Hello Amethyst Snow Angel . Thank you for entering this month's contest.

FORUM

Grill a Christian  (13+) Is Donald Trump evil? #2327636 by LightinMind

As the official Judge of this contest, I have the following comments to offer for "Can the Bible be Trusted?" 

Did you answer the question?

You did not really answer with a yes or no but you did answer the question. You expressed skeptical uncertainty as to whether the historical or theological veracity of scripture could be verified. You were troubled by various OT stories. But overall you believe that the Bible is superior to the alternatives as an archetypal foundation for civilization and for moral reasons and therefore you endorsed it.

Use of quotes, proof-texting or AI - could I hear your voice?

AI seems very unlikely in this case as it reads more like a personal reflection on one woman's journey and experience with the Bible. The account is jock a block full of personal anecdotes. The various interpretative models you chose were also quite marginal and lacked the traction of most of the major religious or even atheist critiques of scriptural authority but also seemed like distinctively personal choices.

How consistent was your argument?

The main inconsistency in your argument is that you maintain a tension between skepticism and acceptance throughout the text. You appear to question scriptures divine or historical authenticity but accept it as having superior worth to the alternatives nonetheless.

My thoughts on the substance of what you said

Your argument echoed that in a book I read recently by Jordan Petersen, "We who wrestle with God." He's a psychologist who recognizes the immense resonance of the scriptural stories with the deepest psychological archetypes of the most successful civilization on the planet, that of the Western world. He does not really care, like you, about theological or historical authenticity but rather about the ways in which scripture is psychologically transformative and the best possible source of stories on which to build a life. The argument goes, these are the kinds of stories that change peoples lives so who cares if they are actually true in any literal-historical sense. I watched a youtube of Jordan Petersen debating with Richard Dawkins on precisely this matter. Petersen drove Dawkins mad with this view but Dawkins did not really have an answer for it. Dawkins has devoted his life to establishing that the Bible does not meet a certain kind of evidential standard and Petersen effectively said he had wasted his time as the stories were transformative in a way that Dawkins abstract conclusions and science never could be. I wonder how many Christians have also repeated the formulas of the party line without letting the stories really sink in and effect actual change in their lives. It is a valuable question at any rate.

That said your argument would not convince me. Without God we are living in a nihilistic world where even the best stories ultimately do not matter. Without the scandal of particularity, the fact that God actually interacts with human history I wonder how relevant the stories would be to us.

Your essay also took your readers on a fascinating tour of various bible conspiracy theories which it seems you passed through and out the other side to the sunlit uplands of saner perspectives:

1) Joseph Atwill's Roman Empire & Jewish elites collaborative effort, creating Christianity to pacify rebellious Jews. His theory echoed Marxist sentiments that religion was the opium to the people to dull their senses to their alienation from the means of production and basic exploitation. The theory lacks any historical evidence, is purely speculative, completely overestimates the intelligence of the elites involved and is actually a misreading of the radically transformative nature of the gospels vis a vis slaves, people of different races and women for example. Also it was spectacularly unsuccessful if true.

2) The Essenes invented Christianity. Again this is unlikely because of the discontinuity between the messaging of both groups, because of the marginal nature of this sect and also because it fails to focus on the unique Divine mission of Jesus which is the real reason for Christianity's formation and rise and its continued expansion today, long after this sects extinction.

3) Separating Paul and the Apostles. Quite simply Paul and the apostles/gospels/Acts don't contradict each other as anyone who actually read them should be able to discern. I just get impatient with people who use this argument and especially when they cannot provide any credible examples of it. I forget who said it but the best dismissal of this kind of liberal claptrap I ever heard was by a guy dismissing the liberal version of the historical Jesus. He said it was like looking down a deep well to see a liberal face smiling back up at you.

You find various violent stories in the OT troubling, like the genocide of the Canaanites by Joshua at the command of God. If you believe God is good and just then these people got what was coming to them. If on the other hand your perspective is filtered by the news and a despair at how many Palestinian human shields have died in Gaza since the Hamas attack on a more secular Zionist Israel you might face more of a moral quandary. The NT talks more about mercy than judgment and this is clearly the better way but to suggest that God did not know what He was doing when he sent the flood, the plagues on Egypt, ordered a genocide or wiped out an army or two seems a little distrusting of the Almighty and the Divine prerogative. Also these proclamations of distrust in God's goodness comes from a shaky pulpit in the modern age.

The Muslim view of Bible corruption lacks an audit trail and any texts that directly support the possibility of the later Quran. We have the manuscripts to show a consistency of messaging while they do not have the same for the Quran, having destroyed most other copies, is the simple answer.

The church has not suppressed secret teachings, that perspective is just a by product of the Gnostics and the basis of various popular but theologically shallow and deceptive novels by Dan Brown. Jesus said what he had to say in public in the marketplace and in the light and that is why they executed him for it.

Lot's unmarried and childless daughters slept with him by the way rather than vice versa. They got him stinking drunk first. Nothing good came from these liaisons. The Bible is not saying go and do likewise it is being honest about a fallen world in which total depravity seems all too obvious.

The New Testament Book of Hebrews makes a lot of sense of the OT sacrifice system which was fulfilled in Christ. In a sense we needed the physical example to show us the more important spiritual fulfilment in Christ as sacrificial Lamb and Great High Priest all in the same person.

I felt your dismissal of Josephus as an external source verifying the gospel context was a little too hasty. His Jewish wars gives an affirmation of the existence of John the Baptist, Herod Antipas, Pontius Pilate, James the Brother of Jesus ( so also mentions Jesus). Even the Testimonium Flavianum has an unembellished Arabic translation that mentions Jesus also. (See research of Shlomo Pines). So there enough historical evidence to give a context and pick out the key characters.

The major problem in what you wrote here is the lack of a theological anchor to it and a lack of proper research on the historical plausibility of scripture. It is like you have repeatedly read these texts and never met the God they are all about revealing. Instead you have followed the white rabbit down various holes in the ground with more fantastical explanations and have only just surfaced back into the light. That said your entry was the most challenging, well written and interesting of all the entries this time around and so you are the winner of this month's contest. Also the Jordan Petersen style argument that we have all the best and most deeply foundational stories is a pretty good argument to trust scripture.


Mechanical issues

Nothing worth mentioning.


Thanks again for entering.
LightinMind

STATIC

My Philosophy of Rating and Reviewing  (E) How do I assess people's work when reviewing? #2259390 by LightinMind

My review has been submitted for consideration in "Good Deeds Get CASH!" .