How is the Bible the Word of God?

[pearl]

Divisions among genuine ' wheat ' Christians or division among Christians and non-Christians ?

Divisions among Christians. Between the followers of a presbyter in Alexandria whose teaching was that Jesus was not fully divine, and Anthanasius, bishop of Alexandria and followers who believed Jesus to be fully divine. The benefits were mutual.. The Emperor ruled over a united people, there was an end to Christian persecution.

Plus, who set up 'Sun'day [ Not 'Son'day ]

There are references that Paul referred to breaking of bread on 'the first day of the week'. The Jewish week ended on Saturday.

 

[pearl]

After all I'm trying hard to understand the concept of God and why He would on one hand let pagans be slaughtered in the O.T., yet merciful in the N.T. & include us gentiles in His love & mercy.

There are many instances of God's mercy in Hebrew Scripture also. God allows what man allows, otherwise there would be no
free will.

I have 2 degrees and now forget how to spell some things so please let no be afraid to mention a mistake.

We get so use to reading text messages which appear to be alien to normal grammar, correct spelling has become obsolete. No
worries.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Underneath all the history, there still has to be one way to know a book is inspired without relying on testimony (which we have today as well as back then), scripture harmony, and "because God told me so."

If it is a fact that scripture is inspired and no other book past, present, and future are inspired, then there's got to be something that backs that up so that everyone from believer to non-believer will "know" its inspired regardless of their "belief" or lack thereof.

"Whoever put canon together" was pagan emporer Constitine, the Roman leader who "won" a civil war in Rome citing "Jesus" as the power behind his victory.
That's a gross over simplification of course.
Constitine organized a counsil of Christian leaders, called "bishops" in Nicea about 325 A.D. They brought all the known collection of writings and they with Constitine
organized what we call the Bible. A collection of works, mostly letters writen by
special men who were someone directed by god to write what they wrote.
Works not conidered "holy" or "inpsired" were destroyed.
The "book" we call Revelation was writen, (we think) by a fellow named "john" of Patmos. Patmos was an island of political prisoners of the Roman Empire.
If "john" was the apsostle John he would have been about 92 when Rev. was writen.
It's debated yet today if Revelation belongs in the Bible.
Beats me. I remain confused.
One wonders what historical works were destroyed by Constitine and fellows that could prove invaluable today.
We get the Nicene (sp?) Creed from the Counsil of Nicea circa 325 A.D.

 

[Thruve]

I like this person.

 

[viole]

Indeed. When the walls of Jerico fell every living thing was slaughtered.
Men, women, children, sheep, goats, babies, everything that breathed was slaughtered.
And Battles B.C. are full of accounts of ruthless slaughter done by "god's chosen people" committing what we would today consider war crimes at the very least.
We cringe at the terrorists actions of islamics, like the recent senseless murders in Pakistan, but that is mild compared to the actions of the "chosen" people who wiped out entire cultures.
From a military viewpoint killing ALL your perceived enemy makes stratigic sense.
No enemy, left alive, no sons & daughters to revenge the death of of family members, no hope of resurrecting a culture deemed unfit for some reason, no one ever at your back because you erased them from the face of the earth.
That kind of action flies in the face of what Jesus preached.
So I sometimes wonder,............ o.k., often wonder, which Jehovah was in charge in Moses' time, and which Jehovah was controling things in Jesus' time.
" I am a jealous god", and " I am a god of infinate love and forgiveness" seems to contradict.
I'm a Christian, I study everything I can get about the Bible and the Christian religion.
I believe; I love the Jesus story, don't believe in the trinity, want to blieve "god" is mercifull, loving, kind, forgiving, and so on, but who is "god", which god do we have today? How can god change from "kill everything, everywhere" to "don't you dare hurt a fly, don't hurt one another, turn the other cheek, forgive everyone, everything, for anything, because I sent my only son to die for your sins". Huh?
I want to believe, I want to understand the apparent skizophrenic god of the O.T.
to the all loving god of the N.T.
Understand my confusion? Can anyone help me resolve the various god's in our Bible?
I've been at this Bible study thing over 15 years ane still can't reconcile the O.T. god with the N.T. god and all the god personalities in between.\
I've even studied with a J.W. family, nice, wonderful, loving people, well veresed and trained in biblical history, have valid sounding reasons for not joining our military, not observing X-mass, easter, etc, not playing sports, not furthering education past high school, and other differences twixt them & the "world" but even they can't satisfy my curiosity & inquisitive nature.

What is more likely? That God approved a certain tribe to perpetrate those massacres, or that those massacres have been perpetrated by people who arbitrarily declared to have God's sanction?

A brief check on the history book of humanity should provide the easy answer to this riddle.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Sapiens]

The Bible contains credible statements that are consistent with scientific discoveries.

The Scripture predicted that the earth is round before science confirmed it. “He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in” (Isaiah 40:22). The book of Isaiah was written about 2500 years ago.

That is an unsupported claim since you fail to identify when science, or more likely common knowledge, identified the world as round. We do know that the Greeks were able to measure the round world about 2,300 years ago.

 

[serp777]

The Bible contains credible statements that are consistent with scientific discoveries.

The Scripture predicted that the earth is round before science confirmed it. “He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in” (Isaiah 40:22). The book of Isaiah was written about 2500 years ago.

More can be read from this book:

Understanding Prayer, Faith and God's will (Understanding Prayer, Faith and God's Will

That's garbage. Pythagaros and greek mathematicians realized the earth was round 700 years before Christianity was even considered.

 

[roman2819]

That is an unsupported claim since you fail to identify when science, or more likely common knowledge, identified the world as round. We do know that the Greeks were able to measure the round world about 2,300 years ago.

Isaiah lived before the Greeks and he wrote “He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth” (Isaiah 40:22)

Now we are not saying that 20 or 50 years before Isaiah said that, there might be some people who already believe the earth was round. But in those time, when majority thought that the earth was flat, Isaiah or the Bible had already said it.

This is not the only verses, there are several others. The Bible rarely made scientific claims but when it does, they always turned out to be correct.

 

[roman2819]

That's garbage. Pythagaros and greek mathematicians realized the earth was round 700 years before Christianity was even considered.

Isaiah lived before Greek empire began, and he wrote “He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth” (Isaiah 40:22)

Now we are not saying that 20 or 50 years before Isaiah said that, there might be some people who already believe the earth was round. But in those time, when majority thought that the earth was flat, Isaiah had already said it.

This is not the only verses, there are several others. The Bible rarely made scientific claims but when it does, they always turned out to be correct.

 

[Fingy]

The Bible contains credible statements that are consistent with scientific discoveries.

The Scripture predicted that the earth is round before science confirmed it. “He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in” (Isaiah 40:22). The book of Isaiah was written about 2500 years ago.

More can be read from this book:

Understanding Prayer, Faith and God's will (Understanding Prayer, Faith and God's Will

But the earth is a sphere, not a circle. There is a significant difference.

 

[Sapiens]

Isaiah lived before the Greeks and he wrote “He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth” (Isaiah 40:22)

Now we are not saying that 20 or 50 years before Isaiah said that, there might be some people who already believe the earth was round. But in those time, when majority thought that the earth was flat, Isaiah or the Bible had already said it.

This is not the only verses, there are several others. The Bible rarely made scientific claims but when it does, they always turned out to be correct.

Authorship and date of Isaiah are open to question.

Circles are flat, spheres are not.

 

[Etritonakin]

Glad we got that sorted out

 

[Awoon]

The Bible also contains assertions that are completely in-credible or absurd, and interpreting "circle of the Earth" to mean a spherical planet floating in space is a bit of a stretch.

Same is Matthew 27: 52, 53.

 

[1robin]

The bible cannot be the word of God. There isn't enough science in the Bible to pass a grade 6 science test.

It is not a science book. It is not trying to decide which of the ten different mathematical approaches works for the quantum, if any do. It is not a biology book, it is not a book of chemistry, it is not a flight manual, nor a tour guide. It is officially classified as historical biography but that is not it's purpose. It is a book designed to ground faith and save people out of a wicked world going the wrong direction. Despite all the kinds of books it is not, it is still the most scrutinized work in human history and is the most influential text ever written. 6th grade science is not the test so where does it fail exactly?

 

[1robin]

What is more likely? That God approved a certain tribe to perpetrate those massacres, or that those massacres have been perpetrated by people who arbitrarily declared to have God's sanction?

A brief check on the history book of humanity should provide the easy answer to this riddle.

Ciao

- viole

What is more likely nothing created everything or something did? After all lets start at the beginning.

 

[viole]

What is more likely nothing created everything or something did? After all lets start at the beginning.

I don't see how something can create everything. Everything would include that something, wouldn't it? Did that something, which is a member of everything, created itself?

By the way, your rebuttal, if we want to call it such, is fallacious. Even if it were more likely that something created everyting, whatever that means, that does not increase the probability that the ancient Jews got the right something.


Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

duplicate

 

[1robin]

I don't see how something can create everything. Everything would include that something, wouldn't it? Did that something, which is a member of everything, created itself?

I assume that who I am talking to is as obsessed with professional debate on these issues as I am and recognizes the same language use. I don't know why I do that as it is almost always untrue. When I am talking about everything that was created I am not talking about things that are eternal.

let me state the formal argument.

1. Everything must have an explanation of it's self either within it's self of external to it's self.
2. All things that begin to exist have causes.
3. Natural entities no matter what size do not contain the explanation for themselves within themselves.
4. There are no infinite causal regression chains possible.
5. Things that do not begin to exist contain their own explanations and do not require a cause.

Conclusions:
A. Nature has no ultimate natural explanation or cause.
B. I run out of nature yet still require a cause that resulted in all other effects.
C. Natures ultimate explanation and cause is non-natural.

Additional conclusion which has far more premise included than I can post.

God is the most probable candidate for that the ultimate explanation and cause.

By the way, your rebuttal, if we want to call it such, is fallacious. Even if it were more likely that something created everyting, whatever that means, that does not increase the probability that the ancient Jews got the right something.


Ciao

- viole

I did not make any such claim in that post.

 

[viole]

I assume that who I am talking to is as obsessed with professional debate on these issues as I am and recognizes the same language use. I don't know why I do that as it is almost always untrue. When I am talking about everything that was created I am not talking about things that are eternal.

Well, I am a mathematician, so clear cut definitions and precision are fundamental.

By the way, everything that has been created has, indeed, been created. Tautologically. Blue fairies are also blue.

Are you sure you are not begging the question by already invoking a creation process that would entail a creator in its premises?

If you want to go through your formal argument, let me know. i love those

Ciao

- viole

 

[1robin]

Well, I am a mathematician, so clear cut definitions and precision are fundamental.

My degree is in math and I work in defense weapons systems yet I find winging it intuitive. Anyway lets roll on.

By the way, everything that has been created has, indeed, been created. Tautologically. Blue fairies are also blue.

I did not make that argument. I did not say everything that has been created is therefore created. I said everything the begins to exist requires a cause.

Are you sure you are not begging the question by already invoking a creation process that would entail a creator in its premises?

No, those are deductive arguments that have existed since the Greeks.

If you want to go through your formal argument, let me know. i love those

Ciao

- viole

You can pick out which part you think is not true and say why if you want. I am not volunteering any more typing than necessary.