The Bible was NOT man made, it was Godly made

quote:

---

The Dead Sea Scrolls attest to the fact that the literally translated versions are quite accurate compared to those old scriptures.

---

The Dead Sea scrolls tell us nothing about the accuracy of translation. They do tell us that there was more variation in the texts than was thought.

quote:

---

My problem with the above cited statement is that naturalistic ideologies can take that ball and run with it in any direction they choose to claim a score, all the while undermining the only real bonafide collection of written books inspired by God. No other existing books written by humans have fulfilled prophecies as are found in the prophetic books of the Bible supportive to divine inspiration.

​

The rocks, living things, the cosmos as well as human history, by observation, can be interpreted in whatever manner suits the fancy, but the words of the Bible are like your word "different."..

---

Your real complaint is that scence proves you wrong - it's not as if creationist "interprtations" fit the evidence - the more so since they have to pretend that much of the evidence doesn't even exist. If the evidence was so open to interpretation creationism would still be a live option in the scientific community, instead of a long-dead idea only adhered to be cranks and fanatics.Your claims to fulfilled prophecy have been examined here and shown to rely on distorting and misrepresenting the Bible. Apparently - according to you - the Bible is even more open to "interpretation" than the empirical data open to science. So long as you're doing the "interpreting" . Edited by Admin, : Fix typo in quote dBCode.

A couple of points to consider

quote:

---

On the opposite--if 2 or more witnesses give exactly the same account of an incident--word for word-- a wise judge would through away these testimonies as coming from "rehearsed" or "expert" witnesses.

---

The Synoptic Gospels (Mark, Matthew and Luke) contain enough word-for-word (or very closely similar) material that we know that there was a significant amount of copying.

quote:

---

In the books of Kings and Chronicles, you will find many "contradictions" like this king started ruling at age 18, on a different page ( say, Chronicles) you will find an account which says that that king ruled while age 21. W/o further reading and not enough insight, critics harp on these "errors" . But, do a little research and you will find out that one author started counting from the time that king CO-RULED w/ his father. Another, would start counting from the time that king was the SOLE ruler.

---

Well, no typically you won't FIND it. What you will find is that Christian apologists INVENT co-rulerships to explain away the contradictions. There is a difference between discovering a fact and inventing an excuse.

quote:

---

"very similar" is not proof of rehearsed witnesses. On the contrary, it is proof of persons witnessing same events.

---

Well they're more than just "very similar", and not one of the authors of the three Synoptics can be reliably idenified as a witness of the events.

quote:

---

As to the copying, it is proof of existence of formal records at that time.

---

No, it isn't. There's no evidence of any other documents except, possibly one containing the material found in both Matthew and Luke and not in Mark ("Q"). And even that is disputed.

quote:

---

Matthew can trace Jesus geneology coz of these records.

---

Except he doesn't mention using any records and Luke comes up with a quite different genealogy (and spare me the fiction that Luke was giving Mary's genealogy - it's not what the book says).

quote:

---

How would you critic the gospel if they were not "synoptics" and varied greatly, say, name of the messiah wa Jesus (by John, Joel (by Matthew), Abraham by (Luke)? Would you believe them?

---

What does that have to do with what I said ? In case you've forgotten the similarities go well beyond those expected from people recounting the same events.

quote:

---

I'm no apologist

---

You're not a professional apologist, but you certainly are an apologist and showing all the faults associated with apologetics.

quote:

---

I disagree that co-rulerships are invented as an excuse

---

I've seen it done. On this forum. I don't say that there are no co-rulerships ever. I do say that they are often invented. If you disagree, why don't you find an example where there is a definite co-rulership (it must be explicitly mentioned) and one book dates the reign from the start of the co-rulership and another from the start of the sole reign. That's what you said happened. So how about just one case where we know that it happened ?Use the "peek" function to see how I produce quotes. Or follow the link

quote:

---

What's that got to do witn the correctness or error of my view? Ad hominem?

---

It's a drect contradiction of your expressed view that you aren't an apologist. And I've got the evidence of your posts to prove it.

quote:

---

How would you feel if I tell you that you are a an aetheist who is trying to ape advocates of "higher criticism" of the bible?

---

I'd feel that you were expressing the usual fundamentalist hatred of Biblical scholarship.
It's not as if I'm putting forward anything that's especially controversial, let alone my own proposals.

quote:

---

I think I'll take a long vacation again. As the saying goes: "if you can't stand the odor, don't go near the sewer".

---

It's amazing how the truth repels your sort of "Christian"Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

quote:

---

they said that what was written thousands of years ago was true. Another thing-thousands of prophecies in the Bible are coming true TODAY. Anyone familiar with Matthew 24?

---

Yes. I've discussed it before on this forum. It's about events leading up to the destruction of the Herodian Temple (which was destroyed in 70 AD). Not exactly "coming true TODAY", is it ?

quote:

---

Jesus clearly states in Matthew 24 that he is talking about the Second Coming

---

Which doesn't change the fact that he is primarily talking about the destruction of the Herodian Temple. And the Second Coming hasn't happened today either.Let me give you some advice. Before trying to argue based on Biblical passage go away and read it, carefully, in context. If you manage to do that you should make fewer embarrassing mistakes.