IAm_Lucifer Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 Greetings, IAm Lucifer. In all fairness to Joel Beeson, it wasn't he who introduced this idea, but me. Joel was simply conceding that I made a valid argument. So, even though you addressed Joel, I think it only proper that I field your question. A totally consistent bible, RENDERED CONSISTENT BY THE LATTER EDITING HAND OF MAN, could ONLY serve to now invalidate the bible as the "Word of God." This is the FEAR of biblical inerrantists. The claim has always been that this Word Of God is INSPIRED by God and therefore "perfect". Yet, we all know of the MANY errors and contradictions within it's pages. But rather than confess that "God" made mistakes, the theologian must warp all logic and common sense to explain away these mistakes. Thus maintaining the illusion that the Bible is inspired and error-free, but that it is MAN who has the short-sighted problem of false interpretation. Correcting or editing out these mistakes would be a fatal confession that God made the mistakes, and is therefore not perfect. (Can't have that!) OR an even more grievous error of conceding that MAN is the one who wrote the bible to begin with, and that's why the mistakes exist. (Once more, you can't have that!) Think about it, people: Let's say that the church now confessed that the bible was FULL OF ERRORS and that they were going to set out to fix them. Just as any editor/writer would do to any work of FICTION. Do you REALLY think the church could survive such a confession? Such a confession is to admit that GOD screwed up! OR that man is the one responsible for this silly book to begin with. And as I said before, just because you can write the bible so that it now agrees in every detail, how does this HUMAN effort now make it the "Word of God"? Take for instance the story of Jesus and the demon possessed man/men of Gadara/Gerasa/Gergesa as related in the 3 synoptics. Re-write it so NOW it makes more sense. Does this editing trick suddenly make it true that "Jesus" cast out a "demon" named "Legion" into a herd of swine that then killed themselves? Not hardly. It's just better and more readable fiction. Just like cleaning up the mistakes or inconsistencies of competing Star Trek novels. No, dear readers, the church is now stuck with their inconsistent bible and will have to content themselves with chicanery, smoke and mirrors, intellectual dishonesty (sweep it under the rug and ignore the smell of offal) and strong arm tactics to keep the faithful and gullible believing it. Yeah I do not know how I didn't realize that you make this point when I started replying to it. However I didn't say that being consistent would make the bible more true. I think it would make it more believable. I still would not convert because they stories in the bible do not seem possible to me. Even if I tried to force myself to believe them, I wouldn't. I think I didn't make what I was trying to say clear, because I agree with most of what you said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkepticOfBible Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 A totally consistent bible, RENDERED CONSISTENT BY THE LATTER EDITING HAND OF MAN, could ONLY serve to now invalidate the bible as the "Word of God." This is the FEAR of biblical inerrantist Yeah, what if it was consistent without the human editing? That would certainly lead many people to believe in it and not leave it in the first place. eg if there was no contradiction at all or it was clearly written eg in regards to the Easter events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Checkmate Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 A totally consistent bible, RENDERED CONSISTENT BY THE LATTER EDITING HAND OF MAN, could ONLY serve to now invalidate the bible as the "Word of God." This is the FEAR of biblical inerrantist Yeah, what if it was consistent without the human editing? That would certainly lead many people to believe in it and not leave it in the first place. eg if there was no contradiction at all or it was clearly written eg in regards to the Easter events. "What if...?" So what, if it was always "perfect"? (Never mind the REALITY that it has NEVER been perfect and thus that IS what we must deal with.) "Perfection" in textual content does NOT make it the "Truth", i.e, "The Word Of God". I don't care if the bible was ALWAYS in the current KJV, 66 book format ever since 50 CE. I don't care if there were NEVER any errors/contradictions. I don't care if someone could produce the so-called "original autographs" to validate what has been written all the way back to Moses. There would STILL remain the problem that the bible is a vile book of trash, that advocates sexism, murder, genocide, slavery, misogyny, racism, etc., etc., etc. Mistake-free or NOT, I will NOT consider something as "the Word Of God" that contains the tale of two she-bears devouring 42 children for the "sin" of calling a prophet "baldy"! And anyone who DOES worship/revere/believe/follow such a book, simply because it is "error-free", (or has a few "good", common sense sayings) has more than a few screws loose. For this Bible to have any value as the "Word of God" it would have to show itself as the Zenith of Wisdom. A tome that dwarfs all human understanding. Something that illumines the human spirit and uplifts us with it's every word. Having the Book of Chronicles agree with the Book of Samuel on a point of historical slaughter or racial genocide is NOT my idea of "godly wisdom". And NO amount of "accurate transmissions" will EVER make the stories of Joshua, Job and Jonah believable, nor acceptable. Bullshit IS bullshit, after all. If all it takes for someone to comfort themselves with the Resurrection story being true is that all the gospels line up perfectly, then THAT person is a blithering idiot for accepting an obvious fairy tale. Why not go all the way and believe in Pinnochio, Dracula and Jack and the Beanstalk, too? They don't have "errors" in their stories either. It's NOT about "errors and contradictions". It's about TRUTH and WISDOM. And if you're going to have a "Word of God" then it should be overflowing with unassailable Truth and Wisdom. And the Holy Bible, as has been amptly demonstrated for two millenium, has NEITHER. But this whole discussion is moot. Number 1, there is NO "perfect bible", and Number 2, gullible people find it easy to turn off their brains and believe the Lie. Mistakes or not, the faithful will CONVINCE themselves of the bible's perfection as they have ALWAYS done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkepticOfBible Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 Totally agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts