Criteria for God's Word

Tree of Life said:

What would you propose are critera for determining whether something is a word from God?

Click to expand...

First, you'd have to define God.

cvanwey said:

Please note the take-away from this conversation... Which is to say... If such a God does exist, He seems fine with issuing and ordering direct contradiction to His people. If such a God does exist, are you okay with this synopsis?



I did no such thing. I'm sure you do agree suffering still exists, which then raises question as to why you would decide to use such a defense in the first place?

According to the Bible, times will be 'jacked-up' until God/Jesus returns to end suffering entirely. Your given rationalization does not match with the situation at hand.

Please note what you stated:

"I think what are understood as excessive aspects of God in the Old Testament are people in ancient times comprehending God while living in a harsh world."

If you and I agree the world is harsh always, then your prior given argument looks to loose credibility.



Yet another affirmation of yours, to demonstrate my point. If God knows the world is harsh, then and now, then He offers all would-be followers a 'light at the end of the tunnel'.



I did no such thing. I'm pointing out we have an apparent direct conflict. God tells His readers/followers to treat others as you would treat yourself - (the golden rule). But then also tells His readers/followers, in other places, it is okay to own other humans as property for life. And like I already stated, Leviticus 19 already discloses the golden rule twice.

Can you explain the apparent conflict between the golden rule while <also> telling your readers it's okay to own others as life time property?



Yes I do. But, like I've been saying, if God orders one to kill, it is not murder, right? If God sanctions a law to destroy all disobedient humans, it is no longer murder, right? If God tells you to take something or someone, it is not deemed theft, right?



My point is we have contradiction within such pages. Does it not allow for lifetime ownership and the beating of humans?

I could read the Bible, from cover to cover, 12 times, but those passages will remain.



Again, the golden rule was mentioned in the OT. But if you want to stay with the NT exclusively, this is still fine.

Jesus does not abolish owning other humans as property, in this sermon. This leads the way for many to perpetually rationalize permanent allowances in further doing so; without it being considered 'bad' by God. This also conflicts with the re-issued golden rule in the NT. Can you explain?

Click to expand...

cvanwey said:

Please note the take-away from this conversation... Which is to say... If such a God does exist, He seems fine with issuing and ordering direct contradiction to His people. If such a God does exist, are you okay with this synopsis?



I did no such thing. I'm sure you do agree suffering still exists, which then raises question as to why you would decide to use such a defense in the first place?

According to the Bible, times will be 'jacked-up' until God/Jesus returns to end suffering entirely. Your given rationalization does not match with the situation at hand.

Please note what you stated:

"I think what are understood as excessive aspects of God in the Old Testament are people in ancient times comprehending God while living in a harsh world."

If you and I agree the world is harsh always, then your prior given argument looks to loose credibility.



Yet another affirmation of yours, to demonstrate my point. If God knows the world is harsh, then and now, then He offers all would-be followers a 'light at the end of the tunnel'.



I did no such thing. I'm pointing out we have an apparent direct conflict. God tells His readers/followers to treat others as you would treat yourself - (the golden rule). But then also tells His readers/followers, in other places, it is okay to own other humans as property for life. And like I already stated, Leviticus 19 already discloses the golden rule twice.

Can you explain the apparent conflict between the golden rule while <also> telling your readers it's okay to own others as life time property?



Yes I do. But, like I've been saying, if God orders one to kill, it is not murder, right? If God sanctions a law to destroy all disobedient humans, it is no longer murder, right? If God tells you to take something or someone, it is not deemed theft, right?



My point is we have contradiction within such pages. Does it not allow for lifetime ownership and the beating of humans?

I could read the Bible, from cover to cover, 12 times, but those passages will remain.



Again, the golden rule was mentioned in the OT. But if you want to stay with the NT exclusively, this is still fine.

Jesus does not abolish owning other humans as property, in this sermon. This leads the way for many to perpetually rationalize permanent allowances in further doing so; without it being considered 'bad' by God. This also conflicts with the re-issued golden rule in the NT. Can you explain?

Click to expand...

What you do not understand is the formation of the Christian Church & it’s community. Many of us cannot understand how some of the OT accounts do fit in with the Gospel preaching ( for ex. Joshua 6) whereas others ( for ex. Isaiah 53 prophecies of the Lord) & ( for ex. Isaiah 58 expresses much of the living Gospel).

It is the Virgin birth, the Lord’s Gospel preached, His Cross, resurrection, & ascension that have been our focus for 2,000 years. “The light at end of the tunnel” as you quoted the old expression.

The Gospel is clearly anti slavery in its expression but the Lord came as our savior not as a social emancipator. Many early Christians were slaves ( Onesimus per Philemon 1 ) as many people then were slaves.

The surviving records of early Christian community are centered on the keeping of the Lord’s commandments, alms giving, prayer, & fasting ( Matthew 6:1-18). Still, the moral code of the 10 commandments etc. are to be lived out passively. At most, any concept of God “killing” anyone is to keep us from doing so ( for ex. Luke 9:51-56) or killing our children etc. for superstition ( Genesis 22).

An early surviving record of Christian community expression is found in the short manual called: The Didache ( ca. 100 AD): Didache

one translation: Didache. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (translation Roberts-Donaldson).

Tree of Life said:

If this were the case, why would God communicate verbally with us?

Click to expand...

Huh? Where did "verbally" come from? Originally you said "God's words or communication" so I don't see why we're assuming anything was done verbally. If God wants us to act a certain way, but doesn't want us to feel coerced, he would communicate through channels that don't look like God.

I'll assume God exists and he wants to communicate something. I do not assume that communication is verbal, nor do I assume that communication is two-way. You're already trying to smuggle stuff in that isn't in the OP.

Tree of Life said:

“Verbally” comes from “word”.

Click to expand...

Then you shouldn't have said "or". "words or communication"

But there you go. You lost this point so you're ignoring the rest of my post. Catcha on the flip side!

Lukaris said:

What you do not understand is the formation of the Christian Church & it’s community. Many of us cannot understand how some of the OT accounts do fit in with the Gospel preaching ( for ex. Joshua 6) whereas others ( for ex. Isaiah 53 prophecies of the Lord) & ( for ex. Isaiah 58 expresses much of the living Gospel).

Click to expand...

The 'golden rule' does not fit, if other areas of the the Bible also state it is okay to own other humans as property for life. Period.

If the Bible never mentioned slavery, or, if the Bible said anywhere, 'thou shall not own other humans as property', then you might have some sort of a case. But to 'haphazardly' stating 'I do not understand', is pure hogwash

Lukaris said:

It is the Virgin birth, the Lord’s Gospel preached, His Cross, resurrection, & ascension that have been our focus for 2,000 years. “The light at end of the tunnel” as you quoted the old expression.

Click to expand...

Here lies the crux of the matter, it seems. How do we know the Bible IS the Word of God? Do you assert, and then justify by way of circular logic? Or, can you provide some sort of actual evidence that such events DID actually take place, as written? If you can provide some, then maybe we could take the Bible's claims at 'face value', rather than for me to currently be mighty skeptical.

As it stands, the inconsistencies in His message(s), mentioned above, raises additional pause; aside from your now given claims of a 'virgin birth' and a 'resurrection.'

Lukaris said:

The Gospel is clearly anti slavery in its expression

Click to expand...

Your assertion is patently false. Whomever wrote the pages of the Bible, expresses in many places, the allowance to slavery practices. If God was anti slavery, He would have surely said so. Or better yet, would not have mentioned the topic of slavery at all. -- For which you could then possibly argue the Bible is anti slavery.

Lukaris said:

The surviving records of early Christian community are centered on the keeping of the Lord’s commandments, alms giving, prayer, & fasting ( Matthew 6:1-18). Still, the moral code of the 10 commandments etc. are to be lived out passively. At most, any concept of God “killing” anyone is to keep us from doing so ( for ex. Luke 9:51-56) or killing our children etc. for superstition ( Genesis 22).

An early surviving record of Christian community expression is found in the short manual called: The Didache ( ca. 100 AD): Didache

one translation: Didache. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (translation Roberts-Donaldson).

Click to expand...

I will ask for at least a third time now.

It is not considered murder if God orders it, right? It is only justified killing.

God has ordered some to kill others. God also sanctions death, by the way of humans hands to kill other humans, whom commit disobedience in God's said law(s).

If God orders the action of death; it's 'justified killing', not murder, right?

cvanwey said:

The 'golden rule' does not fit, if other areas of the the Bible also state it is okay to own other humans as property for life. Period.

If the Bible never mentioned slavery, or, if the Bible said anywhere, 'thou shall not own other humans as property', then you might have some sort of a case. But to 'haphazardly' stating 'I do not understand', is pure hogwash



Here lies the crux of the matter, it seems. How do we know the Bible IS the Word of God? Do you assert, and then justify by way of circular logic? Or, can you provide some sort of actual evidence that such events DID actually take place, as written? If you can provide some, then maybe we could take the Bible's claims at 'face value', rather than for me to currently be mighty skeptical.

As it stands, the inconsistencies in His message(s), mentioned above, raises additional pause; aside from your now given claims of a 'virgin birth' and a 'resurrection.'



Your assertion is patently false. Whomever wrote the pages of the Bible, expresses in many places, the allowance to slavery practices. If God was anti slavery, He would have surely said so. Or better yet, would not have mentioned the topic of slavery at all. -- For which you could then possibly argue the Bible is anti slavery.



I will ask for at least a third time now.

It is not considered murder if God orders it, right? It is only justified killing.

God has ordered some to kill others. God also sanctions death, by the way of humans hands to kill other humans, whom commit disobedience in God's said law(s).

If God orders the action of death; it's 'justified killing', not murder, right?

Click to expand...

I will reply further later; on your last point, no, I do not believe God justifies murder. Man is the author of this as Cain killed Abel ( Genesis 4) & still, God said anyone killing Abel would increase 7 times ( Genesis 4:15). God sets the guidelines for us as our conscience guides our spontaneity. Despite the consequences given by the mark of Cain, depravity increased ( Genesis 6). After the flood, God tried to establish a new earth with Noah ( Genesis 8:20-22, Genesis 9) telling not to kill ( Genesis 9:6). Despite seeming obscure, the laws of Noah are actually the natural law in which we are accountable ( Romans 2). Nothing worked though, people were doing human sacrifice ( & undoubtedly before the flood, Ecclesiastes 1:9). God taught Abraham that this was wrong in the lesson of Isaac ( Genesis 22).

In Ecclesiastes 3, Solomon comes to realize the actions of man “under heaven” whether in obedience or in rebellion to God’s will. I do not believe God ordered any one to kill but in our suffering & conflicts we do whether we believe God is with us or not. I also believe many wise “skeptics” have wished ill will to others. I know a schmuck like myself has harbored ill will to others but God sent His only Son asking us to cooperate as best we can so we can be saved ( John 3:16-21).

Lukaris said:

I will reply further later; on your last point, no, I do not believe God justifies murder. Man is the author of this as Cain killed Abel ( Genesis 4) & still, God said anyone killing Abel would increase 7 times ( Genesis 4:15). God sets the guidelines for us as our conscience guides our spontaneity. Despite the consequences given by the mark of Cain, depravity increased ( Genesis 6). After the flood, God tried to establish a new earth with Noah ( Genesis 8:20-22, Genesis 9) telling not to kill ( Genesis 9:6). Despite seeming obscure, the laws of Noah are actually the natural law in which we are accountable ( Romans 2). Nothing worked though, people were doing human sacrifice ( & undoubtedly before the flood, Ecclesiastes 1:9). God taught Abraham that this was wrong in the lesson of Isaac ( Genesis 22).

In Ecclesiastes 3, Solomon comes to realize the actions of man “under heaven” whether in obedience or in rebellion to God’s will. I do not believe God ordered any one to kill but in our suffering & conflicts we do whether we believe God is with us or not. I also believe many wise “skeptics” have wished ill will to others. I know a schmuck like myself has harbored ill will to others but God sent His only Son asking us to cooperate as best we can so we can be saved ( John 3:16-21).

Click to expand...

Little nitpick first, I definitely recall and was right, that it was Cain who God said no one should kill or they're given vengeance sevenfold. Seems a bit redundant to bring up Abel when at this point he was already dead and Cain was going wherever he did to find his magical wife (that would logically have to be either his sister or a demon/spirit entity)

A natural law doesn't require a lawgiver, that's the problem in the idea that God is somehow necessary for laws to make sense in their applicability and assessment for our actions. If I kill someone, it kind of stands to basic reason I open myself up to be killed, especially if my killing was unnecessary and unjustified. If, on the other hand, I killed someone in self defense or protecting the life of another, 1) I'm still going to have to live with that, it is not just going to go away in my mind, 2) It may still be the case someone is going to be angry and then try to kill me out of that vengeance, which is human fallibility in itself, irrespective of claims about being "fallen" or such.

Are we really going the line of argument that if I wish ill upon others, it is as if I have murdered them "in my heart"? That's thought-crime and it's nonsense in terms of anything more than the idea of, maybe virtue ethics in that you should strive to edify yourself and not have those thoughts or certainly not let them pervade your behavior

Also, pretty sure God did command killing, particularly in the OT to the Israelites when they took back the Promised Land. Or does that not count as ordered killing even though the justification I hear often is that they were effectively enemies of God's people that "deserved it"?

muichimotsu said:

Little nitpick first, I definitely recall and was right, that it was Cain who God said no one should kill or they're given vengeance sevenfold. Seems a bit redundant to bring up Abel when at this point he was already dead and Cain was going wherever he did to find his magical wife (that would logically have to be either his sister or a demon/spirit entity)

A natural law doesn't require a lawgiver, that's the problem in the idea that God is somehow necessary for laws to make sense in their applicability and assessment for our actions. If I kill someone, it kind of stands to basic reason I open myself up to be killed, especially if my killing was unnecessary and unjustified. If, on the other hand, I killed someone in self defense or protecting the life of another, 1) I'm still going to have to live with that, it is not just going to go away in my mind, 2) It may still be the case someone is going to be angry and then try to kill me out of that vengeance, which is human fallibility in itself, irrespective of claims about being "fallen" or such.

Are we really going the line of argument that if I wish ill upon others, it is as if I have murdered them "in my heart"? That's thought-crime and it's nonsense in terms of anything more than the idea of, maybe virtue ethics in that you should strive to edify yourself and not have those thoughts or certainly not let them pervade your behavior

Also, pretty sure God did command killing, particularly in the OT to the Israelites when they took back the Promised Land. Or does that not count as ordered killing even though the justification I hear often is that they were effectively enemies of God's people that "deserved it"?

Click to expand...

You and another person keep insisting that I must believe that God ordered the ancient Israelites to kill ( esp. like Joshua 6 for ex.). I believe in their struggles for survival that is what they believed and the same mistakes have been repeated by Christians ( & other religions, secularists like nazis, communists etc.).

I believe Solomon came to the realization that God has not ordered people to kill others & that life & death etc. are just circumstances “under heaven” ( Ecclesiastes 3). I believe Jesus Christ affirms this ( Luke 9:51-56), tells us not to murder ( Matthew 19:16-19 etc.) & this a great part of the meaning of God’s will on earth as in heaven ( Lord’s Prayer per Matthew 6:9-13). The prophet Ezekiel ( for ex.) testifies that all souls belong to God & wants their repentance ( Ezekiel 18:9-14 ). Despite certain misery he found in life ( Ecclesiastes 4), Solomon concludes that we need to keep the commandments ( Ecclesiastes 12:13-14).

Jesus Christ took everything to the cross including any misconceptions about God ( Father, Son, & Holy Spirit). I pointed out a clear example to another poster that early Christian community was founded on Christ’s cross & following God’s commandments passively ( for ex. the Didache, ca. 100 AD, see: Didache ). The Lord summarized hundreds of pages of scripture in 2 basic commandments (love God & neighbor- Matthew 22:36-40 etc., golden rule ( Matthew 7:12, Matthew 7:1-12) & that is reflected in the Didache that I have linked. Didache

I am just trying to convey to the original inquirer the basic Christian criteria for God’s word. I could see modern examples where people could be so oppressed & looking for some divine spark in their struggle to live ( for ex. in the 1943 Jewish Warsaw fight, Joshua 6 for ex. would probably give a sustaining spirit).

@Lukaris, would say the Bible is the word of God? If so, what do you mean when you say it?

Tinker Grey said:

@Lukaris, would say the Bible is the word of God? If so, what do you mean when you say it?

Click to expand...

Yes, the Lord says so ( for ex.):

Matthew 22:36-40

Matthew 7:12, Matthew 7:1-12

Luke 24:44-45

Notice, love of God & neighbor is which the law & prophets depend, the golden rule ( to treat each other accordingly) is the way of the law & prophets, the Lord says the Bible spoke of Him (Luke 24:44-45).

This is my understanding as a conflicted person; I am not trying to sound self righteous.

Lukaris said:

Yes, the Lord says so ( for ex.):

Click to expand...

Yes, but what does that mean?

If the OT is the word of God and the OT says God ordered a massacre, the doesn't that imply that that is the intended meaning?

If not, in what sense is the OT the word of God?

You and another person keep insisting that I must believe that God ordered the ancient Israelites to kill ( esp. like Joshua 6 for ex.). I believe in their struggles for survival that is what they believed and the same mistakes have been repeated by Christians ( & other religions, secularists like nazis, communists etc.).

Click to expand...

So their belief is essentially irrelevant and the same can be applied to your ideas in regards to morality as "commanded" by God, correct? If you're just going to say "Well, they believed God told them," and then say that recuses the God you believe in, you're just moving the goalposts to say your God wouldn't do that, which is a no true Scotsman fallacy, unless you 1) demonstrate your God is something remotely testable and not just inference based on human apophenia and 2) after that, show that your standard applies consistently to that God as a predictive model

I believe Solomon came to the realization that God has not ordered people to kill others & that life & death etc. are just circumstances “under heaven” ( Ecclesiastes 3). I believe Jesus Christ affirms this ( Luke 9:51-56), tells us not to murder ( Matthew 19:16-19 etc.) & this a great part of the meaning of God’s will on earth as in heaven ( Lord’s Prayer per Matthew 6:9-13). The prophet Ezekiel ( for ex.) testifies that all souls belong to God & wants their repentance ( Ezekiel 18:9-14 ). Despite certain misery he found in life ( Ecclesiastes 4), Solomon concludes that we need to keep the commandments ( Ecclesiastes 12:13-14).

Click to expand...

Sounds like Solomon either concluded maltheism or outright nihilism if he just concluded that people's horrible actions against other humans was just "nature". That's also a fallacy of appealing to nature, because what is natural is not the same as what is good or evil, or even of a moral quality

Why should I regard the commandments as authoritative merely because someone was personally convinced in the bronze age or prior where the idea of moral philosophy was still, I'd hazard, in its infancy?

Jesus Christ took everything to the cross including any misconceptions about God ( Father, Son, & Holy Spirit). I pointed out a clear example to another poster that early Christian community was founded on Christ’s cross & following God’s commandments passively ( for ex. the Didache, ca. 100 AD, see: Didache ). The Lord summarized hundreds of pages of scripture in 2 basic commandments (love God & neighbor- Matthew 22:36-40 etc., golden rule ( Matthew 7:12, Matthew 7:1-12) & that is reflected in the Didache that I have linked. Didache

Click to expand...

And my question remains: why should I take those ideas as any more significant than being able to derive the latter principle without reference to the former? God is not necessary, far as I'm concerned, in making moral assessments, and you're basically just making a circular argument to say that God must be required for moral assessments to make sense by appealing to a book that already agrees God exists

I am just trying to convey to the original inquirer the basic Christian criteria for God’s word. I could see modern examples where people could be so oppressed & looking for some divine spark in their struggle to live ( for ex. in the 1943 Jewish Warsaw fight, Joshua 6 for ex. would probably give a sustaining spirit).

Click to expand...

So how is the Christian criteria better and is it even something that is able to be competed with by other monotheistic religions at all? If it's the latter, then it's tautological to say, "Here's our standard and it's the best," when there isn't really a comparable standard or belief system that holds to that.

I'm not sure if Judaism necessarily has the same idea about divine revelation and even Islam as another counterexample might be contentious, given that both Islam and Judaism thoroughly reject the idea of God having a son in the manner Christians regard, because of problems with dividing divine power, etc.

But for the sake of argument, let's say the Abrahamic faiths all believe in the idea of God's word in the base sense of that God revealing things and it is inspired and written down (or passed down orally and eventually written down, which is a whole random game of telephone). How are we to conclude Christianity's standard for verifying something is God's word any better?

Lukaris said:

I will reply further later;

Click to expand...

Please do!

Lukaris said:

on your last point, no, I do not believe God justifies murder. Man is the author of this as Cain killed Abel ( Genesis 4) & still, God said anyone killing Abel would increase 7 times ( Genesis 4:15). God sets the guidelines for us as our conscience guides our spontaneity. Despite the consequences given by the mark of Cain, depravity increased ( Genesis 6). After the flood, God tried to establish a new earth with Noah ( Genesis 8:20-22, Genesis 9) telling not to kill ( Genesis 9:6). Despite seeming obscure, the laws of Noah are actually the natural law in which we are accountable ( Romans 2). Nothing worked though, people were doing human sacrifice ( & undoubtedly before the flood, Ecclesiastes 1:9). God taught Abraham that this was wrong in the lesson of Isaac ( Genesis 22).

In Ecclesiastes 3, Solomon comes to realize the actions of man “under heaven” whether in obedience or in rebellion to God’s will. I do not believe God ordered any one to kill but in our suffering & conflicts we do whether we believe God is with us or not. I also believe many wise “skeptics” have wished ill will to others. I know a schmuck like myself has harbored ill will to others but God sent His only Son asking us to cooperate as best we can so we can be saved ( John 3:16-21).

Click to expand...

Your response here is a little confusing. Are you inferring that God would never order some humans to kill other humans? He clearly looks to do so in the Bible. Unless you wish to argue those Verses were not sanctioned by God?.?.?.?.? Please clarify?

Furthermore, you did not address my direct observation. If God orders to kill, it is never considered murder, right? Because any direct order from God would always be lawful, right?

I have been a little busy & will try to post more later. Still, I have provided the pattern of the commandments as they have unfolded through scripture & explained how the Lord basically summarized the entire law & prophets as the heart of His Gospel. I also provided evidence of this pattern that was formed in the early Christian community in an early post apostolic document called the Didache ( if anyone has checked it).

I have said that I do not believe God ordered people to kill and that it is a human misunderstanding. Also, I said I believe the Lord took these misunderstandings ( as with everything else) to the Cross. Christ said these scriptures are His word ( I take His word for it, that’s it).

Lukaris said:

I have been a little busy & will try to post more later. Still, I have provided the pattern of the commandments as they have unfolded through scripture & explained how the Lord basically summarized the entire law & prophets as the heart of His Gospel. I also provided evidence of this pattern that was formed in the early Christian community in an early post apostolic document called the Didache ( if anyone has checked it).

I have said that I do not believe God ordered people to kill and that it is a human misunderstanding. Also, I said I believe the Lord took these misunderstandings ( as with everything else) to the Cross. Christ said these scriptures are His word ( I take His word for it, that’s it).

Click to expand...

How are you able to discern which commands from God were of human misunderstanding?

Is it simply if you do not agree with the command? Other?

Tree of Life said:

So far my five criteria for God's word:

1. It should claim to be a word from God.
2. It should be consistent with itself.
3. It should be consistent with what we know through reason.
4. It should provide information otherwise unattainable through reason.
5. It should be universally accessible.

Click to expand...

1. Many claim this...
2. Then in your direct case, you might want to think about discounting the claim for which you currently believe, as we have the 'golden rule' verses the condoning of owning other humans.
3. Same as #2.
4. Does it though?
5. Many are...

On an additional note... Isn't it possible for humans to contrive/write/create text, on their own, which appears consistent? How does consistency relate to God's Word?