Is the Bible the Word of God?

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
The bible was written in over a 1,500 year period with 40 authors in 3 different languages about many controversial topics yet it remains in complete harmony from beginning to end. This is evidence to me that it is the word of God.

---

So you don't see any incongruities in a work that includes "suffer the little children to come unto me..." and God sending bears to eat children for taking the piss out of one of his prophets for being bald?Wake up and smell the coffee mate.....Or even better explain to me what they are both doing in an internaly consistent, divinely inspired document, I could do with a good laugh.....

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 12-10-2001]

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
I didn't claim to understand everything in the bible. I don't think anyone can. But if you ask me a specific verse and tell me where it is in the bible I should be able to do some research and let you know the meaning and hopefully help you understand it better.

---

"suffer the little children..." was JesusThe prophet was either Elijah or Elisha....

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 12-11-2001]

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
This information was taken from another website.

​

Perhaps the greatest and most obvious testimony to the accuracy of Biblical prophecy is provided by the people and nation of Israel. The Jews went without a homeland for 1900 years, just as God had promised numerous times in the Old Testament2, as a reluctant judgment on His rebellious chosen people. Moses warned Israel that if they corrupted themselves, then "the LORD shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other (Deut 28:64, KJV)". Remarkably, this century God restored the Jews to their ancient homeland, fulfilling many other specific Old Testament prophesies3.

​

It is inconceivable to me how the honest skeptic could deny God's handiwork in the history of the people of Israel. Throughout history the "wandering Jew" has been hated and despised, yet despite the unbelievable persecution they endured, the Jews somehow managed to maintain their identity such that when God's timeclock warranted they were able to re-group as a nation in their ancient homeland. Indeed, history is replete with once great nations which were eventually overrun and defeated, but whose people were over time absorbed into the culture of the conquering nation. The fact that this did not happen to the Jews is nothing short of miraculous. There are American Jews, German Jews, Russian Jews, etc.; have you ever heard of a German Babalonian, or an American Philistine? The plight of this small percentage of humanity is certainly unique and unprecedented in the annals of world history

---

I have a prophesy for you one year a non-white horse will win the grand national....Just because it will come true implys no specific foreknowledge on my part....Any prophesy that is stated in vague enough language as to provide a plenum of solutions is not verified by the occurrence of one of those solutions....Also you have neglected to consider that hatred, religious intolerance and ostrasation all form effective barriers to social integration....

quote:

---

Redstang said:
I didn't claim to understand everything in the bible. I don't think anyone can. But if you ask me a specific verse and tell me where it is in the bible I should be able to do some research and let you know the meaning and hopefully help you understand it better.

---

quote:

---

To which I replied:
"suffer the little children..." was Jesus

​

The prophet was either Elijah or Elisha....

---

Still waiting pal.......

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
WHat do you presume "suffer the little children" means?

​

I don't really understand what I'm supposed to disprove or prove?

---

Case one:Someone I forget who tries to stop some children from "bothering" (from his perspective anyway) jesus, JC then says "suffer the little children to come unto me..."Case 2:One of Gods prophets (either Elijah or Elisha) is walking along one day when some children make fun of his bald head, so God sends some bears to eat the children....Prove that these two passages can both exist in an internally consistent and inerrant document....

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 12-13-2001]

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
I think I see what you're saying. How can God want to help the children at one point then later want to kill them later?

​

Well God values the soul more than life because that is eternal. God wants us to come to him to have our soul saved. So when Jesus wanted the children to come to them he wanted them to learn of him so their soul would be saved. The children being eating by the bear could just illustrate that you could die for doing a wrong deed.

---

I am sorry but will have to agree to differ here as I cannot conceive that the two passages could coexist in an internally consistent document...Unless the God that they describe were schizophrenic.....

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
If God said there shall no more be an native american ruler of america back in the indian days, and no american indians came to be president you couldn't say the prophecy failed because Bill Clinton became president.

​

[This message has been edited by redstang281, 12-17-2001]

---

Here is a little fact for you a few hundred years back the king of France (one of the Louis) apassed the edict of Nantes which passed into law various pieces of legislation that persecuted the Huguenots' (a protestant sect) some Huguenots fled to England (which was protestant)....There are no truly accurate records but it was only a small No. of Huguenots that came to England. Of the current 50+ million people living in Britain at the moment it is estimated that at least 25% have at least 1 Huguenot ancestor...My point here is that it is entirely possible that someone with at least one native american ancestor will become president.With the amount of interbreeding that has always gone on it is pointless to talk about race...

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 12-17-2001]

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
"and there shall be no more a prince of the land of Egypt (Ezek 30:13, KJV)."

​

When the Lord said "of the land" to Ezekiel he was speaking of the people who lived in egypt currently. Nasser is not the same as those people. The people "of the land" who the Lord was referring too have been bleed out in race, culture, etc.. He is in no way like them.

---

And again I say that given the inevitable cross pollination that occurred between invader and native population race is a moot point for many of those now in the country....They are no longer Persian, Babylonian or Egyptian they are a conglomeration....

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
The lord was referring to the current people in egypt, not only by race, but also by culture.. etc.. That is obvious when he says "people of the land." What defines people? Like I said, many things define people, their race, their culture, their herritage. None of this was continued.

​

If Bin Laden over threw american and ruled over it, he becomes a new american, but he changes what an american is.

​

The Lord referred to "the people of the land" as the current people of the land of the time.

---

Sorry but anything that requires any sort of interpretation i.e. what is meant by people of the land of Egypt is to vague to be conclusively verified....To be verifiable the language must be exact enough to prevent this sort of semantic wrangling...So I suggest you bring in another because this one doesnt quite pass muster on the exact and verifiable front....

Problem is bud of the same race is:a)A damn fool statement given the amount of interbreeding that occurs between human "races"...b)Only one possible interpretation out of a variety of meanings + prophecy is to vague...you said that the bible was chock-a-block full of prophesies that were realized so bring in another....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Percipient:
You have none of these. Can't we move on to some other prophecy that possesses less ambiguity and better corroboration with the historical record?

​

--Percy

---

Na mate he is still tring to win an the moon off me....See message Message 46 in the $250,000 challenge thread...

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
I can post more websites where they say basically the same quote. How many do I need to post? 10?

---

You can post as many as you like sunshine the ambiguity has already been demonstrated....Next prophesy please.....

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
I think you guys know I'm going to win this one.

---

Really I thought that under the prophesies must not be vague rule this one bit the dust a couple of pages ago.....

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
There are no contradictions in the Bible. I really don't have the rest of my life to spend replying to every one of those examples you cited, I do have projects to complete at work. Your supposide contradictions in the Bible only illustrate your ignorance towards scripture and misunderstand of what the Bible is really about in the first place.

---

Hmmmm.... So your entire defense is...-No it doesnt coz I say so......-Your ignorant.....Not really a worthwhile response is it......

quote:

---

"and there shall be no more a prince of the land of Egypt"

---

Hmmmmm.... The prophesy doesn`t even contain the word native.....Wonder how many other words we could sub in...Got a proposition for you Red you can have native if I can have "dinner for" inserted between "more" and "a"....Thus the prophesy would become"and there shall be no more dinner for a native prince of the land of Egypt"Hows that suit ya?If you can insert words why shouldn`t we?