The Bible

Hello all and God Bless. Hey, I just want to first say that God is real and His love for you will not cease, even if you do not accept Him. However, the choice is yours to make, "If you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved (Romans 10:9-10,13)." In addition, the one true God is one God three persons. The Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit, as scripture has revealed Him.
Now, as for the reliability of the Bible there is no book with more reliability or a foundation that to this day has not been shaken by skeptics, individuals who have actually have constistently tried to destroy the Bible throughout history, non-skeptics, critisicm, or any other action. The Bible is reliable because:
1. It has thousands of prophecies, which have come to pass to their exactness. For example, during this empire this king will be born to this family and his name will be this. Except the empire had not existed, and yet it came to pass. In addition, the prophecies were very specific by which the Messiah Jesus Christ had all prophecies concerning His first coming, fulfilled to their exactness. The chance of one of 8 prophecies(Their 300+ prophecies concerning Jesus, some concerning His second coming) occurring would be 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000. That is just eight, He fulfilled nearly 300.
2. Throghout history the Bible has proven right even when skeptics have denied its historic accuracy. For example, the Hittites were once considered to not exist outside the Bible by skeptics. Then, they were found, or at least the evidence for their existence was, again proving the Bible's reliablity.
3. To denie the new testament's reliablity would mean that one would have to deny Homer, Herodotus, Thucydides, Plato, Demosthenes, Caesar, Livy, Tacitus, and other such classic authors, because the new testament not only has copies written at least 50 years from the actual occurence, but as many as 25,000 copies proving its reliablity. The most from the classic author Homer is 643.
4. If one were to lose all the new testament copies, they could reproduce the new testament from other sources like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen, and many more.
5. It was written by 40 authors at different times, places, moods, three different continents, and individuals of completely different character. However, it has been constistent throughout. One purpose, the redemption of mankind.

There are many other examples of reliability, but I guess I would have to write a book to truly do the Bible and you justice. Also, I urgently remind you that the choice is yours to accept or deny the truth (John 14:6). No one is assured today or tomorrow, so please see the urgency in making a decision.

Thanks for reading, and God Bless (Romans 10:9-10, 13)

ONEWAY,

Ok, here is my take on this, from a skeptic's point of view.

1. It has thousands of prophecies, which have come to pass to their exactness. For example, during this empire this king will be born to this family and his name will be this. Except the empire had not existed, and yet it came to pass. In addition, the prophecies were very specific by which the Messiah Jesus Christ had all prophecies concerning His first coming, fulfilled to their exactness. The chance of one of 8 prophecies(Their 300+ prophecies concerning Jesus, some concerning His second coming) occurring would be 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000. That is just eight, He fulfilled nearly 300.

Click to expand...

First of all, many of the prophecies are pretty general, such as 'coming from the house of David', etc. There were many back then related to King David. Secondly, many of the prophecies are also totally unable to be proven without the Bible, such as the virgin birth. The only way you 'know' that Jesus was conceived by a virgin, is because you read it in the bible. Finally, it is my own running theory, that much of what is written about Jesus is hyperbolic legend. I do think that Jesus lived and was a real person, just not the divine son of god. I also believe that he was an extraordinary teacher, whom the people looked up to, but I am sure that he was not the only travelling preacher crucified for disobeying temple laws, which I believe is also a prophecy. You see, self-proclaimed 'rabbis', Jesus included, were ridiculously common back then, and they all preached some message of reformation, which in itself is a temple disobedience. The number of crucifixions is also staggering. So I agree, the odds are high, but coupled with their generality, as well as the huge number of possibilities (say, if there had only been a handful of crucifixtions, things would be different) the odds are belittled. All of this, not to mention the fact that the people who truly believed in him wanted desperately for him to be their long awaited messiah, and it would have certainly been easy for them to claim he was born in Bethlehem, etc. just to take care of that prophecy. This leads back to the virgin birth though-- all the evidence we have of Jesus' actual life is only to be found in the Bible, which without an objective outside measure, is a bit fishy to me.

2. Throghout history the Bible has proven right even when skeptics have denied its historic accuracy. For example, the Hittites were once considered to not exist outside the Bible by skeptics. Then, they were found, or at least the evidence for their existence was, again proving the Bible's reliablity.

Click to expand...

I agree that the Bible is historically accurate. Heck, it was written by people of that time, so they should know better than anyone what the geography and society was like, etc. In fact, historical accuracy is an absolute must for any document I would even consider taking seriously.

3. To denie the new testament's reliablity would mean that one would have to deny Homer, Herodotus, Thucydides, Plato, Demosthenes, Caesar, Livy, Tacitus, and other such classic authors, because the new testament not only has copies written at least 50 years from the actual occurence, but as many as 25,000 copies proving its reliablity. The most from the classic author Homer is 643.

Click to expand...

Alright, lets start with Homer. I do not deny the existence of his stories, certainly, but to claim that they are not fiction is ridiculous. With the realease of the movie Troy there has been increased interest in Homer, and I have read that archeologists now believe that a battle of that scale might have actually occured between the countries of Troy and Greece (before, archeologists didn't even think the battle itself was historical, let alone all the mythology; even now, there is no proof it actually took place, only evidence for a theory).
During his time, Caesar was much bigger than Jesus, and the difference between the two, is that most of the documents we have of Caesar come from a political field. His actions and even existence are proven by documents from countless countries and people, whereas Jesus seems only to have Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. You can't occupy the world without leaving a legacy, but even a bit of Caesar's could be exaggerated. Then again, like I said-- what we have of Caesar are not stories of his life, but political documents of his rule.
I do not believe the philosophers you mentioned to be disproved either, for what they wrote were their thoughts and viewpoints, which cannot be placed into a category of 'disproved' or otherwise. You could argue that certain documents placed under their names were not in fact written by them, and in truth I am not familiar enough with the archeology of them to refute that, but in this area, it really doesn't matter because a philosophy does not need a definitive author to exist. I agree that the bible is a philosophy, and whether it is true or not, that philosophy will always exist.

4. If one were to lose all the new testament copies, they could reproduce the new testament from other sources like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen, and many more.

Click to expand...

I have never heard of these, but I'll be sure to look into them...are you sure that the ENTIRE New Testament could be replaced? Or is it safer to say that it's just mentioned.

5. It was written by 40 authors at different times, places, moods, three different continents, and individuals of completely different character. However, it has been constistent throughout. One purpose, the redemption of mankind.

Click to expand...

It is indeed consistent in its moral message, and I think it teaches many people how to live better lives, but that's not what's at issue here. The issue is proving the validity of such events as the resurrection and the virgin birth, events which have no outside objective validation. If the bible were true beyond the shadow of a doubt, then these events would be as well, and thus everyone would become Christian. I am posting a website below which highlights some of the bigger contradictions between the gospels ( I don't have it on me now, but when I find it I'll post it immediately) The problem with these contradictions is that they undermine the entire work. You might say that the authors agree on all the big things, and that that's whats important, but details are what build the foundation for a story, and if those don't match up, everything has to be called into question. Think of it this way: The big things are easy to get right, because they are in fact big and unobscure. When one gets the details to match, then you've really got something.

ONEWAY,

Alrighty, here she is:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/paul_carlson/nt_contradictions.html

isis: it takes faith to believe that the authors of the Bible were inspired by the Holy Spirit. if u want the gift of faith, pray for it. i will for u.
the Bible has almost every form of literature in it: story's, similes, analogies, parables, poetry, proverbs, songs, metaphors, allegories, etc. most of it is literal. i hope this helps ure faith. butch

Ceridwen018 this thread is a gathering for all Christian denominations. Why not respect this?

Why some believe and others do not..
Isaiah, "In the year that king Uzzi'ah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple.

2 Above it stood the seraphim: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly.

3 And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory.

4 And the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke.

5 Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts.

6 ¶ Then flew one of the seraphim unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar:

7 and he laid it upon my mouth, and said, Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin purged.

8 Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, Here am I; send me.

9 And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not.

10 Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.

11 Then said I, Lord, how long? And he answered, Until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate,

12 and the LORD have removed men far away, and there be a great forsaking in the midst of the land.

13 But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof."

And such as those that hear the word several things can happen. 1) Satan comes immediately and takes away the word that is sown in ones heart.
2) others when they have heard the word, immediately receive it with gladness; and have no root in themselves so endure but for a time, afterward, when affliction or persecution arise immediately they are offended. 3) cares of this world, deceitfulness of riches, lusts of other things, choke the word, becoming unfruitful. 4) and they which hear it, receive it, and bring forth fruit.

Well I'm under the impression that no matter what happens there will always be people that simply CAN NOT be believers.

true blood,

Why is it that you think some people just cannot be believers?

Before I say anything else, let me make one thing clear: as far as I am concerned, we are all searchers for truth. We all seek knowledge and understanding in our own individual way. Therefore no one has the right to speak with 'final authority' on truth. Truth is open to all, but the way thereto is strictly an individual affair. We shouldn't take anything as true unless it feels right deep down inside. Why do I feel that some people can't be believers? Free-will. I feel that God wants his creation to serve him out of free-will, not by choice. Also in the bible many parables are used. The Parable of the Sower for instance. The sower soweth the word.
And these are they by the wayside, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts. And these are they likewise which are sown on stony ground; who, when they have heard the word, immediately receive it with gladness; and have no root in themselves, and so endure but for a time: afterward, when affliction or persecution ariseth for the word's sake, immediately they are offended. And these are they which are sown among thorns; such as hear the word, and the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful. And these are they which are sown on good ground; such as hear the word, and receive it, and bring forth fruit, some thirtyfold, some sixty, and some a hundred

From this parable alone you see several events that describe what can happen when the word of god is planted in man's heart. Not all will hear it, receive it, and and have become fruitful. Although the choice is available for all.

I know there's more info about predestined christians preordained by God before the beginnings of time. Every true believer is supposedly "bought with a price"

I probably should of stated that because of "Free will" some people cannot be believers. God wants everyone to believe in him, however he doesn't force it.

Wrong, True Blood. This is a forum for DEBATE about the Bible. If you only wanted people to look at it through a Christian point of view, then you should have put it in the Christian main forum.

I was told that one of my earlier post wasn't fit for the section it was posted in. That I would have to use the debate section

This IS the main christian forum.

Islam, The Science of Kabbalah, Buddhism, Unitarian Universalism, Hinduism, Scientology, Baha'i Faith, Satanism, Atheism, Taoism etc..

These are all provided for members that believe in these catagories. You don't see me in there being a critic to their beliefs. I try to have some respect to anyone's beliefs. But what I see is some members of these groups bashing the christians for their beliefs. Continuously so..

Is this then the consequences of believing in the bible?

true blood,

The full title of this thread, is "The Bible; How reliable is it?"

For some crazy reason, this makes me think that this thread is for discussing the reliability of the bible, which is exactly what I'm doing. I don't mean to offend anyone, but if you were expecting for this to be a discussion about how great the bible is, the title is most certainly misleading.

Whoops, sorry. The actual title is "The Bible; a solid argument?"

(Key element being the question mark at the end, kids)

***MOD POST***

Hmm... after looking into it again, I'm actually going to have to side with True Blood on this one. This topic is not open for debate. Isis asked a very specific question when she created this topic in the Christianity forum:

Isis said:

I don't understand how some can base their arguments on a book, maybe some of you could shed some light that I may not have considered?

Click to expand...

She wants to know why Christians base their arguments on the Bible... NOT why non-Christians disagree with basing arguments on the Bible. So, I'm going to have to put an end to this debate. Ceridwen018, while I agree with your arguments, this forum is not for debate. If you want to argue that arguments based on the Bible are invalid, you'll have to do so in the Debate forum (not to the Discussion forum, because that is also closed to debate).

Any more off-topic replies will be deleted. Thank you.

Alrighty, I gotcha

Hello all and God Bless. Hey, I just want to first say that God is real and His love for you will not cease, even if you do not accept Him. However, the choice is yours to make, "If you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved (Romans 10:9-10,13)." In addition, the one true God is one God three persons. The Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit, as scripture has revealed Him.
Now, as for the reliability of the Bible there is no book with more reliability or a foundation that to this day has not been shaken by skeptics, individuals who have actually have constistently tried to destroy the Bible throughout history, non-skeptics, critisicm, or any other action. The Bible is reliable because:
1. It has thousands of prophecies, which have come to pass to their exactness. For example, during this empire this king will be born to this family and his name will be this. Except the empire had not existed, and yet it came to pass. In addition, the prophecies were very specific by which the Messiah Jesus Christ had all prophecies concerning His first coming, fulfilled to their exactness. The chance of one of 8 prophecies(Their 300+ prophecies concerning Jesus, some concerning His second coming) occurring would be 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000. That is just eight, He fulfilled nearly 300.
2. Throghout history the Bible has proven right even when skeptics have denied its historic accuracy. For example, the Hittites were once considered to not exist outside the Bible by skeptics. Then, they were found, or at least the evidence for their existence was, again proving the Bible's reliablity.
3. To denie the new testament's reliablity would mean that one would have to deny Homer, Herodotus, Thucydides, Plato, Demosthenes, Caesar, Livy, Tacitus, and other such classic authors, because the new testament not only has copies written at least 50 years from the actual occurence, but as many as 25,000 copies proving its reliablity. The most from the classic author Homer is 643.
4. If one were to lose all the new testament copies, they could reproduce the new testament from other sources like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen, and many more.
5. It was written by 40 authors at different times, places, moods, three different continents, and individuals of completely different character. However, it has been constistent throughout. One purpose, the redemption of mankind.

There are many other examples of reliability, but I guess I would have to write a book to truly do the Bible and you justice. Also, I urgently remind you that the choice is yours to accept or deny the truth (John 14:6). No one is assured today or tomorrow, so please see the urgency in making a decision.

Thanks for reading, and God Bless (Romans 10:9-10, 13)

ONEWAY,

Ok, here is my take on this, from a skeptic's point of view.

1. It has thousands of prophecies, which have come to pass to their exactness. For example, during this empire this king will be born to this family and his name will be this. Except the empire had not existed, and yet it came to pass. In addition, the prophecies were very specific by which the Messiah Jesus Christ had all prophecies concerning His first coming, fulfilled to their exactness. The chance of one of 8 prophecies(Their 300+ prophecies concerning Jesus, some concerning His second coming) occurring would be 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000. That is just eight, He fulfilled nearly 300.

Click to expand...

First of all, many of the prophecies are pretty general, such as 'coming from the house of David', etc. There were many back then related to King David. Secondly, many of the prophecies are also totally unable to be proven without the Bible, such as the virgin birth. The only way you 'know' that Jesus was conceived by a virgin, is because you read it in the bible. Finally, it is my own running theory, that much of what is written about Jesus is hyperbolic legend. I do think that Jesus lived and was a real person, just not the divine son of god. I also believe that he was an extraordinary teacher, whom the people looked up to, but I am sure that he was not the only travelling preacher crucified for disobeying temple laws, which I believe is also a prophecy. You see, self-proclaimed 'rabbis', Jesus included, were ridiculously common back then, and they all preached some message of reformation, which in itself is a temple disobedience. The number of crucifixions is also staggering. So I agree, the odds are high, but coupled with their generality, as well as the huge number of possibilities (say, if there had only been a handful of crucifixtions, things would be different) the odds are belittled. All of this, not to mention the fact that the people who truly believed in him wanted desperately for him to be their long awaited messiah, and it would have certainly been easy for them to claim he was born in Bethlehem, etc. just to take care of that prophecy. This leads back to the virgin birth though-- all the evidence we have of Jesus' actual life is only to be found in the Bible, which without an objective outside measure, is a bit fishy to me.

2. Throghout history the Bible has proven right even when skeptics have denied its historic accuracy. For example, the Hittites were once considered to not exist outside the Bible by skeptics. Then, they were found, or at least the evidence for their existence was, again proving the Bible's reliablity.

Click to expand...

I agree that the Bible is historically accurate. Heck, it was written by people of that time, so they should know better than anyone what the geography and society was like, etc. In fact, historical accuracy is an absolute must for any document I would even consider taking seriously.

3. To denie the new testament's reliablity would mean that one would have to deny Homer, Herodotus, Thucydides, Plato, Demosthenes, Caesar, Livy, Tacitus, and other such classic authors, because the new testament not only has copies written at least 50 years from the actual occurence, but as many as 25,000 copies proving its reliablity. The most from the classic author Homer is 643.

Click to expand...

Alright, lets start with Homer. I do not deny the existence of his stories, certainly, but to claim that they are not fiction is ridiculous. With the realease of the movie Troy there has been increased interest in Homer, and I have read that archeologists now believe that a battle of that scale might have actually occured between the countries of Troy and Greece (before, archeologists didn't even think the battle itself was historical, let alone all the mythology; even now, there is no proof it actually took place, only evidence for a theory).
During his time, Caesar was much bigger than Jesus, and the difference between the two, is that most of the documents we have of Caesar come from a political field. His actions and even existence are proven by documents from countless countries and people, whereas Jesus seems only to have Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. You can't occupy the world without leaving a legacy, but even a bit of Caesar's could be exaggerated. Then again, like I said-- what we have of Caesar are not stories of his life, but political documents of his rule.
I do not believe the philosophers you mentioned to be disproved either, for what they wrote were their thoughts and viewpoints, which cannot be placed into a category of 'disproved' or otherwise. You could argue that certain documents placed under their names were not in fact written by them, and in truth I am not familiar enough with the archeology of them to refute that, but in this area, it really doesn't matter because a philosophy does not need a definitive author to exist. I agree that the bible is a philosophy, and whether it is true or not, that philosophy will always exist.

4. If one were to lose all the new testament copies, they could reproduce the new testament from other sources like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen, and many more.

Click to expand...

I have never heard of these, but I'll be sure to look into them...are you sure that the ENTIRE New Testament could be replaced? Or is it safer to say that it's just mentioned.

5. It was written by 40 authors at different times, places, moods, three different continents, and individuals of completely different character. However, it has been constistent throughout. One purpose, the redemption of mankind.

Click to expand...

It is indeed consistent in its moral message, and I think it teaches many people how to live better lives, but that's not what's at issue here. The issue is proving the validity of such events as the resurrection and the virgin birth, events which have no outside objective validation. If the bible were true beyond the shadow of a doubt, then these events would be as well, and thus everyone would become Christian. I am posting a website below which highlights some of the bigger contradictions between the gospels ( I don't have it on me now, but when I find it I'll post it immediately) The problem with these contradictions is that they undermine the entire work. You might say that the authors agree on all the big things, and that that's whats important, but details are what build the foundation for a story, and if those don't match up, everything has to be called into question. Think of it this way: The big things are easy to get right, because they are in fact big and unobscure. When one gets the details to match, then you've really got something.

ONEWAY,

Alrighty, here she is:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/paul_carlson/nt_contradictions.html

Ceridwen018 this thread is a gathering for all Christian denominations. Why not respect this?

Please consider that God's Holy Word has been around for approximatly 4000 years. How many other documents can make that claim? It has been added to in that time span by over 60 writers and all along the same line. This in itself is amazing. Those of us who serve Almighty God realize that not everyone will believe but we do still try to explain and many die, even today, for love of the Holy Word. Please consider that all life is moving to death but we know that deep inside there is a soul that will continue. Proof is in humans disregard for life. We know that we will live forever, somewhere. Someday like Voltaire, you may again express the fear as you face death that you do not know what is waiting for you on the other side of death.

martha dodge,

I have a thread entitled "Is the Bible Reliable", under religious debates. I'm replying to your message in there because we're not allowed to debate in here. Hope to talk to you again soon!

:hi: