Interpretation of Texts (General)

by David Turell , Saturday, September 18, 2010, 14:31 (5178 days ago) @ David Turell


> > Supposing there is a God, and this were his book, and he created the laws of nature, then there should be no conflict between his book and the natural order of the universe. 
> > 
> > Again, supposing that this is his book, there can not be a conflict between the various chapters of it. 
> > 
> > These actually set a very high standard and make it easier to *disprove* the bible, as violations of these rules would in fact make the whole castle crumble. - I disagree with your thinking. Your suppositions are making the OT and the NT monolithic to put God's mantle over the whole set of books.(pun intended) The Bible is written by human beings. Scholars tell us that Genesis is composed of several authors contributions. There are two in-the-beginning tales. If this is God's book it is only through His received thoughts by prophetic and deeply inspired people, and is unchanged in transcription. This is the fundamentalist view. That view is taken on faith.-Secondly, both bibles are the result of committee work, discussion and human argumentation, except for the pentatuch. Works were added and works considered and removed. Again fundamentalists faithfully assume God's absolute guidance. So unless you think your suppositions are fruitful of some philisophic advantage to your own quests, to me it is a dead end.-Much of the OT is actual history with reasonable observations of the Earth, within the limited boundries of locality. The NT is entirely different, dwelling on one person, and for me lots of magic. The four Gospels disclose different facts. Were they repeated four times for emphasis or completeness, written so long ( the first one at the least 40 years) after the crucifiction? Why were other Gospels left out? Should they have been, considering what is contained in the Gnostic contributions? God's whim or human?