wildnessliesinwait:

Answer to Job is an attempt by the elderly Carl Jung to explore a number of theological issues relating to the Biblical Book of Job. The story of Job basically goes like this: God sees that Job is the most righteous and faithful of all men, but Satan (still an angel of God at this point in the mythological development — indeed, even a ‘son of God’) questions this to stir up shit and bets God that if things weren’t going so well for him, he wouldn’t be such a model human being. Without a second thought, God kills his livestock, servants, even his children — and smites him with a terrible, debilitating disease. Job remains faithful but cries out to know why he is being punished, what he could possibly have done to deserve this. Eventually, God Himself appears on the scene and, instead of giving him any kind of answer, rants on and on about his immeasurable strength and power. Cowed by this, Job seals his lips and accepts that God can do whatever the fuck he likes.

Did this guy even read the book of Job? I’m leaning towards no. 

stop labor union activism

Instructions for Christian Living

 ¹⁷ So I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking. ¹⁸ They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts. ¹⁹ Having lost all sensitivity, they have given themselves over to sensuality so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, and they are full of greed.

a) Probability and fulfillment of prophesy for the objective, biblical inerrancy, the nature of the Christian God opposed to invented gods, and more things along this line that many do not believe or refuse to accept.

b) Replacing ‘intervened in’ with ‘inspired’ how could sixty-six books written over hundreds of years in numerous languages and on different continents (based off of real manuscript evidence) bear such a striking resemblance and coherence in fine detail? Oh yeah God. We have heaps more manuscript evidence for the Bible than any other piece of ancient literature as well as a much greater purity (95% Old 99.5% New). Fulfillment of specific prophecies (such as those for Babylon and Tyre) also display a foreknowledge man alone is incapable of.

c) Anything? How about history. The Bible is in many instances an eye-witness account of historical events. That’s what history is based upon. As for the second part of the question what would you consider a valid method for obtaining this type of information? Nothing? Perhaps the human mind? Sort of a feeble thing to put trust in, but if you accept the ability of man to understand such things you must accept the Bible at least as plausible. If you believe in the Bible already for other reasons then of course you believe what is says about that which cannot be observed or otherwise ‘validated’ by conventional methods.

As is the case with many multi-part questions if you can come to terms with some of the answers you are able to accept the others. If you take the standard argument against apologism (circular logic) and think about it in this context: by proving any one significant part you can prove the whole.

Are you at all into postmodernism? Just curious.

I’d be happy to discuss something a bit less broad in a little more detail if you’re willing.

fyi the original question was

give me a single reason to believe that 

a) God exists

b) that God somehow intervened in the writing of those books

c) that the concept of scripture is remotely valid in obtaining knowledge about anything, especially metaphysical statements

doesn’t make you an objectively good person. I assure you there are flaws in your code of ethics.

Number three.

and by ‘not sure’ I mean I don’t. Sorry Catholics.

or we don’t but thank you for playing. also the second part of this doesnt make sense.

John 3: ¹⁹ This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. ²⁰ Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed.

It’s not my fault if people hate the light.