Word of (divine monaker here)?

[DrewJMore]

Can it be shown that any religious writing was done by a god?

Aniticipating a negative response to the above: can it be shown that a deity directly or indirectly influenced a writer?

Finally, why would anyone believe affirmative responses to the above questions?

[Marsh]

If a prophecy does not come true, then it was not inspired & sent by God. If it does come true, then it may or may not have been inspired & sent by God; it could be coincidence. When many prophecies from the same source come true, without the exception of any that don't come true, then the evidence tips the scale, in my opinion. Sure, it may still be coincidence... but it might not be.

And why would one be apt to believe that a certain piece of writing is inspired by God, or even to consider that there are such writings? For the same reason that the lost dog try to find its way home.

[dauer]

No.


No. The best prophesies are either vague or written after the fact.

Because it makes it easier for some to believe in a personal God and feel intimately connected to that God.

Dauer

[Marsh]

Originally Posted by dauer

The best prophesies are either vague or written after the fact.

Wouldn't a prophecy that is written before the fact be better than one written after the fact?

[dauer]

Originally Posted by Marsh

Wouldn't a prophecy that is written before the fact be better than one written after the fact?

Nope. Because then it most likely won't come true. If it does, it will be due to blind luck or some insight about the nature of politics or society or... nature. If the prophecy has been made after the fact, it is true. This is why it is better. Vague prophecies are also more likely to be true. If I tell you that tomorrow you're going to meet a man wearing a blue cap who will tell you in these specific words during your conversation, "The weather outside is dreadfully frightful." That's not a good prophecy. Highly unlikely. But if I say, "You will meet a man who will say something of importance to you." That's a little better. Some good prophecies might be:

"There will be a terrible war between two great nations and the people of the nations will live in fear." That is a good prophecy.

"A great storm will trouble the land and many a man will lose their livelihood." Good prophecy.

"In a time of great sorrow a person will arise to restore order to the land." Good prophecy.

Do you see how it works?


Dauer

[DrewJMore]

Originally Posted by dauer

Do you see how it works?

To expand upon your point:
Prophesy before-the-fact, properly constructed, can be made to come true by motivated individuals. Simply put, all prophesy may be self-fullfilling.

An anecdote:
Once, I attended a concert in a former cinema venue. Seated near the front, and in a suggestable state of mind, we attended to the band leader as he recounted a dream he had recently had:

"I dreamt about all you [f-ing] people last night; only in my dream, there were no [f-ing] chairs."

The result? There was shortly a pile of twisted, broken rows of theater seating in the rear of the room, thus creating suitable dancing space in front.

The Lord certainly does work in mysterious ways.

[I, Brian]

And don't forget this great prophecy:

There shall, in that time, be rumours of things going astray, erm, and there shall be a great confusion as to where things really are, and nobody will really know where lieth those little things wi-- with the sort of raffia work base that has an attachment. At this time, a friend shall lose his friend's hammer and the young shall not know where lieth the things possessed by their fathers that their fathers put there only just the night before, about eight o'clock.

[Marsh]

Originally Posted by dauer

Nope. Because then it most likely won't come true. If it does, it will be due to blind luck or some insight about the nature of politics or society or... nature.

Well then it isn't prophecy at all, but just an educated guess. We're thus speaking of two completely different things.

[dauer]

Originally Posted by Marsh

Well then it isn't prophecy at all, but just an educated guess. We're thus speaking of two completely different things.

We're not speaking about two different things. I'm just asserting that most good prophesies have either been vague or written at a later time as coming from the mouth of an earlier figure.

Dauer

[DrewJMore]

The foregoing exchange elucidates the divide between those who have faith and those who do not. Rationally, we all require that the foundations of our beliefs be proven to our own satisfaction. Critically, the nature and extent of such proof varies substantially.





Take the "Book of Mormon," for example: the opening narrative goes to some lengths to convince the reader that it is authoritative and true. To the contrary, even the most slightly skeptical reader will construe the explanation as, at best, a weak foundation for what follows. In the absence of such a dismissal, however, what remains of the exposition may be compelling to many.





In general, to be pious an individual must accept many things on faith. At the foundation of faith, it must be tacitly accepted that:





a.) There are gods.



b.) These gods choose messengers to convey their will.





Inconveniently, the proof of these basic assumptions is only provided within the 'message' itself.



It must be agreed that the fulfillment of prophesy would constitute evidence that a message was sent by a god. Unfortunately, the proof of such fulfillment is also present only within the message.