Is the bible the word of God or men?

i am willing to admit that if any changes were made, the bulk of the text was recorded verbatim.but under your statement:Consider that there is no change of today's OT with the Scrolls. Admittedly, this only proves no changes for 2300 years - but this is still the longest period of no change in all recorded works.i cannot admit with absolution that no changes were made under the earlier system before survivable writing: verbatim.can you at least acknowledge my observation of the possibility?

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

quote:

---

i cannot admit with absolution that no changes were made under the earlier system before survivable writing: verbatim.

​

can you at least acknowledge my observation of the possibility?

---

I gave you numerous relevent reasonings which indicate no changes, as well as proof of the scrolls of no changes for the longest period of any document in existence [aside from stone etchings as in the Pyramids]; have you factored these, which has no equivalence elsewhere? You cannot admit what you have no evidence about: what is your premise based on, if anything?There is the possibility that any translations from the Hebrew to english or latin, and copies of these, may contain errors, because the translation criteria is not followed here, and are particular to the Hebrew. This refers to the hebrew alphabets also acting as numbers, which means if the total numerical quotient is different, it prompts an error, and is then corrected and passed before being given a kosher certificate. This makes it quite impossible to have errors, but not so with other languages.We can be sure there are no changes in the OT, as opposed any other document. This is how it appears. This is further evidenced by two groups who made two different versions of the Talmud, which explains every law in the OT. One was written in Jerusalem, the other in Babylon; any contradictions in these two books, which spans like 20 telephone books each series, would be picked up. The OT contains a specific law not to add or subtract, and this factor has been the cause of many wars with many nations, as well as the break with christianity, and the rejection of islam.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

the reason i have failed to take the text as infallible is because the human race is not perfect. so i question any man made document.however, what your saying is fascinating.the OT, does it include the book of Enoch?where can i get text that is unchanged OT literature?

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

Enoch, Judith are not part of the OT. Nor is the NT. These two works are made one unilaterally by christianity. The intention was genuine and good, but it did not hold, unfortuantely causing much chaos and conflict for humanity. A counter history and scripture is also presented by Islam, contradicting both the OT and the NT.A bono fide OT version I like is the Artscroll series, expensive but worth the price, which contains both the hebrew and english either side of each page, with half page footnotes of each word and verse, of both ancient and contemporary historical and scientific commentary. The OT stops at the book of Malachi, the last of the Jewish prophetic writings, and is made up of the Torah [5 books of Moses] - detailing the first 2500 years of the history of humanity, and the subsequent prophetic writings, made some 100 years apart of each other, upto 100 BCE:Torah - Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy.Prophets - Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi.Writings - Chronicles, Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ruth, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, Esther, Daniel, Ezra / Nehemiah.The NT starts 2000 years ago; the Quran 1400 years ago. It is a rubic cube of contradictions on every possible level, rendering no means of possible allignment from any angle. This makes it all a mysterious construct outside of the hands of any of its participants. If the other religions and peoples are confused - they are on the right track; those who are not - do not understand what is occuring here.

i cant afford that, but i'd like to read it. ill try to dig it up eventually. thanks

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

editedEdited by pelican, : No reason given.

"The bible says God is a spirit." there is a holy spirit part of the God trinity which includes two other entities not"spirts" persay to answer the question of is the bible God written no but it is God inspired

quote:

---

"The bible says God is a spirit."

---

I dont think so. The first time this term is used, Genesis 1/1, it says 'THE SPIRIT *OF* GD HOVERED', which renders 'spirit' one of the products of Gd.We cannot even say that Gd is a spirit or spiritual, which is alluded to in the first 4 opening words of Genesis, 'IN THE BEGINNING GOD' - meaning that at one instant, before Creation, there was only Gd and nothing else. The latter is further adduced by the verse, 'I HAVE NOT CHANGED' - which refers to the only infinite [change being the definition of infinite], which is a unique factor, even unto spiritual realms such as Heaven and spiritual/angelic beings, which were created alongside the physical universe.From a scientific/imperical premise, this is very logical: there must be one infinite, unchanging factor in the beginning, else everything goes into freefall and non-traceable to anything,culminating in a cyclical premise - the factor which evidences the wrong path. The code is, everything aside from the Creator/Infinite factor - must be a duality [the minimum origin point which can be reached]; and a duality can only be derived from a Singularity, but which cannot be within the universe.

quote:

---

i cannot admit with absolution that no changes were made under the earlier system before survivable writing: verbatim.

​

can you at least acknowledge my observation of the possibility?

---

On what basis can I accept- it is not about my own pov, but what the text is saying, and what are the evidences for/against. Its not as if your asking if changes are possible in a written document per se, but rather the underlying principle of a specific document which matters here. We cannot compre this document with any other - because there is not one which exhibits the same factors.The applicable factors for any changes are not what is normative and seen elsewhere with all writings. The factors which evidence changes in a document are as follows:Proof of changes made - eg: another contemporary document which says the same but shows variances. This is not evidenced.Further,if there were changes, namely before the scrolls datings, we would still need [1] above, for why should we find consistant and constant pre-scroll references of the Torah, by numerous Prophetic writings, dated on ave some 100 years apart, and all in allignment with the scrolls, including dates, names, events, etc? There is equal chance to find a disputation as there is as a proof, yet we have evidential writings, but no antithetical writings.The above factors does make the Torah seperate from all other documents, which do not evidence such follow-up confirmations every 100 years. This applies to every historical and theological scripture, from Hamurabi to the Bagwatgita, NT & Quran: they do not evidence such contemporary allignments with specific historical references. But if you gave some examples why it can be possible, then my obligation is to consider them honestly and wisely, but you have not done that, except to pose a question relating to a specific case, by applying generic principles to it the generic reasonings cannot apply by virtue of there not being anything like the specific subject.

What makes you think the bible is inspired by god? What is so outstanding about the bible that god must be involved? I personally see no genius in the writings that I would expect off a god. I don't get it!

Ok in the bible there are predictions fullfilled hundreds of years after the authors death.
Prediction | Fulfilment
----------------------------
Gen. 12:1-3 | Josh 11:23
Gen. 16:10 | Gen. 25:12-16
Gen. 25:21-23 | 1 Chr. 18:13
Gen. 37:5-11 | Gen. 42:6
Gen. 40:12,13 | Gen. 40:21
Gen. 40:18 | Gen. 40:22
Job 19:25-27 | John 5:28,29/Gal. 4:4/Eph. 1:7,11,14
Ps. 2:1-12 | Matt. 3:17/Mark 1:11/Acts 4:25,26/
| Acts 3:33/Hebrews 1:5;5:5/Rev. 2:26,27;19:15,16
Ps. 16:8-10 | Acts 2:27/Acts 13:35/Acts 26:23

---

"People call me strange does that make me a stranger
My best friend was born in a manger"

Only to name a few.

---

"People call me strange does that make me a stranger
My best friend was born in a manger"

Hello, TheTruth: This would indeed be powerful evidence for the veracity of the Bible. However, since both the prediction and the fulfillment are found in the Bible, with no outside evidence in corroboration, this doesn't constitute sound evidence.Note also that, in many of your examples, both the prediction and the fulfillment occurred before the earliest known manuscripts of the Bible by several hundred years (this is true of most of your Old Testament examples but I haven't looked into your New Testament examples yet).So, if the Bible is the word of man, the whole thing could be a lie, a fable or a story. And, archaeology and other studies have yet to verify the biblical account of many of these things.

---

There was a point to this [post], but it has temporarily escaped the chronicler's mind. -modified from Life, the Universe and Everything, Douglas Adams

quote:

---

Ok in the bible there are predictions fullfilled hundreds of years after the authors death.
Prediction | Fulfilment
----------------------------
Gen. 12:1-3 | Josh 11:23
Gen. 16:10 | Gen. 25:12-16
Gen. 25:21-23 | 1 Chr. 18:13
Gen. 37:5-11 | Gen. 42:6
Gen. 40:12,13 | Gen. 40:21
Gen. 40:18 | Gen. 40:22
Job 19:25-27 | John 5:28,29/Gal. 4:4/Eph. 1:7,11,14
Ps. 2:1-12 | Matt. 3:17/Mark 1:11/Acts 4:25,26/
| Acts 3:33/Hebrews 1:5;5:5/Rev. 2:26,27;19:15,16
Ps. 16:8-10 | Acts 2:27/Acts 13:35/Acts 26:23

---

Genesis and Joshua were both written hundreds of years AFTER the events (supposedly) happened. That eliminates five of your "examples" straight away. Some of them are quite absurd. Do you really believe that the author of Genesis 40:18 died hundreds of years before the events of Genesis 40:22 ? The verses themselves only cover a period of three days !Genesis 25:21-23 was also written well after the events that supposedly happened in 1 Chr 18:13. (We may also note numerous problems in the supposed fulfilment).Job 19:25-27 does not seem to be a prophecy (and it is hard to say how any of the verses could be seen as fulfilment - especially John 5 28-29, which is itself a prediction, not an event).The Psalms are NOT predictions. And to take them as such is simply nonsensical. (To take verses from the Psalms out of context and read them as predictions is doubly nonsensical).So this leads to a question. If the Bible really is the word of God then why are you reduced to arguing that the author of Genesis 40:18 died hundreds of years before the event in Genesis 40:22 happened ? Even if you didn't bother to actually read the verses surely you must have seen that they are in the same chapter and only a few verses apart ! I don't blame you - you've placed too much trust in people who are only fallible humans- and more fallible than most.This is why Christian apologetics can never be trusted. Obvious falsehoods are paraded as facts. I hope you'll learn from this - and ask yourself why it is.

Are the bible quotations you give to show genius of god, inspired by god or to show god exists?Is there anywhere in the bible where two or more witnessed or heard god directly in the same moment?I am not saying the bible is not inspiring and I am not saying that the lives in the bible have not been inspiring but why god? Hasn't the concept of god been an individual expression of beliefs?The only evidence I see for the need of a creator is creation itself. Who is to say we are not the creators? And if there is a loving creator, wouldn't the greatest gift to us be to be the creators of our own existence?Is it possible that the bible's sole intention is to draw us to this conclusion? Personally, I do believe this and I've studied human life for a very long time. It was terribly difficult to shed the ingrained perceptions I held of the bible since childhood and almost as difficult to replace with a different concept.The bible stories now mean different things to me than they used to. I don't dispute the authenticity of the bible as evolutionists do. I only dispute/enlarge upon the interpretations and concepts of what is actually written.E.G Many concepts of jesus' teachings are very noble and good BUT many have a devisive nature. "Love thine enemies." Who are the enemy? 'Forgive them Lord." Who are they that need forgiveness? Regards