Who Wrote the Bible?

[Yanni Kang]

If we see this question as a Mind trap, I think Bible was wrote by human beings.

[Redzeppelin]

Sorry, Red, it seems I'm wasting my time here. Arguing with someone whose knowledge of scientific methodology comes from whatever Phillip E. Johnson tells him is the very definition of futility.

Who's Phillip E. Johnson?

First off, you know nothing of what I know about scientific methodology (evident by your allusion to someone I don't know). Your response shows that either a) you're unwilling to address my points, or b) you are unable to do so. Either one is fine with me, but don't try to make it sound like I'm being unresonable when you haven't effectively dealt with the issues I've brought up in the least.

I'm sorry that you expect scientific methodology to pander to your religious biases. Perhaps you'll read up on the philosophy of science and get a more realistic perspective on empirical inquiry.

Here you demonstrate your misunderstanding yet again; I do not "expect" scientific methodolody to do anything to "pander to [my] religious biases." I do not require science to agree with the Bible. I have made it clear in my posts that my issue is not with science but the attitude of Naturalists who think that their philosophic point-of-view is the definitive one in terms of understanding reality - that Naturalism is somehow more "objective" than Christianity; it's not, and that's all I've been trying to say. If you don't understand that, then I am sorry. But if you leave the conversation, understand that it may be that I'm impossible to talk to; or, it may be that you cannot or will not deal with what I have said. You decide.

[Vittoria666]

i disagree with hyperborean..your first post.
its is written like a pretty story but it is very realistic in its own way.. you will never guess but most of the events that were described in the bible are actully true facts!!!

[Lote-Tree]

If we see this question as a Mind trap, I think Bible was wrote by human beings.

All books are written by human beings including all the scriptures.

[Stieg]

First of all, HOW was the bible written?

I mean these stories both in the old and new testament have many accounts written in them as though the writer/scribe occupied these people in their most private and personal moments even personal accounts of nations distant and even hostile to god's chosen people. A la frankly the writers have a uncanny quality of omnipresence. Did god share all this with the writers and scribes? Whew that must been a mouthful. And some real humdingers and cliffhangers in there.

[Lote-Tree]

First of all, HOW was the bible written?

With a Pen? :-)

A la frankly the writers have a uncanny quality of omnipresence.

Yes. Just like a omnipresent narator of a novel.

[weepingforloman]

I really don't think this is a good debate for anyone who takes the Word literally to be involved in (like me). This is only bound to cause frustration and anger. Let me just say that it's a matter of faith-- literally, you choose to believe it or not. It's not necessarily a thing of logic. Take it or leave it, brohame.

[ennison]

I've just come back to this to refresh my memory. Wonder where all these folk are now. At one point I half thought that the Internet was the epitome of transience and yet here are all these exchanges still here. Hmm. I doubt if many opinions were deeply altered but some arguments might have been sharpened as a result of this "wordy warfare of the forum".

[cacian]

Good question.
A bunch of someones wrote the bible to set a tablets of rules based on shoddy morals. God is portrayed as the main characters Jesus as the hero protagonist and the rest as sidliners . A bit like a Hollywood movie really.
Why was the bible written is the question?

[Jackson Richardson]

Why was the bible written is the question?

The Bible is an anthology, not a book. It is a collection of writings which the Jewish and Christian communities have judged to be canonical for their self understanding.

It did not come down from heaven. That is what Muslims believe about the Qur'an. If some fundamentalist evangelicals talk like that about the Christian Bible, then they do not understand the basis of their faith.

[cacian]

The Bible is an anthology, not a book. It is a collection of writings which the Jewish and Christian communities have judged to be canonical for their self understanding.

Yes that too but the other reason could be that these community wanted a large amount of people to become the bible's believers. A bit like organising a dictionary where by the language is spoken the way the dictionary wants it.

It did not come down from heaven. That is what Muslims believe about the Qur'an. If some fundamentalist evangelicals talk like that about the Christian Bible, then they do not understand the basis of their faith.

I don't know how and why would anyone believe that. I could not even if I wanted to.

[Jackson Richardson]

these community wanted a large amount of people to become the bible's believers.

I don't understand that. It sounds like a conspiracy theory. The Old Testament is the body of ancient Hebrew literature. The New Testament texts were almost certainly regarded as canonical because they were used in the worship of the community. You can take it or leave it.

[cacian]

I don't understand that. It sounds like a conspiracy theory. The Old Testament is the body of ancient Hebrew literature. The New Testament texts were almost certainly regarded as canonical because they were used in the worship of the community. You can take it or leave it.

Indeed.
Canonical or not I suggest I follow my own worship.
I certainly find religions that relies on texts and books easily be forgotten. People do not have the memory for it.
How about a religion that relies on own imagination? It is more fun and I do not need preach what I do not keep.

[Jackson Richardson]

Canonical or not I suggest I follow my own worship.

I never suggested anything else.

I certainly find religions that relies on texts and books easily be forgotten. People do not have the memory for it.
How about a religion that relies on own imagination? It is more fun and I do not need preach what I do not keep.

Until the invention of printing, most Christians didn't have a Bible. They heard scripture in the contexts of communual worship, which almost certainly the context in which the New Testament texts were first used and preserved.

The stories, concepts, images and symbolism of scripture are an inspiration for our own imaginations. They are the record of the imaginative inspiration of others.

All religious traditions have some sort of canonical texts, but they operate differently in different traditions. I certainly do not think Christianity relies on the Bible. It relies on the revelation of God in Jesus Christ, to which the Bible, the creeds and the sacraments bear witness.

The sacred texts of Sikhs and Muslims are more important for them.