A look at the history of the Bible shows that it is a compilation of
books that has been modified by human beings over the centuries. There
have been councils and church authorites that have made decisions
about what to include and what not to include. The collection of books
that we now call the Bible is not the same collection that other
people have called the Bible.

Moreover the human hand has unquestionably been at work in copying the
text and in translating it from one language to another.

With all this evidence of the error-prone human mind influencing the
document we now call the Bible, how do most of the people that hold
the Bible to be the unquestionable word of God rationalize their view?

For the most part, they "rationalize" their views by simply rejecting
the "evidence" you mention as being untrue and/or invalid. I put some
of the preceding terms in quotes to avoid making a statement of
judgement about Christian fundamentalist beliefs. They do not consider
themselves to be rationalizing and they do not accept certain
discoveries and theories as valid evidence. It should also be noted
that different "fundamentalists" differ in the degree and nature of
Bible literalism they espouse.

For a discussion of Christian fundamentalist history and beliefs see the Wikipedia.
Fundamentalist Christianity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist_Christianity

As one might expect, the above article is disputed.
Talk page for above article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fundamentalist_Christianity 

- Hammer

---

Request for Answer Clarification by augusta-ga on 15 Nov 2004 19:59 PST

Thanks for your answer Hammer.

Can you provide supporting evidence for your statement:

  For the most part, they "rationalize" their views by simply rejecting
  the "evidence" you mention as being untrue and/or invalid. 
  They do not consider themselves to be rationalizing and they do not accept
  certain  discoveries and theories as valid evidence. It should also be noted
  that different "fundamentalists" differ in the degree and nature of
  Bible literalism they espouse.

While the discussion of Christian fundamentalist history and beliefs
at Wikipedia is relevant, it is not a precise answer to the question.

---

Clarification of Answer by hammer-ga on 16 Nov 2004 06:05 PST

Augusta,

I'm reluctant to point out fundamentalist beliefs and say "See what an
incorrect and rationalized belief this is!" I don't feel that it is my
place to pronounce someone else's beliefs to be invalid in my role as
a Researcher.

I will provide a common example of what you describe, and you can
decide for yourself. By tracing back the begats, Bible literalists
believe that God created the world about 6000 years ago, therefore
evidence of civilizations older than 6000 years must be false,
therefore the theories of evolution must also be flawed.
Top Ten Scientific Facts Proving Evolution is False and Impossible.
http://www.biblelife.org/evolution.htm

I think that an important distinction to make on this subject, which
is a point well made by the commenters, is that there is a difference
between taking the Bible as *literal* and taking the Bible as *truth*.

I believe that your question describes a very particular group of
people who only make up a small portion of fundamentalism. These
people rationalize their beliefs the same way as people rationalize
all beliefs that they choose to hold onto without regard for evidence
to the contrary. Rationalization is considered a defense mechanism. To
read briefly about more defense mechansims, including rationalization:
http://peace.saumag.edu/faculty/Kardas/Courses/GPWeiten/C12Personality/DefMech.html

The snippets below are from the source referenced above:

"Defense mechanisms, in their original context, are unconscious
methods of dealing with anxiety."

"Denial
A reality that causes anxiety is simply not perceived. For example, a
mother may unconsciously refuse to see her son's true character
because it is too anxiety-arousing. The use of denial may lead to
abrupt intrusion of reality into one's life. The mother above, for
example, may receive the news that her son has been arrested for armed
robbery."

"Rationalization
Rationalization is realizing that one's motives are not always pure or
publicly acceptable and substituting appropriate motives. For example,
failing to study because one was "exhausted" rather than "lazy" is an
example. Being lazy is not seen as a socially acceptable motivation."

Some people need to believe that every word in the Bible can be taken
absolutely literally. It makes them feel safe, or righteous, or like
they are pursuing faith as it is meant to be pursued. Because they
*need* it to be true, they *make* it true. Not everyone has the mental
or emotional discipline to hear things that go against the foundations
of their basic beliefs and make a careful, logical and unemotional
analysis. Some people just get scared and "defend" themselves. Then
again, some literalists actually do believe and therefore, are not
rationalizing. Characterising fundamentalist beliefs as
rationalization is a statement not only that the belief is inherently
wrong, but also that the believer is aware of the wrongness and is in
denial. This is not always the case.

The Bible literalists may be correct. I don't believe that they are,
but, I also don't claim certain or absolute knowledge. The
intersection of faith and logic is a very large and complex subject to
try to cover for $2.00, let alone the concepts of decided vs.
discovered beliefs. Some believe that logic can be applied to God.
Others believe that while faith and Aristotle can both exist, they are
not required to reconcile. Still others think that even attempting to
discuss faith in logical terms in blasphemy. Making a general
statement about "how they do it" is quite a trick.

- Hammer

Great value for the money.

Okay, so . . .  where's pugwash-ga?

"Hasn't the Bible been rewritten so many times that we can't trust it anymore?"
http://www.carm.org/questions/rewritten.htm

Okay so its called Biblical literalism. 

There are "literalist" groups in almost every religion and they tend
to be the most prone to getting angry, exclusive and even violent when
dealing with people that don't shre their views. I think it is
reasonable to say that it was the Jewish literalists that had Jesus
put to death. Certainly Osama B.L. and his posse are Quranic
literalists.

I think that the type of person that tends to adopt this point of view
is less tolerant than the average person of ambiguity and complexity.
The difficult part of dealing with this type of person is that they
also take the position that their views are somehow holy and
sanctioned by God. Thus, in their own minds,  they are righteous
defenders of a holy belief and other views are un-holy, ignorant or
evil requiring correction.

Here is a quote from Wikipedia:

"a fundamentalist Christian is a Christian who holds the Bible to be
infallible, historically accurate, and decisive in all issues of
controversy that the Bible is believed to directly address; which was
the central issue for which the Christian Fundamentalist movement has
contended."

Of course, there are also those who are firmly convinced that
liberalspeak is infallible. I trust neither.
monroe22

I think that by simply rejecting the "evidence" of human meddling as
being untrue and/or invalid, and by not accepting certain discoveries
and theories as valid, Biblical literalists exempt themselves from
serious debate with people outside of their circle of belief.

If discussion, argumentation, debate is to be useful and valid, it
needs to be based on principles of rationality and reasonable
standards of evidence. If two parties do not share a consensus about
what consitutes rationality, logic and standards for truth, they might
as well not waste time in discussion with each other. Their energy and
time would be better spent just trying to shout louder and more
compellingly than the other guy.

Hi Timespacette. I`m glad someone is missing me. I`ve been in a bit of
trouble lately, what with cancellations and stuff. However, I would
like to comment on this one as I am a bit of a fundamentalist. I
believe that the Bible is a "user`s manual" giving people guidance in
living a life ACCEPTABLE to God.
Although the Bible has forty authors of various books stretching over
1600 years, from Moses [ Genesis 1513 B.C.E.] to the Apostle John [
Revelation 96A.D.]all the books have one theme. The legal right of God
to direct our lives and His legal right to punish us for
non-compliance with His laws. The First prophecy of solving
the...ongoing... problem of the bad influence of Satan is at Genesis
3;15. The two combatants are Jesus and Satan. Satan bruises Jesus in
the heel, a non lethal wound and Jesus bruises Satan in the head, a
very lethal wound. Jesus has been resurrected to heaven and is still
functioning. Satan is still to receive his wound. Simply because
Armageddon, that final battle, has still to be fought.
Other fundamentals. God`s name. Where is it to be found , was it
always known and should we use it?. Psalm 83;18, Exodus 6;3. "LORD"
the word used in many Bibles to indicate God, is a title and not a
name.
Jesus Christ is not God or part of God. He is God`s son, a separate
individual who stressed that he could do nothing of his own
initiative. John 5;19,30, 7;28, 8.28,42, 10;18. Spurious scriptures
have been added to some translations to prove different views . A
direct warning against this practise is found at Revelation 22;18.
God loves us all, but not unconditionally. Warnings are given at
Deuteronomy 18;10 about astrology in its many forms. First Corinthians
6;9 warns against practices that abound today, and many people
mistakenly think that God`s love is all encompassing. It is certainly
not what was written to the Corinthians.
Isaiah 5.20, "Woe to those who are saying that good is bad and bad is
good, those who are putting darkness for light and light for darkness,
those who are putting bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter". Can`t be
plainer than that.
Will there always be wars? Isaiah 2;4..neither will they learn war
anymore. This time period still to come.
Will we always end our days by dying. Many have a hope that all
illness and disease will be cured by men, given sufficient time. But
the Bible says at Isaiah 25;8.."He [ God] will actually swallow up
death forever..."
And why do we suffer death in the first place?. Doctors and scientists
are at a loss as to why our cells keep renewing from birth to about
age 30. Then something happens and we start to age till we die. Roman
5;12 gives a good answer, but one that secularists find difficult to
understand, "That is why, just as through one man [Adam] sin entered
into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men
because they had all sinned". Roman 6;23.."For the wages sin pays is
death".
My Collins Dictionary defines secularism as an ethical doctrine which
advocates a moral code independent of all religious considerations or
practices.
A simplistic example is; If I bake a cake in a dented caketin, every
cake baked in that tin will show the indentation.
Matthew 24;14 mentions a "Good News" that WILL be preached in ALL the
inhabited earth..and then the end will come. Is any worldwide
preaching being carried out that you know of? It would take a lot of
people and effort to tell every person on this earth this "Good News"
. This "Good News" is the establishment of the Kingdom mentioned at
Matthew 6;9,10, commonly known as the LORD`S PRAYER. It is said
ritually uncounted times around the world. But how many realise its
significance.
So as a big finale, I can only restate Jesus` words recorded at
Matthew 7;21. "Not everyone saying to me 'Lord, Lord, will enter into
the Kingdom of the heavens, but the one doing the will of my Father
who is in the heavens, WILL.
Of course there are many views of what is right, but are they scripturally correct.

Looks like pugwash has decided to take the "shout louder than the other guy" tack.

Dear Augusta. Longer is not necessarily louder. The scriptures are
there for anyone to read. Whether or not they take any notice is up to
them. None of what I said is from MY thinking. There are many to whom
any information from the Bible is like a red hot poker and they shy
away from it. But there are also a few who read it and make up their
own minds as to their future course in life. If I have made any
mistake in quoting any scripture that pertains to the specific
subject, I would like commenters to reply. Of course, it will involve
reading the Bible. Some time back, it changed my mind. Pug.

As a probable "fundamentalist" myself, I'll make the following
suggestions on how one can deal with the varied authorship and
potential copying/translation errors in the Bible.  My view is
probably typical of reasonably well-educated "fundamentalists" who
have given some careful thought to this issue.

On the one hand, we have faith that God preserves the important
doctrines of the Bible intact.  If we are to know about God through
the Bible, then He must make sure that this remains possible
throughout millenia of copying and translating.  Surely He is able to
provide some divine guidance for the translators and the councils that
decided which books to include in the Bible.

On the other hand, the Bible must be interpreted as a whole. 
Doctrines that appear consistently throughout the Bible can be
reliably held.  However, one should not cling desparately to doctrines
that are based on a single verse.  This approach allows for potential
errors in copying/translating that verse.  (It also allows for
potential errors in one's own reading and interpretation of a verse,
which I think is far more likely to be an issue.)

Whether or not one believes that the entire Bible has been preserved
error-free, one should have an attitude of humility.  There should be
a recognition that not all debates can be resolved with the
information available in the Bible, and that not all debates need to
be resolved (some issues are just not as important as others). 
Arguing vehemently for a position can often be unhelpful.

Bravo Bio. I missed that point. It must be viewed as a whole.

There are many things that I wish to say regarding the infallability
and reliablility of the Bible, yet I will start with one.  Yes the
Bible has been translated from language to language over the
centuries, and yes this normally would create a problem except for one
thing.  Modern scholars have over 25,000 biblical documents, and you
know what, they all say the same thing (Except for minor word
variations, but the variations do not change the biblical doctrines at
all)!  The earliest complete documents that we have to study are from
around 150 A.D.  That is only 120 years after Christ's death.

When compared with other ancient documents, the Bible is the most
reliable out there.  Take the works of Plato for example.  No one ever
doubts that what we have written by Plato is actually his work and
words.  But you know what, the academic community only has 9 documents
to translate from (as compared to the 25,000 document for the New
Testament alone in the Bible)!  Besides only having 9 documents, the 9
that we do have are dated 1,500 years after his death (as compared to
120 years after Christ's death).  Which sounds more reliable to you 9
partial documents or 25,000 partial and full documents (dated from 150
A.D. to about 1500) that say the same thing?  Are documents that are
dated 1,500 years after Plato's death really more reliable to the
academic community than the 120 years after Christ's death?  I just
ask that the Bible receive the same rigorous testing standards that
other ancient documents do, and when it far surpasses others in terms
of amount of texts that we have and consistancy of what they say
throughout them all that it get fair credit as standing the test of
time.

It is sad that just because the Bible is a religious document and it
says things about their life that people do not agree with, that it is
completely disregarded.  Whether one likes it or not the Bible is not
going to go away and neither is Chrisitanity.  Everybodys hatred of
Christians and the message that we have been commanded to tell people
about only makes us pray for them more.

I know I said I was only going to say a little.  Please understand
that I think all people have the right to choose what religion they
want to follow.  But I also think that it is unfair the way
Christianity is censored and other religions are not.  We all have the
right to say what we want and practice what we want, but don't censor
us just because we are Christians.  Let us have a voice just as all
other religious groups do.

Sorry again for the space and time.  I would love to hear what you all
have to say and have an intelligent conversation about it.

In His grace,
Theologian <><

Hi augusta!

I realize this thread has been around for a while, but somehow I just
came across it again and hadn't read hammer's good reply . . .

in reading through all the comments, it occurred to me that I had on
hand a document of several different versions of the Lord's Prayer, in
other words, several different *translations* (by the same fellow) of
the same text from the original aramaic.

It's pretty fascinating to see that even from one translator (who is
honest enough to admit that there can be many meanings had from one
piece of writing) that there can be so many subtle and not-so-subtle
variations. Reminds one a lot of old vedic texts, what with all the
references to breath, sound and light.

which I'd learned some of these in my sixteen years of Sunday school . . .   :-)

it's long, but here goes:

King James Version 
(Matthew 6:9-13)

Our Father which art in heaven
Hallowed be thy name.
Thy kingdom come.
Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.
For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever.
Amen.

Eight Aramaic Translations

O Birther!  Father-Mother of the Cosmos,
You create all that moves in light.
Focus your light within us  -- make it useful:
As the rays of a beacon show the way.
Create your reign of unity now  --
Through our fiery hearts and willing hands.
Your one desire then acts with ours,
As in all light, so in all forms.
Grant what we need each day in bread and insight:
Subsistence for the call of growing life.
Loose the cords of mistakes binding us,
As we release the strands we hold of others? guilt.
Don?t let surface things delude us,
But free us from what holds us back from our true purpose.
From you is born all ruling will, and the power and life to do,
The song that beautifies all  --  from age to age it renews.




O Thou!  The Breathing Life of all,
Creator of the shimmering sound that touches us.
Help us breathe one holy breath, feeling only you
This creates a shrine inside, in wholeness.
Let your counsel rule our lives,
Clearing our intention for co-creation.
Let all wills move together in your vortex,
As stars and planets swirl through the sky.
Give us the food we need to grow through each new day,
Through each illumination of life?s needs.
Forgive our hidden past, the secret shames,
As we consistently forgive what others hide.
Don?t let us enter forgetfulness,
The temptation of false appearances.
To you belongs each fertile function: ideals, energy, glorious harmony  -- 
During every cosmic cycle.



Respiration of all worlds,
we hear you breathing  --  in and out  --  in silence.
Help us let go, clear the space inside of busy forgetfulness:
So the Name comes to live.
Unite our ?I can? to yours, so that we walk as kings and queens
With every creature.
Help us love beyond our ideals,
And sprout acts of compassion for all creatures.
Let the measure of our need be earthiness:
Give all things, simple, verdant, passionate.
Lighten our load of secret debts,
As we relieve others of their need to repay.
To find the fraud of inner vacillation ? 
Like a flag tossed in the wind  --  alert us.
Out of you, the queen - and kingship  ---  ruling principles,
The ?I can? of the cosmos.



Source of Sound: in the roar and the whisper,
in the breeze and the whirlwind, we hear your name.
Your Name, your sound can move us
if we tune our hearts as instruments for its tone.
Desire with and through us
The rule of universal fruitfulness onto the earth.
As we find your love in ours,
Let heaven and nature form a new creation.
Produce in us, for us, the possible:
Each only-human step toward home lit up.
Erase the inner marks our failures make,
Just as we scrub hearts of others? faults.
But break the hold of unripeness,
The inner stagnation that prevents good fruit.
Out of you the vital force
Producing and sustaining all life, every virtue .  .  .  



Radiant One: You shine within us
outside us  --  even darkness shines  --  when we remember.
Hear the one Sound that created all others,
In this was the Name is hallowed in silence.
Your rule springs into existence
As our arms reach out to embrace all creation.
Unite the crowd within in a vision of passionate purpose:
Light mates with form.
Help us fulfill what lies within the circle of our lives:
Each day we ask no more, no less.
Absorb our frustrated hopes and dreams,
As we embrace those of others with emptiness.
From the evil of injustice  --
The green fruit and the rotten  --  grant us liberty.
Out of you the astonishing fire, the birthing glory
Returning light and sound to the cosmos.




Name of names, our small identity unravels in you,
You give it back as a lesson.
In peace that Name resides: a ?room of one?s own?, a holy of holies
Open, giving light to all.
Come into the bedroom of our hearts,
Prepare us for the marriage of power and beauty.
Create in me a divine cooperation  --  
From many selves, one voice, one action.
Animate the earth within us:
We then feel the Wisdom underneath, supporting all.
Untangle the knots within
So that we can mend our hearts? simple ties to others.
Deceive neither by the outer nor the inner,
Free us to walk your path with joy.
Again and again from each universal gathering  --
Of creatures, nations, planets, time and space  --  to the next.



Wordless Action, Silent Potency  -- 
where ears and eyes awaken, there heaven comes.
We all look elsewhere for this light  --  it draws us out of ourselves
But the Name always lives within.
From this divine union
Let us birth new images for a new world of peace.
Let your heart?s fervent desire
Unite heaven and earth through our harmony.
Generate through us the bread of life:
We hold only what is asked to feed the next mouth.
Compost our inner stolen fruit,
As we forgive others the spoils of their trespassing.
Keep us from hoarding false wealth,
And from the inner shame of help not given in time.
Truly  --  power to these statements  --  
May they be the ground from which all my actions grow:
Sealed in trust and faith.




O Birther!  Father-Mother of the Cosmos!
Focus your light within us  --  make it useful!
Create your reign of unity now!
Your one desire then acts with ours,
As in all light, so in all forms.
Grant what we need each day in bread and insight.
Loose the cords of mistakes binding us,
As we release the strands we hold of others? guilt.
Don?t let surface things delude us,
But free us from what holds us back.
Amen.

let us pray . . .
ts

Hi theologian,

I really appreciate your comment. I like the fact that you explain
your belief in the Bible using rational argument. I am a person that
does not believe in the infallibility of the Bible, so if I am to be
persuaded of your points, you need to reach me through rational
argument and not by holding up lines from the Bible as evidence of the
infallibility of the Bible.

Your point about multiple supporting sources is very interesting.

all the best,

Augusta

People can try to make it complex all they want.  God makes people
uncomfortable as does all introspection.  However, the Bible can
contain the inerrant Word of God even though human hands put the ink
to paper/parchment/CDs/whatever.  It doesn't have to mean that every
translation has to be identical for the truths to remain.  Sure it can
be confusing and frustrating.  Personally, I think working it out is
part of the deal.

Matthew 6;9-13..Better known as ' The Lord's Prayer". Jesus said it to
teach people how to pray. But its more than just a "feel good"
exercise.
It states that God resides in the heavens...And yet here was Jesus as
a man on earth, living. So Jesus cannot be "God on earth". God is God
and Jesus is his son. And no one has seen God and lived.
Jesus asks that God's name be sanctified. Or glorified, and respected.
Nothing said about not using it. What is God's name?. "LORD" is a
title. God's name in the Hebrew is YHWH, otherwise known at the
tetragrammaton or 'four letters'. The pronunciation has been lost but
the nearest we can get is YAHWEH. The english equivalent of that is
JEHOVAH.
Let you Kingdom come. God's new arrangement where wickedness is done
away with. Psalm 37;10,29. Still to come.
Let your will take place..in heaven and on earth...The heavens have
been cleaned..Revelation 12;7-9..The earth still has to be.
Treat your neighbour fairly..How hard is that
Protect us from Satan...Where is he?.. He's actually on the earth
influencing everything...Look at all the wars and fighting going
on.Revelation 12;12.
All the various above translations  pretty much say the same thing.
Different words, same meaning. No version replaces 'forgive your
fellow man' with.. Get him before he gets you. We should not argue
over fiddly translations but look to the meaning behind the words. And
about carved images...but thats for another time.

I find this question fascinating. I belong to a Christian church that
believes that the bible we have today was inspired but that many
things have been removed, lost and even changed over time. In the Book
of Mormon, (the story of a family that leaves Jerusalem 600 BC and
comes to America, becomes a great and at times righteous nation and is
even visited by Jesus Christ after his resurrection), a prophet
receives a revelation about the Bible: "that there are many plain and
precious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the
Lamb of God." That is why we as members of The Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints also believe that a modern-day prophet is needed
to receive revelation for the church and to guide our understanding.
Joseph Smith (the modern-day prophet) received a revelation that led
to the restoration of Jesus Christ?s original church when he was
praying about how to understand the bible when everyone interprets it
so differently. Anyways very interesting stuff, I?m always curious how
other feel about scripture. www.lds.org explains our views.

Although it has been changed maney times, God will find a way to make it the same.

in Jesus
gavin