/lit/ - Literature

Which errors?

>>20577130
"divine inspiration" implies the intercession of fallible humans, no?

>>20577172
The Book of Revelation is often called out for containing grammatical mistakes; it's likely that the author spoke Greek as a second language. Some are mentioned here: https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/stewart_don/faq/bible-difficulties/question21-are-there-grammatical-errors-in-scripture.cfm (though the author copes with "maybe it's wrong on purpose").

>>20577207
Maybe, but many Christians believe the Bible is perfect.

>>20577130
>communists would rather worship a black criminal who robbed a gas station with a banana

>>20577130
Grammar than truth are greater? Hmmm

>>20577223
if someone successfully robbed a gas station armed with only a banana, it would be a greater miracle than any in the new testament

>>20577222
Interesting. But the faults in language are simply human, doesn't mean that the message itself is not divinely inspired or truthful. If God could get a message across through someone whose language isn't great but is serviceable, there's no necessity to miraculously improve his Greek.
It's "divinely inspired", not "divinely written".
Not even a theist btw, it's just a weak argument.

>>20577130
>divinely inspired vs literal Word of God
Christcuckbros...

>God makes grammatical errors
Your grammar is in error

>>20577394
This is the right answer. Also explained by Berkeley in Alciphron.

>>20577130
God can't write for himself so various people throughout the ages wrote his teachings down as best as they knew how

>>20577702
>God is omnipotent
>God can't write for himself

Kek

>>20578528
this is just
>why doesn't god fight the devil 1v1 like batman vs superman
2007 youtube atheism

>>20577222
Well I study catholic theology and nobody here claims that the bible is perfect. It's basically consensus that Greek is John of Patmos' second language. More points to you as well since most geneologies in the bible contradict each other. There's a multitude of problems and errors in the bible, only the most fundamentalist christians would deny this.

I don't see the problem with divinely inspired. If you wanna be atheist here okay. Jung says that we must at least admit that God exists in the minds of men. Therefore you can see divinely inspired as inspired by their image, their cognition of what they call God. You should read some William James if the concept of inspiration is still confusing to you.

Inspired is not the same as dictated or typed by God Himself

>>20577130
Not literature you fucking retard

>>20579251
It's literature you fucking retard

>>20577223
What the fuck are you talking about

>>20577130
>grammatical errors
Compared to classical Greek? Maybe, but it's an unfair comparison because the language had changed. Until very recently he had no idea of the grammar used by normal people and all this changed with the discovery of Egyptian papyri. Until all papyri have been edited and studied, you don't what the grammar of Hellenistic koine was like.

>>20579371
>you don't what
*know

>>20577130
Brah

>>20578528
>he still doesn't understand God's nature
ngmi moment
>>20578683
this

>>20577130
>the bible isnt written in modern english
whaat??

>>20577394
>But the faults in language are simply human, doesn't mean that the message itself is not divinely inspired or truthful.
Why should we assume it's divinely inspired at all if it's not above a mundane human standard?

>>20579504
Because as I've just said in the post you reply to, "divinely inspired" bears no necessary relation to minor technical mistakes that arise in human writing. God inspired a human, the human wrote. The idea that the Bible is divinely inspired is not based on its formal perfection, in fact you can see an actual Christian theologian here >>20579239 who points out even more problems than just grammatical ones. The divinity and truthfulness of the text is argued through different means.

we are not Muslims who believe that every book in the Bible was written on a heavenly tablet by God before all creation - we believe that God inspired human authors to write the truths fundamental for salvation, embracing all of their humanity (like their cultural context, language quirks, etc). Think of the Psalmist Asaph writing of God as warring against a primordial serpent in Psalm 74. This is clearly influenced by ANE mythology regarding figures like Ba'al and Marduk, but this imagery is being utilized by the author's psyche to speak in an analogical sense of the aspects of God.
"It was you who split open the sea by your power;
you broke the heads of the monster in the waters.
It was you who crushed the heads of Leviathan
and gave it as food to the creatures of the desert." (Ps. 74:13-15)

So, properly understood, one would expect idiosyncrasies in the Biblical texts according to the cultural experiences of their author. Read Dei Verbum and Divino Afflante Spiritu for more info

>>20578683
Holy cope

I like it how Goliath gets killed twice. First by David, then by some random dude.
Also Saul doesn't recognize who David is even after David supposedly lives in his court as his personal musician.
Then we have Judah moving back to Canaan from Egypt during the time of the exodus.
Speaking of the exodus, did you know God tried killing Moses?
By the way, Moses and Joshua, who were supposedly contemporaries, were 4 and 11 generations removed from Jacob (respectively). That'd be like Queen Elizabeth being contemporary with king James I of England. Oh, and Moses's wife's name inexplicitly changes halfway through the story.
Then we have 3 different sets of Ten Commandments, conflicting accounts of the flood story, references to camels hundreds of years before they were domesticated and of course a gorillion different ways in which the Gospels disagree with each other on even basic facts about Jesus's life.

Truly, divinely inspired.

>>20581549
>That'd be like Queen Elizabeth being contemporary with king James I of England.
They were contemporary, though. James succeeded Elizabeth.

>>20577130
It was widely recognized as lacking in literary style and occasionally bizarre syntax by ancient fathers who read Greek naturally, and in pre-vulgate Latin versions.
Only early (pre 1700) protestants had this Muslim attitude (the "uncreated" Quran) towards the making of the Bible in order to boost the sola scriptura nonsense. I recall the image of the bible being written by the finger of God on a tablet in heaven at the start of creation is found in one of the gnostic texts though, but have forgotten which.

>>20577223
take your meds. nobody is talking about communism here

>>20577659
>what is divine intellect

>>20579239
>Jung says that we must at least admit that God exists in the minds of men.
holy lol that's some huge cope . also Jung was and theist retard who was completely lost in his life lol

>>20581462
>. The idea that the Bible is divinely inspired is not based on its formal perfection,
that's right, it s divinely inspired because ''some humans says so'' woah

I shit on a bible, god damned stone age fairy crap

>>20577130
The apostles weren’t writers and also didn’t spoke Greek as it primary language.

>>20581650
He probably meant Elizabeth the Second, not the Virgin. Inadvertently leaving a textual mistake while criticizing textual mistakes in the Bible.

>>20582856
If God doesn't live in the minds of men then why has every civilization of note in the history of mankind been theistic? How could you possibly deny that, retard

>>20577130
>god gives message
>message is received, it's morals and instructions are obvious.
>.... HOLD ON GOD WAIT A MINUTE DOWN HERE WE USE A DIFFERENT TENSE IN THIS SENTENCE!!!

>>20582856
>cope
>retard
Buzzwords with no argument. I could be standing at a vending machine pressing buttons to get these responses