Psalms and the "Divine inspiration" thing

[Setzer]

Most Christians nowadays seem to accept that the Bible was written by men, but inspired by god. The way I picture this is that the authors set pen to papyrus, and god sorta subconsciously influenced them on what to write.

Well, that makes sense for several books, but what about the book of Psalms? THey were written by David to praise god, and a complement means little if you have to tell the complimentor what to say beforehand.

So this has 3 possibilities as far as I know:

1. God is a total whore for praise and influenced David on what to write.

2. The book of Psalms was written by David alone, with no input from god.

3. I'm contemplating an aspect of the Bible no one bothered to put any though towards before.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Or, it could be a useless old book of anecdotes and contradictory messages that was written by various authors of nomadic peoples over the course of decades over two millenia ago.

[Setzer]

Meh, besides that.

[Surlethe]

2. The book of Psalms was written by David alone, with no input from god.

I go for this. Is there any reason the entire Bible must necessarily have been divinely inspired?

[The Prime Necromancer]

Well, that makes sense for several books, but what about the book of Psalms? THey were written by David to praise god, and a complement means little if you have to tell the complimentor what to say beforehand.

In my estimation, worship means little if you're constantly under threat of death, than horrible punishment for eternity. So yeah calling God a "whore for praise" hardly seems inaccurate.

[Darth Wong]

2. The book of Psalms was written by David alone, with no input from god.

I go for this. Is there any reason the entire Bible must necessarily have been divinely inspired?

Because "inspired by hallucinations induced by fasting and disease" doesn't sound as good.

[Kitsune]

Are the "Songs of Solomon" divinely inspired?

Sex poems and hatred of sex in the same book and both inspired by Gog

[Lord of the Abyss]

2. The book of Psalms was written by David alone, with no input from god.

I go for this. Is there any reason the entire Bible must necessarily have been divinely inspired?

Because if it's not - there's simply no reason to believe in God or any of the rest of that nonsense. There is no objective evidence, and religion doesn't hang together logically very well. If you throw out the "evidence" provided by divine inspiration there's no reason to think God is any more real than Iron Man or Honor Harrington.

Hell, at least they are occasionally entertaining.

[The Prime Necromancer]

I thought we were looking at this from a "Suspension of Disbelief" standpoint; assuming God is real, then why the psalms?

[Setzer]

yeah, that's it.

[EmperorSolo51]

I think people are taking this from a more Protestant Point of View rather than a Jewish or Catholic/Greek Orthodox Point of View. The Protestant Point of View gets you into trouble becuause they believe the bible the 100% Infallible and inerrent Word of God. Once you get into that realm then you start to hem and haw about how the Bible supports Scientific Theory XYZ even though the Bible is at odds with Scicentific Thoeory ABC and contradicts Theory XYZ. By Interpreting the Sacred Scriptures literally, What you are doing is losing any real significance or meaning of the Scripture by taking them at thier literal Face Value. This in my opinion goes to both the New and Old Testaments as there is alot of stories of Morals and Ethics in the Old Testament that are very Human such as the reaction of the Hebrew Writers during thier days in babylonian captivity or as well as the accounts of the Israelites going into whole villages and slautering the populace or God commanding them to. By reading it Literally and ignoring the the historical context of by which these people lived, what you are doing is falling into the same mentaility of the Scriptures yet from a completely different and opposite view of our Protestant Bretheran and not understanding of any deeper meaning.

The Catholic and Greek Orthodox Point of View is that the Bible is inspired by God, however the Bible is NOT The Word of God. That Title is granted to only one Person and that is Jesus Christ who is the Word of God made Flesh, the second person in the Divine Trinity. We believe that the Sacred Scripture carries the Word of God from the Old Testament to the New. No where in the Bible does it say to use Scripture alone. The only place you will find anything remotely close to that is in the Second Epistle of St. Paul to Timothy, however if you look more clostly at what St. paul says says the the Sacred Scripture is sufficiant in teaching to other Christians.

from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.

He doesn't say we shouldn't express any deeper meaning or tell us we shouldn't try to interpret scripture nor does he say that Scripture Alone is sufficient. Nor does he say what to those Scriptures are nor does he say how we should interpret those scriptures and His Gospel. That's why we as as Apostolic Christians regard Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition together a divinely inspired. If you have everybody and his Brother interpreting Scripture this or that way literally then what you will se is what happened during the Reformation, the Body of Christ splintering at the seems creating what is essentially Organized Chaos.

[Tiriol]

I think people are taking this from a more Protestant Point of View rather than a Jewish or Catholic/Greek Orthodox Point of View. The Protestant Point of View gets you into trouble becuause they believe the bible the 100% Infallible and inerrent Word of God.

Just to point out, I don't believe that the Protestants believe the Bible to be entirely word of God, infallible in all aspects, and the ultimate truth about everything (at least, the Finnish Evangelical-Lutherian Church (I have no idea how it is actually written in English) doesn't think so and I suspect that many other Protestant churches also think so). When I was in my confession school (pretty much compulsory for anyone who belongs to the Church), the priest pointed out that the Bible is written by men - and by men who had no idea of modern science and who were filled with supersition. While he did (surprisingly ) say that many parts were inspired by God, many were also not, since mortal men have added something of their own to it. He happened to believe that faith is important, not the strict rules for it.

Of course, since the Fundamentalist churches are also Protestants (at least a huge majority), I cannot say that all Protestants would be as intelligent as that priest fellow. Sad, but true.

[EmperorSolo51]

Just to point out, I don't believe that the Protestants believe the Bible to be entirely word of God, infallible in all aspects, and the ultimate truth about everything (at least, the Finnish Evangelical-Lutherian Church (I have no idea how it is actually written in English) doesn't think so and I suspect that many other Protestant churches also think so). When I was in my confession school (pretty much compulsory for anyone who belongs to the Church), the priest pointed out that the Bible is written by men - and by men who had no idea of modern science and who were filled with supersition. While he did (surprisingly ) say that many parts were inspired by God, many were also not, since mortal men have added something of their own to it. He happened to believe that faith is important, not the strict rules for it.

Of course, since the Fundamentalist churches are also Protestants (at least a huge majority), I cannot say that all Protestants would be as intelligent as that priest fellow. Sad, but true.

To be fair you would be coming from a High Church Lutheran Synod. If Martin Luther were still around today he would be appalled at what your church is professing in regards to the Bible because Luther went so far as to add "Faith Alone" and "scripture Alone" into Sacred Scripture as well as tear out all of the Deuterocanonicals from your Standard Bible. This would include 1st and Second Maccabees, Tobit, Sirach, The Wisdom of Solomon, Additional chapters of Esther and Daniel, and the Book of Revalation. Luther, Calvin, and Zwingili believed that only faith alone can lead you into heaven and that the Bible is the only authoritative work even though Sola Scriptura and Sola Fidei are not found in any of the Translations of the Bible before or After Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation.

[wolveraptor]

Wasn't the Catholic Church's stance on the Bible also inerrancy and literalism during the middle ages and much of the Rennaisance? They only changed it when mounting scientific evidence forced them to.

[EmperorSolo51]

Wasn't the Catholic Church's stance on the Bible also inerrancy and literalism during the middle ages and much of the Rennaisance? They only changed it when mounting scientific evidence forced them to.

Yes and No, The Church has supported Scientific Research. Many of the Popes had Church Scientists/Astronomers and Church Doctors who would tend to the Church and Council the Church on matters of Science and the Humanities. Popes themselves would comission great woks of Art and Science for the Church from Such men as Leonardo Davinci, Michaelangelo, Dontatello, Raphael, and Bottacello.

During The Black Death, One of the earliest poeple to make discovery about the various ways to treat the Black Death was Boccaccio. He was the primary Physician to Pope Clement VI, He through the caring of Sick patients and later contracting of the diseas helped him make breakthroughs in the treating of the Disease that killed nearly a Quarter of Europe's population.

However the whole notion that the Church was anti-scientific stems from the Trial of Galileo, Who was brought up for Trial not for Heresy, but for the fact His book insulted his holiness. Infact Gailieo was holding to the Copernican theory that the The earth moved in a circular orbit around the sun, while the Pope's own Astronomers subscibed Theories of Johannes Kepler and pointed out the evidence that it did. The other thing we should remember is that Gailieo was never forbidden to continue his studies or send letters about his scientififc theories. Galileo would be allowed to continue his Scientif studies until his death.