Is the New Testament Accurate and Reliable? Archaeology?

Originally posted by garyo1954
With that corrected I would also point out the synopsis of Acts explains that Luke was a close travelling companion of Paul.

Perhaps he was. So then, how do we know that this close travelling partner is the author of Acts? The Gospel of Luke as well as Acts have anonymous authorship. It is only church tradition that claims Luke wrote them.

This tradition developed hundreds of years after the documents were authored.

Yeah no kidding, what Saul SAW and HEARD was JESUS FIRSTHAND.......you can dismiss it, but blinded by his 'vision' doesn't hold water with me. He sure as heck thought he was visited by Jesus, so much that he did one of the largest 180's in history. Don't claim that I don't know the meaning of my own religion you just failed to see what I wrote.

I believe the writer was speaking as to witnessing the life of Jesus, the crucifiction, and the resurrection.

Therefore he was correct in his statement.

When in a rush to "prove" something make sure you realize what needs "proving". Saul or Paul did not meet Jesus during the physical existence of such.

The day he "met" the Lord? Only the Lord really knows.

I am a God Fearing man, not wanting to see anyone condemned. I can no more prove God to someone like you scientifically anymore than you can prove no God in the same manner.

Why do you fear GOD?

Originally posted by madmanacrosswater

I am a God Fearing man, not wanting to see anyone condemned. I can no more prove God to someone like you scientifically anymore than you can prove no God in the same manner.

Why do you fear GOD?

Its the wrath I fear....as I know I am not worthy of His Grace, but I also tale comfort in knowing that I am forgiven.

It is the same kind of fear you would show of a hot burner on a stove. A fear out of respect, and fear of it's great power that shows your every weakness.

Ed-singer, or Jehosephat, or any other christian for that matter.....

Perhaps I can derail this a tad since it's already ventured off the path.....

I was raised X'stian, and the reason I left was mainly the whole fear issue. I never understood why soo many focus on the fear part. It would seem as if that is all that is ever attributed to God. You know the only way to the father type of thing. As if it wasn;t for Jesus, God would not forgive any of you, it's only through the sacrifice of his firstborn (molech anyone?) that the world and this evil race is redeemed.

As I said before I am not trying to argue the existence of x'rist, I have over six years of theological studies under my belt and I learned a long time ago everyone is entitled to their beliefs, and No one should try to take that from them, sometimes that might be all they have in this world.

I do feel comfortable though asking you why you focus on the fear soo much? If God is limitless in all capacities including wrath, can he not be limitless in his compassion?


On a side note I would also like to mention. Having the belief in the ultimate forgiveness of Christ, yet still fearing the wrath of the father. (assuming you are like most modern x'rstians and believe that Jesus and God are one in the same) Creates a paradox that I would like to hear you explain.

[edit on 18-8-2005 by phoenixhasrisin]

I do not dwell on the fear, but when I sin it occurs to me that I am due the wrath of God because of my sin. That is what is so comforting about Jesus to me. He has paid the price for me and I can look forward to eternity in Heaven and not in Hell.

Originally posted by edsinger
I do not dwell on the fear, but when I sin it occurs to me that I am due the wrath of God because of my sin. That is what is so comforting about Jesus to me. He has paid the price for me and I can look forward to eternity in Heaven and not in Hell.

Fair enough...can you adress my second question though.....the one regarding the paradox?

I would especially be interested in hearing your response, especially considering that I have not been able to have a Christian discussion with anyone who was not trying to convert me.

I thank you in advance for not doing that.

I will try,

The wrath of the Father is due the sinner, hence the fear.

So why do I not fear the Christ?

Well the Father is just and does not lie. The wages of sin is death. I will die due to my sin. Most fear death.

But the Father is also compassionate and does not want anyone to go astray. So He made a path that would allow me to be forgiven of that sin so that I can not dwell on eternity in Hell.


So in answer to your question, I fear God because I know I am unworthy of His Grace and Forgiveness, and His Son provides the comfort that I need to deal with that fear.......should I fear? Well maybe not but I am human and am not perfect and I ask myself a 1000's times, what makes me so special? I should be considered no higher than a worm in the dirt.

But by Grace I KNOW I am saved. It I make it to Heaven as a janitor, then fine, at least I made it....

Ed singer thanx again for being the type of christian I preer to deal with. I have had many run-ins with others here, and i can say with assuredness they are not as "cool" as you.

I can understand your point of not being worthy in the "fathers eyes"

i iguess at this point it would be prudent to ask you if you seperate the sun (jesus) from the father (god)

Do you bvelieve in the trinity? Do you believe in the father son and holy ghost? Not trying to be intrusive but I honestly feel the validity of BOTH our arguments lie in the foundations of our beliefs.

I will state outright that I do believe in God...Whether or not some Jew named Jeshua was his first born and same self in the flesh, I am not willing to ascribe to yet.

IMHO- Jesus might of existed and probably did have a good philosophy regarding the Jews of his time.

Can we apply this to modern thought and living? IMHO......only to a certain extent.

SO I suppose for simplicities sake I must ask you....To you......is Jesus one and the same as the father, or is he a seperate, yet still powerful entity that plays a role in human affairs? I feel it is a legitamate question in need of distinction especially concerning the fact that most christian denominations consider the christ to be the same as the father, which if you familiar with your history would know that this was not the case amongst the early christians...

Not trying to debase your faith just trying to gain an understanding from the "believers" perspective I guess.

One again thank you for not trying to convert me.

spam,

When I referred to Lucan it was meaning the same authorship as Luke.
I don't know if the author has any other identification by which they are known.

Anyone?

Well yes I do believe in the Trinity and here is a short reason why,



John 14:28 "You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.

Note: This is pre ascension...


This verse is used by the JW's to claim Jesus is not God. Same for the Muslims I guess.


But, we know that another term for the Christ, Messiah is the "WORD" right?


John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:2 He was with God in the beginning.
John 1:3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.


This leaves little doubt as to His identity.,


John 10:27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.
John 10:28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand.
John 10:29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all ; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand.
John 10:30 I and the Father are one."
John 10:31 Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him,


As can be seen from the Jews reaction here, they did not understand it either and thought it heresy.




John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
John 14:7 If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."
John 14:8 Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us."
John 14:9 Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?
John 14:10 Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.
John 14:11 Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves.



Here is another, that grabs me.




Exo 3:13 Moses said to God, "Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, 'What is his name?' Then what shall I tell them?"
Exo 3:14 God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.'"


Notice the name He gives "I AM" now lets look at this verse,

John 8:54 Jesus replied, "If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me.
John 8:55 Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and keep his word.
John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad."
John 8:57 "You are not yet fifty years old," the Jews said to him, "and you have seen Abraham!"
John 8:58 "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

So there are many parts that lead me to believe that GOD is Triune. Check this site out:



The "I AM" Sayings Prove Jesus to be Divine



Another thing which I seek to draw the readers attention to is the actual Greek words 'ego eimi', translated (I AM). Leon Morris correctly states, "Jesus uses an emphatic "I AM" to bring out important teaching about his person. In Greek, the personal subject of the verb is not normally expressed: the form of the verb makes clear what the subject is. But if it is desired to emphasize the subject, then the appropriate pronoun may be used. What makes this so important in John is that we find a similar usage in the Greek translation of the Old Testament. There we find that the translators used the emphatic form of the speech when they were rendering words spoken by God." He then goes on to say, "When Jesus used the "I AM" construction he was speaking in the style of deity." And, "There is general agreement among Johannine scholars that this kind of language is a significant pointer to what John is telling us about the person of Jesus." (1) In other words, when Jesus was using the "I AM" construction he was indicating His divinity, and in John recording His statements he was doing likewise.


[edit on 18-8-2005 by edsinger]

Ed-singer,

Ok so you do believe in the trinity fine, no wrong in that I suppose. Just do me a favour and tell me how your trinity is any different from any other that has existed throughout the millinea? Not saying you are not right, just asking why you believe your stories of trinities to be different from any others, that's all.

I assume you are familiar with the babylon mystery schools, and even the thoughts of pythagorous that influenced modern though? That being the case how can you still argue the absolute validity of the trinity?

Once again not trying to take away anyones faith.....I just think these are legitimite quesitons that arise in theological thought.

With all the additions to modern thought and theories how can we be soo sure of which is the corret one?

I would be most appreciative of your explanation, thank you.

Well as I showed you with the Word, and I believe the Word of God. Its that simple. I don't care what the Babylonians believed as even one of their great Kings saw Gods power. So call me fickle, but I accept God's Word at face value.

Dan 3:23 And these three men, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, fell down bound into the midst of the burning fiery furnace.
Dan 3:24 Then Nebuchadnezzar the king was astonied, and rose up in haste, and spake, and said unto his counsellors, Did not we cast three men bound into the midst of the fire? They answered and said unto the king, True, O king.
Dan 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God
Dan 3:26 Then Nebuchadnezzar came near to the mouth of the burning fiery furnace, and spake, and said, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, ye servants of the most high God, come forth, and come hither. Then Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, came forth of the midst of the fire.


[edit on 18-8-2005 by edsinger]

its wierd the way many say some of the babylonians turned out to be jewish people of today. god teaches us to realize which are jews and which arent.

it sort of makes sense knowing that the most sinful areas ever known are sodom gomorrah, babylon.

“I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.” (Rev. 2:9-10)

Hey Eddie:

You are clearly not conversant with the texts of the "bible" which you seem to quote in English so freely.

Your attachments are superficial and do not address the "problem of the scrolls" i.e. the time capsule element of caves 1-11 which were sealed in June of AD 68 which show massive differences between the "bible" of modern Rabinnic Jews (who mainly use the pointed Masoretic Text of AD 980 from a SINGLE copy in Leningrad) and the unpointed Hebrew and Aramaic texts in copies which are more than 1000 years older and show a definite FLUIDITY of tradition in terms of actual content of the books i.e. the very words on the page (24% difference on average between them) and the actual names of the books themselves (i.e. the canon).

The Time Capsule element of the Dead Sea Scrolls put a large nail into the coffin of those who would claim that the "bible" is inerrant or "unchanging" (it is neither) or that the texts known to R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean (i.e. "Jezzuzzz") were the same as the ones read by (and held to be sacred by) modern day people who style themselves as "Christians" (99% of whom CANNOT read unpointed paleo-Hebrew or even Greek in the first place, and yet "believe every word of the Bible"... )

Eddie, you CANNOT believe what YOU CANNOT READ....plain and simple. And you CANNOT hold up a book and say "this is the ONLY VERSION" when plainly there are competing versions of the same writing from antiquity (read the fragments of Origen's HEXAPLA that have managed to survive e.g. the Psalms....and notice the 6 to 7 columns he used for the different Greek versions of the OT many of which were widley circulating BEFORE R. Yehoshua was even born !)

Even as late as AD 110, there were Rebbes in Palestine arguing over whether the Song of Songs or the Book of Daniel or the Book of Esther "defiled the hands" i.e. were sacred scripture to be included in the Old Testament---this was more than 70 years AFTER the death of R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean---and the Jews STILL did not have an absolutely fixed canon even by then....

If you are going to provide links to subjects which are clearly WAAAAAAAY over your head, you need to provide links that actually can be substantiated.

I would STRONGLY advise you to get a book (which is written in modern English so there is NO excuse for you !!) called THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS BIBLE compiled by real scholars such as Michael O. Wise, Martin G. Abegg (with Eugene Ulrich and Peter Flint) = ISBN # 0-06-060063-2 (1999) put out by Harper Collins Press NY.

It shows the various differences between the Masoretic Text of the OT (AD 980), the SamPent (BC 420), the HEBREW UNPOINTED VORLAGE (Hebrew underlay) to the Greek Septuaginta Old Testament (BC 200) as well as the various Qumran versions which show MARGINALIA (i.e. added verses placed into the margins) dating from BC 250 (to the sealing of the caves in AD 68) as well as the various Aramaic Targums of books like Job (BC 150 to AD 68) and show these differences by ITALICS and also in footnote format.

It is a GREAT book for the beginner who is (like yourself) NOT CONVERSANT with the essential problems of establishing a coherent text of "the Bible's Old Testament"....

And a MUST READ for people like you who like to spout nonsense based on the fear you might discover that many of the most beloved tenets of your "Christian" belief systemand the assumptions that spring from these tenets are based on nothing more than empty air....

This discussion group is for people who DEAL WITH FACTS, so let's start there, Eddie!!

Originally posted by phoenixhasrisin
Ed-singer, or Jehosephat, or any other christian for that matter.....

Perhaps I can derail this a tad since it's already ventured off the path.....

I was raised X'stian, and the reason I left was mainly the whole fear issue. I never understood why soo many focus on the fear part. It would seem as if that is all that is ever attributed to God. You know the only way to the father type of thing. As if it wasn;t for Jesus, God would not forgive any of you, it's only through the sacrifice of his firstborn (molech anyone?) that the world and this evil race is redeemed.

As I said before I am not trying to argue the existence of x'rist, I have over six years of theological studies under my belt and I learned a long time ago everyone is entitled to their beliefs, and No one should try to take that from them, sometimes that might be all they have in this world.

I do feel comfortable though asking you why you focus on the fear soo much? If God is limitless in all capacities including wrath, can he not be limitless in his compassion?

Fear can be a friend to us. Fear can be an enemy to us. Fear makes us alert and aware of our need. For example, knowing that we are sinners we, like Adam, are fearful of God's wrath. We know we cannot save ourselves. We learn this from God's Law. Therefore, we know we need a Savior. In the Gospel of Jesus Christ we see our Savior. He has made us right with God. Romans 5:1, "Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." Thus, our fear of God has served us as a friend. God brought his merciful message of His love for us to us in connection with His Gospel when we felt fear.

Fear is our enemy when fear is not accompanied by the Gospel. Without the Gospel message of being right with God and at peace with God through Jesus Christ, we are fearful to the point of despair and hopelessness. Since we have perfect hope given to us by God, any fear that leads to hopelessness is counter-productive, at best. It might certainly be called our enemy.

my fear makes me love God, and makes my fear less

Originally posted by Jehosephat
Fear is our enemy when fear is not accompanied by the Gospel. Without the Gospel message of being right with God and at peace with God through Jesus Christ, we are fearful to the point of despair and hopelessness.

Bwahahaha!

I'm incapacitated with fear about the Boogey man too! ...and Santa Claus scares the carp out of me. I mean think about it. If he knows when you've been bad or good, that means he must always be watching me. Ooooh. Scary.

My desperate hopelessness from all this fear keeps me from doing anything but hiding under my bed. That's where I'm at right now. I have a laptop under my bed where I hide due to all my fear, despair, and hopelessness.

That's the problem with faith. Once you accept faith as a valid form of knowledge, you lose the ability to discern reality from fantasy. Just because you wish that everyone who rejects your rediculous mythology is living a desparate life of fear and loathing, doesn't make it true.

heheheeee!

you said "...and Santa Claus scares the carp out of me. "

Really, a fish comes out when you see Santa?!

Originally posted by Al Davison
heheheeee!

you said "...and Santa Claus scares the carp out of me. "

Really, a fish comes out when you see Santa?!

This board frowns on foul language. So yes, a dislexic fish eminates from my body merely from thinking about Santa.