The Bible - Why Trust It

[URAVIP2ME]

Sorry. How are you not worshiping jesus when you pray to god you pray in the name of jesus? You dont have to say "I worship you jesus" to put him at such high importance, he can act as gods go-between himself.

Right, we don't have to say, and we don't say, 'I worship Jesus' because Jesus taught to worship only his father at John 4:23-24. We are to worship/pray our Father in heaven as Jesus taught while on Earth.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I find that Jesus, the teachings of Jesus, are only found between the pages of Scripture.
The two ( Scripture and Jesus ) are inseparable.

Remember Jesus was speaking or addressing those opposing Jews against him.
They had the Scriptures ( as does apostate Christendom today ) but they chose to ignore Jesus.

I skip the last part. So if you have no scirpture, you Literally have no jesus??

You dont worship jesus but you use scrpture as an idol of jesus with whom, without him, youd have no eternal life?

 

[sojourner]

They felt they had eternal life because they had the Scriptures. ( so does apostate Christendom today )

No Christians I know in any of a number of denominations believe that the Bible saves them. And I know A. Lot. Of people.

What those Jews were ignoring was that those Scriptures were leading up to Messiah coming

But that Messiah was not Jesus, according to them.

So, those corrupted Jews were Not like the common people who were living in ' expectation ' of Messiah's arrival in the first century as per Luke 3:15.

Your history is weak.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Right, we don't have to say, and we don't say, 'I worship Jesus' because Jesus taught to worship only his father at John 4:23-24. We are to worship/pray our Father in heaven as Jesus taught while on Earth.

Whats the difference?

You dont need to say his name to still worship jesus. If you just believed in god, you would not need jesus.

 

[sojourner]

Right, we don't have to say, and we don't say, 'I worship Jesus' because Jesus taught to worship only his father at John 4:23-24. We are to worship/pray our Father in heaven as Jesus taught while on Earth.

Yet, Disciples fell at Jesus’ feet and worshiped him, and he didn’t correct them...

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Right. We take literacy for granted. In Jesus’ time (and before), most people couldn’t read, and most writing took place on soft clay tablets. Most things weren’t written down, but transmitted orally. The written word is a comparatively recent development in Christendom.

The scrolls were kept in the temple, so people went to the temple to read them as Jesus did at Luke 4:16.
When Zechariah asked for a writing tablet at Luke 1:63 I find it would have been a wooden framed table coated with wax. Probably bee's wax and a stylus used to write on it.
Even children used them. Kind of like a first-century etch-a-sketch.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Whats the difference?
You dont need to say his name to still worship jesus. If you just believed in god, you would not need jesus.

I find, as Jesus said our Father in heaven hallowed ( sacred ) be 'YOUR' name.
Jesus did Not say his name was to be hallowed or held sacred.
Jesus said he would declare his Father's name as found at John 17:6 and John 17:26.
Since God sent Jesus to Earth for us, then yes, we need Jesus because Jesus paid the ransom price for us with his faithful life.

 

[sojourner]

The scrolls were kept in the temple, so people went to the temple to read them as Jesus did at Luke 4:16.
When Zechariah asked for a writing tablet at Luke 1:63 I find it would have been a wooden framed table coated with wax. Probably bee's wax and a stylus used to write on it.
Even children used them. Kind of like a first-century etch-a-sketch.

No. Some people could read. Most of them simply memorized the hearing. Yes, wax or clay, but the writing was not meant to be permanent. No, I’m afraid there’s ample evidence to show that this was an overwhelmingly oral culture.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Yet, Disciples fell at Jesus’ feet and worshiped him, and he didn’t correct them...

KJV English does Not always convey the meaning we have today.
Worship was in the sense of doing obeisance which is more like showing respect.
Kind of like in some countries where people 'bow' in respect to elders.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I find, as Jesus said our Father in heaven hallowed ( sacred ) be 'YOUR' name.
Jesus did Not say his name was to be hallowed or held sacred.
Jesus said he would declare his Father's name as found at John 17:6 and John 17:26.
Since God sent Jesus to Earth for us, then yes, we need Jesus because Jesus paid the ransom price for us with his faithful life.

Whats the difference?

Worship means you put someone or something above yourself in reverance. Since jesus holds that position, you are worshiping jesus. The difference is not As god; but, you worship him just the same.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Whats the difference?
Worship means you put someone or something above yourself in reverance. Since jesus holds that position, you are worshiping jesus. The difference is not As god; but, you worship him just the same.

Jesus worshipped his God, and Jesus still thinks he has a God over him according to Revelation 3:12.
No where does Jesus teach he is God, but I find as God's Son as per John 10:36.
At John 4:23-24 Jesus directs worship to his God.
We can have reverence for a parent without worshipping one's parent or parents.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Jesus worshipped his God, and Jesus still thinks he has a God over him according to Revelation 3:12.
No where does Jesus teach he is God, but I find as God's Son as per John 10:36.
At John 4:23-24 Jesus directs worship to his God.
We can have reverence for a parent without worshipping one's parent or parents.

Whats the difference?

If you are not worshiping christ, you do not need him in your faith. You would only need god. Regardless if jesus is god or not, is not my question nor statement. As long as you need to pray in the name of ejsus and need him for your salvation, thats beyond reverence. That is by definition worship. Reverence dosnt mean you put that person above you.Worship you do.

I mean, I revere The Buddha and The Dharma; they are very important foudnations to life both speciifc and in general. I dont worship The Buddha nor The Dharma. The historical buddha nad physical suttas do nothing. Worship is in and of itself through us.

In contrast

You interrelate physical scriptures with jesus christ
You use physical scriptures as i they are the word of christ
You pray in the name of christ

These rae all acts of worship not reverence

 

[Thaif]

Pretty dumb thought, considering how few read it.
I havent, You havent.

But then, you were at a loss for a clever quip, and,
that was the best you could do.

Actually I have, The preface by Gillian Beer was particularly onerous and must have taken a quarter of the dreary tome, bit of a fan-girl I think. I only read it to see what the fuss was about. Darwin spends a lot of time apologising and theorising doesn't mention humans in his work. The appendices, index and reference take up what must be another fifth of the book. All in all a disappointing, shorter than expected work. I suspect Darwin was more of an agnostic that atheist and not very good at it.

 

[blü 2]

"There are no absolute truths," sounds like a claim to an absolute truth

or is it just me?

Well, maybe just that one absolute truth ...

 

[ChristineM]

I find Jesus ' laced ', so to speak, his teachings by weaving a tapestry picture of biblical teachings together for us.
The ' facts ' Jesus used were ALL based on the old Hebrew Scriptures explaining them for us.
In other words, Jesus used logical reasoning on the historical Hebrew Scriptures teaching fulfillment of them.
For example: God promised father Abraham that ALL families and ALL nations of Earth will be blessed.
In the Revelation which Jesus gave to John is that ALL nations of Earth will be blessed with the benefit of healing.
Whether a person chooses to believe the teachings of Christ is a personal matter, but the threads of the Bible are closely sewn together from Genesis (paradise lost) to Revelation (paradise regained - Revelation 22:2)

Your view is fine by you.

You need to look up and learn the definition of ''fact"

There is no actual evidence of jesus, nor any of god.

And no, not woven closely, there are considerable differences and contradictions between the writing of the 40(ish) authors.

The NT was not compiled (selectively, by committee) until some 350 years after events. In a time when most people could not write and data was stored in peoples brains to be passed on as it suited the owner of that data, with any embellishments the data store saw fit.

But you, and many others find comfort in the book.

 

[Audie]

Actually I have, The preface by Gillian Beer was particularly onerous and must have taken a quarter of the dreary tome, bit of a fan-girl I think. I only read it to see what the fuss was about. Darwin spends a lot of time apologising and theorising doesn't mention humans in his work. The appendices, index and reference take up what must be another fifth of the book. All in all a disappointing, shorter than expected work. I suspect Darwin was more of an agnostic that atheist and not very good at it.

I think you would find that a lot of 19th or 18th century writing
is not to your taste. A George Washington letter say.

In the event, the book is as I said, not a popular one, and
your pretty much said why.

AND, the relative popularity has many reasons for the bible
being so overstudied. But one is that it can be made
to say whatever the reader wishes it to say. N'est-ce
pas?

 

[Audie]

Well, maybe just that one absolute truth ...

If that is not it, I'd like to hear one that is.

 

[Thaif]

I think you would find that a lot of 19th or 18th century writing
is not to your taste. A George Washington letter say.

In the event, the book is as I said, not a popular one, and
your pretty much said why.

AND, the relative popularity has many reasons for its
being so overstudied. But one is that it can be made
to say whatever the reader wishes it to say. N'est-ce
pas?

Darwin's book was surprisingly undersold and not very popular, surprising for such an over quoted tome. Gillian Beer is actually still alive and kicking, Darwin, not so much, I'm happy to talk about some more contemporary "scientists", Chomsky is still around, he is a linguist who at one stage thought that humans had evolved a speech organ but like most scientists with dumb ideas, he dropped that train of thought. We could go on about Dawkins but I don't much like him. Perhaps you don't actually read, much? Maybe science is not your interest? Adding a little French, by the way, is not really clever.

 

[Audie]

Darwin's book was surprisingly undersold and not very popular, surprising for such an over quoted tome. Gillian Beer is actually still alive and kicking, Darwin, not so much, I'm happy to talk about some more contemporary "scientists", Chomsky is still around, he is a linguist who at one stage thought that humans had evolved a speech organ but like most scientists with dumb ideas, he dropped that train of thought. We could go on about Dawkins but I don't much like him. Perhaps you don't actually read, much? Maybe science is not your interest? Adding a little French, by the way, is not really clever.

You seconded my observation that the bible and darwins
book are hardly comparable re popularity or reasons for same.

The ideas expressed are what is of importance, not the length or style of Darwin being as you put it "over quoted".
This is all obvious.

I wonder what got into you that you are being so rude
for no reason.

ETA, corrected an error in my earlier post..
many reasons for the bible

 

[Jumi]

I cannot but agree with that in bold, it is the same
thing I do. Other than that I've not opened a bible in
years, may never again.

I remember lots from the book, would be strange if I didn't since I've read it and had mandatory religious schooling for a decade in the education system for the state religion. Other than that I almost never reread parts if they don't come up in discussions here. I got too many books to read to obsess over one collection.