Would you still believe in God if...

MacFall

Agorist
Nov 24, 2007
12,726
1,170
Western Pennsylvania, USA
✟25,688.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I already believe that men, especially those seeking power, have messed with the Bible quite a bit - not directly, but indirectly, using errors as leverage. Most English translations bear serious errors in terms of differences from the original languages in which they were written, and often people's ignorance of the idiomatic meanings of what was written colors their beliefs. Some people, either in like ignorance, or in some cases knowing better, have used Man's faith in the Bible (a printed work, to be distinguished from God's Word, which is the person of Christ) to evil ends.

There is also the question of compilation. If we believe the Bible is true, then we must accept that it is the last dispensation of direct inspiration given to man by God, because that is in the Bible. In that case, we must ask by what authority did the Synod of Hippo, three centuries after the cessation of direct inspiration, decide what books should be canon and which should not? How do we know the individuals involved did not omit certain things that might have been edifying, and ensure that some things that could be used for their agendas were included? The fact is, we don't.

And yet I remain a Christian. I believe that God's word is written on the hearts of Man, and the Bible is only a tool for helping Man discern it. It is a tool crafted by the hands of men, and so will contain imperfections. I have unlimited faith in God, but I do not have unlimited faith in man to accurately transcribe His word. And if the latter were a condition of the former, I probably would not believe. Because of that faith, I believe that God has ensured that the Bible remains a useful tool. He also gives us reason, through the application of which we can resolve the apparent contradictions that result from poor translation or idiomatic misunderstanding. And He will be faithful to convict us of the truth if we earnestly seek Him.

As I've said before, the only thing that would seriously challenge my faith would be evidence, sufficient to overcome the testimony borne unto death by his disciples, that Christ was never crucified and raised from the dead. The world's cleverest anti-theists have failed to present me with such evidence, and I doubt that anything better for their case will ever turn up than that which has already been contrived.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tamara224
Upvote 0

.Mikha'el.

7x13=28
Christian Forums Staff
Supervisor
Supporter
May 22, 2004
33,059
6,417
39
British Columbia
✟997,521.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Let me ask this. Would you still believe in God if the Bible was proven to be edited severely? Would that make a difference of whether or not you believe in God?
It depends on what parts were edited. There is no doubt that editing has been done. I don't trust that every last word was in the oringinal manuscripts, and surely some verses were inserted later to empahsize certain points.

But as far as my faith goes, to learn that the editing took place on the side of the narrative would hurt me far more than if the editing effected the writings of Paul. or other epistles. One ofthe biggest reasons I consider myself Christian is that I trust that the Bible is a reasonably reliable historical document, and that the authors took pains to record history accurately. What theological validity can a text possibly hold if the history upon which those beliefs are based is no good?

But as far as Paul goes, it wouldn't be a big deal. I don;t give him half the authority most Christians do. He is one person, and only one person, expressing his views on concerns he has about specific communties, discussing matters unique to them. His words often contain a great deal of wisdom, but that's all the authority I give them. To grant him the same authority the words of Christ have would actually be heretical, imo. I think he'd be rolling over in his grave to know that 2000 years later, most Christians do exactly that. And the same is true of most of the othe NT epistles. So no, in short, it wouldn't bothe me one bit if he, or the episltes of Peter or the other apostles had been edited.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

liesje

Singing in the rain
Aug 30, 2008
1,714
33
✟17,066.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
But as far as Paul goes, it wouldn't be a big deal. I don;t give him half the authority most Christians do. He is one person, and only one person, expressing his views on concerns he has about specific communties, discussing matters unique to them. His words often contain a great deal of wisdom, but that's all the authority I give them. To grant him the same authority the words of Christ have would actually be heretical, imo.

Paul himself claims to speak with the authority of Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Spirit_Star

Newbie
Dec 14, 2008
382
16
USA
✟8,107.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
It would have no effect on my faith. My faith goes beyond the bible. We have many interpretations because people see things differently. We humans tend to complicated things. God is love and acceptance (acceptance does not equal agrees with) pure and simple. God loves all of his creation.
 
Upvote 0

MehGuy

A member of the less neotenous sex..
Supporter
Jul 23, 2007
55,887
10,812
Minnesota
✟1,154,929.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Eh IDK maybe? My faith was mainly lost due to finally realizing evolution was true and realizing personally that these feelings of God can come from the brain, and that I really had no reason to believe in God in the first place, and other little reasons...

But eh I guess the edit thing would be an annoying nag.. lol.
 
Upvote 0

.Mikha'el.

7x13=28
Christian Forums Staff
Supervisor
Supporter
May 22, 2004
33,059
6,417
39
British Columbia
✟997,521.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Paul himself claims to speak with the authority of Christ.
That's the problem. He is but one person expressing his own opinion, and that includes where his own views come from. If you take him at face value on that, fine. But I however would be far more inclined to take such a claim at face value if it were made by third party in a narrative context, and not by one person talking about himself, because of how strong the possibility of bias is.
 
Upvote 0

MacFall

Agorist
Nov 24, 2007
12,726
1,170
Western Pennsylvania, USA
✟25,688.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
That's the problem. He is but one person expressing his own opinion, and that includes where his own views come from. If you take him at face value on that, fine. But I however would be far more inclined to take such a claim at face value if it were made by third party in a narrative context, and not by one person talking about himself, because of how strong the possibility of bias is.

I tend to look at the Epistles (not just of Paul, but of the other Apostles as well) as letters of advice, written to specific groups of people in specific times, as well as you. However, I see no particular reason to disbelieve Paul when he says he speaks with the authority of God. If my pastor told me something, and said it in a manner suggesting that he believed he spoke with the authority of God, the question for me would be, "does it ring true in the light of what I know about God as revealed to me through Jesus Christ?" If it does, then I would have no reason to reject the idea that it was spoken with God's authority. And what Paul says does ring true to me, at least when viewed from the perspective of those to whom he was writing.
 
Upvote 0

liesje

Singing in the rain
Aug 30, 2008
1,714
33
✟17,066.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
That's the problem. He is but one person expressing his own opinion, and that includes where his own views come from. If you take him at face value on that, fine. But I however would be far more inclined to take such a claim at face value if it were made by third party in a narrative context, and not by one person talking about himself, because of how strong the possibility of bias is.

It's not just Paul saying it. He was an apostle, which in itself means one who is sent with the authority of the sender, and before Jesus left he said that he would send his spirit to enable his apostles to remember his teaching, and understand new teaching.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blank123
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

.Mikha'el.

7x13=28
Christian Forums Staff
Supervisor
Supporter
May 22, 2004
33,059
6,417
39
British Columbia
✟997,521.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
I tend to look at the Epistles (not just of Paul, but of the other Apostles as well) as letters of advice, written to specific groups of people in specific times, as well as you. However, I see no particular reason to disbelieve Paul when he says he speaks with the authority of God. If my pastor told me something, and said it in a manner suggesting that he believed he spoke with the authority of God, the question for me would be, "does it ring true in the light of what I know about God as revealed to me through Jesus Christ?" If it does, then I would have no reason to reject the idea that it was spoken with God's authority. And what Paul says does ring true to me, at least when viewed from the perspective of those to whom he was writing.
I don't disagree with you that he probably did much of the time. But I just don't think we have to take him at his word just because he says it, and that's what I'm trying to get at. We do have to evaluate what was said and see if it lines up with what we feel is correct. So we can pick and choose. But if it doesn't line up with what is sound theology from the gospels, we are free to disregad them and thus reject Paul's claim that those particular words were of divine authority. Not everything is going to be.
 
Upvote 0

Ceta_cea

I'm a Kings Daugther
Mar 1, 2011
153
19
a village near Lucerne
✟7,845.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Well I believe that there are things in the bible which are lost in translation, but that doesn't make the bible wrong. But that doesn't make me lose my faith. In my option faith is more than just reading the bible. Faith is a personal thing, a personal expierience with God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. If I wouldn't expierience God in my daily life I would probably not believe what is written in the bible. The bible is one way of God how to speak with us. It is his way to tell us how the things in his eyes are.
 
Upvote 0
T

TanteBelle

Guest
Let me ask this. Would you still believe in God if the Bible was proven to be edited severely? Would that make a difference of whether or not you believe in God?

The fact is, the Bible has been edited with some views that are purely personal. The KJV, though I believe it to be the most authentic version out there, still is rather anti-semetic in many areas. But no, it doesn't change my view on God or scripture. It only makes me seek what it was that He was trying to say all the more!

If you believe in Jesus(as in you believe that he was the son of God as he claims to be), would that affect how you view Jesus, if the Bible was proven to be edited?

Allow me to consider worst case scenario, what if the Bible was edited after-the-fact about Jesus and who he said he was, or if it was proven that Christianity flat out borrowed its concepts from another religion, do you think that would hurt your faith in him? I'm not looking to condemn you if you do, I just want to know what people honestly think here.

How can it borrow it concepts from another religion? I spose this would depend upon the 'trinity vs. non-trinity' coz then, yes, I can see how the trinity theory could be a borrowed belief.

I'm just having trouble in having faith that the god the scriptures are talking about is a real, living god. My faith has been shot to pieces, but I still believe in a creator.

There's a different type of idolatry and that is trying to put God to what you think He is or should be! A preconceived idea of God that isn't Him at all. Folks try to fashion Him to what they want him to be and they get disappointed when they find out that He's not what they wanted Him to be (usually for convenience sake!).

Its a lot of things.
Why does God reveal himself to very few people?

No, it's not that; it's just that we're too busy talking rather than shutting up and listening! :D

How can we trust in God and Jesus's character if the Bible has been edited so much?

What is it about His character that has you in doubt?

What about all the other religions that are similar to Judaism/Christianity or that have similar origins/beliefs? Zoroastrianism (the BIGGEST issue for me regarding Christianity with its origins.) and Sumerian (particularly the bit about the great flood) are some examples.

I have no idea what they are to be honest. I'll have to check that out.

Why do we have so many different interpretations of who "is saved and who isn't?" Is it by grace or by works? Do i have to be baptised or do i not? Do I have to say a certain prayer or will my faith alone compensate? Do i have to dance on my right foot or my left foot? I've caught myself thinking I'd rather just go to hell if i had to jump through so many obscure and seemingly trite hoops, because I'm bound to guess wrong anyways. Does anyone know??? Does it matter what I do or how I do it???

The prob there is not understanding what 'saved' and 'salvation' are and they are different. Sounds like you are pretty messed up! If you wish to PM me, shoot one through and ask as many questions as you can! LOL! Depending on what you're doing, yes, it does matter how you do it and if you do it. But God also knew that He was dealing with 'children/babes in faith'. That's why He's acutally got everything very specifically written down! We just refuse to abide by it and want to run our life how we want it!

Not to mention there are some historical discrepancies in the Bible. Take Joshua and the wall of Jericho for an example. According to Joshua, the Israelites marched around the wall and it came tumbling down. Archeologists are saying that the walls of Jericho were rebuilt and taken down several times before Joshua came.......about 300-1000 years before he did.

*Ahem* Pardon the sarcasm but apperently there's huge 'proof' that Yeshua married Mary Magdelene and had kids with her!!! Really now! One person says this and another says this and that and proves that this really didn't happen and blah blah blah!!! And no one can agree on anything! That's your step of faith to make.
 
Upvote 0

Tink

our God is faithful. ♥
Supporter
Aug 11, 2004
21,802
2,540
Texas
✟56,353.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
funny thing. Its actually been proven to be the most consistent ancient text we've got. Time and time again. All the edits and such that Ehrman et al... like to point to to "prove" that man has horribly messed with it over time are actually minor things like spelling issues. The overall doctrine has never been changed.

so its not something I'd ever have to worry about. God has preserved His Word :)

This plus what was said about the Word of God being in the heart of man.
 
Upvote 0

Lord Herdsetk

What were they thinking?
Dec 4, 2010
1,176
99
Alabama
✟16,810.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
As far as Jericho goes, I believe the test results vary so much depending on what method they use. If its carbon dating, well that in itself can vary a lot as it is not as accurate as its cracked up to be.

Think about it like this, the walls of Jericho have been destroyed and rebuilt several times, most likely due to the location of the place. What do I mean by the location? Well, several factors could come into play here, like natural disasters or others coming and raiding the place.

Also, with the dates varying 700 years, its could quite easily have happened around the time that the Israelites were said to have come through Jericho. 700 years is a massive time frame.

Another thing, with the Western view point, we tend to take some events from the Bible as "Yes, this happened literally, as is written, to the dotting of the i's." Jericho could have easily been destroyed by a natural disaster or enemy right before the Israelites arrived.....or as they were walking around the city from afar. Keep an open mind, the important thing is that they overtook the city with God's help.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EyesOfKohl
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Inkachu

Bursting with fruit flavor!
Jan 31, 2008
35,357
4,217
Somewhere between Rivendell and Rohan
✟62,966.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I already know the Bible is somewhat "edited" (ie King James didn't write the Bible, news flash to some lol). No it doesn't affect my belief in God whatsoever. I've had personal encounters with Him. Can't touch dat. Belief in God that is purely intellectual, and not at all spiritual...is so sad.
 
Upvote 0

LadyOfMystery

Heart of Gold
Mar 25, 2007
38,436
8,272
36
North Carolina
✟278,993.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I already know the Bible is somewhat "edited" (ie King James didn't write the Bible, news flash to some lol). No it doesn't affect my belief in God whatsoever. I've had personal encounters with Him. Can't touch dat. Belief in God that is purely intellectual, and not at all spiritual...is so sad.
This. Enough said. :)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums