|
|
| Poptarts: They're so hot |
| they're cool. |
|
100% |
[ 14 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:39 pm
 |
|
|
 |
Because the Bible declares itself as the Word of God multiple times, and because Christ himself verified that all the Old Testament scriptures could be trusted as accurate, and because he is the one who picked his disciples who went on to write the New Testament, I say that yes, a Christian can trust that the Bible is the accurate and complete Word of God. It is something that must be taken on faith, but it is a fundamental part of Christianity, and it comes with assurances as you develop and mature in the Christian walk.
This topic is in response to divineseraph's posts in What if Gods views change.... I moved my response here because I thought it was too far off that topic.
divineseraph Crimson Raccoon divineseraph The Lord spoke to them and told them what to eat and what not to eat. He also told them not to kill. I don't see why one rule should be more infinite than the other, as killing should be detestable to one as well. As I described, and as the Bible teaches, the laws regarding diet were given for a specific purpose. When that purpose was fulfilled, the laws were lifted. Saying that this means God must have changed his mind is like saying whenever somebody dies, God must have changed his mind that he ever wanted them to have lived. No, they had a purpose, and it was fulfilled, that's all. I'm not sure what you mean by "one rule being more infinite than the other." I don't know what it means for a law to be infinite. I said that there is a difference in the way God viewed the dietary laws and the moral laws, by showing that Scripture makes it clear that only sin is an abomination to God, not any animals. You said, "killing should be detestable to one as well," and yes that's very true, which is why God specifically said it is abominable to him in the verse from Proverbs I quoted above, about "hands that shed innocent blood." If by infinite you mean eternal, well, none of the laws are eternal. The 10 Commandments have a specific purpose too, and when that purpose is fulfilled, they too will be lifted. Christ himself specifically said that the law will pass away when he comes again. Because then, there won't be any need for it. Just as there isn't any need for dietary restrictions now! ;P It can't mean God is going to change his mind about the 10 Commandments, because he is telling us ahead of time that they will pass away. divineseraph So, again, either the people of Israel liked to put their words in God's mouth, or God can change his mind. I think it's the first one. When someone makes a topic asking a question about "God" in a Christian guild, I venture the assumption that they are asking about the Christian God in particular. And because the Christian God insists that we learn about him from the Bible, I make my arguments based on the conviction that the Bible is the Word of God. If you're speaking from the point of view that the Bible can't be trusted, I suppose there's nothing anyone can say to convince you of much about God, so there's not much point in discussing topics like this. If I could show you a verse that came right out and said, "God did not change his mind about any laws, but they had a purpose which were fulfilled, and by the way, this was not written by anything other than the finger of God himself," well, if such a verse existed, apparently it still would not be able to convince you. But a sad and weak God it is who gives his Word to man and is unable to make sure it is kept up accurately. Christ himself verified the Old Testament scriptures as being the Word of God. But then again, I suppose someone could have just lied and invented everything he said about that. Still, what a pathetic God we would be trying to learn about, if he sent the Savior into the world, and was unable to secure any accurate way of making his teachings known. The whole ordeal of Christ would have been rather pointless. God did not tell you that the bible is the way to learn about God. The guys writing the book about the guy who talked to God did. It's actually a logical fallacy of begging the question here- The bible is the truth about God because in the bible it says that the bible is the truth about God. You're justifying something with itself, and that is just illogical. And I think because of the way we butchered the teachings of Christ, yes, it was kind of pointless. That's probably why God hasn't spoken to us in about 1500 years.
divineseraph God did not tell you that the bible is the way to learn about God. The guys writing the book about the guy who talked to God did.
Well, the majority of the Bible claims to be written by the actual guy who talked to God. Not every book, but the majority of it. The first five books of the Bible were written by Moses himself, and everything from Isaiah through Malachi were written by the prophet himself that each book is named after. The majority of the New Testament was written by apostles, who were hand picked by Christ to spread his teaching, and he empowered them and gave them authority to do so, as well as the holy spirit.
If we can't trust a single sentence of the Bible, then there's no point in discussing any of this, because everything is a matter of opinion and there's no way to know if we're all wrong about everything. No, if you want to know about the Christian God, you need to learn about him from the Bible. If you want to learn about the Muslim God, you get it from the Quran. Etc, etc. If someone doesn't believe that God ever spoke directly to anyone, perhaps they are a Buddhist or some other religion. If you have a different God in mind besides the Christian God who we're all talking about, perhaps he has a guild devoted to him, and you might find it more suited for you to discuss him there. But the Christian God made himself known through written words, and if the Bible never existed, there would be no Christians today. We have no other way of knowing anything about Christ.
divineseraph It's actually a logical fallacy of begging the question here- The bible is the truth about God because in the bible it says that the bible is the truth about God. You're justifying something with itself, and that is just illogical.
It's not a logical fallacy. In mathematics, you use mathematical proofs to show mathematical equations are correct. There's nothing illogical about it. It's the same way with the Bible. If someone believes in the God who is presented in the Bible, then they should also believe in what the Bible says about God, because God says the Bible is his Word. If someone doesn't believe in the same God who is presented in the Bible, then they believe in a different God, that's all.
The Bible is not just one book written at one time by one person. It is a collection of multiple writings, written by multiple authors, spanning across hundreds of years, and all the authors are affirming each other. Many of the authors and prophets (including Christ) confirm that the books written before them were from God. We either have to accept all of it or we can't trust any of it; and if we accept absolutely none of it, obviously the God we believe in is not the Christian God.
divineseraph And I think because of the way we butchered the teachings of Christ, yes, it was kind of pointless. That's probably why God hasn't spoken to us in about 1500 years.
Actually, wouldn't you know it, the Bible tells us why God hasn't spoken to us since then. =P
Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son. -from Hebrews 1:1-2. God does not speak to his people the way he did long ago in Old Testament times, because God has fully revealed himself in Christ. There is nothing else he has to say.
When the Bible was completely written, God made it clear that it was complete, and that he would not give his Word again. How does the Bible end, after all? What is the last thing written in the Bible?
I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book. He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus! The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all. Amen. -Revelation 22:18-21
God ends his Word in 95 A.D. by saying that nothing is to be added to it, and nothing is to be taken away. He's quite firm about it. (And in saying so, he's also confirming that everything written before it is indeed accurate). That's why God hasn't directly spoken to us since then. He's fully revealed himself in Christ, and he's said everything that needs to be said for us to know salvation and have a relationship with him.
EDIT: I moved my main ideas to the top of this post, so people coming into this discussion don't need to read the entire section between divineseraph and I quoted above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 2:39 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 2:47 pm
|
|
|
|
divineseraph Firstly- The Muslim God is the Christian God.
Sure, in theory all monotheistic religions are following the same God. But in practice they can be very different, and not all of them can be correct. The Quran and the Bible contradict each other about many things, including some things about what God is like. They can't both be right. Muslims explain this by saying that the Quran is accurate, and the Bible was originally given as the Word of God but became corrupted, and so the Bible is wrong whenever they contradict. (Somehow God was able to keep his Word passed down in the Quran as accurate, but he couldn't for his Word passed down by the Jews.) Christians explain the contradictions simply by saying that the Quran is not the Word of God and never was, since God had already said at the end of Revelation (written hundreds of years earlier) that nothing was to be added to his Word.
Christ said "No one comes to the father except through me." So, according to Christ, even if Muslims are trying to worship the same God as the Christian God, they aren't successful at it because they don't go through Christ.
That's all getting too far off topic anyway. The point I was making is that in Islam, you learn about the religion from the Quran, and in Christianity, you learn about it from the Bible. We can't really separate the religion of Christianity from it's source. Anything that we know about what it means to be a Christian comes directly from the Bible, or from another person telling us something from the Bible. Take the Bible away, and there can't be any Christianity.
divineseraph The God I believe in is the one you believe in. I just don't attach the meaningless bullshit to Him that people like to. Things like "Which son is God's favorite?!" or "What's God's favorite color?!" or "If I have a different favorite color, do I burn in hell?!".
I'm not sure what you're getting at. I mean, I know some people do ask pointless questions like those, but, I'm not aware that I do. Certainly not in anything I was talking about here, right? What is it you're referring to?
divineseraph It is illogical. I cannot say "Weekly World News is real because an article in Weekly World News said so."- It's begging the question.
This is the issue I was trying to address when I said that the Bible is a book written by multiple authors, spanning across over a thousand years, but all are agreeing and verifying each other. Your analogy would be more accurate if it went like this:
Weekly World News is a newspaper that has been in print for three thousand years, and its subscribers have always found it to be accurate. Weekly World News is written by over 30 different authors, and they have always agreed with each other and supported what the other authors have written. Whenever a new volume is written in it about history, the people who lived through that history put it in a higher place than all their other newspapers, because they agree it gave the most accurate description. Each generation of editors who contribute to Weekly World News testify to the accuracy of the volumes published generations before. The Weekly World News has never had to print a retraction. The Weekly World News predicted that the Son of God would come. The Son of God came, and said that Weekly World News is an accurate newspaper. He highly recommends it. He expressed his confidence that all the volumes of Weekly World News published before he came are true. He also commissioned the writing of several more volumes. The Weekly World News is no longer publishing new issues; however, all back-issues are available.
Anyway, that was maybe too silly. But it's true that the Bible isn't just one book that claims to be the Word of God, it is many books that verify each other as the Word of God, across a thousand-year period. It's not the same thing as picking up a tabloid and believing its true because the tabloid says it is. Believing the Bible is the Word of God is ultimately something that needs to be taken on faith; it can't be proven by any means of logic. But it can't be disproven by logic either; it just needs to be taken on faith. It's a fundamental part of Christianity.
divineseraph And christianity added and removed plenty from the original ideas of christ. They toyed with Jesus' divinity, they toyed with what stories they would allow us to hear, and how they would be translated.
Over the centuries, people have added ideas to what Christianity was originally about, and when they've been corrected, it's been because the Bible was used to prove them wrong. And if we can't trust that the Bible is accurate, then there's no way to prove it when anyone adds or changes anything of the original ideas, because we'd have no idea what Christ truly originally taught. So it would have been pointless for Christ to come and teach anything at all.
As for toying with how the Bible would be translated, today it really doesn't matter if translations made by any particular person or church were deliberately misleading or not. We don't use those copies today. When we translate the Bible today, we base it on documents that date back thousands of years. The Old Testament is translated from manuscripts that unquestionably date to before Christianity existed. So if Christians had changed anything in them, we would know about it because we have older copies to compare it to. For the New Testament, we translate it from documents that date back well before the emergence of any particular sect or denomination. The differences between denominations are based on the interpretation of Scripture, not on the accuracy of Scripture.
Of the different historical translations and ancient documents we have, they are all very much in agreement with each other, so there is no indication that any were made to be misleading or to change or add ideas. Differences between copies are very minor, and don't have an effect on any significant idea. And the translations we have today are the most accurate to the original that our society has ever had, because we have discovered more ancient documents to base them on over time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 2:58 pm
|
|
|
|
Yes, I believe that the Bible is the Word of God. (John 1:1)
Quote: The Bible contains the mind of God, the state of man, the way of salvation, the doom of sinners, and the happiness of believers. Its doctrines are holy, its precepts are binding, its histories are true, and its decisions are immutable. Read it to be wise, believe it to be safe, and practice it to be holy. It contains light to direct you, food to support you, and comfort to cheer you. It is the traveler's map, the pilgrim's staff, the pilot's compass, the soldier's sword, and the Christian's charter. Here Paradise is restored, Heaven opened, and the gates of hell disclosed. Christ is its grand subject, our good the design, and the glory of God its end. It should fill the memory, rule the heart, and guide the feet. Read it slowly, frequently, and prayerfully. It is a mine of wealth, a paradise of glory, and a river of pleasure. It is given you in life, will be opened at the judgment, and be remembered forever. It involves the highest responsibility, will reward the greatest labor, and will condemn all who trifle with its sacred contents.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 3:38 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 3:56 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 4:02 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 5:28 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 5:31 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 5:49 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 6:32 pm
|
|
|
|
Zahwomen Austin Shipp ia lot of the bible is lost in translation from the original hebrew to other languages WOW! Thank you! That is the most helpful thing that has been posted in this thread! (I am not being sarcastic)
Zahwomen, I'm curious, why did you find that so interesting? =P
Yeah, when anything is translated from one language to another, it is impossible to capture every subtle meaning and connotation of every word; and things like figures of speech don't always carry over exactly. So some details can be "lost in translation." That's why a lot of Bibles have footnotes for particular verses like that. Also, that's why it's important for preachers to go to seminary school and study Greek and Hebrew for their masters degree, so that they are educated enough to teach their church members what the original text means when they are preaching. Really though, the main meanings of every passage can be understood in a good translation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 7:53 pm
|
|
|
|
Crimson Raccoon Zahwomen Austin Shipp ia lot of the bible is lost in translation from the original hebrew to other languages WOW! Thank you! That is the most helpful thing that has been posted in this thread! (I am not being sarcastic) Zahwomen, I'm curious, why did you find that so interesting? =P Yeah, when anything is translated from one language to another, it is impossible to capture every subtle meaning and connotation of every word; and things like figures of speech don't always carry over exactly. So some details can be "lost in translation." That's why a lot of Bibles have footnotes for particular verses like that. Also, that's why it's important for preachers to go to seminary school and study Greek and Hebrew for their masters degree, so that they are educated enough to teach their church members what the original text means when they are preaching. Really though, the main meanings of every passage can be understood in a good translation.
All I'm trying to say is that the Bible is not infallible, it was written by men.
Do you believe that the Vatican contains un-included books of the Bible, or do you think that the Good Book is all that there is or ever was? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:20 am
|
|
|
|
Zahwomen Do you believe that the Vatican contains un-included books of the Bible, or do you think that the Good Book is all that there is or ever was?
The Vatican hiding un-included books of the Bible. No, I don't really think any serious and fair historian could believe that possible. Whenever the people of a church had a letter or book that they considered to be inspired by God, they copied it furiously and spread it all over the known world. We have over 20,000 ancient manuscripts that our New Testament is based on (making it the most reliable document that was ever written before 1439 AD, the year the printing press was invented).
The Roman Catholic church didn't become organized as we know it today until Christianity had been around for a while. People debate exactly when that happened, but it was unquestionably no less than 200 years after the New Testament had been completely written.
If, at that point, the Roman Catholic church had wanted to remove any book or letter from public existence, they would have had to systematically seize hundreds upon hundreds of copies of it, from all over the world, and they would have needed to do it completely secretly so that such a campaign would never appear in any recording of history. And since it's impossible to know how many copies of each book were made, the Vatican would never know when they had them all. It would be an impossible endeavor.
And, there have been splits in the Roman Catholic church more than once in history, and those splits have involved people of high authority in the church. If there was any such kind of a conspiracy, surely something of it would have been publicized when someone who was once a leader in the church became a dissenter.
So no, I really don't believe such a conspiracy is possible. Might the Vatican have ancient manuscripts that they don't want anyone to read? Sure, I guess any big organization could. But not manuscripts that were ever considered to be inspired by God. The people spread those across the Mediterranean like a plague. cool
God is sovereign, and he has the control to make sure that his Word is preserved completely and accurately. When God speaks, he does not speak in vain.
The grass withers, the flower fades,
but the word of our God will stand forever. -Isaiah 40:8
So shall my word be that goes out from my mouth;
it shall not return to me empty,
but it shall accomplish that which I purpose,
and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it. -Isaiah 55:11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 1:16 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 2:59 pm
|
|
|
|
Zahwomen Well, there's no persuading you then.
My friend, there's no persuading me because history doesn't allow for the possibility of Roman Catholic conspiratorial control of the Bible... This is bad? =o
I wouldn't expect everyone to just be convinced by those Bible passages I put in. The whole defense above that is just plain old, solid history. The Christian church did not organize until 325 AD at the earliest; far too late snatch up any books and letters that have had 235 years to spread around.
That would be like if today the U.S. government wanted to seize every single copy of the Declaration of Independence, keep anyone from reading it, keep everyone from knowing it ever existed. Sure, they'd get the original, but think how many copies there are. And all of them in agreement with each other as to what the original says.
Interestingly, there is exactly the same number of years between Jefferson's writing of the Declaration of Independence and today, as there is between the completion of the New Testament and the making of Christianity the official religion of Rome. There is no way the U.S. government could try to get every copy of the Declaration without the entire world knowing about it, and without there being hundreds of copies hidden away from them securely. So there shouldn't be persuading anyone that the Roman Catholic church could somehow have secretly accomplished the same thing.
Zahwomen I view organized religion the way I view organized government. Good usually, but there will always be people who take advantage of it.
Yeah, you're right about that, naturally. It's why the Reformation happened. =P Maybe someone should make a thread discussing church government, how the Bible says it should be run compared to how it actually has been run in history. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
