farhan said:
Gospels were written decades after Jesus, & he didn’t dictate them. It includes the life/teachings of Jesus in Human words. Jesus Christ neither himself wrote or compiled any of the Gospels nor he asked his disciples to do so. It is more like the Sunnah texts in Islam (Although all sunnah text comes with a chain of narrators).We don’t even know who were the actual writers. And there is still no reason why the church selected only 4 gospels out of many. Then we have acts/letters that are obviously no divine work.
What exactly is the problem with human speculation?
God created us. The minds we have were created by God. The ability to discover God, discover what He wants for us, to establish a personal and intimate connection with God, would be a great achievement on the part of God. In other words, the Ideal, Supreme God, could, in theory, be one that doesn't need a perfectly written text to convey His intentions to us. Why not just let us figure it out for ourselves? Do you not think that such a God would be greater than one who has to
deploy a perfectly written Text to us, one without error?
My view is that the Bible was a result of God
initiating a process of discovery and exploration of the concept and story of God and humanity. Even if God didn't write the Bible, God can still take credit for creating beings (us) that could write the Bible and use it as a stepping stone in the process of discovering Him. Even if the work wasn't perfect, it could, still lead us to God.
In that sense, you could say that the device/instrument/system
deployed was not the Bible or Quran but
our minds. The Bible was something
ordained as the work that resulted from our discovery and exploration of concepts about God and humanity. Our minds were the systems
deployed for the purpose of discovering God, the work of writing and studying Bible was the work
ordained for us. Do you see my point? In this alternate perception of reality, I am saying that God didn't deploy a perfectly written Text, but instead invited us to discover who He was. He allowed us to use whatever space and time that was available us, a part of which was used to write the Bible.
To me, a relationship with God is far more important than determining correct scientific, medical or social practices. Understanding God is about understanding people. Understanding ourselves. The Bible's focus is on human relationships and interactions, not the way we organise the world in which we live. The attitudes, emotions, interactions and expressions of sentient beings take precedence over the way the world is organised. My point is sentimental harmony, sentimental values and personal dignity over utilitarian efficiency. The Bible isn't so much concerned about utilitarian efficiency/proficiency as it is about the personal dignity as people. It's to do with the human need to be known, valued, appreciated and understood.
The idea of a perfectly written Text has to do with the idea of utilitarian proficiency -- "perfection" in the systematic sense of a Text ordained by God having no faults anywhere in its context. But not all the things in a written Text have value to everyone at the same time and place, and it's different from person to person. The minds God has given us allow us to filter out unimportant details. Some "faults" are unimportant. If you endorse the view that everything in a written Text ordained by God must be "perfect without flaw," then you're treating human beings like machines!!! In other words, human beings are like coin-operated machines and the words in the Bible/Quran are like coins. The wrong coin may destroy the machine!!!
But human beings aren't machines!!! We think. We evaluate. We judge. We decide. Our minds filter out irrelevant details in order to work out the true meaning of a passage in the Bible/Quran. Good communication requires that we get the most important details out first, because the receiver/listener/reader's thinking is influenced by what we convey as important. In the New Testament, Paul explains what love
means in 1 Corinthians 13. Love is considered to be important, and considering that it's important, why not explain it? But what does the Quran say about love? Does the Quran explain love? Is love explained and expressed through rules and regulations or through words that conceptualise our thoughts directly as in 1 Corinthians 13?
True, one Text may have errors, but the Text that is perfect but doesn't address important issues or explain important concepts is no better.
A perfect and incorrupt text has only
utilitarian value -- this treats human beings like machines that are operated by coins -- machines that can't tell the difference between good coins and bad coins -- machines that can't evaluate and judge what you give to them. A Text that addresses important concepts like love and having the right attitude has
sentimental value. There is room to explain more because human existence presents a vast world of possibilities. But then again, important concepts must be addressed. The New Testament may be relatively short, but still rich in meaning.
To me, the Bible has sentimental value because it focuses on human relationships, human sentiment and human interactions.
Utilitarian value or sentimental value -- which do you prefer?
I prefer a Text that explains and conveys concepts with sentimental value. I don't consider myself to be a coin-operated machine that can't evaluate and judge the coins I am receiving.
Do I believe in Mohammed's prophethood? That depends. Does the Quran explain
important concepts? If so, does it deal with them appropriately? Does it conceptualise our thoughts and feelings directly as Paul did in 1 Corinthians 13?
