part of this experience is also that a number of us have also had the experience of speaking prophetic words or being inspired to write, so that these things are not unique to the Bible

I can understand what it is to be inspired by god, but it seems like Christians are using the term a little differently when they talk about being inspired by God. For example, one can be inspired by the sea to write a poem, or give an inspired performance. But again, you seem to use the word a in a difference sense. Is this true? And, if so, can you explain the difference to me?

The difficulty in this is you are trying to reason because you have no way to experience what we say. To have the same understanding as we do you must have the measure of Faith. How prophecy works for me is I hear a sentence in my mind and if I speak those words the prophesy flows, I am inspired to speak, I have not prepared to speak and what I speak about I have not thought about.

Likewise, looking up "Unction of the Holy Spirit", I find that unction is an anointing which in turn means to dab with oil as a symbol of divine connection. I assume the anointing here used metaphorically? Can other people see the unction happen? Clearly, I am confused. Can you explain this to me in simple language

?

I am using the word unction both in the sense of anointing and in the sense of pressure or a gentle urging. The anointing of the Holy Spirit can be felt in a physical sense. The presence of God can be felt or sensed

I am happy to continue this discussion with you but I can do so more fully if our contact is direct. Please email me [email protected]