1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured How Do We Know The Bible is True?

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by Skwim, Oct 28, 2018.

  1. Skwim

    Skwim Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    26,337
    Ratings:
    +10,453
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    Well. . . . . ?

    The Focus on the Family web site has tried to answer this question but fails miserably. It asked "How Do We Know the Bible Is True?" and then went on to answer by essentially saying "because Christians believe it is." Nice, but hardly convincing. Nothing becomes true simply because we believe it is. Of course other characteristics were cited that supposedly confirm the Bible's truth: "it corresponds to reality," it's "internally consistent," and it's "coherent." But as we all know, this can be equally true of a whole lot of BS.

    Then they presented a basket full of specious evidence such as, "copies show that the Bible has been transmitted accurately," "the Christian worldview is robust, reasonable and grounded in history," and "making a case for the truth of the resurrection also makes a case for the truth claims of Jesus and, in turn, the reliability and truth of the Bible." and what makes the case for the truth of the resurrection? They say it's Paul's admission that "if the resurrection did not happen, Christian faith "is futile; you are still in your sins."

    Sound like rational arguments to you? They sure don't to me,

    But perhaps Focus on the Family is simply inept at making a case for the truth of the Bible, and inadvertently botched the job. So I ask:,

    What rational evidence do you have that the Bible is true?
    (No need to bother yourself with things such as the Flood or Jonah in the "big fish." I'm dismissing them as tall tails)

    .
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Hockeycowboy

    Hockeycowboy Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2015
    Messages:
    5,508
    Ratings:
    +3,164
    Religion:
    Christian
    (Is this why you haven't posted on the thread, Evidences Supporting the Biblical Flood ? What should I attribute this to? Bias?)

    How about this? It's one line of evidence after another:

    http://www.2001translation.com/Authenticity.htm
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Misunderstood

    Misunderstood Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2015
    Messages:
    377
    Ratings:
    +305
    Religion:
    Christian
    Of course it is true! If someone believes God exists in their mind, is it not true God exists in their mind?

    What about an engineer, he feels he can build a bridge to cross a great divide, does that not exist in his mind. But he now goes a step further and builds the bridge and it works as he stated, has his belief not become something physical that can be observed and tested?
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  4. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    23,628
    Ratings:
    +8,823
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    Just like an engineer built a bridge.

    Christianity has built their God.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. adrian009

    adrian009 Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    8,199
    Ratings:
    +6,148
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    It’s true to the extent that it becomes a reality in the live’s of its followers that they become better people and it brings lasting change to communities. It doesn’t need to be historically true in its entirety but it does need to be theologically true, at least in the hearts of those who believe in it.
     
  6. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    7,925
    Ratings:
    +2,121
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    As I read the article, I find that your statements prove that you want it to be unprovable..

    I, personally, would add the prophetic accuracy too.
     
  7. Dave Watchman

    Dave Watchman Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2018
    Messages:
    94
    Ratings:
    +32
    Religion:
    Waldensian
    I took a scan of the article. It didn't really knock me off of my seat.

    But i'm sure that the Bible is true. How sure? If it's impossible to be 100% without Divine revelation, then i'd be 99.9% The proof, the empirical, is embedded within the Bible's 18 prophetic time periods. But i don't think it would be appropriate material for here right now. But if you can find the Abomination, and then know therefore and understand that it is EXACTLY 1290 days until a "darkened" sun and a moon that will not give her light, you could see that this would be impossible to fake, even by a dragon empowered composite beast.

    Did you ever notice how so many of the sub atomic particle scientists are God believers? And guys like Isaac Newton and Einstein?

    "For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. - Romans 1:20-21
    Don't let the foolish heart, be "darkened".

    [​IMG]
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. Anna Therese

    Anna Therese Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2018
    Messages:
    52
    Ratings:
    +12
    Religion:
    Traditional Catholic
    I know the Bible is true because God (Who can neither deceive nor be deceived) has revealed it to be true through His Church and I have the infallible authority of the Church.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Earthling

    Earthling David Henson

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,793
    Ratings:
    +756
    Religion:
    Bible Believer
    What rational evidence do we have to establish anything as true?
    And how different is it than the God of the Bible.
     
  10. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    23,628
    Ratings:
    +8,823
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    It isn't. Both are completely man-made.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    23,628
    Ratings:
    +8,823
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    I guess it all depends upon a person's standards of believability.

    The Bible I could say is a true window into the past because of its age concerning a sect of Christianity. It's still, when everything is said and done, a book of ancient mythology written by people long gone that a number of people living today like to think it's true solely on the basis of what is read.

    There's a fair number of people out there who want something more substantial to go by then just blindly accepting an old book at face value just because other people who never wrote it say the same exact thing as they themselves have been told originally.

    It's not hard to see how these things can take hold for some people who don't have a high level of critique and skepticism when it comes to things like this.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Earthling

    Earthling David Henson

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,793
    Ratings:
    +756
    Religion:
    Bible Believer
    Well, that's debatable. If we could take it to a court of law to decide the evidence I have in support of the Bible being "true" in as much as we can determine it, would be much greater than the evidence that you have. The concept that it was made up is a relatively new one, being popularized only in the 19th century C.E.

    Even if we were to dismiss the supernatural as possible evidence I would easily win the case. How? Through historical, astronomical and archaeological evidence.
     
  13. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    23,628
    Ratings:
    +8,823
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    There is no prophetic accuracy. Each successive author just adds in enough language in order to "fulfill" things.

    It's not hard to make anything accurate if you're privy to what was written earlier.

    You can just make up things as you go along like comparisons of verses with the Old Testament and the New Testament and inventing a "link" that "fulfills" whatever criteria is desired.
     
  14. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    23,628
    Ratings:
    +8,823
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    There is no historical astronomical and archaeological evidence. In fact, there is no evidence. None whatsoever.

    There's references to real places, some people, and times.

    It doesn't help if what you are referencing, has no record in its own right to collaborate whatever is being claimed.

    The only real world evidence is the recorded beliefs concerning an ancient sect of Christianity. It pretty much begins and ends with that.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Earthling

    Earthling David Henson

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,793
    Ratings:
    +756
    Religion:
    Bible Believer
    Of what?

    Evidence is subjective. You aren't going to accept any evidence that doesn't support your supposition. If the Bible says that Pilate existed and critics of the Bible doubt it until 1961 when an archaeological expedition found a stone slab near Caesarea listing the Latin names of Pilate and Tiberius that's evidence of the Bible being true in the case of the existence of Pontius Pilate.

    Is it possible that the slab is no more accurate than the Bible? There you go - the difficulty in demonstrating something is true. If I say I had cornflakes for breakfast it would be very difficult ot establish as true. What would be the evidence of it? A photograph? A half empty box of cornflakes? A newspaper article? Eyewitness testimony?

    Lets be realistic.
     
  16. Hubert Farnsworth

    Hubert Farnsworth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2016
    Messages:
    2,701
    Ratings:
    +1,876
    Religion:
    De Facto Atheist - technically Agnostic
    Ahh, you mean like the prophecy that Nebuchednezzar would destroy Tyre and that Tyre would never exist again, but Tyre still exists today? Or the prophecy that "some who were standing" there would still be alive at the time of Jesus' return?
     
  17. Earthling

    Earthling David Henson

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,793
    Ratings:
    +756
    Religion:
    Bible Believer
    You've read that on some atheist website? It isn't true, so I would like for you to present support of it in scripture. there were multiple prophecies regarding the destruction of Tyre, and they all were fulfilled. None of them say that Tyre would never exist again, and in fact, one of the prophecies goes on to describe to exactly how it would exist.

    The second case you mention, of "some who were standing" also is inaccurate. For a lengthy explanation of this, the following . . .

    Some Bible critics think that, according to the Bible, the end would come within the lifetime of Jesus' listeners, but in reality they mistake the transfiguration, the destruction of Jerusalem, Jesus being at the right hand of power, and John's Revelation at Patmos.

    Matthew 16:28 - Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. (Also see Mark 9:1 / Luke 9:27)
    The Interpreter's Bible says: "The prediction was not fulfilled, and later Christians found it necessary to explain that it was metaphorical."

    What believers and skeptics alike seem to have glossed over is the fact that in the very next verse Matthew reveals that just 6 days later this prophecy was fulfilled. Peter, James and John witnessed the transfiguration. (Matthew 17:1-2 / Luke 9:27-36 / 2 Peter 1:16-18)

    Matthew 23:36 - Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. (Also see Matthew 24:34 / Mark 13:30 / Luke 21:32)

    All of the above verses differ from the verses given in consideration of Matthew 16:28. British scholar G. R. Beasley-Murray: "The phrase 'this generation' should cause no difficulty for interpreters. While admittedly genea in earlier Greek meant birth, progeny, and so race, . . . in the [Greek Septuagint] it most frequently translated the Hebrew term dor, meaning age, age of humankind, or generation in the sense of contemporaries. . . . In sayings attributed to Jesus the term appears to have a twofold connotation: on the one hand it always signifies his contemporaries, and on the other hand it always carries an implicit criticism."

    So Jesus could have been directing that statement to the Jewish opposition there around him at that time, who, within a generation would see the destruction of Jerusalem in 66 - 70 C.E. by Titus, the son of Emperor Vespasian where 1,100,000 Jews died and 97,000 were taken captive, most of whom died horrible deaths and the Christians who knew it would come were saved. (Matthew 24:16, Matthew 24:22) And Jesus may have been applying the same to those in opposition in the future as well.

    Matthew 26:64 and Mark 14:62 are parallel accounts to one another and you won't have to wait or look far to see them fulfilled. Acts of the Apostles 7:55-56: "But he, being full of holy spirit gazed into heaven and caught sight of God's glory and of Jesus standing at God's right hand, and he said: "Look! I behold the heavens opened up and the Son of man standing at God's right hand." Also see Psalm 110:1 / Luke 22:69 / Ephesians 1:20 / Colossians 3:1.

    John 21:20-23 is somewhat interesting. Jesus may have been telling Peter that John would live longer than him, and in fact John would live 70 years, but also he might have been referring to the prophetic vision that John was given at the end of his life while in exile on the island of Patmos. As recorded in the book of Revelation John was transported to "the Lords day." (Revelation 1:1, Revelation 1:10; Revelation 22:20)

    The end will come within the lifetime of the New Testament authors?

    Response: Jesus taught his followers that no one, not even Jesus himself, knew the time of the end of the world. (Matthew 24:36 / Mark 13:32 / Acts of the Apostles 1:7)

    Also at this point some clarification should be made as to what exactly is the "end of the world." The Bible says that Earth was given to man for him to fill and subdue it, that the meek will inherit the earth and live forever upon it, and that it will last forever. (Genesis 1:28 / Psalms 37:29; Psalms 115:16 / Ecclesiastes 1:4) The end of the world is the end of the present system of things and all that involves. Of Satan's influence and sin, which, when concluding brings much destruction, but when ended, allows peace.

    1 Corinthians 1:7-8; 1 Corinthians 7:29 / Philippians 1:10 all convey the importance of the missionary work in the early stages of Christianity. They all had important work to do before the end of their lives. Nowhere in any of these passages is it conveyed that they expected the end of the system of things to occur during that time.

    1 Thessalonians 4:17 is often used to support the rapture, but actually it is referring to some who were mourning the death of their fellow Christians. Paul was reminding them as well as faithful Christians in the future of the resurrection hope, some to heaven immediately upon death and some to paradise earth upon resurrection.

    1 Thessalonians 5:23 refers to the presence of Jesus Christ. The Greek noun parousia is used. It means "being alongside." In his work on The Parousia, Israel P. Warren, D.D., wrote: "Had our translators done with this technical word 'parousia' as they did with 'baptisma,' - transferring it unchanged, - or if translated using its exact etymological equivalent, presence, and had it been well understood, as it then would have been, that there is no such thing as a 'Second Presence,' I believe that the entire doctrine would have been different from what it now is. The phrases, 'second advent,' and 'second coming,' would never have been heard of. The church would have been taught to speak of The Presence Of The Lord, as that from which its hopes were to be realized, whether in the near future or at the remotest period, - that under which the world was to be made new, a resurrection both spiritual and corporeal should be attained, and justice and everlasting awards administered."
    The word occurs 24 times in the Christian Greek scripture: Matthew 24:3, Matthew 24:27, Matthew 24:37, Matthew 24:39 / 1 Corinthians 15:23; 1 Corinthians 16:17 / 2 Corinthians 7:6, 2 Corinthians 7:7; 2 Corinthians 10:10 / Philippians 1:26; Philippians 2:12 / 1 Thessalonians 2:19; 1 Thessalonians 3:13; 1 Thessalonians 4:15; 1 Thessalonians 5:23 / 2 Thessalonians 2:1, 2 Thessalonians 2:8, 2 Thessalonians 2:9 / James 5:7-8 / 2 Peter 1:16; 2 Peter 3:4, 2 Peter 3:12 / 1 John 2:28.

    Pareimi is a related verb with the similar meaning of being present. It also occurs 24 times in the Christian Greek scripture: Matthew 26:50 / Luke 13:1 / John 7:6; John 11:28 / Acts of the Apostles 10:21, Acts of the Apostles 10:33; Acts of the Apostles 12:20; Acts of the Apostles 17:6; Acts of the Apostles 24:19 / Acts of the Apostles 12:20 / 1 Corinthians 5:33 / 2 Corinthians 10:2, 2 Corinthians 10:11; 2 Corinthians 11:9; 2 Corinthians 13:2, 2 Corinthians 13:10 / Galatians 4:18-20 / Colossians 1:6 / Hebrews 12:11; Hebrews 13:5 / 2 Peter 1:9-12 / Revelation 17:8.

    The Greek word, eleusis (Latin adventu), which conveys the physical act of coming is different and only occurs once in the Christian Greek scripture, at Acts of the Apostles 7:52. Paul was encouraging those with a heavenly hope to remain blameless until their death, or the conclusion of the system of things and the presence, not the physical presence, of Jesus Christ.

    In discussing Hebrews 1:2; Hebrews 9:26 / 1 Peter 1:20; 1 Peter 4:7 it is somewhat difficult to stay on topic of the so called end of the world because the last days that Paul was referring to were not the last days of the present system of things, but rather the last days of the Jewish system of things. Jehovah had given the prophecy of those days 850 years earlier. (Joel 2:28-32 / Acts of the Apostles 2:16-21 / Hebrews 1:1-2) It was the end of God's favor upon the Jewish congregation and the beginning of his favor for the new Christian congregation.

    1 John 2:18 refers to the end of the apostolic period. The work mentioned as important in the scriptures at the beginning of this article were near completion and would conclude upon the death of John shortly after he completed the writing of Revelation.

    The end will come soon. (Within a couple thousand years or so)?

    Response: It is interesting that, as with the case of Philippians 4:5, the Lord that is being referred to isn't Jesus Christ but rather, Jehovah. Codex Sinaiticus, Greek, fourth century C.E., Codex Alexandrinus, Greek, fifth century C.E., Vatican ms 1209, Greek, fourth century C.E., Christian Greek Scriptures in 12 languages, including Hebrew, by Elias Hutter, Nuremberg, 1599, Christian Greek Scriptures, Hebrew, by William Robertson, London, 1661, and the Latin Vulgate, by Jerome, c. 400 C.E. (Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem) all read Jehovah.

    James 5:7-8 is talking about the presence (parousia) mentioned earlier in this article.

    At Hebrews 10:37 Paul quotes Habakkuk 2:2-3 from the Greek Septuagint, which reads "And the Lord answered [me] and said: Write a vision; write it distinctly in a book that the reader may trace these things [may run]; for the vision is for a time yet to come. But it will spring up at last and will not be vain. Though he may tarry, wait for him; for he will assuredly come and will not fail [and will not tarry]."

    Revelation 1:1, Revelation 1:3; Revelation 3:11; Revelation 22:7, Revelation 22:12, Revelation 22:20 may undoubtedly amuse the skeptic, who, of course, is familiar with the Biblical fact that a thousand years are as a watch in the night to God (Psalms 90:4), but to the writers of the Bible, especially John when writing Revelation and who would die shortly afterward, the resurrection hope would follow sleep in death which would seem, upon that resurrection, as the same day as they died, though it actually had been thousands of years.
     
  18. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    7,925
    Ratings:
    +2,121
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    I disagree
     
  19. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    7,925
    Ratings:
    +2,121
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    I'm talking about Israel being a country again, successive reigns after Nebu, Josiah who wouldl be born to the house of David hundreds of years later that would sacrifice the priests of the high places who make offerings here, and human bones on the grave of Jeroboam. etc.

    Not old parroted examples and bad interpretations.
     
  20. Kelly of the Phoenix

    Kelly of the Phoenix Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,948
    Ratings:
    +2,653
    Religion:
    "Post" Christian, likely Deist
    Isn't Israel a country again SPECIFICALLY because people were trying to make the prophecy happen? It'd be more impressive if all these "prophecies" were unknown to the ones fulfilling them. Jesus goes out of his way to fulfill some of them, like riding a donkey. This was ancient Judea. It'd be more impressive if Jesus came in driving a Lexus.
     
Loading...