|
QuickSearch
Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ] |
EvC Forum active members: 61 (9027 total) |
| |
JustTheFacts | |
Total: 883,430 Year: 1,076/14,102 Month: 68/411 Week: 89/168 Day: 6/12 Hour: 0/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is the Bible the inerrant word of God? Or is it the words of men? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Zift Ylrhavic Resfear Junior Member (Idle past 2735 days) Posts: 9 Joined: |
I was attracted to the forum "The Bible: Accuracy and Inerrancy" by that description i used for the title. As if there already is a subject i missed it would have at least several years of inactivity, i thought i might as well make a new topic.
So, is the Bible the inerrant word of God? Or is it the words of men? Just take Jesus as an example. What do you think would have happened if he came and said "Your whole conception of how the world is and was made is wrong, let me tell you how it really is." ? Just for everyone to acknowledge the earth is round took thousands of years. I like to try to write what he could have said (which he maybe actually did by the way) about the creation of the earth not being done in "seven day" but several billions of years :
That's why i think using the bible as an absolute truth isn't good. The humanity at this time wasn't ready to accept new ways of thinking, and even now, when one of the key point of the science is to question everything, it is still hard for a new theory to be accepted, so how could God reach us if he didn't play our game and do as if we were right? I think we should take the basic saying of the bible like the ten commandment (is it how they're called in english?), and adapt the rest to our new society. Well, even the ten commandment were probably carefully spelled not to offend the believers of the time, so it might be good to review them too (i didn't read them so i can't really talk about them). The question now would be to know who should be doing that review. I'm certain there would be a lot of people not accepting it, even if it was from the Pope himself. Maybe we should try to do a new conduct code, that would be accepted by everyone, believer or non believer. God said to love each other, wasn't it because he wanted us to live in peace? If he truly cares about us, then he would rather have us do it without believing in him than not doing it but believing in him. Well, as you can see i love to talk, sorry for going a bit off topic, i hope you had a good read ^^
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 12713 From: EvC Forum Joined: |
Thread copied here from the Is the Bible the inerrant word of God? Or is it the words of men? thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
We know that men wrote the words, whether or not they were inspired by God is a little short on data.
Well, there are some things in there that we know are wrong, so, even if we thought God said them we still shouldn't believe them.
A God that has the power to create the entire Universe should not have any problem with making humanity ready to accept new ways of thinking.
Yes.
I don't really care much about the Old Testament, but I think Jesus' philosophy was good. Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 14966 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: |
quote:Truthfully, Ive seen anecdotal evidence that scriptures address the concerns of the human heart and actually have a transforming effect. Critics would say this is a biased view. The problem is, many of the critics are biased towards belief in human wisdom and would argue that the books of the Bible themselves were not inspired by a source other than human wisdom(and fallibility and motive). Personally, I disagree, but am not opposed to human wisdom and education...I am just aware that the belief that I have been taught is sound. I will state that the only purpose of the Bible ultimately is to introduce humanity to Jesus Christ and that He lives today. Edited by Phat, : add
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member Posts: 18878 From: frozen wasteland Joined: Member Rating: 2.9 |
That's it exactly.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member (Idle past 85 days) Posts: 3998 From: Liverpool Joined: |
The Bible says it is inspired so if you beleive anything in it you may as well believe that, too.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulGL Member (Idle past 2178 days) Posts: 92 Joined: |
Rousseau, one of the most respected minds of the Renaissance, had this to say: 'Either the Bible was written by men who were inspired by God- or they were gods themselves, for it is too profound to be a mere work of man'. If your opinion differs from his, then how does your capability and objectivity stack up against Rousseau's? Lastly, I would point out that the prophetic part (as in prediction) of the Bible HAS & IS coming true. You will see this with your own eyes regardless of your opinions. Not talking Mayan calendar nonsense, nor Nostradamus hindsight- but empirically deduced validated by scientific facts. For details, email me.
Edited by PaulGL, : some text accidently left out
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 7 days) Posts: 16112 Joined:
|
Uh, no. Rousseau was born in 1712. He can't possibly have been "one of the most respected minds of the Renaissance" any more than I can be "one of the most respected minds of the Industrial Revolution". Wrong century.
Where did he say that? Could you give a reference? Only an internet search suggests that no-one has ever said that, least of all Rousseau. You seem to be just making stuff up. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulGL Member (Idle past 2178 days) Posts: 92 Joined: |
Rousseau was a pretty smart Frenchman! OK? As to the origin of that quote, I'll track it down and get back to you. Thanks!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 7 days) Posts: 16112 Joined:
|
Sure, but that doesn't mean that I have to believe everything he says. Nietzsche was a pretty smart German, but I don't have to become an atheist just 'cos he said so. I'd have to look at his actual arguments, wouldn't I?
Well, good luck with that, 'cos I can't find that anyone said exactly that, ever. If your religion is true, then wouldn't you be able to support its truth by saying true things? Instead, your very first argument, the one that you wanted to put first when you started posting on this thread, was demonstrably false. Doesn't that give you pause for thought?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4034 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 4.0
|
Much better.
No. This is wrong and always has been.
Actually, what we've always seen with our own eyes, regardless of our opinions, is that the Bible is not factual, and there is no such thing as The Biblical Apocalypse/End Times or The Rapture. They're just made up.
If you'd like to back up your statements objectively, you can do so here any time you're able. The Bible is not inerrant, it is most definitely the words of men. Take any general group of Bible believers... They're just the same as everybody else. That's why the Bible isn't inspired. So far, the only way we've found to make progress in this world is through objective observations. The Bible simply fails to measure up to this standard or to provide a better one. Edited by Stile, : This was the only the only edit.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member (Idle past 85 days) Posts: 3998 From: Liverpool Joined: |
The bit about Rousseau is badly disguised argument from authority.
Poor form. The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulGL Member (Idle past 2178 days) Posts: 92 Joined: |
Now from the fig tree learn her parable: when her branch is now become tender, and putteth forth its leaves, ye know that the summer is nigh; even so ye also, when ye see all these things, know ye that he is nigh, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all these things be accomplished. (Matt. 24:3234)
It has been realized by students of the Bible for more than a hundred years (Footnote #305, published in 1876) that the parable of the fig tree meant that Israel would become a nation again. The prophecy of the Lord related to the parable of the fig tree stated that the generation that sees the fig tree put forth its leaves shall not pass away till “all these things” are accomplished. "All these things" refers to verses immediately preceding these verses, verses that describe outward signs of the end times and include the actual, physical return of Christ to the Earth. Notice that Luke 21:2526 is a description of outward signs also occurring at this time, since it is at the same time as these outward signs that the powers of the heavens are shaken and Satan and his angels are cast out. What causes the roaring of the sea and the billows (waves)? What is the main cause of wave action? Mainly tidal forces resulting from the influence of the moon and the sun form waves. What are the only signs in the sun that are visible to the naked eye? Sunspots! Let us narrow the time span for the most likely occurrence of this earthquake. What day of the year should we choose as the focal point of most likely occurrence? The most likely time for the triggering of the earthquake is the time midway between the spring and fall of 1982. Thus, the focal point of likeliest time is midnight August 4- 5, 1982 (Israeli time), midway between spring and fall. Are there any other outward prophetic signs that we may refer to? And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (Matt. 24:30) What is the sign of the Son of man (accent on and in reference to His humanity), which will appear "in heaven" before the time of Christ's actual return? Due to the juggling of records by the Roman Catholic Church, Christ was actually born in the year that we record as 4 B.C. Subtracting 4 B.C. from 240 B.C. gives us 236 years between the time of the star that the Wisemen followed and the recorded date of the visit of Halley's Comet in 240 B.C. Dividing 236 years by three (the number of intervals between successive visits) gives us 78 years and 8 months per interval- within the 74 to 79 year variation of the period of Halley's Comet. Undoubtedly, Halley's comet was considerably more brilliant then than now. Almost certainly this was the star that the Wisemen followed, and it was the tail of Halley's comet that was used by God to point their way. The next appearance of Halley's comet will be in 1986 ... it will appear brightest in February of 1986 . . 318 Coincidence or fulfillment of prophecy? I also find it to be very significant that Halley's Cornet reached its apogee and thus began its return to the vicinity of the Earth's orbit in 1948, the year of Israel's reestablishment. What is the only natural sign in the moon, and does such occur in 1982? The only natural sign in the moon, an eclipse, occurred on the night of July 56, 1982. How does this eclipse relate to the beginning of the likeliest time for this earthquake, the first week of August 1982? The most likely time of day (although by no means conclusively) for the commencement of the rapture (the rapture of the manchild and firstfruits) is midnight ("At midnight, a cry was made."), Israeli time. This spectacular total eclipse in July occurred precisely one lunar cycle before midnight (Israeli time), August 45, 1982; which, in turn, is exactly mid-way between Spring and Fall. It is my opinion that the inference to be drawn from this sign in the moon is that the last week of years can start at any time after midnight of August 45 1982. This date of 4004 B.C. is a date indicated by the Scriptures. Its actuality may not be verifiable directly from Scripture. This is to be expected as a ramification of free will, since the direct determination of an exact date would be too prone to objective methods of proof and disproof. However, the very fact of its indicativeness increases the significance of this date, since this indicated date applies as well to the date of Adam's "creation," i.e., his receiving of a human spirit.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulGL Member (Idle past 2178 days) Posts: 92 Joined: |
Hey, until and unless I document the source of that quote, I admit that I was in error by passing on information which I had reason to believe was valid. I didn't verify this for myself. Sorry, I'm not perfect- only forgiven. And not a good messenger. That's why truth (reality) is experiential requiring faith. If you can see it, it is only temporal.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4034 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 4.0
|
Prophecies... you're doing them wrong.
More likely that it was just a story. My prophecy: Now I'll look it up. quote: Whoops. Looks like you missed again. You: 0 Correct, 2 Wrong. But, really, who cares about Biblical prophecies? All they do is make God look like he can't get anything right. The reason why the Bible is known to be written by man is because it doesn't provide any results different from any other man-made creation. If the Bible was divinely-inspired... then there would be some result that sets it apart. Maybe all Bible-readers would be: But... nope. All Bible-readers are exactly the same as all other man-made results. Maybe Vegeta is God. At least his results are beyond human. They're over 9000.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021