Why do you accept the bible as inerrant historical fact?

[nazz]

That is remarkable. You really need to meet more mainstream Christians.

I wasn't referring to them. Terry said: I do not suppose that even the most ardent Bible only Christians fully believe that. I took that to mean fundamentalists and it is a tenet of fundamentalism that the bible is 100% inerrant and literally true.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

What you describe is 'false prophets'. How do you know true Prophets do not exist, and that those prophets like Jesus and Muhammad were false?

I don't use your same terminology. So can you tell me the difference between a 'false prophet' and a 'true prophet'?

As for Jesus and Muhammad, all I know for sure is that neither of them had a closer connection to God than I do. And I'm pretty sure they had a weaker connection.

 

[arcanum]

I don't use your same terminology. So can you tell me the difference between a 'false prophet' and a 'true prophet'?

As for Jesus and Muhammad, all I know for sure is that neither of them had a closer connection to God than I do. And I'm pretty sure they had a weaker connection.

You think they had a weaker connection then you? Does the lad fancy himself a real prophet then? How come nobody has heard about you yet?

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

You think they had a weaker connection then you?

Umm... yeah. That's what I said. No person has ever had a stronger connection to God than I have. We're tight. Real buds.

Does the lad fancy himself a real prophet then?

Both of the lads. Jesus and Muhammad were both lads who fancied themselves to be real prophets. Can you believe that?

How come nobody has heard about you yet?

Oh, me. I'm a humble prophet. I don't boast and brag like most of the others. God doesn't like it when I do that.

But a few people have heard of me.

You, for one.

 

[arcanum]

Umm... yeah. That's what I said. No person has ever had a stronger connection to God than I have. We're tight. Real buds.



Both of the lads. Jesus and Muhammad were both lads who fancied themselves to be real prophets. Can you believe that?



Oh, me. I'm a humble prophet. I don't boast and brag like most of the others. God doesn't like it when I do that.

But a few people have heard of me.

You, for one.

The Church of the Prophet Ambiguousguy, got any followers yet?

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

The Church of the Prophet Ambiguousguy, got any followers yet?

I'm not sure why you're winking, but I am a new sort of prophet in the world. I don't allow followers.

I only offer those who need it a little foundation to lean against as they rest for a moment in their journey.

 

[arcanum]

I'm not sure why you're winking, but I am a new sort of prophet in the world. I don't allow followers.

I only offer those who need it a little foundation to lean against as they rest for a moment in their journey.

Ok I'll play. Since you you claim to have a stronger connection to god than Jesus or Mohammad, and consider yourself a prophet...tell us a little bit about your teachings. What is your message?

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Ok I'll play. Since you you claim to have a stronger connection to god than Jesus or Mohammad, and consider yourself a prophet...tell us a little bit about your teachings. What is your message?

You seem to hold an antiquated concept of what a prophet is. You think they come with some Grand Message for Humanity. (Do you also think they can foretell the future and do other magic stuff?)

My message is to relax and be severely honest in one's journey through life. It's the only possible way to draw near to God.

And loving God more than ego, of course, is also how we become prophets.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Originally Posted by nazz View Post
I wasn't referring to them. Terry said: I do not suppose that even the most ardent Bible only Christians fully believe that. I took that to mean fundamentalists and it is a tenet of fundamentalism that the bible is 100% inerrant and literally true.

The important part of that sentience is Fully believe that.
It would be rare indeed for someone to "Fully" believe anything.
When it comes to the Bible, it is even more difficult as the question then arises "Which bible" "which translation" and "whose interpretation"

I accept that there are Fundamentalists that are "required" to believe everything, what ever they are taught............But do they?
It seems to me human nature would not allow it.

 

[rusra02]

I've asked this in other forums and never got a satisfactory answer. And please don't just quote II Timothy 3:16. That's problematic for several reasons but it's circular reasoning anyway. Or if you do you use it I would ask why you believe that to be true.

I believe the Bible contains the sayings of the one true God, Jehovah. Both internal and external evidence convinces me it is the truth. What book that was completed some 2,000 years ago could even make the claim that it is accurate and true, much less support that claim?
The Bible has been and continues to be endlessly attacked physically and intellectually. I find that time and again. It's critics retreat in defeat as more accounts in the Bible are confirmed or supported by discoveries in archeology and other scientific disciplines.
In addition to its historical accuracy, the Bible is filled with prophecies concerning the future. As Joshua 23:14 confirms: "and you well know with all your heart and with all your soul that not one word out of all the good promises that Jehovah your God has spoken to you has failed. They have all come true for you. Not one word of them has failed."
Thus, over the millenniums of history the Bible discusses, Jehovah has built a record of absolute reliability and truthfulness. No other god can thus prove their Godship. As Isaiah 46:9,10 affirms: "*Remember the former things of long ago, That I am God, and there is no other. I am God, and there is no one like me. From the beginning I foretell the outcome, And from long ago the things that have not yet been done. I say, ‘My decision will stand, And I will do whatever I please.’" This is a very brief and incomplete summary of why I believe The Bible is without error.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I believe the Bible contains the sayings of the one true God, Jehovah. Both internal and external evidence convinces me it is the truth. What book that was completed some 2,000 years ago could even make the claim that it is accurate and true, much less support that claim?
The Bible has been and continues to be endlessly attacked physically and intellectually. I find that time and again. It's critics retreat in defeat as more accounts in the Bible are confirmed or supported by discoveries in archeology and other scientific disciplines.
In addition to its historical accuracy, the Bible is filled with prophecies concerning the future. As Joshua 23:14 confirms: "and you well know with all your heart and with all your soul that not one word out of all the good promises that Jehovah your God has spoken to you has failed. They have all come true for you. Not one word of them has failed."
Thus, over the millenniums of history the Bible discusses, Jehovah has built a record of absolute reliability and truthfulness. No other god can thus prove their Godship. As Isaiah 46:9,10 affirms: "*Remember the former things of long ago, That I am God, and there is no other. I am God, and there is no one like me. From the beginning I foretell the outcome, And from long ago the things that have not yet been done. I say, ‘My decision will stand, And I will do whatever I please.’" This is a very brief and incomplete summary of why I believe The Bible is without error.

Wow... with evidence like that it should make believers of us all.

If only it were true.....................

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

In addition to its historical accuracy, the Bible is filled with prophecies concerning the future. As Joshua 23:14 confirms: "and you well know with all your heart and with all your soul that not one word out of all the good promises that Jehovah your God has spoken to you has failed. They have all come true for you. Not one word of them has failed."
Thus, over the millenniums of history the Bible discusses, Jehovah has built a record of absolute reliability and truthfulness. No other god can thus prove their Godship.

I've never noticed that any of the biblical prophecies have come true, at least not in any remarkable way.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Wow... with evidence like that it should make believers of us all.

If only it were true.....................

It's even funnier because a lot of things have not been confirmed...

King David and Solomon are still up in the air figures, the exodus...no evidence...the wandering of the desert? Nope, Noah's flood? Nope...tower of babel? Nope...world created in 6 days? Nope...the Israelites tendency to fall into polytheism? Exaggerated it would appear polytheism was the norm according to archaeology...but you know victors write history.

 

[outhouse]

It's even funnier because a lot of things have not been confirmed...

King David and Solomon are still up in the air figures, the exodus...no evidence...the wandering of the desert? Nope, Noah's flood? Nope...tower of babel? Nope...world created in 6 days? Nope...the Israelites tendency to fall into polytheism? Exaggerated it would appear polytheism was the norm according to archaeology...but you know victors write history.

The list is tall for what is proposed as mythology

Abraham and his sons.
Exodus
Moses
Noah
Soloman

The first five books should never be read as history, but more as theology to teach morals and other lessons.

 

[nazz]

The important part of that sentience is Fully believe that.
It would be rare indeed for someone to "Fully" believe anything.
When it comes to the Bible, it is even more difficult as the question then arises "Which bible" "which translation" and "whose interpretation"

I accept that there are Fundamentalists that are "required" to believe everything, what ever they are taught............But do they?
It seems to me human nature would not allow it.

Well I would say no one can do it because they are irreconcilable contradictions in the Bible. One cannot believe two contradictory things at the same time. But they believe in believing in the bible as literally inerrant.

 

[nazz]

The Bible has been and continues to be endlessly attacked physically and intellectually. I find that time and again. It's critics retreat in defeat as more accounts in the Bible are confirmed or supported by discoveries in archeology and other scientific disciplines.

Hmm, I've not witnessed that. Quite the opposite. The more science reveals through evidence the less those accounts seem to be true in a literal historic sense.

 

[outhouse]

The Bible has been and continues to be endlessly attacked physically and intellectually.

The bible is not attacked as much as those who wish to pervert it with personal literal interpretations. [example] those that claim god or divinity wrote it instead of the ancient men who collected different traditions and compiled them over centuries.


It was never ment to be a history book nor a science book.

 

[viole]

Hmm, I've not witnessed that. Quite the opposite. The more science reveals through evidence the less those accounts seem to be true in a literal historic sense.

You nailed it.

This is how "progressive" Christianity works when it comes to interpret Scriptures:

- symbolic --> what has been obviously proven false by evidence
- literal --> what hasn't been obviously proven false by evidence (might become symbolic later)

Ciao

- viole

 

[thau]

I've asked this in other forums and never got a satisfactory answer. And please don't just quote II Timothy 3:16. That's problematic for several reasons but it's circular reasoning anyway. Or if you do you use it I would ask why you believe that to be true.

I do not see where those who may be described as literal fundamentalists cause a real problem for their own souls or for other Christians or for outisiders by believing it is literal or historical in all senses?

However, such a position does allow for the doubters to find an easy piece of theology to attack. And if they can convince their audience that Noah’s ark was a fable or that Adam was not true or that he did not live to be 900 years old, then they parlay that into making the point the Bible is total fantasy. Which of course is a false argument regardless if it works on some.

The Bible is historical enough that many should take serious notice, IMO. Evolution is the fable.

 

[nazz]

I do not see where those who may be described as literal fundamentalists cause a real problem for their own souls or for other Christians or for outisiders by believing it is literal or historical in all senses?

The main problem I see is that it causes a false dilemma for those who are asked to choose between the Christian faith and science. That one cannot be a Christian and accept the conclusions based on scientific evidence.

However, such a position does allow for the doubters to find an easy piece of theology to attack. And if they can convince their audience that Noah’s ark was a fable or that Adam was not true or that he did not live to be 900 years old, then they parlay that into making the point the Bible is total fantasy. Which of course is a false argument regardless if it works on some.

I agree that is a non-seqitur.

The Bible is historical enough that many should take serious notice, IMO. Evolution is the fable.

Evolutionary theory is based on solid evidence and makes predictions which are subsequently confirmed.