Can God go against the Bible?

It's putting the cart before the horse or in this case God before the bible which is true if you remove the Christian or Catholic perspective of what or who God is.

The concept of Gods or God > the Bible > the Christian God, is valid.

The Christian God > the Bible > a better understanding of the Christian God, is not valid.

Gods existed in many forms for many people for a long time. Man then wrote the bible claiming they were divinely inspired (first leap of faith is to believe that these men are telling the truth) the concept of the Christian God is now created and people choose to then place their faith in that concept.

Without first placing your faith in fallible men who mistranslated and re-wrote the bible several times always for their own gain you CANNOT have faith in the Christian God. You can have faith in some generic God but the moment you speak of Jesus or the Christian God you are placing your faith in men, including yourself.

 

It's simply a stupid question that has no basis in logic. It's amazing it still gets bandied about.

 

So you're really asking if God hamstrung himself by subjecting himself to forces like gravity (which He created, BTW) would he be subject to his own laws? It's a circular question.

He did do such a thing--Jesus.

BTW, Jesus could have stopped the crucifixion, but he did not. It's even recorded in the Bible.

 

I already know the answer. The RC thinks they know more than God.
The RC doesn't believe the bible is the inspired word of God.
They have their own versions.

 

First it is my belief (we are speaking of religion after all) There is but one God and that God has been around from the beginning. Any other Gods are either apsects of God (such as Allah), non existant, or deamons. Though I will not begin to decide which is which. I am not a theologian so I would not feel qualified to say one mans God is a fake while anothers is not. I will instead just trust in my beliefs and prey.

But more importanly your synopsis would only be correct if the Christian Church did not exist before the compulation of the Bible. But it did in fact exist andhad for hundreds of years. The Bible was created to codify the correct way to worship it did not creat the religion or the Church. so to use your example God>Church>Bible.

- - - Updated - - -

Not so the Roman Catholic Church does not think it knows more then God and they do think the Bible is divinly inspired. But they do feel they are an authority on their own book of scriptures considering they had a hand in compiling them.

 

According to the other poster of RC denomination, the bible is not the authority, the doctrine of the church is 1st, the bible is a reference source.
And, if the bible is divinely inspired, then it is NOT their own "book of scriptures". Unless they compiled them in a way to go against the "inspired word of God". Or to control the pagans.

 

If the Bible is to ward off heresy, why are the four Gospels hearsay?

 

So you say...








.

 

Corrections to your errors:
1. Crawdadr is not "RC."
2. The Bible is not THE authority, it is AN authority
3. Jesus is First
4. the last part of your post was nonsensical gibberish and cannot be corrected except through your own humility.

 

He said, "to promote faith" as well as to ward off heresy, Genius. Guess which one is the purpose of the 4 Gospels. C'mon....you can do it. Here's a hint: it's not to ward off heresy.

 

To embrace hearsay?

hearsay rule

n. the basic rule that testimony or documents which quote persons not in court are not admissible. Because the person who supposedly knew the facts is not in court to state his/her exact words, the trier of fact cannot judge the demeanor and credibility of the alleged first-hand witness, and the other party's lawyer cannot cross-examine (ask questions of) him or her.
http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=859

 

What does that have to do with a book that is used by a group to govern their orginisation?

 

Which one of the Gospels was written by an eye witness?

Which ones were written on hearsay?

 

So just as a frame of future reference simply calling something stupid without providing any logical argument against it will from this point forward be considered a valid argument?

 

Wait so you're saying the old testament didn't exist until after the church?

 

No, it's a paradox...a paradox of Omnipotence. If God can make a rock so heavy HE can't pick it up...He's not omnipotent, since He cannot budget the rock. If He CAN'T make a rock so heavy He can't pick it up...He's not omnipotent, since there is something He cannot create.

His "choosing not to"...is irrelevant. I could claim to be the greatest soldier the world has ever seen....but if I CHOOSE to never join the military and fight in a war....my claim is baseless.

 

No but the books which make up the Bible were compiled into the new and old testaments after the Church came into existance.

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/relig...an-god-go-against-bible-2.html#post1062949664
No, you say. Without the RC, one can not know God correctly. That God can not give us his guide without the RC telling us what God meant.

 

I would say that is not exactly true, it is more that without the guidence of the Church it is much harder to know God and abide by his commandments. The Church fathers spent their entire lives preying and studying the scriptures and writings of Christianity. Can the common leyman say the same? I know I am not as well versed as them and I find the advice and discussions of the Church Fathers very useful in understanding my faith.

 

Apparently you missed my other posts.

 

The problem is not God's, it is the absurd notion that omnipotent means one can do things not logically possible.

Omnipotent means can do all things. Things = possibilities. Ergo, God can do all possible things. Posing a logically contradictory challenge is not God's lack of "potency," it is the questioner's lack of logic.

 

So we're arguing over semantics? When the bible was compiled has nothing to do with my argument. No I wasn't specific by saying "the bible" but I didn't realize that would cause a problem I simply meant the written text.

Who created the church and what did they found it on?

You will quickly see no matter where you begin with God, man was there first.

Let me ask you this. Take away everything that was ever written about the Christian God or any God for that matter but keep your belief that A God does exist. Without using the written word of man what is God and how do you know him?

 

Why does an Atheist like Wolverine so intrigued by the Bible? makes you wonder if he's throwing off that gutter religion of Atheism after all? PRAISE GOD!

 

Me I know him through the writings and Traditions of the Church. But if you mean how does a person without access to those things know God then that would be through the Holy Spirit, miracles, and life experiances. My words may not be enough but from the beginning there was the Lord. The first man that looked up at the stars and felt there was some one watching was feeling the Lords hands upon him. Man as a creature of not just flesh but also spirit has always known that there was something else out there.

 

Ah I think I understand what you mean now my appologies. No the old Testament is from the Hebrew Bible and predates the Church.