Can Christians see the bible as flawed due to its nature: a HUMAN recording?

[Zylka]

Not necessarily flawed to the point of it being irrelevant and inferior to verbal legend... but can Christians logically admit to inconsistencies, since the bible is not God's direct voice? How did the idea come about, for instance - that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John etc. were credible in perfection of description of the events?

I always hear that the bible is "God's word" - but as it was described and physically created through human medium, can imperfections not be expected?

[Nubclear]

Re: Can Christians see the bible as flawed due to its nature: a HUMAN recording?

[BeBMan]

Re: Can Christians see the bible as flawed due to its nature: a HUMAN recording?

[Paul Hanson]

I would probably imagine that this is how some Christians would account for the contradictions in the Bible.

[Ben Kenobi]

but can Christians logically admit to inconsistencies, since the bible is not God's direct voice?

Good question. Too tired to answer properly tonight, and I have an early morning tomorrow.

G'night all.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

The band Coil use a recording technique called "Worship the glitch". In other words, if the sound is affected by some equipment behave strangely, the workings of chance should be respected and the machinery should be considered as making a valid artistic contribution in it's own right.

Somehow that concept seems to fit here, but it might only make sense to me.

[Lonestar]

I consider it as such.

[Q Classic]

as far as i understand it, we catholics are supposed to take it figuratively and not literally; this, i assume, takes care of the contradictions?

i'm kinda fuzzy on that bit.

[Apocalypse]

Yes, humans are flawed. The meaning is divine though since it was inspired by the Holy Spirit. That's an idea anyway.

[Sava]

Good post Zylka

[Kuciwalker]

Re: Can Christians see the bible as flawed due to its nature: a HUMAN recording?

Unfortunately, they usually can't

[JCG]

Depends on the specific kind of Christian...But in general, the more they admit it, the more likely it is that they're somewhat close to abandoning their faith.

[MrFun]

The Bible was written by people who recorded what they believed would be God's demands and expectations.

Not to mention that it becomes even more complicated due to the fact that it took hundreds of years of years for the Bible to be completed, by numerous people living in different, distant regions in different time periods.

[Shi Huangdi]

Re: Can Christians see the bible as flawed due to its nature: a HUMAN recording?

Originally posted by Zylka
Not necessarily flawed to the point of it being irrelevant and inferior to verbal legend... but can Christians logically admit to inconsistencies, since the bible is not God's direct voice? How did the idea come about, for instance - that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John etc. were credible in perfection of description of the events?

I always hear that the bible is "God's word" - but as it was described and physically created through human medium, can imperfections not be expected?

Yes, of course. The writers of the bible were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write it down, but that doesn't mean they got it perfectly. Of course- the 4 you mentioned: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John I think we should give a little more importance too and credibility too since they try to give a more historical outlook on Jesus's life, relating to us what Jesus said- as say opposed to the parts of the New Testament about the works of the apostles and their preachings.

[Dis]

of course, I've always known that the bible was written by man- even if it was supposedly dictated to by god. Inconsistencies are inevitable.