Non Christians What If The Bible Is True?, page 40

privacy

Pages: << 37 38 39 40 41 42 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 16 times

reply posted on 21-3-2008 @ 02:34 PM by Clearskies

reply to post by MajKarma

I can't see your link.

reply posted on 21-3-2008 @ 02:43 PM by Bigwhammy

reply to post by an3rkist

Part of it is interpretation. Part of it is understanding the original language. But with the Old stuff like Genesis it's be able to think like a Hebrew would in 100 B.C. That is hard, and that is what Dr Sallihammer is good at. That means you have to know the context of their life, customs, symbols, etc. Some things are pretty obvious like the 10 commandments. But sure anytime you take something that old you need to proceed with care before taking a translation completely literally. I suppose that amounts to a personal choice, you can choose who you trust. I tend to be pretty critical. Some people just don't care, and - it really doesn't matter in the big scheme of things, you don't have to have an opinion on Genesis 1 to be saved.

reply posted on 21-3-2008 @ 06:57 PM by AndrewTB

The bible was just an ancient version of harry potter.

reply posted on 21-3-2008 @ 09:47 PM by idle_rocker

reply to post by The Nighthawk

Now that I have had some rest, I would like to address a few questions by a number of posters on this thread, and I will start with Nighthawk's questions.

Originally posted by Nighthawk:

On a side note about the authors of the Bible, why is there no Gospel of Jesus? I'd think that someone so important to Christianity would have had something to say in His own words on spirituality. But no, everything we have today of Jesus' supposed teachings comes from second-and third-party sources, ("second" assuming the existing Gospels were actually written by the authors they're named for). Why did Jesus Himself not write any books?

And why has no one, not one single person on this thread, responded to my very logical attempt to bring the original point of this thread back into focus? In order to determine whether the Bible is true you must determine the parameters of what you consider "the Bible" to be first. Without laying down some basic criteria one cannot logically proceed.

The gospel of Jesus is found throughout the New Testament and if you have a red-letter version of the Bible, you will find the original quotes of Jesus in these gospels written in the red lettering. The second and third party sources you speak of are the disciples and apostles who were with Jesus during his ministry and were, therefore the best authors to rely upon. This would be no different than reading a biography of Ronald Reagan written by Nancy Reagan or one of his other aides who were directly associated with his presidency (not that this is a perfect comparison; it's not. But it's the only one I can think of right now). Someone asked about the corroborating witnesses, and these are also found in the New Testament historical and theological writings. There you will find many names, such as Timothy, Martha, Mary Magdalene and a host of others who followed Jesus during his lifetime and are found referenced again and again in the NT as witnesses to his ministry.

After thinking a bit about your second question, I think you are asking why there are different Bibles used in the faith and that the thread must establish which one is being referenced in order to debate it. I believe that the OP intended the Bible that Protestants use to be the Bible referenced; however I could be wrong and I know Bigwhammy will correct me if I am.

Most Protestant Christians use the original Canonized version of the Bible but the Catholics still use a few additional books, the Apocrypha. And as has already been discussed, the Mormons use the teachings of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon in addition to the canon, I believe. I am not "up" on Mormon beliefs, so I really cannot address this properly.

Most Christian denominations do not divide over the most important aspects of salvation in the canon; the most basic tenets being that Jesus was the Son of God, lived as a human being and ministered on earth during his lifetime, and then intentionally allowed himself to be crucified for the salvation of mankind. Also, one must simply trust his word and believe, asking for his forgiveness to receive salvation. Additionally, Protestant Christians believe we are saved by grace alone, through faith, and that Jesus alone is the intermediary between the human sin nature and the divinity of God.

There are certain aspects that do divide the denominations, such as Protestants believing that works is not necessary for salvation, while Catholics and Mormons believe works are essential. Protestants believe that once saved through grace (a gift from God), good works follows, but still not a requirement of salvation. Baptism is another division, where some believe one must also be baptised to be saved whereas others do not believe this is a requirement, but rather symbolic of following Christ. Some believe one must be fully immersed while others believe sprinkling is sufficient. Because the basic tenets are believed by most, all these differing denominations (I don't know about Mormonism) are all considered Christian, even though there are differences. And you may know, there are differences in every practiced religion, even atheism, which is a religion despite debate to the contrary.

I do not follow any particular denomination but still consider myself a Christian in that I believe the basic tenets of the faith described above. There are some aspects such as the belief in Hell, of which I have not yet formed an opinion. Fear of death and hell were not the reason I began following the faith, so I have not studied this as well as some. It is on the top of my list of topics to study now that so many people on ATS have inquired about it.

I'm sorry I don't have a source to quote because everything I have written has been taken from various sources over my years of study. Again I am not preaching, just explaining answers to questions I have seen here.

reply posted on 21-3-2008 @ 09:58 PM by idle_rocker

Part of quote by Nighthawk:

They knew about His birth, and that He did some teaching in His early teens. Where's the rest? Did Jesus just sit around doing nothing until He started His ministry? Did He just wake up one morning and say "Well, I think I'll go have my cuz John baptise me and start preaching." And why no Gospel account of Jesus' full life-story from, oh, say, his mother? (actually a Gospel of Mary exists, but it's still undetermined whether it was the Virgin Mary or Mary Magdelene. Again-NOT IN THE PUBLISHED BIBLE!!!) Or Joseph, for that matter? They knew Jesus his whole life. Where's their account of his life story?

Jesus was a carpenter from what we gather in the Bible, following in the footsteps of his father, Joseph. There is one story that I know of in the Bible of Jesus at the age of 13 confounding the Jewish Priests and scholars at the Temple in Jerusalem with his knowledge. They couldn't believe how intelligent and knowledgeable he was of the Torah. Apart from that, it appears that Jesus went about his life as any normal Jewish child and teenager, learning and growing until the age of 30 when he was called to his ministry. This would be the most important part of his life since it includes his teachings, death and resurrection accounts. We don't even today write much about a historical figure's childhood unless there is something significant to tell...perhaps a child prodigy or something like that. But normally, we read about the accounts of a person's life that had the most significance toward mankind.

[edit on 3/21/08 by idle_rocker]

[edit on 3/21/08 by idle_rocker]

[edit on 3/21/08 by idle_rocker]

reply posted on 21-3-2008 @ 10:02 PM by idle_rocker

Originally posted by damwel
All of these works works are so riddled with contradictions that is most obviously apparent that they written by man. It doesn't really lessen their impact. They are guides for those who cannot find their way.

I apologize to those whom I might offend but God did not write the Bible and Allah did not write the Quran. It was written by those who were "enlightened". They are good books for those who need them.

Those who authored them were enlightened, just like the illuminati.

Nuff said.

I am not offended. I think the reason the Bible seems so filled with contradictions is because so much of it is interpreted literally when the truth of it is probably more allegorical in some cases. If you read it and find more allegorical meanings, it makes more sense in a lot of these contradictory cases.

reply posted on 22-3-2008 @ 01:48 AM by Chad Andrew

Can any of us prove that everything in the King James Bible or bibles like it are full of true stories? I don't know if any of the stories in that bible & bibles like it are true.

reply posted on 23-3-2008 @ 04:32 PM by MatrixProphet

I was a Christian for most of my life and am no longer one. But I believe that the Bible was written by The Gods. Another words, more than one God. It explains many possibilities regarding inconsistencies.

I have written this a few times so if one of you is tired of reading this then move on. But I feel the Bible was written to be a conspiracy book and one that was written to mislead! If I am right, then what a brilliant concept!! The Gods would have a book written that only those in these "end of days" would be able to interpret what the hidden meanings are, behind the dogma and doctrine.

I really believe that if more non-Christians looked at the Bible this way they would find more of a fascination with it. I am not an atheist but know many and the thing that is most disturbing with the Bible is the "Christian element!" The Christians and their Bible thumping tend to ruin it for many who want to find new insight - away from religion.

reply posted on 24-3-2008 @ 02:25 PM by Threadfall

I'm not about to read this whole thread, and with as many replies as there have been what I have to say is probably redundant by now anyway. Oh well, here goes. You could have replaced the words Christians and Bible in the OP's title with any religion/scripture and have posed the same question. Basically, depending on said ethos's views, you might be screwed. In matters of faith it's hard to be certain.

reply posted on 24-3-2008 @ 02:48 PM by Bigwhammy

Originally posted by MatrixProphet
I was a Christian for most of my life and am no longer one. But I believe that the Bible was written by The Gods. Another words, more than one God. It explains many possibilities regarding inconsistencies.

I have written this a few times so if one of you is tired of reading this then move on. But I feel the Bible was written to be a conspiracy book and one that was written to mislead! If I am right, then what a brilliant concept!! The Gods would have a book written that only those in these "end of days" would be able to interpret what the hidden meanings are, behind the dogma and doctrine.

It was written by 40 different authors over thousands of years and it has an amazing unity considering. If you can establish that conspiracy with some evidence sounds like you would have a hell of a thread. Go for it! It will be interesting. Expect to be challenged by folks who know the scriptures...

I really believe that if more non-Christians looked at the Bible this way they would find more of a fascination with it. I am not an atheist but know many and the thing that is most disturbing with the Bible is the "Christian element!" The Christians and their Bible thumping tend to ruin it for many who want to find new insight - away from religion.

Organized religion has a huge flaw... people. The Bible is the supernatural book of all time. It is amazing... many folks don't really get what it is truly about. I wish you well on your search for truth!

reply posted on 24-3-2008 @ 03:08 PM by Rasobasi420

reply to post by Bigwhammy

Bigwhammy,

It must be asked......

What would you do if you the bible was false?

What if you found out that the Vedas were the one true spiritual path? Or the Kabalah, or something else separate from Christianity?

In many cases these other texts are more accurate and hold more truths, so what would you do if you were wrong?

reply posted on 24-3-2008 @ 09:35 PM by idle_rocker

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
reply to post by Bigwhammy

Bigwhammy,

It must be asked......

What would you do if you the bible was false?

What if you found out that the Vedas were the one true spiritual path? Or the Kabalah, or something else separate from Christianity?

In many cases these other texts are more accurate and hold more truths, so what would you do if you were wrong?

I'm not Bigwhammy, but I can answer that from my point of view. You see, when you become a Christian, you're whole life and outlook on life changes. If you truly are one, that is. And, we've all had a personal experience with God that proves the truth of the Bible to us. So there would never be any reason in my mind to find another truth than the one I have already found. Trust me, I haven't always believed this way. I searched and searched for something other than what I found, but in the end, I had to realize that if it's the truth...it's true. And the Bible is true because for us Christians, it has been revealed as such to us.

reply posted on 24-3-2008 @ 09:41 PM by Rasobasi420

Originally posted by idle_rocker
And the Bible is true because for us Christians, it has been revealed as such to us.

And I yam what I yam and that's all that I yam......

And now I hope everyone can see from your circular statements and lack of logical structure how silly the OPs question actually is and stop feeding this useless thread.

reply posted on 24-3-2008 @ 09:54 PM by idle_rocker

Originally posted by MatrixProphet
I was a Christian for most of my life and am no longer one. But I believe that the Bible was written by The Gods. Another words, more than one God. It explains many possibilities regarding inconsistencies.

I have written this a few times so if one of you is tired of reading this then move on. But I feel the Bible was written to be a conspiracy book and one that was written to mislead! If I am right, then what a brilliant concept!! The Gods would have a book written that only those in these "end of days" would be able to interpret what the hidden meanings are, behind the dogma and doctrine.

I really believe that if more non-Christians looked at the Bible this way they would find more of a fascination with it. I am not an atheist but know many and the thing that is most disturbing with the Bible is the "Christian element!" The Christians and their Bible thumping tend to ruin it for many who want to find new insight - away from religion.

You know, when I was younger I set out to prove the same thing you are asserting here. To my surprise, the more I studied, the more truth I found in the Bible and the more I prayed, the more truth the Bible revealed to me. It takes a lot of study, an open mind, prayer and asking God for guidance to understand the seemingly contradictions. But once you do, oh the wonder of it all!

reply posted on 24-3-2008 @ 09:56 PM by idle_rocker

Originally posted by Rasobasi420

Originally posted by idle_rocker
And the Bible is true because for us Christians, it has been revealed as such to us.

And I yam what I yam and that's all that I yam......

And now I hope everyone can see from your circular statements and lack of logical structure how silly the OPs question actually is and stop feeding this useless thread.

Well, Raso, if you're not interested you don't have to come here. There are many threads available for atheists and believers in other religions. You're always welcome, of course, but snide remarks do nothing to chase me away. I find it quite interesting that you seem interested enough to come back and try to sway me to go away.

reply posted on 24-3-2008 @ 10:00 PM by idle_rocker

Originally posted by Chad Andrew
Can any of us prove that everything in the King James Bible or bibles like it are full of true stories? I don't know if any of the stories in that bible & bibles like it are true.

Yes Chad, the historical facts in the Bible have mostly been proven true through archeology. You might find archeology an interesting subject to study especially the study of archeology in the Middle Eastern areas. There are also other historians who wrote about Biblical times, other than the books contained in the Biblical Cannon. You can find many of those writings on the web by googling.

reply posted on 24-3-2008 @ 10:13 PM by Bigwhammy

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
reply to post by Bigwhammy

Bigwhammy,

It must be asked......

What would you do if you the bible was false?

What if you found out that the Vedas were the one true spiritual path? Or the Kabalah, or something else separate from Christianity?

In many cases these other texts are more accurate and hold more truths, so what would you do if you were wrong?

If I found out for sure that the flying spaghetti monster was the one true God I would repent of my Christian ways and get some parmasagne cheese and worship spaghetti.

The thing is I had a an encounter with the real God. So I do not have to wonder or doubt. You can too. But it is not easy.

reply posted on 25-3-2008 @ 01:03 PM by Realtruth

reply to post by Bigwhammy

Scriptures, tablets, old new what does it prove? Nothing because we didn't live in those times.

Stories to prove other stories? I would say this is circular argumentation, because this story begets that one, and that one points to this one.

Think about it, we can't even keep a story straight if it happens in todays world.

People lose the point. You can not prove metaphysics with physics.

If you truly believe in something without any doubt, then why do you need any proof?

reply posted on 25-3-2008 @ 02:54 PM by Bigwhammy

reply to post by Realtruth

Well the point was. Skeptics used to claim there was no evidence there was ever a real city of Sodom and Gremorah. Well guess what? Then they find these elba tablets, they are not the Bible scriptures, but they mention Sodom and Gremorah and other cities mentioned in Genesis 14. Bingo there''s your corroborating evidence. Criticism denied.

That's the point.

[edit on 3/25/2008 by Bigwhammy]

reply posted on 25-3-2008 @ 04:07 PM by newday

I personally take strong exception to Christians calling themselves believers in the context of the bible being the truth.

If the bible is true then the term Christian was a slang composed by outsiders from the idea certain individuals had in the first century about the Messiah, and their communicating that idea betwixt themselves.

The understanding that those who believed, the idea they were talking about, was of the power which the Messiah supposedly made available through his accomplishments, the idea of the new creation, the inner man, the comforter, the man of the spirit, Christ in you and you in Christ, that is what they believed as far as I can tell nothing remotely reassembling the teachings of the Christian religion.

It is a complete misnomer to say you are a believer in the bible as truth and at the same time a Christian.

You can be a believer in the Christian theology but that is contradictory to the idea expressed in the bible and I am sure would be considered by Christ who demanded belief of those who followed him, offensive in the extreme

If you are a believer in the bible as truth then the bible lays out clear expectations of certain manifestation, that not just you, but others should be able to witness with there eyes if you do indeed believe.

If those manifestations are not evident in your life, and the bible is true, then you do not believe in the truth of scripture and should not refer to yourself as a believer only as a believer in Christianity and a non believer in the idea of the bible as truth.

Which is just making my point the long way, that the non christians are in better shape if the bible is actually the truth than those clamming to be Christians because they have not been duped, they have just been themselves in the flesh and not pretended to be more than that.