PDA

View Full Version : A Different kind of Bible Wheel



Richard Amiel McGough
11-03-2011, 08:57 AM
I was surfing around to see what others have been saying about the Bible Wheel and encountered an article called The Bible Wheel (http://leftchristianity.com/2011/10/23/the-bible-wheel/) on www.leftchristianity.com (http://www.leftchristianity.com) with this image:


http://leftchristianity.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/308330_10150871030460117_302201620116_21087501_767 102519_n.jpg

That is indeed circular reasoning. And that's why I put it here in the Hermeneutics forum. We have been having a number of conversations that turn about the point of "Why believe the Bible" and the question about why a Christian's "personal testimony about experiencing God" is valid whereas the testimony of a Muslim or Mormon is not. All these beliefs seem circular to me, and hence invalid.

Beck
11-03-2011, 03:45 PM
So Richard have you come to the conclusion that the Bible is man's invention? That's if the Bible is NOT the word's of God, but only how man invisioned an Most Holy and that would also mean that you're come to the conclusion that this Bible Wheel is nothing more that man's invention. Is that the case?

Richard Amiel McGough
11-03-2011, 03:59 PM
So Richard have you come to the conclusion that the Bible is man's invention? That's if the Bible is NOT the word's of God, but only how man invisioned an Most Holy and that would also mean that you're come to the conclusion that this Bible Wheel is nothing more that man's invention. Is that the case?
No, not at all. As yet, I have not been able to refute the evidence supporting the Bible Wheel.

There are two problems with your suggested interpretation.

First, there is no appeal to objectively verifiable evidence like fulfilled prophecies or the Bible Wheel in that diagram. That's why it's a fallacy of circular logic. The circle could easily be broken by appealing to objective evidence.

Second, even if the Bible is not "man's invention" it does not mean that it is properly understood as the "inerrant and infallible Word of God." That's the whole "conundrum" that currently engulfs my mind. All the evidence for the Bible Wheel remains valid as far as I know, but I don't know what it means because the Bible contains many errors, contradictions, logical absurdities and moral abominations it attributes to God. Therefore, I can neither refute the Bible Wheel nor believe in any of the traditional "Christianities" that are derived from it.

That's quite a conundrum, ain't it?

:sCo_hmmthink: