• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

How We Know the Bible is God's Inspired Word

rusra02

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Nowhere Man said:
Yep. It endures same as many Dharmic works that are notably much older than the Bible. They're still around for sure. Albiet discrediting the works are not as big an issue on this side of the fence as it were.
Click to expand...

When I said the Bible endures, I mean it endures as the word of God and the truth, despite relentless efforts to discredit it.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
So why can we pretend that the Bible is inspired?

Because it feels so damn good.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
Did you folks know that the Bible was actually the first iPod and you could listen to your digital library with unparalleled comfort and ease?

It was also the first guitar, wheel, and flying robot.

Just drink a fifth of Jack and squint your eyes on 1 Assumptions 18:69 and you will actually see Ben Franklin ripping off the lighting rod design from 1 Kings 2:8-11.

Inspired!
 
rusra02

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
angellous_evangellous said:
There still isn't positive proof that David existed. The two archaeologists that argue for David's existence freely admit that they are stretching scanty evidence beyond reasonable limits. That is, they believe that David existed because it makes them feel warm and fuzzy and not because of the evidence.
Click to expand...

The positive proof David existed is the Bible's historical record, including the testimony of Jesus Christ. The fact that archeologists have confirmed the Bible account should give pause to anyone who questions what the Bible records, merely because archeology hasn't YET confirmed it. Your insinuation that the archeologists who found the basalt stone bearing David's name are dishonest is without merit.
Israel Finkelstein, Tel Aviv University stated: "Biblical nihilism collapsed overnight with the discovery of the David inscription."


 
Caladan

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
rusra02 said:
While your 'middle of the road' position may seem to be balanced, it leaves out of account the fact that the Bible claims to be, not a mere historical account, but the inerrant word of God. It's historical accuracy is partial proof for that claim. Imagine a book dating world war II in the 1800s. That book would be unworthy of trust. No one has successfully challenged the historical accuracy of the Bible.
Note that the Bible does not depend on archeological confirmation, but on the contents of the Bible itself. Still, archeology has confirmed many of the people, places, and events in the Scriptures as the truth. King David, for example. Until 1993 no extrabiblical proof for David existed. In that year, archeologists found in
Israel a basalt stone dated to the ninth century B.C.E that bears the words "House of David" and "king of Israel". As the Bible itself states: "If some did not express faith, will their lack of faith perhaps make the faithfulness of God without effect? Never may that happen! But let God be found true, though every man be found a liar." (Romans 3:3,4)
Click to expand...
Please read my post again. the fact that the Bible claims to be the word of God, or that you claim the Bible to say that fails the acid test. because clearly much of it is ideological. there are texts that give an ideological account of Biblical people and events in order to support a case, a house, a dynasty, or an ethnic ethos.
for all we know, the scribes never meant for it to be regarded as pure history. and the people knew that what the scribes are promiting was ideology, to some extent or the other.
furthermore. I am well aware of the House of David inscription. also notice that I never said that King David or Solomon did not exit. what I am saying is that the historical account would not fall word to word with the Biblical account which is clearly ideological in many passages. for example there was an agenda to glorify the Davidic dynasty at the expense of the historical record which was not always necessarily favorable to the dynasty.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
rusra02 said:
The positive proof David existed is the Bible's historical record, including the testimony of Jesus Christ. The fact that archeologists have confirmed the Bible account should give pause to anyone who questions what the Bible records, merely because archeology hasn't YET confirmed it. Your insinuation that the archeologists who found the basalt stone bearing David's name are dishonest is without merit.
Israel Finkelstein, Tel Aviv University stated: "Biblical nihilism collapsed overnight with the discovery of the David inscription."
Click to expand...

No, I'm saying that the evidence is being abused by people who are delusional and abysmally incompetent.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
YmirGF said:
Personally speaking, I think you are being very kind putting it even that way.
Click to expand...

It's amazing to me how low an otherwise respectable scholar will go just to get on the History Channel.

The real problem is when people like our friend hear an archaeologist say something like "this may be proof" and take it for the Gospel truth. It's unfair and misleading to the average gullible listener, who can't tell the difference between what MAY be the case, given tremendous doubts and problems with the statement that the speaker has no interest in disclosing. The speaker is expressing his/her insight rather than a rational explanation of the problem.

The issue of the existence of David, ancient aliens, the city of Atlantis, Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, and tooth fairies coming out of your butt are all fun for some people to imagine, and the History Channel and some other publications take advantage of their poor audience.
 
YmirGF

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
angellous_evangellous said:
The issue of the existence of David, ancient aliens, the city of Atlantis, Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, and tooth fairies coming out of your butt are all fun for some people to imagine, and the History Channel and some other publications take advantage of their poor audience.
Click to expand...
Indeed. What is disturbing is how folks skip past the qualifiers and begin to insist that these assertions are somehow factual. I tried watching a "documentary" about Atlantis recently and turned it off after a few minutes when it became obvious that the people in the presentation implicitly believed their own baffle-gab. Ditto that for the so-called "Ancient aliens" show. Pretty effects, fun to think about, but little more than a diversion from boredom. The problem is that the facts, as we know them to be, aren't as exciting.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
YmirGF said:
Indeed. What is disturbing is how folks skip past the qualifiers and begin to insist that these assertions are somehow factual. I tried watching a "documentary" about Atlantis recently and turned it off after a few minutes when it became obvious that the people in the presentation implicitly believed their own baffle-gab. Ditto that for the so-called "Ancient aliens" show. Pretty effects, fun to think about, but little more than a diversion from boredom. The problem is that the facts, as we know them to be, aren't as exciting.
Click to expand...

The Bigfoot show is a million times worse.

It seems to me that the all the fun of those myths gets thrown out the window when those idiots embarrass themselves by attempting rational thought. If they stuck with campfire stories it would be far more entertaining and captivating.

The whole David issue rests on just a few artifacts that have nothing to do with him that can be dated about 900BCE. That's it. The connection to the biblical David is complete speculation that has absolutely nothing to do with archaeology. They can't be honest about it because they are selling you something AND their bias is bigger than my considerable ego.

It's like finding Troy and concluding that Homer is completely accurate.
 
T

The Sparda

Member
Fulfillment of prophecies, historical accuracies and, as someone has mentioned, the scientific accuracies as well can help show that the Bible is indeed the real deal.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
The Sparda said:
Fulfillment of prophecies, historical accuracies and, as someone has mentioned, the scientific accuracies as well can help show that the Bible is indeed the real deal.
Click to expand...

Did you know that toilet paper was foreseen by Isaiah?

Thumb drives - Noah
Baby powder - Johnathan
Brothels - Solomon
Solar panels - Nathan
Predicted 9/11 - Hamburg
Magic Mouse - Paul

The list goes on and on
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Caladan

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
angellous_evangellous said:
It's like finding Troy and concluding that Homer is completely accurate.
Click to expand...
That is what I was looking for in some regard. and that's what I've been trying to say here.
yes we have extrabiblical sources that discuss Biblical figures, we also have extrabiblical sources that verify events that the Bible discusses.
but the Bible is written in an ideological fashion. therefore, not historically accurate. more than that, who is to say that all of it was ever meant to be seen as historically accurate?
would the Iron Age people who formed the Israelite or Judahite identity actually believe in the story of the conquest of Joshua? was it even possible to tell it to them as a real history?
events such as the exodus could be echoing circumstances that were historical, such as the movement of people between the Levant and Egypt, escaping slaves, etc. but the movement of an entire nation, the miracles, the narrative, this is clearly ideological.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top