Why Trust the Bible?

[GostHacked]

On 7/4/2017 at 2:54 PM, betsy said:

Science doesn't agree with you. 

No, it's just you that does not agree with me. Which came first the human or the egg?  Ah screw it, your answer is too predictable with big red font rehashing the same garbage over and over and over and over ...  hoping you get a different answer .. that's a definition of insanity.

[betsy]

On 7/5/2017 at 7:49 PM, GostHacked said:

No, it's just you that does not agree with me. Which came first the human or the egg?  Ah screw it, your answer is too predictable with big red font rehashing the same garbage over and over and over and over ...  hoping you get a different answer .. that's a definition of insanity.

 

I'm not forcing you to believe what I'm illustrating here, Gosthacked. 

Apparently, either you're not getting the logic behind the argument......or you're simply being a staunch atheist:       you can't afford to open your mind. That's understandable. 

Either way, suit yourself.

 

But I do question your sanity since you keep turning up in topics about God.  It's not like as if you offer anything to refute the given argument.  Saying, "it ain't so," with nothing to support your claim, isn't a rebuttal.   

Given your forcible self-confinement to a closed mind when it comes to the possibility of God's existence,  what's the point of you debating in subjects such as these? 

 

So spare me the theatrics.   I'm moving on.

Edited July 8, 2017 by betsy

[betsy]

The Creator has intimate knowledge of His creation, another evidence is given to indicate the divine inspiration of the Bible, by revealing detailed knowledge of the physical world that was not understood by ‘science’ until many centuries, if not millennia, later.

 

Pleiades, Orion and Arcturus

 

 

Job 38

31 Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?

32 Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?

 

 

In the verse, God seems to challenge Job's ability to “bind the sweet influences of Pleiades” - as if saying, “Job, do you think you can keep Pleiades together?” Pleiades (aka Seven Sisters), is an open star cluster in the constelation of Taurus.

 

Quote

 

It is classified as an open cluster because it is a group of hundreds of stars formed from the same cosmic cloud. They are approximately the same age and have roughly the same chemical composition. Most importantly, they are bound to one another by mutual gravitational attraction. Isabel Lewis of the United States Naval Observatory (quoted by Phillip L. Knox in Wonder Worlds) said, “Astronomers have identified 250 stars as actual members of this group, all sharing in a common motion and drifting through space in the same direction.”

The Pleiades stars may thus be compared to a swarm of birds, flying together to a distant goal. This leaves no doubt that the Pleiades are not a temporary or accidental agglomeration of stars, but a system in which the stars are bound together by a close kinship.

From our perspective on Earth, the Pleiades will not change in appearance; these stars are marching together in formation toward the same destination, bound in unison, just as God described them. ”

 

http://coldcasechristianity.com/2013/is-the-astronomy-in-the-book-of-job-scientifically-consistent/

 

 

 

 

In the verse, God seems to challenge if Job can “loose the bands of Orion.” This refers to the “belt” of Orion.

 

Quote

 

Orion’s belt is formed by two stars (Alnilam, and Mintaka) and one star cluster (Alnitak). Alnitak is actually a triple star system at the eastern edge of Orion’s belt. These stars (along with all the other stars forming Orion) are not gravitationally bound like those in Pleiades. Instead, the stars of Orion’s belt are heading in different directions.

Garrett P. Serviss, a noted astronomer, wrote about the bands of Orion in his book, Curiosities of the Sky: “The great figure of Orion appears to be more lasting, not because its stars are physically connected, but because of their great distance, which renders their movements too deliberate to be exactly ascertained.

Two of the greatest of its stars, Betelgeuse and Rigel, possess, as far as has been ascertained, no perceptible motion across the line of sight, but there is a little movement perceptible in the ‘Belt.’ At the present time this consists of an almost perfect straight line, a row of second-magnitude stars about equally spaced and of the most striking beauty. In the course of time, however, the two right-hand stars, Mintaka and Alnilam (how fine are these Arabic star names!) will approach each other and form a naked-eye double, but the third, Alnita, will drift away eastward, so that the ‘Belt’ will no longer exist.” Unlike the Pleaides clusters, the stars in the band of Orion do not share a common trajectory. In the course of time, Orion’s belt will be loosened just as God told Job.

 

 

 

In the verse, God seems to challenge Job if he can direct Arcturus (and his sons), anywhere he wants.

 

Quote

Arcturus (/ɑːrkˈtjʊərəs/), also designated Alpha Boötis (α Boötis, abbreviated Alpha Boo, α Boo), is the brightest star in the constellation of Boötes, the fourth-brightest in the night sky, and the brightest in the northern celestial hemisphere. Together with Spica and Denebola (or Regulus, depending on the source), Arcturus is part of the Spring Triangle asterism and, by extension, also of the Great Diamond along with the star Cor Caroli.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arcturus 

 

Quote

While Arcturus certainly appeared in antiquity to be a single star, in 1971 astronomers discovered there were 52 additional stars connected directionally with Arcturus (known now as the Arcturus stream).

Interestingly, God described Arcturus as having “sons” and Charles Burckhalter, of the Chabot Observatory, (again quoted in Wonder Worlds) said “these stars are a law unto themselves.” Serviss added, “Arcturus is one of the greatest suns in the universe, is a runaway whose speed of flight is 257 miles per second.

Arcturus is a runaway.

Newton gives the velocity of a star under control as not more than 25 miles a second, and Arcturus is going 257 miles a second.

Therefore, combined attraction of all the stars we know cannot stop him or even turn him in his path.” Arcturus and “his sons” are on a course all their own. Only God has the power to guide them, just as described in the ancient book of Job.

http://coldcasechristianity.com/2013/is-the-astronomy-in-the-book-of-job-scientifically-consistent/

Though astronomy dates back to antiquities, and is the oldest of natural sciences......the Bible gives some information that are not observable without modern-day technology.

Edited July 8, 2017 by betsy

[GostHacked]

9 hours ago, betsy said:

 

I'm not forcing you to believe what I'm illustrating here, Gosthacked. 

Apparently, either you're not getting the logic behind the argument......or you're simply being a staunch atheist:       you can't afford to open your mind. That's understandable. 

Either way, suit yourself.

 

But I do question your sanity since you keep turning up in topics about God.  It's not like as if you offer anything to refute the given argument.  Saying, "it ain't so," with nothing to support your claim, isn't a rebuttal.   

Given your forcible self-confinement to a closed mind when it comes to the possibility of God's existence,  what's the point of you debating in subjects such as these? 

 

So spare me the theatrics.   I'm moving on.

My mind was open to god. I looked, I did not get an answer, so I went on my own way.  What about your theatrics, I bet some are tired of your own.

The debate purposes to show your argument is full of holes and inconsistencies.

You say 'the bible',  I asked, which one?  I did not get a real answer. Why is it that the horrific things God has done that were laid out in the bible, seems to be ignored to show that God loves all of us.  Those two conflicting ideas are what is the issue with your core argument in this thread right from the start. So the notion of believing in something that goes polar opposite to your true beliefs is going to be a problem for you, if it has not become one already.

[hot enough]

9 hours ago, betsy said:

The Creator has intimate knowledge of His creation, another[sic] evidence is given to indicate the divine inspiration of the Bible, by revealing detailed knowledge of the physical world that was not understood by ‘science’ until many centuries, if not millennia, later.

The science haters of long centuries try to advance a new pretense that they now embrace science but still they massage it with their religious fantasies. 

[betsy]

A recap of evidences given:

 

The Creator has intimate knowledge of His creation - evidences given to indicate the divine inspiration of the Bible, by revealing detailed knowledge of the physical world that was not understood by ‘science’ until many centuries, if not millennia, later.

 

Refer to post #57 for some detailed explanations.  All from the Book of Genesis 1 and 2:

*In the beginning (consistent with science's discovery that the universe had a beginning)

*All waters gather to one place, and land appear (consistent with science's claim that in the early times there was only one super ocean and only one super continent - Pangaea and Panthalassa)

*The waters bringing forth creatures that has life (compatible with evolutionist claim that life started in the water).

*"After their kind" in relation to reproduction - without any mention of genders, except to humans - male and female - (consistent with science discovery that some species don't require a mate in order to reproduce.  Some creatures are asexual)

*God formed man from dust (consistent with science finding that the human body is made up of elements that comes from dirt/dust).

*God's curse towards the snake that it would from henceforth crawl on its belly and eat dust (compatible with science's discovery that snakes used to have limbs or legs)

*Man's dominion of animals (consistent with reality - as can be observed, even today)

------------------------

*Stretches the Heavens (consistent with science discovery that the universe is stretching).  Take note that most of the verses uses the present tense "stretches."   How appropriate!  The universe is still stretching.

Job 9:8  He alone stretches out the heavens _ and treads on the waves of the sea.

Psalm 104:2; Isaiah 40:22; Isaiah 42:5; Isaiah 44:24; Isaiah 45:12; Isaiah 48:13; Isaiah 51:13; Jeremiah 10:12

Jeremiah 51:15;  Zechariah 12:1

-----------------------------------------------------------

*Psalm 102:25-26, Isaiah 51:6, Hebrews 1:10-11 indicate the universe is wearing out (consistent with the Second Law of Thermodynamics)

Hydrological Cycle  (post #454)

Atoms (post #478)

Springs in the Oceans  (post #493)

PATHS OF THE SEAS  (post #495)

THE EARTH IS ROUND (post #526)

AXIAL TILT (post #526)

AIR HAS WEIGHT (post #551)

THE SINGING STARS (post  #561)

THE FIRST LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS (post #566)

CHICKEN CAME FIRST (post #569)

EARTH WAS COVERED WITH WATER (post #573)

FORMATION OF CONTINENT(S) (post #577)

THE BIBLE DESCRIBES THE CORRECT ORDER OF CREATION  (post  #599)

PLEIADES, ORION, and ARCTURUS (post #603)

 

[betsy]

The Creator has intimate knowledge of His creation, another evidence is given to indicate the divine inspiration of the Bible, by revealing detailed knowledge of the physical world that was not understood by ‘science’ until many centuries, if not millennia, later.

 

THE PHYSICAL LAWS ARE CONSTANT

 

Jeremiah 31

³⁵ Thus saith the Lord, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The Lord of hosts is his name:

³⁶ If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.

 

 

Quote

 

The most effective and unambiguous way to test the biblical claim about the physical laws’ constancy is to take advantage of the look-back times in astronomy.

In astronomy it takes time for light to travel from the stars, galaxies, and quasars to telescopes. Simply by observing galaxies and quasars at varying distances researchers can directly measure the values of several fundamental constants of physics at distant times in the past history of the universe.

The one constant of physics most amenable to this testing technique is the fine structure constant, which characterizes the strength of the electromagnetic interaction. Astronomers can determine this constant’s past values by measuring the relative separation of absorption and emission lines in the spectra of galaxies and quasars. Systematic effects and assumptions about the physical mechanisms that generate the spectral lines can pose challenges to the interpretation of their results. However, astronomers can eliminate this problem by using the same set of spectral lines in a large sample of galaxies and quasars at widely varying distances.

The fine structure constant has the additional advantage of being directly related to several other physical constants. For example, it is

• the ratio of the elementary electron charge to the Planck charge;
• the ratio of the velocity of the electron in the Bohr model of the atom to the velocity of light;
• the ratio of the energy needed to overcome the electrostatic repulsion between two electrons separated by distance D to the energy of a single photon at wavelength = 2πD.

Consequently, testing the constancy of the fine structure constant enables astronomers to also test the constancy of several other physical constants.

 

The bottom line is that the fine structure constant unquestionably joins the growing list of fundamental constants in physics demonstrated to be exceptionally constant over the history of the universe.

This confirmation has important implications for the Christian faith. First, it affirms the Bible’s capacity to accurately predict future scientific discoveries far into the future.

Of all the holy books that undergird the world’s religions, the Bible stands alone in predicting that the laws governing the universe are fixed or constant.

more.....

 

http://www.reasons.org/articles/testing-the-biblical-claim-of-constant-physics

 

 

 

Quote

 

Have physical constants changed with time?

The fundamental laws of physics, as we presently understand them, depend on about 25 parameters, such as Planck's constant h, the gravitational constant G, and the mass and charge of the electron.  It is natural to ask whether these parameters are really constants, or whether they vary in space or time.

 

So far, these investigations have found no evidence of variation of fundamental "constants."

 

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/constants.html

[hot enough]

6 hours ago, betsy said:

The Creator has intimate knowledge of His creation, another evidence is given to indicate the divine inspiration of the Bible, by revealing detailed knowledge of the physical world that was not understood by ‘science’ until many centuries, if not millennia, later.

You are repeating a bunch of crap that you don't even understand, Betsy. That's the equivalent of lying, which is yet another christian value.

[betsy]

On 7/8/2017 at 3:59 PM, GostHacked said:

You say 'the bible',  I asked, which one?

 

Check out all the bibles you can find, and find the given verses on this thread.    Let me know which Bible version doesn't carry  any of them.

Edited July 10, 2017 by betsy

[betsy]

The oft asked questions about the Bible, which this thread will answer:

Is the God of the Bible, the Creator?
Is the Bible, reliable? Can we trust the Bible?
Is it truly God-inspired? How do you know it came from God?

 

I had given the first argument (proof) - the Creator has intimate knowledge of His creation, along with evidences to support that claim.  (Refer to posts #606 and 607)

Here's the next proof:

 

MATHEMATICAL PROBABILITY: ORDER OF CREATION

 

 

  The order of creation has been described accurately by Moses, author of the Book of Genesis.  He made 13 claims, as having been accomplished in the order given:

 

1. "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (v.1).

2. "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep" (v.2).

3. "And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters" (v.2).

4. "And God said, Let there be light ... and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night" (vv. 3-5).

5. "And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament" (v. 7).

6. "And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place" (v. 9).

7. "And let the dry land appear" (v.9).

8. "And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind" (v. 11).

9. "And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years... " (vv. 14-18).

10. "And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind" (v. 21).

11. "And every winged fowl after his kind" (v. 21).

12. "And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing and beast of the earth after his kind" (v. 24).

13. "So God created man in his own image" (v. 27).

 

The following is a very long article.  For in-depth SCIENTIFIC explanation to each claim, and a very, very detailed explanation of mathematical probability:

 

Quote

 

1. THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE
2. THE EARLY EARTH
3. THE EARLIEST LIFE
4. LIGHT
5. THE EARTH COOLS OFF
6. THE EARTH WAS COVERED WITH WATER
7. THE CONTINENTS WERE FORMED
8. VEGETATION
9. BREAKS APPEAR IN THE CLOUDED SKY
10. FISH WERE CREATED
11. BIRDS
12. MAMMALS
13. MAN WAS CREATED


Thus we find that the thirteen things named in Genesis are in the same order that geology finds them. We must therefore ask the question, from what source did Moses obtain this order? I think there are five possibilities: (1) The information came from the schools of Egypt where Moses was educated. (2) Moses did not write Genesis; it was written at a much later date, such at the Babylonian period of culture. (3) The information came from some other civilization (4) The writer of Genesis just made up the story or sat down and reasoned it out. (5) It came by inspiration of God.

If these are the only possibilities, one of these five must be correct; and if we can prove four to be impossible, we will then have established the fifth. Let us consider them in order.


Yes, we could say that Moses just guessed, and while he had only one chance in 311,351,040 he did get it right. But this position would be most unreasonable.


Now this number of 311,351,040 does not tell the whole story. This is only the number of ways in which the thirteen things can be satisfactorily arranged.


Where did Moses get the thirteen things to arrange? Did Moses know all about dark nebulas so he could write a perfect description of one in verse 2? That is absurd, for the greatest of the scientists, having many photographs of dark nebulas, never guessed one existed until about the 1920s.

What chance had Moses, as a man, of writing a discretion of an object to be discovered nearly four thousand years later?

 

 

 

Science Speaks, Peter W. Stoner, Chapter 1, Changes in Science
 

 

Be reminded that we're talking about just the Book of Genesis.

 

 

Quote

Peter Stoner (June 16, 1888 – March 21, 1980)[1][2] was Chairman of the Departments of Mathematics and Astronomy at Pasadena City College until 1953; Chairman of the science division, Westmont College, 1953–57; Professor Emeritus of Science, Westmont College; Professor Emeritus of Mathematics and Astronomy, Pasadena City College

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Stoner

 

 

Edited July 11, 2017 by betsy

[GostHacked]

Bible verses are not scientific proof.

[betsy]

The oft asked questions about the Bible, which this thread will answer:

Is the God of the Bible, the Creator?
Is the Bible, reliable? Can we trust the Bible?
Is it truly God-inspired? How do you know it came from God?

 

I had given the first argument (proof) - the Creator has intimate knowledge of His creation, along with evidences to support that claim.  (Refer to posts #606 and 607)

The second argument:  Mathematical Probability (The Order of Creation) - (post #610)

Here's the next:

 

MATHEMATICAL PROBABILITY: THE CHRIST PROPHECY

 

Everyone can make a prediction. To make a prediction is one thing.  To have it precisely fulfilled, is quite another.  

Furthermore, the more details you give in your prediction, the less likely for it to be precised in its fulfillment.

 

Quote

The Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship at Pasadena City College sponsored a class in Christian evidences. One section of the work of this class was to consider the evidence produced by the fulfilled prophecies referring to the first advent of Christ. The students were asked to be very conservative in their probability estimates. They discussed each prophecy at length, bringing out various conditions which might affect the probability of any man fulfilling it. After discussion, the students agreed unanimously on a definite estimate as being both reasonable and conservative. At the end of the evaluations the students expressed their feelings thus: If any one were able to enter into the discussions and help in placing the estimates, as they had done, that person would certainly agree that the estimates were conservative.

The estimates used in this chapter are a combination of the estimates given by this class on Christian evidences combined with estimates given me later by some twelve different classes of college students, representing more than 600 students. I have carefully weighed the estimates and have changed some to make them more conservative. If the reader does not agree with the estimates given, he may make his own estimates and then carry them through to their logical conclusions.

We considered the following eight prophecies:

Science Speaks by Peter W. Stoner, Chapter 3, The Christ of Prophecy
 

 

 

Quote

Peter Stoner’s Calculations Regarding Messianic Prophecy

Peter Stoner calculated the probability of just 8 Messianic prophecies being fulfilled in the life of Jesus.
As you read through these prophecies, you will see that all estimates were calculated as conservatively
as possible.

Applying the Science of Probability to the Scriptures | Lamb and Lion Ministries
 

 

Quote

Sometimes we weigh our chances in the business world, and say if an investment has nine chances in ten of being profitable, and only one chance in ten of being a failure, it is safe enough for us to make the investment.
Whoever heard of an investment that had only one chance in 1017 of failure? The business world has no conception of such an investment. Yet we are offered this investment by God.
By the acceptance of Jesus Christ as our Savior we know, from only these eight prophecies which lack only 1 chance in 1017 of being an absolute proof, that that investment will yield the wonderful dividend of eternal life with Christ.
Can anyone be so unreasonable as to reject Jesus Christ and pin his hope of eternal life on such a slim chance as finding the right silver dollar among this great mass, covering the whole state of Texas two feet deep? It does not seem possible, yet every man who rejects Christ is doing just that.


More than three hundred prophecies from the Old Testament which deal with the first advent of Christ have been listed. Every one of them was completely fulfilled by Jesus Christ.

Let us see what happens when we take more than eight prophecies.

Science Speaks by Peter W. Stoner, Chapter 3, The Christ of Prophecy

Edited July 16, 2017 by betsy

[GostHacked]

Bible verses are not scientific proof.

[blackbird]

Reefer Madness,

I will simply say your understanding about Holy Scripture (KJV 1611) is incorrect.  The original languages were mainly Hebrew for the Old Testament.   There were copies of the Old Testament around at the time of Christ because it was in fact the Jewish Bible.  The New Testament was written mostly in Greek and copies were made and passed down.  The various copies can be compared with one another to verify their authenticity.  These were Greek manuscripts, some of which, survived down through history.  They were used to translate the first English language bibles in the 1500s and the King James Version in 1611.  The Roman Catholic church had it's own translation called the Latin Vulgate produced in the early centuries.  However Protestant churches which were formed at the time and after the Reformation differ greatly with the teachings of Roman Catholicism.   Protestantism in a general sense believes the Bible is to be the rule of faith, not the church hierarchy or decrees of a church council or Pope.  These days with the drift of many churches away from the Bible, this may not be absolutely clear.  There is no question of the accuracy of the KJV 1611.  Countless people believe it is 100% accurate.

You are correct in saying different people do interpret it in different ways.  But there are certain important fundamental doctrines which most christians agree on.  These were written down in the early centuries in creeds like the Apostles Creed and Nicene Creed.  Later, more doctrines were determined from careful study of the Holy Scriptures and councils developed confessions like the Westminster Confession of Faith from the UK which states clearly the fundamental beliefs of the christian faith.  There is the confessions from the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands called the Heidelberg Catechism and the Belgic Confession.  In Germany the Lutherans have their cofession.  The Baptists have a confession as well.  But modern Baptist churches often have simply a statement of faith which is often listed on the internet for each church.  Most of these confessions agree in certain fundamental beliefs.  Cults are different and they are identified as such because some of their fundamental beliefs differ greatly from the majority of Protestant churches and confessions.

[ReeferMadness]

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

Reefer Madness,

I will simply say your understanding about Holy Scripture (KJV 1611) is incorrect.  The original languages were mainly Hebrew for the Old Testament.   There were copies of the Old Testament around at the time of Christ because it was in fact the Jewish Bible.  The New Testament was written mostly in Greek and copies were made and passed down.  The various copies can be compared with one another to verify their authenticity.  These were Greek manuscripts, some of which, survived down through history.  They were used to translate the first English language bibles in the 1500s and the King James Version in 1611.  The Roman Catholic church had it's own translation called the Latin Vulgate produced in the early centuries.  However Protestant churches which were formed at the time and after the Reformation differ greatly with the teachings of Roman Catholicism.   Protestantism in a general sense believes the Bible is to be the rule of faith, not the church hierarchy or decrees of a church council or Pope.  These days with the drift of many churches away from the Bible, this may not be absolutely clear.  There is no question of the accuracy of the KJV 1611.  Countless people believe it is 100% accurate.

You are correct in saying different people do interpret it in different ways.  But there are certain important fundamental doctrines which most christians agree on.  These were written down in the early centuries in creeds like the Apostles Creed and Nicene Creed.  Later, more doctrines were determined from careful study of the Holy Scriptures and councils developed confessions like the Westminster Confession of Faith from the UK which states clearly the fundamental beliefs of the christian faith.  There is the confessions from the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands called the Heidelberg Catechism and the Belgic Confession.  In Germany the Lutherans have their cofession.  The Baptists have a confession as well.  But modern Baptist churches often have simply a statement of faith which is often listed on the internet for each church.  Most of these confessions agree in certain fundamental beliefs.  Cults are different and they are identified as such because some of their fundamental beliefs differ greatly from the majority of Protestant churches and confessions.

The bible wasn't written.  It was selected over the course of about 1,000 years from passages that were written by various people. That seems to me to be a rather haphazard way to pass along a vital message from the creator - especially since there were already thousands of generations of people that had to get by without it.   There are some practical questions here?

What would have happened if the people who wrote the bible passages didn't write them or wrote the wrong things?  Aha! you say.  God is omniscient and so he knew in advance that they would be born and what they would write.

But if that's the case, what does that say about free will?  If God knew in advance what was going to be written, that implies everything is predetermined.  If everything is predetermined, there is no free will (none that is meaningful anyway) and the universe is nothing more than a giant mobile.

 

[blackbird]

20 hours ago, ReeferMadness said:

The bible wasn't written.  It was selected over the course of about 1,000 years from passages that were written by various people. That seems to me to be a rather haphazard way to pass along a vital message from the creator - especially since there were already thousands of generations of people that had to get by without it.   There are some practical questions here?

What would have happened if the people who wrote the bible passages didn't write them or wrote the wrong things?  Aha! you say.  God is omniscient and so he knew in advance that they would be born and what they would write.

But if that's the case, what does that say about free will?  If God knew in advance what was going to be written, that implies everything is predetermined.  If everything is predetermined, there is no free will (none that is meaningful anyway) and the universe is nothing more than a giant mobile.

 

The various books that make up the Old Testament were written over a period of 1,500 years.  The Old Testament is the Jewish scriptures called the Law and the Prophets.  Prophet means someone who speaks on behalf of God.  God selected certain men to write down his thoughts.  You can say what they would write was predetermined but don't think that is relevant to anything.  How else could he communicate what he wished to communicate?  They were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write what they wrote.

While God is in control he seems to have given man a certain degree of leeway to make choices.  But he has said in Scripture we are do what he has taught us or live according to his will.  Man does seem to have the choice to do good or evil.  So man does seem to have some choice and decision-making power.  God didn't create man to be robots.  What would be the use of that?  But at the same time, the Scriptures do teach that God is in control and has a foreordained plan.  This is evident by the prophecies given in the Bible.  The book of Revelation is an example of future predictions.

Edited November 21, 2017 by blackbird

[blackbird]

On 11/19/2017 at 7:50 PM, ReeferMadness said:

The bible wasn't written.  It was selected over the course of about 1,000 years from passages that were written by various people. That seems to me to be a rather haphazard way to pass along a vital message from the creator - especially since there were already thousands of generations of people that had to get by without it.   There are some practical questions here?

What would have happened if the people who wrote the bible passages didn't write them or wrote the wrong things?  Aha! you say.  God is omniscient and so he knew in advance that they would be born and what they would write.

But if that's the case, what does that say about free will?  If God knew in advance what was going to be written, that implies everything is predetermined.  If everything is predetermined, there is no free will (none that is meaningful anyway) and the universe is nothing more than a giant mobile.

 

 

On 11/19/2017 at 7:50 PM, ReeferMadness said:

The bible wasn't written.  It was selected over the course of about 1,000 years from passages that were written by various people. That seems to me to be a rather haphazard way to pass along a vital message from the creator - especially since there were already thousands of generations of people that had to get by without it.   There are some practical questions here?

What would have happened if the people who wrote the bible passages didn't write them or wrote the wrong things?  Aha! you say.  God is omniscient and so he knew in advance that they would be born and what they would write.

But if that's the case, what does that say about free will?  If God knew in advance what was going to be written, that implies everything is predetermined.  If everything is predetermined, there is no free will (none that is meaningful anyway) and the universe is nothing more than a giant mobile.

 

In the case of Old Testament Scriptures, the Jewish scribes were very meticulous and copied the Scriptures very carefully down through the ages.  Every word and marking had to be correct.

[ReeferMadness]

On 11/23/2017 at 11:04 PM, blackbird said:

In the case of Old Testament Scriptures, the Jewish scribes were very meticulous and copied the Scriptures very carefully down through the ages.  Every word and marking had to be correct.

Well, I guess that proves it's the literal word of God. 

Silly me. 

[Omni]

On 11/23/2017 at 11:04 PM, blackbird said:

 

In the case of Old Testament Scriptures, the Jewish scribes were very meticulous and copied the Scriptures very carefully down through the ages.  Every word and marking had to be correct.

I could be very meticulous in copying a speech from Donald Trump. Would that make his statements any more relevant or true? 

[blackbird]

17 hours ago, ReeferMadness said:

Well, I guess that proves it's the literal word of God. 

Silly me. 

Accurate transcribing of the O.T. manuscripts down through the ages by the Hebrew scribes shows they were less likely to corrupt the original wording. The issue of it being the literal word of God rests on other evidences. 

There are several evidences that demonstrate the Bible came from God or is inspired by God.  One is fulfilled prophecy.  Many events were prophesied before they occurred and then later fulfilled.   Another is the eyewitness accounts of miraculous occurrences recorded in the Bible.  One for example is the resurrection of Jesus Christ.  He was seen by a number of people after he was resurrected.  His resurrection proves that he is who he said he was,  that is, the Son of God and God.  So if he is God and said the Scriptures came from God, why would anyone question it or not believe it? 

The apostle Peter said:

"For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.  For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."  2 Peter ch1 vs16, 17. King James Bible (1611) KJV

 

 

13 hours ago, Omni said:

I could be very meticulous in copying a speech from Donald Trump. Would that make his statements any more relevant or true? 

As I said to ReeferMadness,  there are other evidences that show the Bible is the literal word of God.  In English it is the King James Bible (1611).

[Omni]

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Accurate transcribing of the O.T. manuscripts down through the ages by the Hebrew scribes shows they were less likely to corrupt the original wording. The issue of it being the literal word of God rests on other evidences. 

There are several evidences that demonstrate the Bible came from God or is inspired by God.  One is fulfilled prophecy.  Many events were prophesied before they occurred and then later fulfilled.   Another is the eyewitness accounts of miraculous occurrences recorded in the Bible.  One for example is the resurrection of Jesus Christ.  He was seen by a number of people after he was resurrected.  His resurrection proves that he is who he said he was,  that is, the Son of God and God.  So if he is God and said the Scriptures came from God, why would anyone question it or not believe it? 

The apostle Peter said:

"For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.  For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."  2 Peter ch1 vs16, 17. King James Bible (1611) KJV

 

 

As I said to ReeferMadness,  there are other evidences that show the Bible is the literal word of God.  In English it is the King James Bible (1611).

Thanks but I'll take my chances. I reckon if there is a God in heaven, when I get there God will say "c'mon in and thanks for not buying all that self serving nonsense that was made up on earth about me and this place"

[Scott Mayers]

Because this thread is so long and old, I can't participate directly. But I wrote a summation of a theory on Temples and Sacrifices the other day here if anyone wants to look at. It is relevant to my take on this subject. Treat the summary as a 'conjecture' here because it is not an official proof here.

[betsy]

Latest news in archeology:

 

 

 

Quote

 

Legendary Lost City Of King David Found by Archaeologists

 

According to Professor Fause, the new discovery is “part of the events in the Bible ascribed to the Kingdom of David.”

If we take a look at Biblical references, we will find how King David is believed to have been an ancestor of Jesus and may have lived around 1,000 Before Christ.

Despite the fact that there is no direct evidence outside of the Bible speaking about King David, the Tel Dan Stele, an inscribed stone erected by a king of Damascus in the late 9th/early 8th centuries BCE to commemorate his victory over two enemy kings, contains the phrase ביתדוד, bytdwd, which most scholars have translated to “House of David”.

 

Many historic scholars are convinced that the site is the home of the Canaanite city of Eglon, later listed in the bible as part of the Tribe of Judah, of which David was the founder.

 

Speaking to Breaking Isreal News, Professor Faust said: “We, of course, did not find any artifacts that said ‘King David’ or ‘King Solomon’ but we discovered site signs of a social transformation in the region which are consistent with a change from Canaanite culture to a Judean culture.

Radiocarbon dating tests performed on the archeological discovery suggest that the city belongs to that same time.

 

https://ancient-code.com/legendary-lost-city-of-king-david-found-by-archaeologists/

 

 

Edited May 8, 2018 by betsy

[French Patriot]

On ‎5‎/‎1‎/‎2017 at 9:18 AM, betsy said:

That's the question usually asked by non-believers. 

This video addresses the arguments usually given by non-believers.  For those who want to discuss, please watch and we'll discuss the points given in this video on why we should trust the Bible.

 

Honesty test.

Your link says that truth can be found in your bible.

Do talking serpents and donkeys seem like a truth to you?

 

Regards

DL

[betsy]

15 hours ago, French Patriot said:

Your link says that truth can be found in your bible.

Do talking serpents and donkeys seem like a truth to you?

 

Regards

DL

If you have any clue at all about the Bible - and what the Bible is all about - you wouldn't be giving such an ignorant response.  

 

 

For those who venture into Philosophical discussions - logical, critical thinking is a requirement.  

Furthermore, you can't criticise or give sensible opinion of what you know nothing about.   That's logic #1.   That would be like a three year old spouting off about the economy.  You may  want to use your time arguing with this three year old - but hey,  that's your choice......just don't expect everyone to be like you!

 

Philosophy/Theology, isn't a grade school subject.  Of course, you're free to give your opinion.  Just don't be offended if you're not taken seriously, or if you're ignored. 

 

Cheers.

 

Edited May 10, 2018 by betsy