• 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!

Reasons for believing in the Bible as the literal word of God.

Status
Not open for further replies.

TLK Valentine

Read the books that others would burn.
Where did the gods go? They were there, and then they weren't.

Were they there?


One explanation: they liked and supported faiths that let them hide from society such as Catholicism. That would make the bible the literal word of God

Another explanation: they were placeholders in belief systems that tried to explain the unexplainable mysteries of the world...

...until a funny thing happened: more and more "unexplainable" mysteries get explained, and the "gods" found themselves unemployed.



But I also question your certainty of History. Did you know that Livvy, our best known Roman Historian, said that most of Roman History passed on to him was manufactured? Its in the introduction to his work. He was unable to recover Rome's true history.

Was it not Napoleon who said that "history" is naught but a fable men choose to believe? Maybe not, but the sentiment is true enough regardless of who of anyone actually said it.

But if you're referring to my comparison of the Bible to secular history, then I should say that if the sum total of Secular history (which I did not get from Livvy, so your objection is invalid) is unreliable, then the Bible as a source of history is even more so, being based on far less.


Have you ever seen a political 'Dialogue'? Such spit and venom, but everyone gobbles it up like cream. And these people we rely upon to safeguard truth and History.

Who shall we rely on instead? You, or the Bible?




How easily we are fooled and taught through advertisements! How shallow is common sense which is about as reliable as The Discovery Channel. Do you know someone who likes alien conspiracies and ghost hunts? I don't but at some time most people do! Serious fellows like me can't be fooled that way, so we are fooled in other ways such as by crypto schemes.

I have no doubt that there are several ways which serious fellows such as yourself can be fooled.


I empathize, however the world is filled with chaos, lies, completely bedeviled beliefs that people are confident in.

Indeed -- The credulousness and mendacity of human beings is (sadly) constant.

Your own certainty is sadly familiar.

As are your attempts to undermine it.
 

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
Were they there?
Supposedly.
Another explanation: they were placeholders in belief systems that tried to explain the unexplainable mysteries of the world...

...until a funny thing happened: more and more "unexplainable" mysteries get explained, and the "gods" found themselves unemployed.
The mysteries of the world remain to be explained, and besides you are presuming your conclusion that the world is and has always been consistent.
Was it not Napoleon who said that "history" is naught but a fable men choose to believe? Maybe not, but the sentiment is true enough regardless of who of anyone actually said it.

But if you're referring to my comparison of the Bible to secular history, then I should say that if the sum total of Secular history (which I did not get from Livvy, so your objection is invalid) is unreliable, then the Bible as a source of history is even more so, being based on far less.
Napoleon was petty about human lives, yet he sought permanence.. Like all wealthy and famous men he strove to somehow leave an immortal mark upon this world, but it never stopped changing beneath his own feet.

Did you compare the bible to history? I don't think its a history book but an evidence of chaotic change. Nothing can be confirmed about History, and even our museum pieces gradually become irrelevant over time. They are like the Ozymandias poem. Kings build statues, but nothing lasts You build scientific and historical theories believing that those will last, hoping against hope. Your hope is so strong that you believe you cannot be wrong.

But if anything is proven wrong you will simply update your information. You will say that last theory existed to make way for something better. So there is no guarantee of correctness. There is also no reason to be sure future generations won't toss away learning and burn every book. But for now everyone is swept up in and convinced until the theory gets updated again.

Who shall we rely on instead? You, or the Bible?
I would probably start a harem
 

TLK Valentine

Read the books that others would burn.
Supposedly.

Let's remember that.

The mysteries of the world remain to be explained, and besides you are presuming your conclusion that the world is and has always been consistent.

On the whole, the human race has made some pretty good progress explaining mysteries -- the work is incomplete, but encouraging.

None of which would have been remotely possible without consistency... so you might want to abandon the notion that 2+2 is going to equal "fish" any time soon.

Napoleon was petty about human lives, yet he sought permanence.. Like all wealthy and famous men he strove to somehow leave an immortal mark upon this world, but it never stopped changing beneath his own feet.

Panta rei, and all that.

Did you compare the bible to history? I don't think its a history book but an evidence of chaotic change.

This should be interesting.


Nothing can be confirmed about History, and even our museum pieces gradually become irrelevant over time.

We've been over this - if history is a big unknowable, then the Bible is useless.


They are like the Ozymandias poem. Kings build statues, but nothing lasts You build scientific and historical theories believing that those will last, hoping against hope. Your hope is so strong that you believe you cannot be wrong.

Not sure who you're talking to... knowing - indeed, expecting to be wrong is at the heart of all scientific inquiry.

But if anything is proven wrong you will simply update your information. You will say that last theory existed to make way for something better. So there is no guarantee of correctness.

No guarantees whatsoever... the search for answers is a process, not a final result.
Which is where a constant comes into play... never stop searching.

There is also no reason to be sure future generations won't toss away learning and burn every book.

None whatsoever -- but should that unfortunate scenario ever come to pass, the human race can start over.

The art, history, literature... the humanities may very well end up lost forever, which would be tragic... but the science that was lost can be discovered again... someone will simply have to re-invent the wheel.

Now, here's the fun part: In the process of re-learning, There are going to be a lot of mysteries... and almost certainly some new gods to serve as placeholders.

But for now everyone is swept up in and convinced until the theory gets updated again.

...which is exactly how it's supposed to work.

We stand on an island of knowledge in an ocean of ignorance. Little by little, we wade out.

Why, what's the alternative?

I would probably start a harem

As would I, most likely -- perhaps then it's better to entrust the search for knowledge to far wiser people than either of us.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
Genesis chapter 1 says the first man and woman were made at the same time, and after the animals. But Genesis chapter 2 gives a different order of creation: man, then the animals, and then woman.
Genesis 1 doesn't say man and woman were created at the exact same time. And Genesis 2 doesn't speak of creating animals, it tells God formed animals in the garden. It is possible that created animals existed outside the garden before that.
Okay, New Testament: Matthew 2:13-15 depicts Joseph and Mary as fleeing to Egypt with the baby Jesus immediately after the wise men from the east had brought gifts. But Luke 2:22-40 claims that after the birth of Jesus, his parents remained in Bethlehem for the time of Mary’s purification (which was 40 days, under the Mosaic law). Afterwards, they brought Jesus to Jerusalem “to present him to the Lord,” and then returned to their home in Nazareth. Luke mentions no journey into Egypt or visit by wise men from the east.
Fleeing to Egypt could have happened after Mary's purification and all the things law required.
There are many, many, many internal contradictions like this -- too many to bother with here. But let's look at just one more: Ezekial 18 says, "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him." Of course, that's simple justice. And yet, when David sinned with Bathsheba, who died at the will of God-- taking a cruel 7 days to do so? Their child. So God doesn't even bother paying attention to his own rules.
The reason for the death was not necessary the iniquity of father. It could have been just the result of the action otherwise.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Genesis 1 doesn't say man and woman were created at the exact same time. And Genesis 2 doesn't speak of creating animals, it tells God formed animals in the garden. It is possible that created animals existed outside the garden before that.

Fleeing to Egypt could have happened after Mary's purification and all the things law required.

The reason for the death was not necessary the iniquity of father. It could have been just the result of the action otherwise.
I just love that each of your answers says, "it is possible," "could have happened" and "could have been."

One has to wonder why there's never anything better, and then one has to wonder why on earth anyone would imagine any ofthose "possibilities-sans-evidence."

But I guess if it's all you've got to go on, it will have to do.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Genesis 1 doesn't say man and woman were created at the exact same time. And Genesis 2 doesn't speak of creating animals, it tells God formed animals in the garden. It is possible that created animals existed outside the garden before that.

Fleeing to Egypt could have happened after Mary's purification and all the things law required.

The reason for the death was not necessary the iniquity of father. It could have been just the result of the action otherwise.
If the Bible is the "word of God" even apparent contradictions should not exist. That alone tells us that at best God is incompetent. I see that you had no explanation for the ten year difference between the dates of nativity between Luke and Matthew.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
I just love that each of your answers says, "it is possible," "could have happened" and "could have been."

One has to wonder why there's never anything better, and then one has to wonder why on earth anyone would imagine any ofthose "possibilities-sans-evidence."

But I guess if it's all you've got to go on, it will have to do.
My goal is not make people to believe, just to understand that the opinions atheists offer, are not necessary the truth.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
If the Bible is the "word of God" even apparent contradictions should not exist.
Person who wants to see contradictions, can always read texts so that it could look contradictory, if he is free and lives.
That alone tells us that at best God is incompetent. I see that you had no explanation for the ten year difference between the dates of nativity between Luke and Matthew.
Sorry, what was the problem with dates of nativity?
 

TLK Valentine

Read the books that others would burn.
My goal is not make people to believe, just to understand that the opinions atheists offer, are not necessary the truth.

Neither are yours - but it's clear that in order to accept your opinions as plausible, we'd have to twist our minds in knots.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
My goal is not make people to believe, just to understand that the opinions atheists offer, are not necessary the truth.
No one has said that they are "necessarily the truth". Though to deny some of them is self contradictory. You should be a bit more specific.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Person who wants to see contradictions, can always read texts so that it could look contradictory, if he is free and lives.
[/QUOTE]

You need to quit making false accusations as part of your argument. No one "wants to see contradictions". They are simply there. You cannot deal with them properly. They are still there after your poor arguments.
Sorry, what was the problem with dates of nativity?
LOL! If you do not even know what is in your book of myths how do you expect others to take you seriously? The account in Luke is very clear as to when Jesus was born. It specifically mentions Quirinius and the survey of Judea that he made when the Romans made that territory officially part of Rome. That even is well dated by a historian often cited by Christians to support the existence of Jesus. The Census of Quirinius was in 6 CE.

Matthew on the other hand is much more vague. But we know that Herod the Great was still King of Israel at that time. Israel was a client state of Rome under his rule. They were independent states that still ran themselves. They existed as a buffer between Rome and possible enemies. They were still self ruling. Rome could not have ordered a census of them, nor was there any reason for them to do so. There would have been no census of them at that time. So wrong ruler for Judea at the time of Jesus's birth and no census in Mathew, you will notice that the did not use that idea. He had Joseph already in Bethlehem. @TLK Valentine already told you of this problem. Biblical scholars are practically unanimous about this obvious self contradiction. You will not find an honest one that can defend it.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Fleeing to Egypt could have happened after Mary's purification and all the things law required.
Either that or the author was drawing a symbolic similarity to Moses' venture. Things like Jesus being the "new Adam" tend to be commonly used in ancient Semitic literature.
 

SDavis

Member
Bad analogy. UFO's have been shown again and again to be just unexpected side effects of new technology. They have been shown to be man made errors. Oh wait! I see your point. The Bible is merely an anthology of human errors and false beliefs.
Think what you want to think about the Bible that's your business.

A wise person would see what is written in the Bible concerning the goings and comings of extraterrestrial beings is occurring today as it was in the ancient days. The only difference is is they cannot directly communicate with mankind as they did. But they will again and the world is being prepped for it.

I don't know where you get your information from but what you are saying is false.
Some phenomenons have been explained but far too many haven't been and can't be. The latest article

None of these people below are stupid but highly educated, holding high ranking offices and they're not mistaking what they see or know

President Carter In 1969, Jimmy Carter saw a UFO in Georgia. Here's what happened.

President Reagan

President Barack Obama

military personnel

US military reports 'several hundred' UFO sightings in 2022, Pentagon officials claim




Governments around the world have been searching for UFOs - sightings by civilians around the world on the rise.

The US government after the crash in Roswell began UFO investigations in 1947 from Project Signed to Project Grudge to Project Blue Book up until today with Donald Trump's Space Force

The Phoenix lights 1997 still unexplained
......
the Battle for Los Angeles what they were shooting at never came down and if it was Japan attacking they didn't fire anything.


And there is much much more information out there.... But you as you may
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Some phenomenons have been explained but far too many haven't been and can't be. The latest article

None of these people below are stupid but highly educated, holding high ranking offices and they're not mistaking what they see or know

President Carter In 1969, Jimmy Carter saw a UFO in Georgia. Here's what happened.

President Reagan

President Barack Obama

military personnel

US military reports 'several hundred' UFO sightings in 2022, Pentagon officials claim




Governments around the world have been searching for UFOs - sightings by civilians around the world on the rise.

The US government after the crash in Roswell began UFO investigations in 1947 from Project Signed to Project Grudge to Project Blue Book up until today with Donald Trump's Space Force

The Phoenix lights 1997 still unexplained
......
the Battle for Los Angeles what they were shooting at never came down and if it was Japan attacking they didn't fire anything.


And there is much much more information out there.... But you as you may
Yes, most have been shown to be false. I do not respond to Gish Gallops, unless you want to play by my rules. When you Gish Gallop the refutation of one claim refutes them all. Do you want to play that game? Do you remember when a few years ago when there were three UFO sighting released? They were quickly refuted in very short time. The experts "may not be stupid"., but they are often experts in the wrong fields. For example the GOFAST UFO was most likely a high flying bird. How was that determined. The data gave the elevation and distance to the object That allowed a calculation of its size. It's motion was apparent motion. The plane itself was moving rapidly. They system would lock onto a subject and keep it centered. Have you ever locked your eyes onto a fencepost as you were riding in a car? The background will appear to be moving rapidly behind the fencepost due to your own motion. That appears to what happened with the bird. A plane that was moving very rapidly locked onto an object that would be almost stationary in comparison. The motion was that of the background, not of the UFD (Unidentified Flying Duck).
 

Thrillobyte

Active Member
So, do I have it right? There is no good reason to believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God.
It's hard to believe the Bible is inerrant when by last count scholars had caught 50,000 errors and contradictions in it.

 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
It's hard to believe the Bible is inerrant when by last count scholars had caught 50,000 errors and contradictions in it.

I do not think that this site has all 50,000 but it does it in such a pretty way:

 

SDavis

Member
Yes, most have been shown to be false. I do not respond to Gish Gallops, unless you want to play by my rules. When you Gish Gallop the refutation of one claim refutes them all. Do you want to play that game? Do you remember when a few years ago when there were three UFO sighting released? They were quickly refuted in very short time. The experts "may not be stupid"., but they are often experts in the wrong fields. For example the GOFAST UFO was most likely a high flying bird. How was that determined. The data gave the elevation and distance to the object That allowed a calculation of its size. It's motion was apparent motion. The plane itself was moving rapidly. They system would lock onto a subject and keep it centered. Have you ever locked your eyes onto a fencepost as you were riding in a car? The background will appear to be moving rapidly behind the fencepost due to your own motion. That appears to what happened with the bird. A plane that was moving very rapidly locked onto an object that would be almost stationary in comparison. The motion was that of the background, not of the UFD (Unidentified Flying Duck).
Person of your said intelligence should be able to do better than what you just posted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top