1. Ohara Library Banner Contest

    The Beasts Pirates demand your services.
    Join the OL Banner Contest!
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Welcome to the forums! Take a second to look at our Beginner's Guide. It contains the information necessary for you to have an easier experience here.

    Thanks and have fun. -NF staff
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Winter is coming one last time...

    Dismiss Notice
  4. Come enter in the KCC Cooking Contest!

    Dismiss Notice
  5. The Anime Awards of 2018 have started! Click here to see the post!

    Dismiss Notice

Bible Basis

Discussion in 'Philosophical Forum' started by Gai-Sifu, Oct 12, 2006.

  1. Gai-Sifu The Wild Green Beast of Raabu

    Messages:
    577
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2006
    Sorry if this has been done before but I just wanna know what you guys think about this. If we research back to where that bible comes from we find that is comes from a bunch of gnostic texts hand selected by a council of Bishops over what should be in the bible. The bible we read today as a constantly revised and re-translated version of a hand-picked text of firsthand accounts seen by people in historical times. Now these stories are nice and all but why do all us christians believe them as truth and relavent truth at that.

    I don't understand how the bible which people say is written by god is clearly not. And more so use is as a reference of truth when it is clearly not. I know we are supposed to interpret what it says for ourselves, but isn't there better more reliable texts like Plato where we can build a moral culture around rather than, something that was written by a bunch of fearing old men who were protecting their power over the population under the guidance of a roman emperor named constintine?

    I guess my only question is, why do we still follow these fabrications and lies today?
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2006
    Tags:
  2. MartialHorror The Convicted Cinephile!

    Messages:
    21,970
    Likes Received:
    215
    Trophy Points:
    1,333
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Oy, first off, the Bible has never been changed or revised. That is a ploy used by Atheists, spread by Atheists(or at least biased attackers of Christianity)

    Can their be translation errors? Sure. That's different than what the claim is though.

    Basically, there was a council that voted if Christ was the son of God or not. It was hardly debatable. Like 99% of them agreed(I want to say 600 to 2, but I dont remember the exact number). They then selected what books of the Bible were reliable.

    They determined this by if the dates matched with the authors lifetime(Example, the book of James claimed to be written by James but it was written many years after James died), if the dates were just that far off(The book of Judas was written 200 years after the time of Christ) or had no basis whatsoever(The book of Peter I believe had certain ideas and stories that none of the gospels agreed with, such as Christ being a spirit. Also, I believe this was written a few years after Peters death)

    May I remind you that the Bible was written by people who were persecuted for being Christians. When it was written, Christianity was not in power. It was just organized by the Church, and may I also remind you, the Bible often contradicted what they felt or believed.

    Women have no souls: Not according to Christ.
    He who lives by the sword dies by the sword: The crusaders obviously missed this.
    Christ being angry on how the religious leaders turned the religion into a business: Obviously the Catholic Church ignored this.
     
  3. Gai-Sifu The Wild Green Beast of Raabu

    Messages:
    577
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2006
    Whah? Okay so you explain my point quite well. The bible contradicts what christ believes, so why use it?
     
  4. That NOS Guy The Pilot Who Lives by Pride

    Messages:
    2,543
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    The Bible has never been changed eh? Ever take a look at Catholic and Protestant bibles per chance?
     
  5. Kurairu Lords of Insufficient Light

    Messages:
    539
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Agnostic--
    The Bible has been changed and revised in the past. It's a valid historical fact oO

    To me, the idea of God reminds me of when parents may tell their children not to go somewhere because there are monsters there or that doing so would result in a punishment that can't be averted. Control them with their own fear. >.>
     
  6. MartialHorror The Convicted Cinephile!

    Messages:
    21,970
    Likes Received:
    215
    Trophy Points:
    1,333
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Er, where did that come from? The Bible does not necessarily contradict Christ, it's the Catholic Church who does so........

    And yes, I've read the Protestant and Catholic Bibles, and the only real difference is the way it's written. It has more of an old english slang(if you read the English version). The Protestant Bibles(such as NIV) are the same, but are worded so that a modern day reader will understand. That's not changing, as much as it is updating.

    And no, its not a historical fact that it has changed, it is a fabricated myth created by naive people and/or fabrications.
     
  7. lordmacintoshii Member

    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    "Christians defend yourself"- I think is a tad rude. So the Bible was written and revised by a bunch of senile old man under Constantine. Mind you, Plato's texts are not exactly original. A long history short, the texts ended up in the hands of the prominent Islamic culture. They translated the texts into Arabic which was later returned to the west during Renaissance. My point, the Bible is God's words crafted by man. Might not be necessarily accurate but has enough evidence to make it an accountable source. Places mentioned in the Bible exist till this very day. I could care more or less whether you are an atheist or not: the basic premise of the Bible is to do good and live a good life. I've seen atheists do a lot of good for society than Christians. Although in many translations, some facts are consistent. Have you picked up a Bible to read to check for the inconsistency? Huh, and I got into the thread on my own too.
    Sayonara.
     
  8. Lord of Mikawa Slow dance with the

    Messages:
    881
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2006
    Controlling people by using their fears---->The essence of religion.
     
  9. s0id3 Hinata is annoying and ugly

    Messages:
    737
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2006
    definitely true...
    ah...yes it has...the bible/church also ignores or leaves shit outta the bible like judas' gospel...it's just that u are ignorant
     
  10. maj1n Active Member

    Messages:
    3,898
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2005
    Wrong, the very first prototype of our current Bible created by Tatian in the Syrian Church contained only the 4 Gospels, every other material was later added, and parts of the gospels are forgeries, such as John 21, this is evidence since Tertullion mentions John 20 as the last chapter, and John 21 is in a different mode of narrative.

    Not even the Catholicism supports your argument.

    "The idea of a complete and clear-cut canon of the New Testament existing from the beginning, that is from Apostolic times, has no foundation in history. The Canon of the New Testament, like that of the Old, is the result of a development, of a process at once stimulated by disputes with doubters, both within and without the Church, and retarded by certain obscurities and natural hesitations, and which did not reach its final term until the dogmatic definition of the Tridentine Council"
    -http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htm
    Wrong.
    It was a majority, it was not 99% or anywhere near that.

    Wrong, the Church never tried to date the Bible texts.
    Ever.

    If they did, they would have realised Pauls epistles to be later than the Gospels, for Paul writes about King Aretas as if he was alive, but they put it after, the Bible is not in chronological order, Mark, for instance, is the earliest Gospel.
    THe reason why the early Church fathers left some out was for personal preference on little issues, for instance, a Gnostic text was left out because Tertullion didnt like it that it allowed the drinking of wine on forbidden ocassions.

    And there are many types of Bibles that were definitely different to ours, the first Gnostics for instance, pissed off the early Church leaders enough that they retaliated.
     
  11. neko-sennin AKA shadesmaclean

    Messages:
    9,042
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    392
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    No bias involved. Just human nature.

    At least three ancient languages (Hebrew, Greek, Latin), and over three thousand years of religious fanatics fighting wars of assimilation and ideological pissing contests with each other... and it's never been changed? Just how gullible do you think we are?

    If you've ever stepped out of Sunday school and examined it through the lenses of literary critique or historical evidence, you would find things are not as cut and dry as you have been led to believe.

    As far as the existence of "God" is concerned, I've never met anyone who struck me as qualified to comment on that one, but I can tell you the true origin of religion:

    The parent who got sick of their kids asking "WHY?" (Dogma is the antithesis of curiosity or crtitical thinking.)

    The chieftan/king/priest who got sick of commoners asking why they were in charge, and not someone else. ( 'Cause God said so. Doesn't that sound awfully familiar from somewhere?)

    Neurotic-compulsives seeking a justification for their neuroses and compulsions. (Ever notice how "God's will" always turns out to be exactly what they wanted to do in the first place? Or, in the case of masochists, the exact polar opposite?) For them, "God" is just some kind of id/superego glitch.

    Children-- and yes, even grown adults-- muttering strange prayers at the dark, following broken-record rituals to keep the existential nightmare at bay.

    Ultimately, organized religion is nothing more than a tool of political and economic mass-manipulation. Those who seek spirituality by exploring the nature of reality and consciousness are actually doing what the human mind does naturally. Those who are presumptuous enough to believe they can stuff an omnipotent deity in a building and lock him away when things get inconvenient are seeking to shut down their own greatest asset.

    When you realize the difference between religion and spirituality, you will then realize how silly it is to claim that something created by human hands has never been changed by human hands. You will no longer need to let a book do your thinking for you.
     
  12. JiraiyaPimp Sneakapeak jutsu

    Messages:
    480
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    It's true that Christianity has been perverted by the passions of men in power but it's aim has never changed. Christianity is no different today than it was over 2000 years ago and, amazingly, people aren't any different either. God's message is still clear in the pages of scripture. I do disagree about contradictions. This is an argument that muslims like to use: If God is a god of order, why would he contradict himself in his Word?

    Too often people mistake other's action for God's Will and take that as a reason to NOT believe. Everytime I see a thread like this, all I read is "Give me a reason that you don't believe the bible"

    Revelation is not men's business. No one can make you believe. Either you do or you don't. It's that simple. For those who have had or believe that they've had a revelation, God takes precedence. Don't be fooled. As long as you refuse to believe what the bible sais, no amount of preaching or conversation can make you. Funny thing is, for every argument that you make, you're no different from the same people who didn't believe 2000 years ago. If you need a reason to believe, look around. The world isn't right. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.
     
  13. Gai-Sifu The Wild Green Beast of Raabu

    Messages:
    577
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2006
    I see what you're saying, but that isn't enough proof to stretch that anything in the bible can be used, whether you look at any form of litearture, art or religion,

    In liturature, everyone will have their own individual opinion of what the writer was trying to say, some people will read only what they want to read and appreciate what they want to appreciate and in a sense the reader who approaches the literature like that will take something away from it but at the same time, they will not get the full message of what the writer said. In art and music it is the same.

    Scriptures are also subject to this, people will see what they want to see, they won't necessarily take home the full message, now the bible for instance has a full message and some of it is good, but some of it is bad, and alot of it is subject to change by people who will only read what they want to read, I am suggesting that perhaps the bible has been altered for these reasons, I don't want anyone trying to neglect what I have said as "Lies the athiest tell you" But you have to look at whats really plausable, faith in yourself is, but faith in an unreliable literature, is it?

    People take what they want from it, the fact is, alot of people in christianity, well not just christianity but in all religions, passions what have you, follow what fits with them to fill a void that is missing in their life, whether is be purpose, loss of a loved one, or other things that we need mentally, physically and emotionally. The bible has been subject to this for so many years and it has not been properly reviewed as a legitament source of information, infact as of yet there is no archeological evidence of anything in the bible actually happening.
     
  14. JiraiyaPimp Sneakapeak jutsu

    Messages:
    480
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Okay,

    Haha, hasn't been proved as a reliable source for information?! Science got more than a few tips from Scripture. Are you absolutely certain that there is not archeological evidence or is this your opinion? Can you disprove that the Great Flood during Noah's time created our modern oceans? Can you disprove that the lands or seas mentioned in Scripture don't exist i.e. Egypt, The Tigris, Euphrates or Israel? What about the Tower of Babel or Nebuchadnezzar? Soddom and Gemorrah? There is archeological evidence to support Scripture. You can find testaments of archeologists online who did studies based off of nothing but Scripture. But this isn't what you mean, is it? You mean more fantastic happenings such as the walls of Jericho, Moses turning water to blood or Christ's Resurrection. You've got to remember that Scripture is also a historical account i.e. a history book. It seems that you want science to prove/disprove the accuracy of the historical account of Scripture. The Bible has changed countless millions lives from Constantine to Mohammed to Ghandi to the average Joe. It is legitimate in the life of the believer. That's really what matters. It has survived under heartless persecution and thrived. You are right about one thing. The bible has been subject to endless attempts to disprove it for years. It still stands. After more than 2000 years, it still stands. The message is just as potent today as it was then. Picking at straws as justification to say the Bible, in its entirety, is wrong clearly shows that you don't believe it. I am in no position to make you believe or change your mind. That's God's business imho but I am tasked to share the Gospel of Christ. Some accept it and some don't, as always. Still, the Bible IS the Word of God to all who believe it's teachings. It's also a bestseller. I've written enough (whew lol).
     
  15. Turnip Girl Purveyor of Fine OroKabu

    Messages:
    907
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Anyone who believes that something that's been around for 2000 years (especially something as 'important' as the Bible) has remained unchanged is naive.
     
  16. Adonis Logical Positivist

    Messages:
    7,740
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    People actually believe that a 300-by-300 cubit box, which measures out to about 450-by-450 feet, could fit EVERY species of animal and bug in it and float? Let's not forget the impossibility of herding every animal over an area equal to 7 continents and cleaning their fecal matter from the ark along with other practical realities that I don't feel it's neccessary to go into.

    Normally, I try to be subtle. I'll say it bluntly: If you actually believe that the Great Flood and Noah's Ark occurred, you're a bloody idiot and a dicksmack.

    How is asking why an omnipotent being would need rest on the 7th day grasping straws? How is pointing out that plants can't exist before the sun or that the Earth wasn't created thousands of years ago being picky? How is citing that there is no historical document from Jesus's time supporting his existence/execution or an earthquake on a full moon being unreasonable. If you want to ignore objective fact, so be it.
     
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2006
  17. hoshika :'D

    Messages:
    414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Of coarse the Bible has been changed or edited to different Church's likens. IT'S ALL ABOUT TEH POWER!!1!111

    But people shouldn't take the details to heart. I think the "overall" message in the Bible has been kept intact.

    And I really really do doubt that Noah can fit 1 million at most bugs in his little ship along with atleast 100 land mammals... and oh don't forget amphebians, reptails, and birds... To be honest, I really don't believe in that story but I believe that the jest or the "moral" of the story is what is the main point of it. That we should be more concerned about the moral points or lessons to be learned from Noah's story and not exactly Noah's Arc.

    But whatever... let people believe what they want to believe...
     
  18. Robotkiller Still alive

    Messages:
    21,644
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    Obviously the bible has undergone changes, back in the days of Mr.Jesus the only way to reprint the bible was through the use of a scribe, and scribes often changed and added various ammounts of text to the bible.

    But the fact the the bible HAS changed and HAS evolved over the years since it was first put onto paper is part of what makes it such a fascinating book.
     
  19. spirishman Negative Nancy

    Messages:
    568
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    1) It was 450x 75 and 4 1/2 stories tall
    2) If you really think about it, it wouldn't be hard if he took the younger animals, plus there wouldn't be as many species as today, but the main foundations of the families which would ventually reproduce, go through variation and become all the lovable creatures we know today
    3) Herding the creatures of the large continent would be a problem considering it took noah 200 years to build the ark
    4) I doubt fecal matter would be a problem

    1) Give me a day or two, I cna't find any greek translations for genesis 2:2, but I do know for a fact that rest in the original greek doesn't mean rest like he was tired, but he stopepd and basically looked at what he had created

    2) I won't touch the plant issue yet since I need to look more into it, but the earth being 6-7 thousand years old is a lot more plausible then millions, or even billions. First let me get into how current secular scientists date the earth. The some of the main methods are the radiometric dating methods ( Uranium-lead method, Rubidium-strontium method, and Potassium-argon method) and Geochronology( the geological column). Now The radiometric methods are based on three assumptions (I won't bother explaining the methods since you seem to be so well informed)
    1. The system must have been initally made up of all parent elements and no daughter elements.
    2. The rate of decay must have been constant from the moment the process was started.
    3.The system must operate as a closed system. Nothing from the system can be taken away, nothing from the outside the system can be added.

    Now what's the first thing noticable about these assumptions? They can't be tested or proven, which means they are not scientific . For one it's impossible for anyone to know the initial components of the system. Second, it's unreasonable to suggest that the rate of decay is the same then as it is today. Third, there is no such thing as a closed system in nature. It's all hypothetical to claim a process could have taken place long ago and not have had outside interference. I could get more into this, but I want to move onto the biggest and most well known dating method, Carbon 14 Dating. Now once again I'll assume you know how carbon 14 works so I won't explain how it works, but what assumptions are necessary for it to work
    1. The amount of radioactive carbon in the earth's atmosphere must have been constant.
    2. The decay rate must be the same then as it is now.
    3. There must be no contamination of radioactive carbon since the death of the specimen.
    Now here's the things wrong with the assumptions
    1. The earth's magnetic field has is decreasig( 14% over the past 130 years) Because of this cosmic radiation more readily enters through the earth's atmosphere, thus increasing the rate of carbon 14 formation.
    2. One of the major components of a volcanic eruption is the release of carbon dioxide, which would upset the balance of carbon 14.
    3. Solar flares increase the rate of formation of radioactive carbon.
    4.Nuclear tests have icnreased the rate of radioactive carbon formation.
    5. Collisions wil asteroids and meteorites on the earth has increased the rate of radioactive carbon formation.


    So there you have it, the first main method has been proven to be very un reliable


    Now geochronology is more easily shown to be a bad method. Once again I'll assume you know how geochronology works. Now it's basically saying one could geta layered cake, fold it, and it would break or the layers wouldnt' be ruined. Now hopefully you have enough common sense to know this wouldn't work, so why would it work with the earth's crust? Also large catastrophic events (Katrina, Mount St. Helens , volcanoes, etc.) create new layers, which would complete mess up the order of layers in the geological column.


    Now some evidence for the young earth
    1. If uniformitarianism is correct ( the rate of erosion, sedimentation, and volcanic activity are the same today as it was at the begging of the earth) then the continents would erode to sea level within 14 million years.( I know, assumptions, so I won't rely to heavily on this, just throwing it out there)
    2. The magnetic field is grradually decreasing. If you collect the data of decrease and made a chart going back hrough the years (averaging the rate of decrease) then the earth's magnetic field would be the equivalent of a magnetic star only 10,00 years ago. Obviously nothing could live in that condition. If you were to go back to 30,00 years, the earth would have been sufficient enough to generate 5000 degrees C. The temperature is sufficient enough to melt or vaporize the elements of the earth.
    3. The oil and gas deposits under the earth's surface are surronded by prous material. This would dissipate under high pressure over millions of years. The high pressures that remain give clear proof that the petroleum deposits could not possibly be even 1 million years old, let alone billions.



    Now chew on that, and if you have questions I'd be glad to answer them. I won't touch the bible being tampered with yet either since I can't seem to find all my notes and what nots from my studies, but I can assure you they haven't been tampered with... well maybe I'll talk about it a little



    The gospel of judas wasn't included because it was a gnostic gospel. Gnosticism is not considered christian. The doctrine of most gnostic groups are very different from that of pure christianity. I believe, but don't quote me on it, that the four gnostic gospels rejected are the gospels of thomas, judas, peter, and mary.

    The catholic churches doctrine is just a jumbled mess. I don't want to offend anyone, and pardon my language, but it's shit. It completely contradicts the old/new testament. Purgatory, praying to saints/mary, the pope, confession, sacrements, priests and nuns takign a vow of celibacy, the crusades, and even keepign jesus on the cross is all heretical. If you really want me to get into, I canprovide scripture that shows these aren't right.


    Sure after awhile the translations might get mixed and mashed, but that's because of lingual differences. One major example is that the greek language has three words for love, while the english language has one. Things get mis interpreted, certain verses get focused on, and many don't study the original greek versions. That's why at times the bible can seem contradictory and seem really confusing, but simply studying the greek makes it much clearer.

    If you see anything funny looking in what I said, tell me andI'll double check since all of this is from memory. Oh and please excuse and grammatical or spelling errors
     
  20. hoshika :'D

    Messages:
    414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    ^ Okay then. If the Earth really is "7 thousand years old" then how do you explain Dinosaurs?

    And how do you explain the diversity of life on this planet? There are more then varieties of insects then humans alive. How do you explain Pandas existence? Pandas are only found in China and obviously Noah didn't travel to China to get a Panda couple. And Evolution from one species to another is a very long process.

    Besides by your theory, in our own lifetime we should be seeing the evolution of species with our own eyes!

    I'm sorry but your logic isn't adding up.
     
  21. BladeofTheChad Pedo for Sakura

    Messages:
    5,199
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005

    much like the Bible...ZING!
     
  22. Robotkiller Still alive

    Messages:
    21,644
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    This creation is one of my newer devices, I thought this an appropriate place to use it.

     
  23. Colest Kooru-Sama

    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    You know there is a thread two threads up you should visit. It's called "Why do Atheists and Theists hate each other?"

    It IS proven, christ the church even admitted it a few centuries back. What the hell do you think the Dead Sea Scrolls are. Texts removed from the old testament because they weren't politically correct enough or too uncanon for the book itself.

    What people need to understand is that the bible's stories aren't meant to be taken literally but to learn the overall meaning from. I mean honestly, if you believe stories like "David and Goliath" and "Noah's Arc" you must be living in some state of fairy-tale denial that has yet to be named. The meaning, love thy man.
     
  24. EXhack The Immortal Stalker

    Messages:
    1,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    It's all metaphors and symbolism. Like poetry that tells you how to live you life.
     
  25. Colest Kooru-Sama

    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Exactly and I rep you for that.
     
  26. Gai-Sifu The Wild Green Beast of Raabu

    Messages:
    577
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2006
    even if it is as abstract as you say and even if it still exists after 2000 years... this does not make it the oldest text, and there are older that are more reliable, just because it is mainstream doesn't mean it is relevant.

    As I said before, people take what they want from literature, and in religion they'll take what they want to fill a void inside them in order to make themselves happy, this can lead people on crusades and paths of hate and anger, as well as giving them a quick fix solution to a complex problem leading them to feel better, if not happy and fulfilled.

    In science, in order for people to understand something they try to come up with an experiment to prove a situation can occur or that it ever happened. The another researcher will come along and review it. Then more researchers come along and try to disprove it and after that, more researchers come along and try to repeat the experiment but improve upon it. After this, reviews are done and all the evidence is gathered and discussed until we have a good understanding of something and a truthful understanding of something.

    But people, often don't want a hard to understand truth, they just want an answer, an easy answer. The bible can give you this easy answer and that is why it is so popular. Don't use people's laziness t prove your point please.

    You even say some accept it and some don't, but accepting something as truth and actually understanding the truth are two very different things - and may be the difference between believers and non-believers.

    My original point has nothing to do with this, but of the legitimacy of the text and how it is relavent to today. How is someone supposed to follow a doctrine of a "prophet" of whom only evidence of his existence exists in a badly written book.
     
  27. Superb Herb Follower Of Jesus Christ

    Messages:
    1,176
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    to throw out the Bible is to throw out all literary works. It is the most accurate book ever written. Read this it answers all questions.

    In fact, I’ve address this, and I will be certainly glad to show you the response.

    1. They are composed of eye witness accounts to Jesus Christ. By several eye witnesses to Christ.

    2. When were these 25 books of eye witness accounts composed?

    The Gospels Matthew, Mark, and Luke were each written within 20 years after Christ’s death. Dr. John A. T. Robinson states that the Gospel of Matthew was written as early as A.D. 40, within eight years of Christ.

    Dr. Hiebert, Dr. Harrison, and Dr. Harnak, Dr. T.W. Manson all date Pauls letters, Peters Epistles, and to 50-66 A.D.

    In regards to Paul Dr. Kevan writes

    " There is unimpeachable evidence of the contemporary letters of Paul the Apostle. These epistles constitute historical evidence of the highest kind. The letters addressed to the Galations, the Corinthians, and the Romans, about the authenticity and date of which there is very little dispute, belong to the time of Paul's missionary journeys, and may be dated in the period of 55-58. This brings the evidence of the resurrection of Christ still nearer to the event: the interval is the short span of twenty years. "

    John, was an apostle of Jesus, and ate with him, lived with him, and studies under him. John’s disciple Clement of Alexandria which we have several extra biblical documents of attested to the Biblical account of John’s banishment to the Island of Patmos, where in A.D. 95-100 he wrote his eye witness account of Jesus, and The revelation. He was banished to Patmos under The Emperor Domitian, this is also confirmed by Eusibus, a great historian.

    We have several points to make.

    1. The 25 books, containing several eye witness accounts, all written at an early date after Christ’s Death. This is vital to their testimony. What I want to do, is affirm, to you, their accuracy, in a comparison mode. Here are the top books of antiquity, and here are the statistics that back their authenticity:

    1. Caesar written 100-44 BC, earliest copy 900 AD, that is 1, 000 years after it was written!!!! And the number of copies we have are 10

    2. Livy written 59 BC-AD 17 earliest copy 900 AD, 1100 years after is was written! Copies = 7

    3. Aristotle, now everyone uses Aristotle’s work! Writted 384 BC, the earliest copy is 1100 AD that’s 1400 years after it was written!!!!!!!! Their are 49 copies of it

    4. Plato, come on, who questions platos work!? His was written 427 BC and the earliest copy was 900 AD 1300 years after it was written man! That’s insane and there are only 7 copies!!!!!! Yet no one questions his writings!!!!!!!

    5. Sophocles 496 BC it was written and the earliest copy was 1000 AD that’s 1400 years! 193 copies. That’s allot of copies! I mean that has allot of backing, but still 1400 years, allot of time eh!?

    6. Catullus 54 bc it was written and the earliest copy is 1500 AD that’s 1600 years after! And this guy gets tough in schools ! there are 3 copies.

    I can go on and on. But these are the absolute top writings of antiquity, the absolute highest ( next to the bible ) is Homer's Iliad. You read that right!? Everyone has. It blows all the other works of antiquity away. Look at these stats man!

    written 900 BC, the earliest copy is 400 BC. Only 500 years. That’s pretty close compared to other works of antiquity don’t you think!? And its authentic, look it has 643 copies! That’s got allot of backing!!!!!! Very authentic. Again aside from the new testament this is the most backed work of antiquity!


    Get ready ! Now you will see why the new testament has more backing then any other book of antiquity! guess what? It was written from 40 A.D. to 100 AD( John on Patmos ), Guess when our earliest copy is!?? Ill let you think about it....

    The earliest manuscript, get ready! Is 125 AD! Only 25 years after the new testament was finished! Now how many copies. I mean homer has 643 copies! And it’s the most backed book of antiquity aside from the new testament? It is more than 643, and it’s more than 1, 000 and its more than 2, 000 and it’s more than 10, 000! In fact, hold your breath! It’s a total of over 24, 000 copies!!!!!!!!!!!!
    You heard right, 24, 000 copies! All matching each other from the first!

    Did you know, that if we threw away every single new testament bible in the world. That we could reconstruct the whole new testament down to 11 verses!? Over the first 2 centuries the early church fathers would send letters, in which they would quote books of the new testament. They did this so frequently, and there are so many of these preserved over the first 2 centuries that the whole new testament can be reconstructed! We have over 86, 000 quotations of the new testament writings. That’s over 110, 000 documents which affirm the accuracy of the text.,

    To discredit the new testament would be to throw out every work of antiquity in existence! There is no past writing with more backing, and here are a few quotes I’m going to copy for you!
     
  28. Superb Herb Follower Of Jesus Christ

    Messages:
    1,176
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Therefore the first two factors have been covered. Which are, and early date, and the uncannily, essentially miraculous backing that the words of the eye witness accounts to Jesus Christ, have been preserved.

    The next aspect is to discuss the Historicity of the Bible.
    Old School covered this excellently. One of the most incredible aspects of the New Testament, is that it is actually very testable in this manner. Luke made this statement in his book of Acts:

    1 The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach, 2 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen: 3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs , being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God

    It is vital, that many of these proofs can be historically tested. I can, and in the future will discuss, an amazing, huge and extensive list of the Historical confirmation of every testable event in the new testament. Luke for example, has been credited, as one of the greatest historians of all time. Simply because he meticulously recorded facts. Including Goverment officials, peoples, customs, dates, times, and places.

    As far as some of the Archeology, Old School has discussed this in the past, I'll paste his response, which only touches on the subject

    Some of the Archeological evidence for Scripture's accuracy:
    a. Hittite civilization (Genesis 15:20) discovered in 1906
    b. Quirinius Governor of Syria (Luke 2:1-3) confirmed as a double duty by coin
    c. Correct titles of government praetor, proconsul, first man, politarchs (Lukes writings)
    d. John alone mentions The Pool of Bethesda (John 5:1-15), it was found as described
    e. The walls of Jericho (Joshua 6) with the exception of part of the Northern wall - Rahabs
    house??? (Heb. 11:30-31) - found in 1950. They were burned and fallen from the inside out.
    f. Census taking in first century (Gospels) method of family counting used is accurate
    g. Pilate the Governors (John 19) existence confirmed by inscription found in 1961
    h. Jesus; direction of travel (Mark 7:31) probable route through mountains makes sense
    I. Daniel accurately recorded Belshazzars position (5:16) as co-regent
    j. Nazareths existence (John 1:46) confirmed by family lists and tombs in vicinity 1962
    k. Method of crucifixion confirmed in 1968
    l. The method and fact of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19) verified
    m. Lysanius the Tetrarch (Luke 3:1) confirmed as correct name for that time period
    n. John alone mentions the Pool of Siloam (John 9:7) found as described
    o. Jacobs Well (John 4:12) found as described
    p. Cities of Lycaonia included Iconium (Acts 14:6) confirmed as correct
    q. Erastus the city treasurer (Romans 16:23) inscription found in Corinth in 1929
    r. Ecclessia meeting in theater (Acts 19:23) found
    s. The proper title meris; used of Philippi of Macedonia
    t. Jesus probable home unearthed in Capernaum (Mark 1:29-34)
    u. Millstones (Luke 17:2) unearthed in Capernaum
    v. First century Galilean boat found to hold crew of 13 1986
    w. John (3:23) correctly identifies John the Baptist as being in Aeno
    x. John (2:1) distinguishes the two Canas, and the two Bethanys (1:28; 11:18)
    y. John (4:5-6) specifies the city of Sychar in Samaria where Jacobs well is found.
    z. Evidence has also been found for the Tower of Babel and the confusion of languages

    a. The method and destruction of the city of Tyre is 100% accurate (Ezekial 26)
    b. Christ was tried by Pilate in the "Gabbatha" (or pavement) found (John 19:13)
    c. Personal and place names in the Patriarchal accounts are genuine "Canaan" "tehom"(Ebla)
    d. In 1977 an inscription mentioning Dan was found near the high place (1 Kings 12:28-29)
    e. The Mesha Inscription found in Jordan mentions the tribe of Gad (Joshua 13:24-28)
    f. The Babylonians recorded the fall of the "city of JUDAH" to Nebuchadnezzar in 597 BC
    g. The palace at Jericho where Eglon, king of Moab, was assassinated by Ehud .
    h. The east gate of Shechem where the forces of Abimelech approached the city found
    i. The Temple of Baal/El-Berith in Shechem,
    j. The pool of Gibeon where the forces of David and Ishbosheth fought found
    k. The royal palace at Samaria where the kings of Israel lived
    l. The Pool of Samaria where King Ahab's chariot was washed after his death found
    m. The water tunnel beneath Jerusalem dug by King Hezekiah during the Assyrian siege found
    n. The royal palace in Babylon where King Belshazzar held the feast
    o. The royal palace in Susa where Esther was queen of the Persian king Xerxes found
    p. The royal gate at Susa where Mordecai, Esther's cousin, sat found
    q. The Square in front of the royal gate at Susa where Mordecai met with Halthach found
    r. The foundation of the synagogue at Capernaum where Jesus cured a man with an unclean spirit
    and delivered the sermon on the bread of life .
    s. The house of Peter where Jesus healed Peter's mother-in-law and others found
    t. The tribunal at Corinth where Paul was tried found
    u. The theater at Ephesus where the riot of silversmiths occurred found
    v. Herod's palace at Caesarea where Paul was kept under guard found
    w. Graves of Caiaphas the High Priest (John 18:13), Caesar Augustus (Luke 2:1-7), Cyrus the
    Great (Isaiah 45), Darius-I the Great (Ezra 6) known
    x. The cave of the Patriarchs (Sarah, Abraham, Isaac, Rebekah, Leah and Jacob) known
    y. Grave of David and Solomon known
    z. Grave of Uzziah (an inscription was found on the Mount of Olives in 1931 which reads, "Here
    were brought the bones of Uzziah, King of Judah - do not open."...evidently because of leprosy)

    And to add some details...

    Joshuas conquest of the Promised Land
    Critics of the Bible have claimed for decades that the Bible's statements in Joshua about the conquest of the Promised Land in the centuries before the monarchy of King David were pure fiction. In light of this new archeological evidence critics will be forced to relinquish their rejection of the Bible's record of Israel's conquest as stated by Joshua. In the book of Joshua (6:5), God told Joshua, When you hear them sound a long blast on the trumpets, have all the people give a loud shout; then the wall of the city will collapse and the people will go up, every man straight in." Even this miracle is confirmed by archaeology. Professor John Garstang found and recorded his amazing finding, ;there remains no doubt: the walls fell outwards so completely that the attackers would be able to clamber up and over the ruins into the city.; The evidence from all other archaeological digs around ancient cities in the Middle East reveal that the walls of cities always fall inwards as invading armies push their way into the city.

    (To read more, refer to John Garstang and J.B.E. Garstang, The Story of Jericho, London: Hodder & Stoughton Ltd, 1940 page 172.)

    Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah
    (Gen 19:24-29 NIV) Then the LORD rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah--from the LORD out of the heavens. Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire plain, including all those living in the cities--and also the vegetation in the land. But Lot's wife looked back, and she became a pillar of salt. Early the next morning Abraham got up and returned to the place where he had stood before the LORD. He looked down toward Sodom and Gomorrah, toward all the land of the plain, and he saw dense smoke rising from the land, like smoke from a furnace. So when God destroyed the cities of the plain, he remembered Abraham, and he brought Lot out of the catastrophe that overthrew the cities where Lot had lived.

    The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah is one of the most memorable stories in the Bible. According to the Bible, the inhabitants of these two cities were so wicked (Gen 18:20, 19:1-13) that God supernaturally destroyed them. For many years, historians regard this as a fairy tale.

    We know from the Bible that Sodom and Gomorrah were located in the Valley of Siddim (Gen 14:3), a known name for the Dead Sea. In 1973 Walter Rast and Thomas Schaub began to excavate a site known as Bab edh-Dhra, which it located in this area (on the eastern shore of Transjordan across from the Lisan peninsular). They found remains of a heavily fortified and large community. Another thing caught the attention of excavators: the evidence of extensive destruction by fire. The townsite was covered by a layer of ash many feet in thickness. Many dead bodies were found inside buildings. The archeologists also found that the fire did not start from inside the building (as would be the case of an earthquake) but in every case started on the roof of the building, then the roof burned through, collapsed into the interior and then the fire spread inside the building. Archeologists have no explanation for this but the Bible does. The Bible talks about Gods destruction of these cities because of their sin and speaks of God raining fire and brimstone down on these cities from heaven.

    (For a published report of these excavations, see W.E. Rast and R.T. Schaub, Survey of the Southeastern Plain of the Dead Sea,Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 19:5-54, 175-85.)
     
  29. Superb Herb Follower Of Jesus Christ

    Messages:
    1,176
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Historicity of numerous kings mentioned in the Bible
    Only fifty years ago many disbelieving scholars totally rejected the historical accuracy of the Bible because they claimed that the Scriptures talked about numerous kings and individuals that could not be confirmed from any other historical or archeological records. Recent discoveries have proven these critics wrong. Discoveries have been found referring to King David, Solomon, Uzziah, Hezekiah and many others.

    Recent archeological investigations have demolished the position of those who rejected the biblical account of Israel's kings such as King David. In 1993, archeologists digging at Tel Dan in the Galilee in northern Israel found a fragment of a stone inscription that clearly refers to the "house of David" and identifies David as the "king of Israel." This is the first inscription outside the Bible that confirms the Bible's statement that David was the king of Israel in the ninth century before Christ.

    A stone inscription from Egypt confirms that Israel was established as a nation in Canaan centuries before the reign of King David, just as the Bible claims. The Merneptah Stela is a seven-and-a-half-foot-high stone inscription discovered in the temple of Pharaoh Merneptah at Thebes in Egypt. Scholars determined that Pharaoh Merneptah ruled Egypt from 1213 to 1203 B.C. and confirmed that he launched an invasion into the area of the modern-day West Bank in Canaan, defeating the Jewish inhabitants of the land. The second line from the bottom of this inscriptions boasts, "Israel is laid waste; his seed is not."

    In addition to the archeological evidence for King David, we now have confirmation of other kings of Israel. The name of Omri, king of Israel, is recorded on an inscription known as the Stela of King Mesha of Moab. In addition, Omri's name appears on the rock inscriptions of three kings of Assyria, the annals of both Tiglath-Pileser III and Sargon II, and the Black Obelisk of King Shalmaneser III, who wrote, "I conquered . . . all of the Land of Omri (Israel)." Other Assyrian inscriptions found in Nineveh confirm the Bible's records about these kings of Israel: Ahab, Jehu, Joash, Menehem, Pekah, and Hoshea. In addition, the names of many of the kings of the southern kingdom of Judah are also recorded on inscriptions of the nations that fought against the Jews. The inscriptions found by archeologists also confirm the names of these kings of Judah: Ahaziah, Uzziah, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, and Jehoiachin. Scholars found ration records of the army of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon (606 to 562 B.C.) that state, "ten sila of oil to Jehoiachin, king of Judah. . . ." Obviously, the fact that these foreign nations listed the kings of Israel and Judah provides the strongest evidence confirming the accuracy of the Word of God.

    Historicity of other Biblical Personalities
    One of the most interesting discoveries in recent years was the finding of two bull', or clay seals, that bear the impression of the actual seal used by Baruch, the scribe of Jeremiah the prophet who transcribed the Book of Jeremiah. Both bull' bear the inscription, "Belonging to Berekhyahu, son of Neriyahu, the Scribe." One of these clay seals is on view in the Israel Museum in Jerusalem. However, the second bull' was found in Jerusalem earlier in this century and purchased by collector Shlomo Moussaieff of London who owns the greatest private collection of ancient Jewish inscriptions in the world. This second clay seal, bearing the same inscription, also reveals a fingerprint that probably belonged to Baruch.

    At the beginning of this century a fascinating seal was discovered in Israel that bore an inscription of a beautiful lion and the words, "Belonging to Shema servant of Jeroboam." This amazing find indicates that it belonged to an official of King Jeroboam of Israel. Other seals have been discovered confirming the biblical records about King Uzziah (777 to 736 B.C.) and King Hezekiah (726 to 697 B.C.).
     
  30. Superb Herb Follower Of Jesus Christ

    Messages:
    1,176
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Another important seal found in Jerusalem dates from the seventh century before Christ and is inscribed as follows: "Belonging to Abdi Servant of Hoshea." This seal made of orange chalcedony, used to authenticate royal documents for security, belonged to Abdi, a high official of King Hosea, the last king of the northern kingdom of Israel before it was conquered by the Assyrian Empire in 721 B.C. Another large seal on red limestone was found bearing the inscription "Belonging to Asayahu, servant of the king"ÿtogether with a galloping horse. The name "Asaiah" is a short form of the name "Asayahu."ÿThis name occurs twice in the Old Testament in connection with the title "servant of the king." In 2 Chronicles 34:20 we find the name, "Asaiah a servant of the king's" and again in 2 Kings 22:12, "Asahiah a servant of the king's." It is possible that this seal was owned by "Asaiah, the servant of the king" a high court official who was sent by King Josiah to carefully examine the scroll of the lost Book of Deuteronomy that was found in the Temple by the High Priest Hilkiah in approximately 622 B.C.

    Explorers in Iraq in the last century found the ancient inscribed clay cylinder bearing the actual decree of King Cyrus of Persia allowing the various captured natives of many different nations to return freely to their ancient homelands. It was the government policy of the preceding Babylonian Empire of King Nebuchadnezzar to displace whole peoples such as the Jews and resettle them in the far reaches of their empire. However, King Cyrus of Persia, a moderate and God-fearing monarch, reversed the cruel Babylonian policy. Immediately after conquering the Babylonian Empire, King Cyrus issued a decree allowing the Jews to freely return to their homeland in Israel ending the seventy-year-long captivity. The decree of King Cyrus began with these words, "I am Cyrus, king of the world, great king." After describing his conquests and deeds, the cylinder inscription reads, "I gathered all their former inhabitants and returned to them their habitations." In this incredible discovery we find the confirmation of one of the most astonishing events in the pages of Scripture. "Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing, saying, Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, The Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth; and he hath charged me to build him an house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Who is there among you of all his people? his God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and build the house of the Lord God of Israel, he is the God, which is in Jerusalem" (Ezra 1:1-3).

    The Archeological Evidence of the New Testament
    The English scholar, William Ramsay, traveled as a young man to Asia Minor over a century ago for the sole purpose of disproving the Bible's history as described by Luke in his Gospel and in the Book of Acts. Ramsay and his professors were convinced that the New Testament record must be terribly inaccurate. He believed that Luke could not be correct in his history of Christ or in his account about the growth of the Church during the first decades following Christ. Dr. Ramsay began to dig in the ancient ruins of sites throughout Greece and Asia Minor, searching for ancient names, boundary markers, and other archeological finds that would conclusively prove that Luke had invented his history of Christ and His Church. To his amazement and dismay, William Ramsay discovered that the statements of the New Testament Scriptures were accurate in the smallest detail. Finally, Dr. Ramsay was convinced by the overwhelming evidence proving the Bible's accuracy. As a result, he accepted Jesus Christ as His personal Savior. He became both a Christian and a great biblical scholar. As a result of his conversion to belief in Jesus Christ, Sir William Ramsay's books became classics in the study of the history of the New Testament. Another great scholar, A. N. Sherwin-White, was a great classical historical scholar at Oxford University who studied the extensive evidence for and against the historical accuracy of the Book of Acts. Sherwin-White wrote his conclusion after studying the evidence, "For Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming . . . any attempt to reject its basic historicity even in matters of detail must now appear absurd" (Quoted by Rubel Shelley, Prepare To Answer [Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1990]).

    Dr. William F. Albright was unquestionably one of the world's most brilliant biblical archeologists. In 1955 he wrote: "We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any book of the New Testament after circa A.D. 80." However, additional discoveries over the next decade convinced him that all the books in the New Testament were written "probably sometime between circa A.D. 50 and 75." Significantly, Albright concluded that the writing of the New Testament within a few years of the events it described made it almost impossible that errors or exaggeration could have entered the text. He wrote that the duration between the events of Christ's life and the writing was "too slight to permit any appreciable corruption of the essential center and even of the specific wording of the sayings of Jesus." In other words, Professor Albright, one of the greatest minds in the field of archeology and ancient texts, concluded that the New Testament records the truth about Jesus Christ and his statements.

    Dr. John A. T. Robinson was a distinguished lecturer at Trinity College, Cambridge and developed a reputation as a great scholar. Naturally, he accepted the academic consensus universally held since 1900, that denied the disciples and Paul wrote the New Testament and concluded that it was written up to a hundred years after Christ. However, an article in Time magazine, March 21, 1977, reported that Robinson decided to personally investigate for himself the arguments behind this scholarly consensus against the New Testament's reliability because he realized that very little original research had been completed in this field in this century. He was shocked to discover that much of past scholarship against the New Testament was untenable because it was based on a "tyranny of unexamined assumptions" and what he felt must have been an "almost willful blindness." To the amazement of his university colleagues, Robinson concluded that the apostles must have been the genuine writers of the New Testament books in the years prior to A.D. 64. He challenged other scholars to complete original research necessary to truly examine the question fairly. As a result of such a new analysis Robinson believed that it would necessitate "the rewriting of many introductions to-and ultimately, theologies of-the New Testament." Robinson's book, Redating the New Testament, published in 1976, suggests that Matthew's Gospel was written as early as A.D. 40, within eight years of Christ.

    Archeology has been continually proving the New Testament to be a reliable source of history. Many people, places and customs spoken of in the New Testament has now been confirmed to be true.

    For example, the pool of Bethesda described in John 5:2 has been located in the north­east quarter of the old city of Jerusalem called Betheza.

    The fact that Gallio was proconsul of Archaia as stated in Acts 18:12 has been proven correct through inscriptions found.

    In 1968 the first physical evidence of crucifixion as a form of punishment was found when archeologist discovered heel bones still tranfixed by an iron nail.

    And there you have it broken in to a few posts.
     
Loading...