%%USERNAME%%    %%ACCWORDS%% %%ONOFF%% |
 Review #4846018 |
 | Can the Bible Be Trusted?  [E] A reflective journey through doubt and tradition to test the trustworthiness of the Bible.  |
| (3.5)| Hello Kaytings . Thank you for entering this month's contest.
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?Yes you normally answer with a poem but this time you wrote an essay. Use of quotes, proof-texting or AI - could I hear your voice?This was written in your style and with your voice. How consistent was your argument?Your arguments began with a reference to the undoubted impact and significance, across multiples times and cultures, of the Bible. While there are ongoing historical discussions your view was that the Bible was historically credible. You affirmed its ethical clarity while also admitting to the more difficult discussions. You answered scientific critiques with a faith in miracles and an understanding that scripture was not a scientific textbook but rather had a different focus. The spiritual impact of the bible on billions in different cultures and times is undeniable, in it we hear a whisper older than our doubts. So yes we can trust the bible but should not do so naively, rather we should walk the old road with open eyes. My thoughts on the substance of what you saidYou argue holistically and soulfully in a poetic style about authority. You do allude to concrete evidences such as; -the extent and depth of the geographical and Historical impact on multiple cultures -The sheer volume and quality of the manuscript evidence But your argument, in the main, lacks specificity and details of concrete discoveries that might affirm the points you make. You refer to experts that have done the hard work for you like the biblical archaeologist William Foxwell Albright. You trust their conclusions without a substantive review of their evidences. Your trust could be described as a simple faith. This is fine and an answer to the question but who are you trusting here? You are not trusting Western academic theologians nor even the teaching authorities of the major denominations where traditional understandings have been disputed in the last three centuries. Indeed you ignore the theological debates and discussions of the last three hundred years that have eroded traditional understandings of Bible authority. Your ethical section could be summarized - the bible speaks with ethical clarity but there are some unspecified troubling issues with simply affirming that. That is really just an party position/opinion that asserts faith over doubt without engaging with any examples. So why do you trust the conservatives over the various German liberals that have brought a wrecking ball to traditional affirmations of biblical authority over the last three hundred years? I think you are right to trust them as there are answers to all the various critiques of biblical authority that have been made, but you do not demonstrate any kind of ownership of these arguments or why they are more credible here. I found your scientific section especially superficial. A good read here might be Lennox's "Seven Days of Creation that Divided the World." Genesis 1-11, even if interpretated in the Mythopoetic style of a literary framework, sets certain boundaries. For example Aristotle had a steady state view of the universe and this was the mainstream scientific viewpoint for more than two millennia. But the Bible speaks of a beginning. Science only accepted this in the last century with Big Bang Theory. So separating science and bible in terms of how and why might miss the boundaries set in scripture that explain things better than science does. Similarly today the immaterial information that defines the irreducible complexity of a cell or our DNA is explained in biblical terms in terms of a transcendent Creator who spoke into the void and created all life with a word. There is no realistic, merely natural explanation for the consistency, functionality and indeed origin of this information source from within nature itself. Your strongest arguments were to say that if God exists then miracles are possible and if he does not exist then they are not. So faith is at the root of how we approach the Bible. Also that the personal resonance of scripture across multiple cultures and times testifies to its authority. Your personal walk with God has demonstrated to you how powerfully the Bible speaks into your experience, answers your deepest questions /doubts and shows you the pathways out of the most complex of moral mazes. But why should someone who does not share your personal victories in the walk of faith regard the bible as trustworthy? Mechanical issuesNothing major to say here. Thanks again for entering. LightinMind
 My review has been submitted for consideration in "Good Deeds Get CASH!" .
|
|||||||||
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
Community Newsfeed
Puzzle Hub
General Discussion
Sponsored Items
Book of Trinkets
Static Items
Books
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
You have not yet responded to this review.