And you were told or read something another human said ,taught or wrote. You believe it was God but have no proof. You choose to believe the other humans and that is your right, but that doesn’t make it fact. I could write and say God told me something(he didn’t) but there are some who would believe me.
Much closer then Tacit Knowledge’s post #158 which sounds like it comes directly out of the atheists handbook of standard replies. But still missing an aspect.
We are gods since we are God’s children, so we have the ability to know certain truths and interpretations, we have the ability to connect with God and be one with God - further explaining the trinity.
In that there is leading to certain books or other works that will become text books for the student. Like any text book it is meant to have a teacher that helps guide the student, however the student and teacher are one with each other. This is not limited to the Bible or even to things considered sacred texts, but can be any work.
So much of it comes from within. In that I’m not saying that angelic visits are not real, but perhaps that is just some extra help.
If that were the stance of virtually any Christian denomination, then I would even consider re-joining the church.
But they all tell me Jesus, a man, was God. If he wasn’t, their entire philosophical underpinning falls apart. They won’t simply let the man (for lack of a better term) speak for himself.
And a proven fact they are all humans. just claiming something is from God doesn’t make it so.That is your belief in another human, and if it helps you to live a better life then so be it. Belief is not necessarily the truth and I prefer fact to fiction.
This also shows that you didn’t read or understand my post, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. But it is not in reading another human’s words but it is in interpreting them, which is internal.
Really? Again with the “proven fact” claim? You don’t know that. Where is your “proof”?
I would tend to agree with you that all spiritual writings are created by humans, but your insistence that this is a “proven fact” indicates that you do not know what either of those words mean which, in turn, makes your assertion worthless.
Does this mean because some human we are sure that they were humans wrote something it is the truth? What were the writers if not humans? This would mean the Gospel writers were not humans. They didn’t have human thoughts etc…Can you prove it was not written by humans? Belief is not fact.
Would it not be the default assumption that humans wrote the Bible, considering the complete lack of evidence that any other entities with the ability to do so exist?
Agreed. I can’t “prove” that the “Good Book” didn’t involve spiritual entities. I also can’t “prove” that there are no unicorns anywhere on earth.
But it’s all quite moot. The Hole-ish Babble is taken by certain religious to be totally reliable and morally instructive. I don’t know whether to laugh, cry, or vomit.
At least parts of it would be “demonic” if that even has any meaning.
No, but, perhaps you should look it up first under such context. Just to make sure it is appropriate for this forum in the context I ASSU(me) you are using it.
(In short edit time I could not find a consensus of what that term means.)
a ‘default assumption’ or ‘position’ (for many things) is that ‘X does not exist’ - its falsifiable and requires no evidence to state - you then look for things to falsify that statement (evidence).
In this case - in context - since the default assumption/position for ‘spirirts’ or the ‘super natural’ are that they ‘do not exist’ - and there is no evidence for them to ‘exist’ - and we have plenty of evidence that humans not only exist but also write things down (some factual, some fanciful, some a combination thereof ) - it is not a stretch to make the default position that
“Humans wrote the books that came to be known as the bible”.
If you have evidence that falsifies that - please feel free to post it.
I do not feel the ‘default position’ (which sounds semi sexual IMHO) contradicts or supports my position one way or another in this context (except for the point it was ‘created’ and I’ll take that to support my argument that it is a act of creation). To me humans are god children that do god things because of who they are.
Of course you believe that to be so, and as I have stated many times that is your right to believe what ever you choose. One can believe there is human like people on Mars but that doesn’t make it fact. It still boils down to just the words and works of humans, the Bible has no more reasons to be believed it is God’s word than the Koran. And God doesn’t sound like a very fair, just, or loving being if one thinks about the God of the Bible or Koran. I don’t fault you for your beliefs but they are just your beliefs and there are many contradictory things in the Bible, To me a supreme being would be nothing like the Bible describes it. Starting with being a Good, loving, fair all knowing being.
What is printed in the Bible is not the way we would describe a good human parent.
