• CFN has a new look and a new theme

    "I bore you on eagle's wings, and brought you to Myself" (Exodus 19:4)

    More new themes will be coming in the future!

  • Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?

    Join For His Glory for a discussion on how

    https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/

  • CFN welcomes new contributing members!

    Please welcome Roberto and Julia to our family

    Blessings in Christ, and hope you stay awhile!

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

    https://christianforums.net/forums/questions-and-answers/

  • Read the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?

    Read through this brief blog, and receive eternal salvation as the free gift of God

    /blog/the-gospel

  • Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need

    https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

Biblical accuracy and divine inspiration

JMM

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
157
Reaction score
0
If this topic has been discussed before, I apologize. (and if so, could someone post a link to that thread?) For centuries, Christians and non-Christians have been debating whether the Bible is divinely inspired or not. The skeptics claim that the Bible was no more divinely inspired than any other book; that it is limited to the knowledge of the primitive men who wrote it. Christians claim that the Bible was inspired by the almighty Creator of the universe. How do we know which side is right? In my opinion, one way (of many) of determining this is to see if the Bible speaks with accuracy about something that could not possibly have been known at that time (except by divine inspiration). Check this out:

http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2204

The faith of each individual Christian rests upon the bedrock foundation of the Bible’s inspiration. If the Bible is of human origin, then it logically follows that the facts and doctrines found therein are only as reliable as human knowledge can be. However, if the biblical records were provided by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:20-21), then we have every reason to believe that the facts and doctrines recorded therein are free of those imperfections and blemishes that characterize all purely human efforts…..

.....A close examination of the Bible reveals startling proof of its inspiration…..Sometimes the proof comes in the form of scientific facts that were placed in the divine record hundreds or thousands of years before they were known to the modern scientific mind. This brief article deals with…..an important piece of scientific foreknowledge found with the biblical text that was completely unknown to man until fairly recently.

In Genesis 17:12, God specifically directed Abraham to circumcise newborn males on the eighth day. Why the eighth day? In 1935, professor H. Dam proposed the name “vitamin K†for the factor in foods that helped prevent hemorrhaging in baby chicks. We now know vitamin K is responsible for the production (by the liver) of the element known as prothrombin. If vitamin K is deficient, there will be a prothrombin deficiency and hemorrhaging may occur. Oddly, it is only on the fifth through the seventh days of the newborn male’s life that vitamin K (produced by bacteria in the intestinal tract) is present in adequate quantities. Vitamin K, coupled with prothrombin, causes blood coagulation, which is important in any surgical procedure. Holt and McIntosh, in their classic work, Holt Pediatrics, observed that a newborn infant has “peculiar susceptibility to bleeding between the second and fifth days of life…. Hemorrhages at this time, though often inconsequential, are sometimes extensive; they may produce serious damage to internal organs, especially to the brain, and cause death from shock and exsanguination†(1953, pp. 125-126). Obviously, then, if vitamin K is not produced in sufficient quantities until days five through seven, it would be wise to postpone any surgery until some time after that. But why did God specify day eight?

On the eighth day, the amount of prothrombin present actually is elevated above one-hundred percent of normalâ€â€and is the only day in the male’s life in which this will be the case under normal conditions. If surgery is to be performed, day eight is the perfect day to do it. Vitamin K and prothrombin levels are at their peak.

Dr. McMillen observed (S.I. McMillen, M.D., in his book, None of These Diseases):

“We should commend the many hundreds of workers who labored at great expense over a number of years to discover that the safest day to perform circumcision is the eighth. Yet, as we congratulate medical science for this recent finding, we can almost hear the leaves of the Bible rustling. They would like to remind us that four thousand years ago, when God initiated circumcision with Abraham….

Abraham did not pick the eighth day after many centuries of trial-and-error experiments. Neither he nor any of his company from the ancient city of Ur in the Chaldees ever had been circumcised. It was a day picked by the Creator of vitamin K (1984, p. 93).â€Â

Moses’ information, as recorded in Genesis 17:12, not only was scientifically accurate, but was years ahead of its time. How did Moses have access to such information? The answer, of course, is provided by the apostle Paul in 2 Timothy 3:16â€â€Ã¢â‚¬Å“Every scripture is inspired of God.â€Â

So to everyone on this forum: what's your :twocents on this? Is this something we can offer the skeptics as legitimate proof of the accuracy and divine inspiration of the Bible? If not, then why?
 
Curious, what would you then say in regards to things not known in scriptural times and has since been seen to be wrong?

Psalms 19:4-6 In them hath he (Yahweh) set a tabernacle for the sun, Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.

This passage is often taken in regards to how the sun is revolving in a manner around the earth. This passage is used by disbelievers to claim the sun hids from the earth when it actually ia always present on one side. What would your response be?

(Please keep in mind, I do not agree with the objections of Non-believers in this matter.)
 
Divine inspiration does not equate to Biblical accuracy.

Beliefs such as "inerrancy" and/or "infallibility" are not in essential to Christian theology and, as a student of the Bible, I would find them missleading if not entirely false.

Scripture must be interpreted in its own historical context not within ours. That being said, it is technically called "eisegesis" to read contemporary scientific theories into the Bible. :)

Allan
 
Blazin Bones said:
Curious, what would you then say in regards to things not known in scriptural times and has since been seen to be wrong?

Psalms 19:4-6 In them hath he (Yahweh) set a tabernacle for the sun, Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.

This passage is often taken in regards to how the sun is revolving in a manner around the earth. This passage is used by disbelievers to claim the sun hids from the earth when it actually ia always present on one side. What would your response be?

(Please keep in mind, I do not agree with the objections of Non-believers in this matter.)

That's a tough one. I don't want to address that scripture in Psalms just yet, until I have more time to look it up and review the entire chapter, and give a carefully thought out answer. Today is kind of a busy day for me, but I'll get to it ASAP.

I recently discussed this "8th day circumcision" argument from my OP with one of my friends, who happens to be an atheist. I found his rebuttal quite amusing. He said "Yeah, well, it's been said that even a broken watch is right twice a day". He opines that the Bible has gotten a whole lot of things wrong, and that it "accidentally" got this one right.
 
allanpopa said:
Divine inspiration does not equate to Biblical accuracy.

Yes it does. If a book is divinely inspired it is by definition accurate when properly understood. It is our understanding that is lacking, not God's "accuracy". Some books (like Genesis) have been misunderstood to be scientifically accurate when instead it is allegorical in nature, not scientific. Sometimes we get it wrong, God never does.

Beliefs such as "inerrancy" and/or "infallibility" are not in essential to Christian theology and, as a student of the Bible, I would find them missleading if not entirely false.

How do you discern Truth, then, personal revelation? What about the Bible even makes you believe it to be inspired?

Scripture must be interpreted in its own historical context not within ours. That being said, it is technically called "eisegesis" to read contemporary scientific theories into the Bible. :)

I don't think JMM is reading theories into scripture, I think he is pointing to a scientific fact that was probably not known by Moses or the Jews of his time, as a proof of the inspiritation of Scripture, a fact that, theoretically, was only known by God at the time.
 
Again, just saying "Yes it does" doesn't convince me.

I'm quite happy to believe in the inspiration of Scripture in the same sense as I believe in the inspiration of art or poetry or life or love.

Discerning "Truth" I would understand as being a product of our own cultural presuppositions and constructions. If "ultimate truth" exists or not and I'm not so sure that it does, I'm even more skeptical to say that "We have it! And everyone else is wrong!" :)

Allan
 
Hi JJM. If you want to get a world of ways in which the Bible pre-dated science, go to

www/reasons.org

Bick
 
allanpopa said:
Again, just saying "Yes it does" doesn't convince me.

First of all, I don't know what you mean by "again". We have not discussed any subject that I'm aware of, let alone the inerrancy of Scripture. Secondly, I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else, just giving my opinion. And third, I said WAY more than simply "Yes it does".

I'm quite happy to believe in the inspiration of Scripture in the same sense as I believe in the inspiration of art or poetry or life or love.

You are on a Christian Forum discussing "Biblical accuracy and Divine inspiritation", do you mean that God inspired Scripture as simply beautiful (sometimes) literature, or that "art or poetry or life or love" and Scripture are just naturally inspiring in and of themselves?

Discerning "Truth" I would understand as being a product of our own cultural presuppositions and constructions. If "ultimate truth" exists or not and I'm not so sure that it does, I'm even more skeptical to say that "We have it! And everyone else is wrong!"

Not wrong in everything, just wrong where they disagree with us :lol . Just so we have a baseline, do you think Scripture is the inspired word of God?
 
dadof10 said:
You are on a Christian Forum discussing "Biblical accuracy and Divine inspiritation", do you mean that God inspired Scripture as simply beautiful (sometimes) literature, or that "art or poetry or life or love" and Scripture are just naturally inspiring in and of themselves?

Not wrong in everything, just wrong where they disagree with us :lol . Just so we have a baseline, do you think Scripture is the inspired word of God?
I believe that Scripture is the inspired word of God, yes. In that respect I see it as a source for Christian meditation and theology, for Christian sacrament and worship. Theological claims like: "The Bible is the Word of God" are not about the Bible escaping the human condition, they are not about the authors of Scripture being in a trance when they were written, they are all about the way we use Scripture today in order to write theology.

Allan
 
allanpopa said:
I believe that Scripture is the inspired word of God, yes. In that respect I see it as a source for Christian meditation and theology, for Christian sacrament and worship. Theological claims like: "The Bible is the Word of God" are not about the Bible escaping the human condition, they are not about the authors of Scripture being in a trance when they were written, they are all about the way we use Scripture today in order to write theology.

If it is "the inspired word of God" doesn't that necessarily mean it contains objective Truth? Our understanding may be faulty, but the Truth it conveys is not.
 
There is not a single example in the bible of foreknown 'accuracy' with respect to modern science. But that's to be expected...the text was written long ago.

Those who allow it to be situated in its own historical context are the ones faithful to the text. Those reaching for 'proofs' of divine inspiration are the ones misusing it, and they like to play this reverse psychological game, where the ones keeping it in historical context (i.e., realizing that it's not going to live up to modern knowledge) are simply God-haters trying to undermine biblical 'authority' or whatever.

Of course, that's nonsense.


Thanks,
Eric
 
Incidently, Eric is absolutely right.

Trying to force the Bible to say things which it does not say is incorrect methodology and is also the methodology appropriated by fundamentalist Christians as norm. Trying to listen to the ancient prophets who spoke the words of the Bible within their own historical context makes absolute sense and until someone can convince me that the Bible should not be interpreted within its own historical context and should be taken out of it, I'm going to judge all methodologies that do so: "Absurd". ;)

I find it interesting how necessary we find that we need "Objective Truth" even though the very fact that we need to interpret this "Objective Truth" means that it's going to become "Subjective Truth" in a matter of seconds. lol. Let's pretend here that God is somewhat of an economist; would God create a perfect book which simply will be interpreted incorrectly by people and will never be interpreted perfectly by anyone? Would it make more sense to pray that God inspires our interpretation of Scripture rather than pretend that the Scripture itself is magical?

Allan
 
allanpopa said:
Trying to force the Bible to say things which it does not say is incorrect methodology and is also the methodology appropriated by fundamentalist Christians as norm. Trying to listen to the ancient prophets who spoke the words of the Bible within their own historical context makes absolute sense and until someone can convince me that the Bible should not be interpreted within its own historical context and should be taken out of it, I'm going to judge all methodologies that do so: "Absurd".

I agree. I'm not a fundamentalist Christian. We should read and interpret Scripture in it's intended context, whether it's historical, allegorical, etc. Scripture has it's proper place within the Church founded by Christ.

I find it interesting how necessary we find that we need "Objective Truth" even though the very fact that we need to interpret this "Objective Truth" means that it's going to become "Subjective Truth" in a matter of seconds.

I never said it was "necessary", just fact, and I also said "Our understanding may be faulty, but the Truth it conveys is not". I don't understand how you can believe Scripture is the Word of God yet say it's not, in and of itself, objectively True.

Let's pretend here that God is somewhat of an economist; would God create a perfect book which simply will be interpreted incorrectly by people and will never be interpreted perfectly by anyone?

We don't have to pretend, that's pretty much the way it is. Private interpretation leads to error. That's why Jesus founded an infallible Church, not to simply interpret Scripture, but to teach the full deposit of faith, which contains Scripture and oral Tradition.

Would it make more sense to pray that God inspires our interpretation of Scripture rather than pretend that the Scripture itself is magical?

It would make more sense to treat the NT as a group of historical documents and find the truth they contain. You will find they say Jesus claimed to be God, was cricified, rose from the dead, sent the Holy Spirit to guide the Church He founded to all Truth. Scripture is not "magical", just Truthful. Whether we can personally interpret it perfectly is beside the point.
 
Back
Top