Proof Of The Bible

[Hollie]

"End Times" began with Apocalyptic literature about a century before Christ. It was based on the idea that there would be a great leader who would make Israel a light to all nations. However, the realists at the time noted that humans were not capable of holding anything together for long. They surmised only God could do that. John's Book of Revelation was about first century issues, and once more was written in Apocalyptic literature format.

In any event, from a century before Christ, right up to the present, there have always been people convinced the end is near. Each generation goes through tough times, we all make it through. Personally, I think those who lived in the 1300s had the worst of it and had more reason to believe "End Times" than anyone else. I don't give it a second thought and I am sorry it worries so many non-Catholic Christians.

Well, yeah. I'm sorry it worries people, too. I'm sorry I have to share the planet with people who believe it is in their interest to bring about the End Times. But, then again, you're ok with that behavior?

 

[Hollie]

What truth terrifies me?

Apparently many. To be dismissive of fact and truth as secondary to a reality based worldview is concerning.

 

[Meriweather]

I'm sorry I have to share the planet with people

People are unique with a variety of beliefs and attitudes. I am a middle school teacher. It is not that hard to live with them when one is at peace with self.

 

[Meriweather]

Apparently many. To be dismissive of fact and truth as secondary to a reality based worldview is concerning.

Again, I am a middle school teacher among students who are learning and who get things wrong all the time. Being wrong is not the end of the world. In fact it is a reminder of how much there is to get wrong and how far we all have to go.

Ever think about all you don't know or how much you get wrong? We are all in this together. We depend on people who know what we as individuals do not. We are there, many of us loving for the most part, to impart the bits of knowledge we do have.

 

[Hollie]

Again, I am a middle school teacher among students who are learning and who get things wrong all the time. Being wrong is not the end of the world. In fact it is a reminder of how much there is to get wrong and how far we all have to go.

Ever think about all you don't know or how much you get wrong? We are all in this together. We depend on people who know what we as individuals do not. We are there, many of us loving for the most part, to impart the bits of knowledge we do have.

Being wrong is not at all the issue. I would much prefer that schooling focus on such things as critical thinking skills. We function with critical faculties on an ongoing basis, and while we can misinterpret or have varying descriptions of right and wrong, rationality adheres to parameters that are testable. There's no misinterpretation of a flat earth or dead humans becoming undead.

 

[hobelim]

Thanks but as a man of science I put more weight on the archeology I could see with my own eyes and less on the oral history of a bronze age people.

If archeologists found the remains of the house and the actual loin cloth in which Jesus had his first wet dream would it help anyone understand what he taught and the authors were conveying?

Would you need archeological proof of the town where the boy who cried wolf lived before you could grasp the moral teaching of the story? Damn....

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Proof of the Bible
SUBTOPIC: Blend
⁜→ Meriweather, et al,

That is a pretty good attitude to have. (Positive thinking that looks forward).

who get things wrong all the time. Being wrong is not the end of the world. I

(COMMENT)

I think this is quite healthy.

I know many people with a doctorate degree. When you are undertaking a scientific inquiry, I start (most of the time) with an observation. I hope you understand what it is that I see. It often leads to a question. I develop a hypothesis to explain what it is that I observed. I then attempt to conduct an experiment that supports what I observed. IF the experiment fails, THEN I know that my hypothesis was faulty in some respect. Being wrong is when I learn that of all the things I could have hypothesized, I can eliminate that one.

Imagine all the astronomers that were in play (must have thought) at the time of Edwin Hubble → when he hypothesized that those fuzzy cloud-like objects, observed in the dark sky, were actually other galaxies in deep space. Imagine what it must have been like to be a professor at The Ohio State University and teaching the Astronomy Series, only to findout you have been teaching it wrong.

Ever think about all you don't know or how much you get wrong?

(COMMENT)

Not everyone has the ability to be a Nobel Laureates in their field of endeavor. A good professor knows that science is continually evolving. But true genius only comes qaround every once in a while. People like Aristotle, Socrates, Archimedes, Hypatia, Galileo, Keepler, Copernicus, Newton, Faraday, Tesla, Einstein, and Bohr. I once had the privlege to be a student of Adm Grace Hopper (then Captain) at the Defense Computer Institute. I didn't understand then, but now I see, I must have been an aoeba in the presence of a giant.

To answer your question, I think about things that I will never get right.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[alang1216]

If archeologists found the remains of the house and the actual loin cloth in which Jesus had his first wet dream would it help anyone understand what he taught and the authors were conveying?

Would you need archeological proof of the town where the boy who cried wolf lived before you could grasp the moral teaching of the story? Damn....

Apples and oranges. I'm talking history, not theology. Neither is dependant on the other for validity.

 

[Hollie]

If archeologists found the remains of the house and the actual loin cloth in which Jesus had his first wet dream would it help anyone understand what he taught and the authors were conveying?

Would you need archeological proof of the town where the boy who cried wolf lived before you could grasp the moral teaching of the story? Damn....

The authors of the Bible are largely unknown. None of the authors ever met Jesus. It takes a Grand Canyon sized leap of faith to accept moral tales and fables written about Jesus approx. 75 years after his death by unknown authors who never met him.

 

[BreezeWood]

.
or, that of all 10000 pages of the c bible not one word is written by the main character nor in that book is a real reason given for their crucifixion that is conspicuously left unanswered. an answer they knew long before its occurrence.

 

[james bond]

The authors of the Bible are largely unknown. None of the authors ever met Jesus. It takes a Grand Canyon sized leap of faith to accept moral tales and fables written about Jesus approx. 75 years after his death by unknown authors who never met him.

God is the author of the Bible. "Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness:" 2 Timothy 3:16

Sure, human writers wrote the Bible, but men like Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were divinely inspired to do the work for God and some knew Jesus.

"Did the four gospel writers know Jesus?

To varying degrees and by varying closeness. Jesus had 12 disciples with an inner circle of three, Peter, James and John. The gospel of John is definitely the person who was closest to Jesus and knew Jesus very well up close. Matthew is one of the 12 disciples and that travelled with, and was there for Jesus’ teaching. There is debate about the gospel of Mark, but scholars believe it was the teaching of Peter as there are details only he would know. Mark recorded Peter’s teaching as someone who was part of the inner circle. Luke was written by a historian/doctor who interviewed people and gathered the stories. So the gospel of Luke was written by someone who did not personally know Jesus but spoke to those that did."

Did Gospel writers Matthew, Mark, Luke and John know Jesus personally?

Answer (1 of 40): Well, yes—spiritually, at least. But I suspect you mean in the flesh, so… Matthew and John, yes. Matthew, also called Levi, was the tax collector who Jesus called to follow Him in Luke 5:27 (also mentioned in Matthew 10:3), though he doesn’t get much mention after that, except...

www.quora.com

Where do you get the writers are largely unknown? Link?

 

[surada]

God is the author of the Bible. "Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness:" 2 Timothy 3:16

Sure, human writers wrote the Bible, but men like Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were divinely inspired to do the work for God and some knew Jesus.

"Did the four gospel writers know Jesus?

To varying degrees and by varying closeness. Jesus had 12 disciples with an inner circle of three, Peter, James and John. The gospel of John is definitely the person who was closest to Jesus and knew Jesus very well up close. Matthew is one of the 12 disciples and that travelled with, and was there for Jesus’ teaching. There is debate about the gospel of Mark, but scholars believe it was the teaching of Peter as there are details only he would know. Mark recorded Peter’s teaching as someone who was part of the inner circle. Luke was written by a historian/doctor who interviewed people and gathered the stories. So the gospel of Luke was written by someone who did not personally know Jesus but spoke to those that did."

Did Gospel writers Matthew, Mark, Luke and John know Jesus personally?

Answer (1 of 40): Well, yes—spiritually, at least. But I suspect you mean in the flesh, so… Matthew and John, yes. Matthew, also called Levi, was the tax collector who Jesus called to follow Him in Luke 5:27 (also mentioned in Matthew 10:3), though he doesn’t get much mention after that, except...

www.quora.com

Where do you get the writers are largely unknown? Link?

The names of the gospels are based on tradition. The authors are anonymous.

 

[Hollie]

God is the author of the Bible. "Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness:" 2 Timothy 3:16

Sure, human writers wrote the Bible, but men like Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were divinely inspired to do the work for God and some knew Jesus.

"Did the four gospel writers know Jesus?

To varying degrees and by varying closeness. Jesus had 12 disciples with an inner circle of three, Peter, James and John. The gospel of John is definitely the person who was closest to Jesus and knew Jesus very well up close. Matthew is one of the 12 disciples and that travelled with, and was there for Jesus’ teaching. There is debate about the gospel of Mark, but scholars believe it was the teaching of Peter as there are details only he would know. Mark recorded Peter’s teaching as someone who was part of the inner circle. Luke was written by a historian/doctor who interviewed people and gathered the stories. So the gospel of Luke was written by someone who did not personally know Jesus but spoke to those that did."

Did Gospel writers Matthew, Mark, Luke and John know Jesus personally?

Answer (1 of 40): Well, yes—spiritually, at least. But I suspect you mean in the flesh, so… Matthew and John, yes. Matthew, also called Levi, was the tax collector who Jesus called to follow Him in Luke 5:27 (also mentioned in Matthew 10:3), though he doesn’t get much mention after that, except...

www.quora.com

Where do you get the writers are largely unknown? Link?

Your gods did not author any of the bibles.

 

[SweetSue92]

The names of the gospels are based on tradition. The authors are anonymous.

Then we have no history from antiquity at all.

 

[Hollie]

God is the author of the Bible. "Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness:" 2 Timothy 3:16

Sure, human writers wrote the Bible, but men like Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were divinely inspired to do the work for God and some knew Jesus.

"Did the four gospel writers know Jesus?

To varying degrees and by varying closeness. Jesus had 12 disciples with an inner circle of three, Peter, James and John. The gospel of John is definitely the person who was closest to Jesus and knew Jesus very well up close. Matthew is one of the 12 disciples and that travelled with, and was there for Jesus’ teaching. There is debate about the gospel of Mark, but scholars believe it was the teaching of Peter as there are details only he would know. Mark recorded Peter’s teaching as someone who was part of the inner circle. Luke was written by a historian/doctor who interviewed people and gathered the stories. So the gospel of Luke was written by someone who did not personally know Jesus but spoke to those that did."

Did Gospel writers Matthew, Mark, Luke and John know Jesus personally?

Answer (1 of 40): Well, yes—spiritually, at least. But I suspect you mean in the flesh, so… Matthew and John, yes. Matthew, also called Levi, was the tax collector who Jesus called to follow Him in Luke 5:27 (also mentioned in Matthew 10:3), though he doesn’t get much mention after that, except...

www.quora.com

Where do you get the writers are largely unknown? Link?

You cherry picked opinions from anonymous posters on quora.

Fraud.

 

[surada]

Then we have no history from antiquity at all.

That's about the size of it.

 

[Hollie]

Then we have no history from antiquity at all.

“We'll always have Paris."

Rick Blaine - Casablanca

 

[james bond]

“We'll always have Paris."

Rick Blaine - Casablanca

It's in your nature to believe in fiction and be sinful.

 

[Hollie]

It's in your nature to believe in fiction and be sinful.

False.

 

[james bond]

False.

I have proof. People want a hard hitting, controversial, but HONEST site. The libturds/atheists/ags/sinners BELIEVING IN LIES here bring the ratings down -- USMessageBoard Reviews - 2.6 Stars.