Why Do You Trust the Bible?

[Bumberclyde]

Bible prophecy is GREAT proof of the truth of God's word. God created "true science" and it is used through out the universe!

Just a bunch of guys guessing shit. I'm curious though, give me your 3 best prophesies that came true.

 

[Bumberclyde]

Assuming that is true, does it take into account political actions like committees deciding which books were good enough to be in a Bible or kings using Bibles for political reasons like King James I or even just the work of translators or stuff lost along the way when oral traditions were all we had?

Oral traditions weren't all they had. It was an expensive task to write them down on animal skins.

That's not what I'm saying. Before writing, we have nothing more than oral traditions. We don't have writings dealing with any of the people who would become Israel pre-Genesis. Genesis finally puts it all down and covers about the first 3000 years of human existence if the Bible is literal. Since nobody put pen to paper about the story of man before Moses, how do you know the stories about Jacob and Esau and Isaac that ended up with Moses were properly told? Even if the original stories were factual, how do you know that what Noah told his kids about the pre-flood world were the stories his grandkids heard properly?

Remember that game of telephone from third grade? Each person tells their neighbor what they heard and by the end of 30 kids "Billy has a red car" has becomes "Dead cats are chilly"? Did God intercede so that no parts of the story were lost or embellished or changed for dramatic license over the next three millennia or so before it was written down?

We also don't have any witnesses to the 6 day thing, or any scientific evidence like for the big bang.

 

[editec]

THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK on Christian beliefs as I respect the grand majority of Christians, see them to be wonderful people and wonderful contributors to the community, and have no right to say that what they believe is wrong.

However, I have a question; given that the New Testament was written ~30-60 years AFTER the death of Jesus Christ (correct me if I’m wrong), aren’t you at all concerned that the authors might have:

(1) Forgotten some key details, exact words, etc (I mean, do you remember what you ate for lunch March 3rd, 2009? I don’t)
(2) Altered some things to make the story more interesting

Fair question, right?

I mean, imagine if followers (ie disciples) of President Obama were to create a biography of his SIXTY years from now (specifically his followers) – from memory – don’t you think it’d be just a little bit skewed? Would you consider their account to be valid? I know I wouldn't, and would demand backup/proof! Would you?

These are just honest questions from a non-Christian. I'm not trying to be combative...

They TAKE IT ON FAITH.

That is all.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Oral traditions weren't all they had. It was an expensive task to write them down on animal skins.

That's not what I'm saying. Before writing, we have nothing more than oral traditions. We don't have writings dealing with any of the people who would become Israel pre-Genesis. Genesis finally puts it all down and covers about the first 3000 years of human existence if the Bible is literal. Since nobody put pen to paper about the story of man before Moses, how do you know the stories about Jacob and Esau and Isaac that ended up with Moses were properly told? Even if the original stories were factual, how do you know that what Noah told his kids about the pre-flood world were the stories his grandkids heard properly?

Remember that game of telephone from third grade? Each person tells their neighbor what they heard and by the end of 30 kids "Billy has a red car" has becomes "Dead cats are chilly"? Did God intercede so that no parts of the story were lost or embellished or changed for dramatic license over the next three millennia or so before it was written down?

We also don't have any witnesses to the 6 day thing, or any scientific evidence like for the big bang.

the Big Bang sounded like "Let there be....." in Hebrew.....

 

[Bumberclyde]

That's not what I'm saying. Before writing, we have nothing more than oral traditions. We don't have writings dealing with any of the people who would become Israel pre-Genesis. Genesis finally puts it all down and covers about the first 3000 years of human existence if the Bible is literal. Since nobody put pen to paper about the story of man before Moses, how do you know the stories about Jacob and Esau and Isaac that ended up with Moses were properly told? Even if the original stories were factual, how do you know that what Noah told his kids about the pre-flood world were the stories his grandkids heard properly?

Remember that game of telephone from third grade? Each person tells their neighbor what they heard and by the end of 30 kids "Billy has a red car" has becomes "Dead cats are chilly"? Did God intercede so that no parts of the story were lost or embellished or changed for dramatic license over the next three millennia or so before it was written down?

We also don't have any witnesses to the 6 day thing, or any scientific evidence like for the big bang.

the Big Bang sounded like "Let there be....." in Hebrew.....

World wasn't made in 6 days. Let there be light was a good guess, you know, having night and day already.

 

[PostmodernProph]

We also don't have any witnesses to the 6 day thing, or any scientific evidence like for the big bang.

the Big Bang sounded like "Let there be....." in Hebrew.....

World wasn't made in 6 days. Let there be light was a good guess, you know, having night and day already.

lol.....you don't think time was the first thing that had to be created?........actually, don't you find it incredible that some nomadic sheep herder in 4000 BC realized that the first thing needed was "time"?.......it almost seems like, oh I don't know......like maybe somebody TOLD him that?.....

 

[Bumberclyde]

the Big Bang sounded like "Let there be....." in Hebrew.....

World wasn't made in 6 days. Let there be light was a good guess, you know, having night and day already.

lol.....you don't think time was the first thing that had to be created?........actually, don't you find it incredible that some nomadic sheep herder in 4000 BC realized that the first thing needed was "time"?.......it almost seems like, oh I don't know......like maybe somebody TOLD him that?.....

According to people who study these things, time and space, and also energy were all created in the Big Bang. What's the one about the sheep herder, never heard that.

 

[pacer]

Yes, exactly. A person who attends a Christian church every week to maintain a certain position in the community, but doesn't actually believe the story or in Christ isn't in reality a "Christian"..

"...when a Christian becomes a disciple of the ideology, he has lost the faith: he is no longer a disciple of Jesus, he is a disciple of this attitude of thought…". (Pope Francis)

 

[Avatar4321]

We also don't have any witnesses to the 6 day thing, or any scientific evidence like for the big bang.

Which is precisely why I am completely open to God revealing how it happened in the future rather than get in some dogmatic debate based on no physical evidence.

 

[PostmodernProph]

World wasn't made in 6 days. Let there be light was a good guess, you know, having night and day already.

lol.....you don't think time was the first thing that had to be created?........actually, don't you find it incredible that some nomadic sheep herder in 4000 BC realized that the first thing needed was "time"?.......it almost seems like, oh I don't know......like maybe somebody TOLD him that?.....

According to people who study these things, time and space, and also energy were all created in the Big Bang. What's the one about the sheep herder, never heard that.

agreed.....at the time of the Big Bang God created Time, what we refer to as the Natural Laws, Matter.....all referred to in days 1, 2, and 3 in that order......the Amazing Shepherd Cosmologist......

 

[Quantum Windbag]

THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK on Christian beliefs as I respect the grand majority of Christians, see them to be wonderful people and wonderful contributors to the community, and have no right to say that what they believe is wrong.

However, I have a question; given that the New Testament was written ~30-60 years AFTER the death of Jesus Christ (correct me if I’m wrong), aren’t you at all concerned that the authors might have:

(1) Forgotten some key details, exact words, etc (I mean, do you remember what you ate for lunch March 3rd, 2009? I don’t)
(2) Altered some things to make the story more interesting

Fair question, right?

I mean, imagine if followers (ie disciples) of President Obama were to create a biography of his SIXTY years from now (specifically his followers) – from memory – don’t you think it’d be just a little bit skewed? Would you consider their account to be valid? I know I wouldn't, and would demand backup/proof! Would you?

These are just honest questions from a non-Christian. I'm not trying to be combative...

Why do you trust anything written by man?

 

[GISMYS]

If you can read God's word and not know that you are hearing eternal truth then you need to pray for some wisdom,knowledge and understanding.

 

[Steven_R]

THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK on Christian beliefs as I respect the grand majority of Christians, see them to be wonderful people and wonderful contributors to the community, and have no right to say that what they believe is wrong.

However, I have a question; given that the New Testament was written ~30-60 years AFTER the death of Jesus Christ (correct me if I’m wrong), aren’t you at all concerned that the authors might have:

(1) Forgotten some key details, exact words, etc (I mean, do you remember what you ate for lunch March 3rd, 2009? I don’t)
(2) Altered some things to make the story more interesting

Fair question, right?

I mean, imagine if followers (ie disciples) of President Obama were to create a biography of his SIXTY years from now (specifically his followers) – from memory – don’t you think it’d be just a little bit skewed? Would you consider their account to be valid? I know I wouldn't, and would demand backup/proof! Would you?

These are just honest questions from a non-Christian. I'm not trying to be combative...

Why do you trust anything written by man?

"Trust, but verify" is easy to do with stuff written by men. I can always look for another source to corroborate what one man wrote. It's a little harder to do when the only source that backs up the Bible is the Bible.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK on Christian beliefs as I respect the grand majority of Christians, see them to be wonderful people and wonderful contributors to the community, and have no right to say that what they believe is wrong.

However, I have a question; given that the New Testament was written ~30-60 years AFTER the death of Jesus Christ (correct me if I’m wrong), aren’t you at all concerned that the authors might have:

(1) Forgotten some key details, exact words, etc (I mean, do you remember what you ate for lunch March 3rd, 2009? I don’t)
(2) Altered some things to make the story more interesting

Fair question, right?

I mean, imagine if followers (ie disciples) of President Obama were to create a biography of his SIXTY years from now (specifically his followers) – from memory – don’t you think it’d be just a little bit skewed? Would you consider their account to be valid? I know I wouldn't, and would demand backup/proof! Would you?

These are just honest questions from a non-Christian. I'm not trying to be combative...

Why do you trust anything written by man?

Trust, but verify is easy to do with stuff written by men. I can always look for another source to corroborate what one man wrote. It's a little harder to do when the only source that backs up the Bible is the Bible.

The fact that you are unaware of other sources in no way proves that other sources do not exist. To put this in perspective, there is more historical evidence for the life and crucifixion of Jesus than there is for the Gallic Wars won by Julius Caesar. If you actually apply the standards you claim to have you would put more faith in the Bible than you do Caesar's Commentaries.

 

[Bumberclyde]

Why do you trust anything written by man?

Trust, but verify is easy to do with stuff written by men. I can always look for another source to corroborate what one man wrote. It's a little harder to do when the only source that backs up the Bible is the Bible.

The fact that you are unaware of other sources in no way proves that other sources do not exist. To put this in perspective, there is more historical evidence for the life and crucifixion of Jesus than there is for the Gallic Wars won by Julius Caesar. If you actually apply the standards you claim to have you would put more faith in the Bible than you do Caesar's Commentaries.

Actually, the stories about Jesus or the sayings attributed to him where written several generations after he died. No historical artifacts of Jesus exist. Now you know.

 

[Steven_R]

There are sources that confirm some historical facts mentioned in the Bible (e.g., there was a King David, Pontius Pilate was Roman prefect in Judea in 30AD, churches were founded in Anatolia in the early 1st century), but there is nothing to back up the Bible's claim that it is the Word of God except the Bible claiming it is the Word of God.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Trust, but verify is easy to do with stuff written by men. I can always look for another source to corroborate what one man wrote. It's a little harder to do when the only source that backs up the Bible is the Bible.

The fact that you are unaware of other sources in no way proves that other sources do not exist. To put this in perspective, there is more historical evidence for the life and crucifixion of Jesus than there is for the Gallic Wars won by Julius Caesar. If you actually apply the standards you claim to have you would put more faith in the Bible than you do Caesar's Commentaries.

Actually, the stories about Jesus or the sayings attributed to him where written several generations after he died. No historical artifacts of Jesus exist. Now you know.

Actually, the extant writings that talk about Jesus, including all of the New Testament, the writings of the Church Fathers, and historical commentary from non Christian sources date back almost 2 centuries further than any existing copy of the fore mentioned Caesar's Commentaries.

By the way, in case you want to open your mouth wider to see if you can get your other foot into it, I am using the Commentaries because they are contemporary to most of the events in the New Testament. Don't let that little detail derail your insistence on displaying your ignorance.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There are sources that confirm some historical facts mentioned in the Bible (e.g., there was a King David, Pontius Pilate was Roman prefect in Judea in 30AD, churches were founded in Anatolia in the early 1st century), but there is nothing to back up the Bible's claim that it is the Word of God except the Bible claiming it is the Word of God.

So?

 

[Steven_R]

So, I can always use other documents to check to see who was a Roman prefect in Judea in 30AD or if there was a Jewish king named David or if there was a place called Anatolia. I can trust my sources, but verify the facts. I can trust, but verify.

The only verification for the veracity of the Bible's central message that it is the Word of God is the Bible claiming it is the Word of God. I can trust, but not verify.

 

[Bumberclyde]

The fact that you are unaware of other sources in no way proves that other sources do not exist. To put this in perspective, there is more historical evidence for the life and crucifixion of Jesus than there is for the Gallic Wars won by Julius Caesar. If you actually apply the standards you claim to have you would put more faith in the Bible than you do Caesar's Commentaries.

Actually, the stories about Jesus or the sayings attributed to him where written several generations after he died. No historical artifacts of Jesus exist. Now you know.

Actually, the extant writings that talk about Jesus, including all of the New Testament, the writings of the Church Fathers, and historical commentary from non Christian sources date back almost 2 centuries further than any existing copy of the fore mentioned Caesar's Commentaries.

By the way, in case you want to open your mouth wider to see if you can get your other foot into it, I am using the Commentaries because they are contemporary to most of the events in the New Testament. Don't let that little detail derail your insistence on displaying your ignorance.

Wow! No clue AND pompous. The earliest fragment of the bible has been dated to a couple of centuries after Jesus died.