Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Bible was NOT man made, it was Godly made
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 194 of 320 (425760)
10-03-2007 11:41 PM
Reply to: Message 191 by gen
10-03-2007 11:35 PM


Another thing that proves that God wrote the Bible is the timespan it was written over and its various authors. The Bible consists of 66 books, written over a time period of thousands of years, by over 40 different authors that usually didnt know each other. Yet the whole Bible agrees! Their thoughts have got to be coming from a Divine, Eternal, Infinite Source.
What a ridiculous statement. You do realize that when those 66 books were assembled, books that clearly did NOT agree were simply not included? And that the authors of the later books had certainly read the works of many of the earlier books? And that half of the New Testament consists of the letters and writings of Paul, a single man?
This ignores the inconsistencies in the Bible, and the fact that multiple different Canons exist, but your entire statement is just silly, and completely ignores the whole history of the Biblical texts.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by gen, posted 10-03-2007 11:35 PM gen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 197 by gen, posted 10-03-2007 11:46 PM Rahvin has replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 196 of 320 (425762)
10-03-2007 11:43 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by gen
10-03-2007 11:38 PM


Re: Let us gently explain
The Bible itself states that it was inspired by God.
'All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness.' -2 Timothy 3:16
I am God. Everything in my post is true.
...see the problem with trying to prove something without outside verification? A book, even a series of collected works like the Bible, cannot prove itself. If the Harry Potter series started with the words "Everything contained in these books is a true story," would that verify the existence of actual wizards?

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by gen, posted 10-03-2007 11:38 PM gen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by gen, posted 10-03-2007 11:49 PM Rahvin has replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 202 of 320 (425768)
10-03-2007 11:51 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by gen
10-03-2007 11:46 PM


I did not say that each book was written by a different author. Yes, Paul did write a lot of the New Testament, and his writings are some of my favourite and most inspirational in the Bible. As for books that were not included, I believe that they were not inspired by God. Point out for me an inconsistency in the Bible.
Congratulations on ignoring 90% of my post. Like the part about the books being assembled because they agree with each other. By men, not any deity. Or the fact that the later authors already knew about the earlier books (Jews would certainly know the freaking Torah), including some that were not included in the generally accepted 66-book canon (and again, there is more than one accepted Biblical canon, some with as few as 5, and some with many more than 66).
As for inconsistencies - how about the completely different ways Jesus is portrayed in the Gospels? Particularly his final words on the cross. Just off the top of my head.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by gen, posted 10-03-2007 11:46 PM gen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 207 by gen, posted 10-04-2007 12:23 AM Rahvin has replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 204 of 320 (425770)
10-03-2007 11:54 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by gen
10-03-2007 11:49 PM


Re: Let us gently explain
Nothing you say will convince me otherwise. If we go by your theory, nothing can be proven right or wrong, therefore nothing is right, and nothing is wrong. See the holes?
Observations can be proven - you can see them. Inferences can be made based on those observations, predictions can be made from the inferences, and the predictions can be tested by further observations. This is called the scientific method, and it's the reason you're typing on a computer.
Do you honestly not see that a book cannot prove itself to be factual simply by stating that it is? If not, why do you not believe every single book that claims to be true? The Koran would be one. There are others. Most of the mutually exclusive.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by gen, posted 10-03-2007 11:49 PM gen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by gen, posted 10-04-2007 12:27 AM Rahvin has replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 213 of 320 (425780)
10-04-2007 12:39 AM
Reply to: Message 207 by gen
10-04-2007 12:23 AM


I did not ignore 90% of your post. The books which did not agree were left out because they werent inspired by God.
Rubbish. You just said minutes ago that the Bible must be inspired because the books agree with each other. Now you admit that the books were specifically selected to conform? I can pick any number of books that agree with each other, even ones that claim a divine origin. Does that make them actually divinely inspired? What if they completely contradict the Bible? What of the canons that include additional texts that the Council of Nicea determined were not inspired? What of the few churches who predate the Council and have a different canon? What of the Protestant canon that leaves out several books accepted by the Council of Nicea?
The authors did know about some of the earlier books, but what difference does that make?
It means that your point about the authors not knowing each other is misleading and irrelevant. The New Testament authors all recognized and knew the Jewish texts, and other writings besides - some of which are not in the modern Bible, despite being accepted as canon in the early church.
The four Gospels were written by four different men, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Some of them knew Jesus, and presented an eyewitness account, while others wrote stories they had heard from others. They were men of different educations-Matthew was a tax collecter, Luke was a doctor, John was a fisherman, and I think Mark was a scribe. So of course each of them would have a different writing style. It's like comparing the writings of a person with a phd to those of a kindergarten student.
It's worse than you realize: NONE of the authors knew Jesus. ALL of the modern Gospels are reconstructions of the original Gospel texts, written 50 years or more after the events supposedly took place. Stylistic differences don;t even approach the truth, either - Jesus is portrayed as an entirely different character in each Gospel, and each seems to pander to a specifically different audience. For instance, Jesus final words were either "Father father, why have you forsaken me" or "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." (I apologize if my quoting is off, that was from memory). These are entirely different statements, and tell different, contradictory things about Jesus! In one Gospel there is supposedly a great darkening of the sun and an earthquake - there is no such historical record, and the other Gospels do not mention it (and an earthquake is pretty damned hard to ignore). I could go on.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by gen, posted 10-04-2007 12:23 AM gen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 217 by gen, posted 10-04-2007 3:26 AM Rahvin has replied
 Message 233 by Kapyong, posted 10-04-2007 5:53 PM Rahvin has replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 215 of 320 (425782)
10-04-2007 12:47 AM
Reply to: Message 208 by gen
10-04-2007 12:27 AM


Re: Let us gently explain
I know what the scientific method is.
Yet clearly you don't, or you would understand evidence and proof.
So do you not believe anything you read just because it says it is true, and you think it is not. Let me introduce you to faith. Faith is believing in what you cant see. Being sure of something that you havent actually experienced or felt for yourself.
This is called "gullibility" and "delusion." It's what causes little children to believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by gen, posted 10-04-2007 12:27 AM gen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by gen, posted 10-04-2007 3:32 AM Rahvin has replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 224 of 320 (425815)
10-04-2007 4:10 AM
Reply to: Message 217 by gen
10-04-2007 3:26 AM


the books which dont agree are NOT inspired by God!!! God also inspired the people who chose what books to put in the Bible. There is a vast difference between knowing someone and knowing someones writings. A lot of the authors DID know Jesus, that is a fact. John and Matthew were both Jesus disciples.
Why did God inspire different groups of people to include different selections of books? And the authors of the manuscripts we have available today (the oldest and best versions we have uncovered) trace back to documents created over 50 years after Jesus was supposedly executed - long after the original "participants" would have been dead and gone. These manuscripts were re-creations from memory of the original source documents, which were destroyed. Some Biblical scholars also believe one or more of the Gospels may have used another of the Gospels as the source document.
Textual scholars also note that, at varying points in history, each of the books of the Bible has had sections changed, added, or removed - sometimes significantly so. Bart Ehrman, a former fundamentalist who was driven by his faith to devote his life to studying the Bible, said in his book "Misquoting Jesus," that (paraphrasing from memory) there are "more errors in the New Testament than there are words." Surely an all-powerful deity inspiring authors should be able to keep his holy text consistent over the years! There are specific, well-documentd cases where entire parables have suddenly appeared in texts seemingly out of nowhere. Older copies do not contain these sections anywhere for many, many years - and then suddenly another copy is found with an entirely new story added. Multiple words are changed in multiple copies - sometimes due to obvious translation errors or words that look alike (when compared across multiple texts for consistency) and sometimes even based on interpretory notes scribbled by a previous scribe on the document being copied.
How can such a mismatched and obviously corrupted text be considered divinely inspired? You say the books not included were not inspired - why then is there such a difference within the actual books themselves, simply examining the various copies that were made through the years to eventually lead to the several versions we have today?
The different gospels covered different parts of Jesus life, and he did say both those things while on the cross.
Read them again. This time, critically compare the Jesus character, and think about what stories were left in and which were left out of each. Jesus appears to be a completely different person in each of the Gospels. He says wildly different things on the cross - why would he say both that his father had forsaken him, and then commend his spirit to him? Those statements are mutually exclusive, and none of the Gospels contain both quotes - it's clearly a contradictory account, not a "different perspective." There are other contradictions within the Bible as well - this is just the first one I thought of.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by gen, posted 10-04-2007 3:26 AM gen has not replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 225 of 320 (425816)
10-04-2007 4:16 AM
Reply to: Message 222 by gen
10-04-2007 3:48 AM


Re: Why do you not believe this?
he difference between the Qu'ran and the Bible is that the Qu'ran was written by one person, who said it was inspired by God, but the Bible was written by at least 40 people over 1000s of years, yet it still all agrees.
Just a nitpick - while Muslims trace the origins of the Qu'ran to Mohammad, it was transmitted only as an oral tradition, from memory, for the first several generations. The actual text was conglomerated much later, much like the Bible was formed from multiple texts. There were many, many authors of the modern Qu'ran, and the included suras were chosen because they were determined to be of divine origin. Again, by men.
You must take everything in the Bible in context. The text in Exodus was said after the Israelites had sinned, creating an idol that they put before God. Moses said (verse 26) 'Whoever is for the Lord, come to me.' All the others were killed, because they had disobeyed God and been unrepentent.
The most interesting part about this is Moses does this shortly after being given the commandment "thou shalt not kill." I find the sequence of events to be highly ironic.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 222 by gen, posted 10-04-2007 3:48 AM gen has not replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 226 of 320 (425817)
10-04-2007 4:20 AM
Reply to: Message 220 by gen
10-04-2007 3:32 AM


Re: Let us gently explain
I do understand what the scientific method is. Do you believe the world is round?
The shape of the Earth is irrelevant to this discussion - unless you want to bring up the silly quote from the Bible about the "circle of the Earth." The Bible also says the Earth rests on pillars.
And I'm sure you understand what the scientific method is, by rote memorization. But so far you've demonstrated a saddening lack of comprehension regarding the basic principles it uses - evidence and observation. You believe a book can prove itself to be true without a doubt simply by stating within itself that it's contents are true. This is the position of a very gullible person who cannot distinguish fantasy from reality - such a person will believe any silliness that claims to be true.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by gen, posted 10-04-2007 3:32 AM gen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by gen, posted 10-14-2007 2:27 AM Rahvin has not replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 227 of 320 (425818)
10-04-2007 4:23 AM
Reply to: Message 218 by gen
10-04-2007 3:28 AM


Re: Why do you not believe this?
the Bible was written by heaps of people who didnt know each other, and yet their statements agree.
How is this in any way surprising if the books of the bible were specifically selected to agree? Saying the authors did not know each other is highly misleading - since they WERE aware of the writings of previous Biblical authors, they would of course share the same foundation. Surely you don't claim that the author of Luke hadn't read Genesis, or Exodus?

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by gen, posted 10-04-2007 3:28 AM gen has not replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 228 of 320 (425819)
10-04-2007 4:25 AM
Reply to: Message 219 by gen
10-04-2007 3:29 AM


your motivation is why you are in the discussion and therefore it is relevant
This is called an "appeal to motive" fallacy. If a Nazi says the sky is blue while attempting to convert you to his cause, is he not correct in that statement alone? A person's motivation has nothing to do with the validity of the argument, and so is irrelevant.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by gen, posted 10-04-2007 3:29 AM gen has not replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 237 of 320 (426037)
10-04-2007 9:09 PM
Reply to: Message 233 by Kapyong
10-04-2007 5:53 PM


Just a reminder -
The Council of Nicea had nothing to do with choosing the canon.
Apologies - the Council of Trent then, was it? I get them mixed up occasionally. The point I made remains, of course.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by Kapyong, posted 10-04-2007 5:53 PM Kapyong has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 238 by jar, posted 10-04-2007 9:15 PM Rahvin has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024