• 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!

Truth without Scripture?

Mister Emu

Emu Extraordinaire
Staff member
Premium Member
Do you believe this kind of personal revelation from Deity actually occurs in, for want of a better term for it, "everyday life"?
I have no idea...
 

Luke_17:2

Fundamental Bible-thumper
Yet Abraham had no scriptures, and both the Christian and the Muslim scriptures say that he knew God.

In those days, God spoke directly to people, and even presented Himself bodily because there were no Scriptures.

Really, if you were a Christian, you know the answeres to these points.
 

Luke_17:2

Fundamental Bible-thumper
On numbers, see Wikipedia:
Numbers involved in the Exodus

Exodus 12:37 refers to 600,000 adult Hebrew men leaving Egypt with Moses, plus an unspecified but apparently large number of non-Hebrews ("A mixed multitude also went up with them" - Exodus 12:38); allowing for women and children, the total number involved may have been two million or more.[1] Egypt at the time might have supported a total population of around 3-4 million, maybe even up to 6 million,[2] although Napoleon estimated a only 3 million when he invaded in 1798; in any event, the numbers given in Exodus 12:37 seem to represent something between half and almost the entire probable population of Egypt.​
The logistics of the Exodus also present problems. A simple calculation shows that a group of 3 million walking 10 abreast with 6 ft between rows would extend for around 340 miles (3,000,000 / 10 * 6 = 1,800,000 ft. = 340 mi). The "very many cattle, both flocks and herds" which accompanied the fleeing Hebrews, plus straggling children and the elderly, would have increased this distance. Recent archaeological research has found no evidence that the Sinai desert ever hosted millions of people, nor of a massive population increase in Canaan, estimated to have had a population of between 50,000 and 100,000, at the end of the march.[3]​

Hebrew University professor Abraham Malamat points out that the Bible often refers to 600 and its multiples, as well as 1,000 and its multiples, typologically in order to convey the idea of a large military unit. "The issue of Exodus 12:37 is an interpretive one. The Hebrew word eleph can be translated 'thousand,' but it is also rendered in the Bible as 'clans' and 'military units.' There are thought to have been 20,000 men in the entire Egyptian army at the height of Egypt's empire. And at the battle of Ai in Joshua 7, there was a severe military setback when 36 troops were killed." Therefore if one reads alaphim (plural of eleph) as military units, the number of Hebrew fighting men lay between 5,000 and 6,000. In theory, this would give a total Hebrew population of less than 20,000, something within the range of historical possibility.​

It is not unlikey for there to have been 2 million people for several reasons:


1. The U.S., for example, has gone from 3 million people in 1783 to 300 million people in 2007. The Israelites had 400 years to have children, and people had more children in those days.
2. The Egyptians were threatened by them, and if there were only around 20,000 people, there would be no reason to be so. They were threatened because the Israelite 2 million to the Egyptian 3-6 million was a significant fraction of the population.
3. The fact that they were able to conquer Canaan. How could a mere 20,000 people completely displace a civilization?



On what they saw:
And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking: and when the people saw it, they removed, and stood afar off.​

And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.​

And Moses said unto the people, Fear not: for God is come to prove you, and that his fear may be before your faces, that ye sin not.​

And the people stood afar off, and Moses drew near unto the thick darkness where God was.​

And the LORD said unto Moses, Thus thou shalt say unto the children of Israel, Ye have seen that I have talked with you from heaven.​
But all they really saw, according to the account, was lightning and smoke.

True. But that was proof enough. A cloud over a mountain where Moses had gone to talk to God? A bit conspicuous.

Then, of course, there were divine acts that the entire nation was witness to.
 

Quagmire

Imaginary talking monkey
Staff member
Premium Member
Well, the same book from which you get your salvation says a whole lot of other things:

So you get your salvation from a book? That's handy; you can keep it in your pocket and just look at it when you feel like it, and you never have to worry about whether or not it's looking at you.
 

Luke_17:2

Fundamental Bible-thumper
So you get your salvation from a book? That's handy; you can keep it in your pocket and just look at it when you feel like it,

That Book is God's word.

and you never have to worry about whether or not it's looking at you.

Not the Book itself -but the Holy Spirit who dwells within me may speak to me through the Book.
 

Luke_17:2

Fundamental Bible-thumper
If it doesn't work both ways, it doesn't work.

Yes it does. A square is always a quadrilateral angle, but a qualdrilateral angle is not always a square.

Lol! Yes indeed. I believe putting restrictions and boundaries on truth (like trying to confine it to a book) is indeed blasphemous.

What do you base that on?
 

Quagmire

Imaginary talking monkey
Staff member
Premium Member
Yes it does. A square is always a quadrilateral angle, but a qualdrilateral angle is not always a square.

I'm talking about this particular instance. But then you and I are most likely defining "word" differently here.

What do you base that on?

I'm basing this mostly an having observed the results, not just in regards to the Bible, but with any set of doctrine or dogma.

When people say "it works" they're usually saying "it works for me".

A book is a very small thing, and what most people think they see in this particular book, or basically any set of writings they're using for "spiritual" purposes, most often says more about them then about the book itself.

People will go looking for and find affirmation for what they already beleive. It's easy to do with anything even vaguely esoteric. Especially when it comes to something as vague and open to interpretation as the Bible. People find something in there that, by their interpretation, resinates with what they already believe or what they were hoping to find, they get a rush of satisfaction from that, and they think they're having a spiritual experience. :p
 

Arrow

Member
Well of course it works for people, from a Christian point who else would know the best way for us to live other than our Creator? He knows us better than we know ourselves...
 

Quagmire

Imaginary talking monkey
Staff member
Premium Member
Well of course it works for people, from a Christian point who else would know the best way for us to live other than our Creator? He knows us better than we know ourselves...

That's not the "it" were talking about here, Arrow. There really is no "it" when were talking about our individual interpretations of the Bible, let alone Truth as an absolute.

The idea that "God" knows how we should live isn't the issue, the issue is; are the Judeo/Christian scriptures the only way to know what "God" wants. Considerring we can't even come to a concensus about what they're saying I would say if they are the only way to know truth, then we're all in alot of trouble.
 

Mister Emu

Emu Extraordinaire
Staff member
Premium Member
In those days, God spoke directly to people, and even presented Himself bodily because there were no Scriptures.

Really, if you were a Christian, you know the answeres to these points.
I'm a Christian, and nothing I've read in the Bible says that God will not speak directly to people anymore now that we have scripture...
 

Smoke

Done here.
In those days, God spoke directly to people, and even presented Himself bodily because there were no Scriptures.
I can understand why he'd want to distance himself from humanity, but if indeed he can and has spoken directly to people, that just underlines the superfluity of written scriptures.

Really, if you were a Christian, you know the answeres to these points.
Rather, if I were a Christian, I'd be more likely to accept nonsensical answers.
 

Carol wis

Member
Do we know God exists? I believe He does, an interesting input on this discussion would be Helen Keller. We all know with her being blind and deaf, she had absolutely no way of communication, with anyone, no one could influence her thinking or beliefs, until Anne Sullivan, after teaching Helen sign language, she one day started to sign in Helens' hand about God. Helen quickly sign back,...."He has come to me often, I just didn't know His Name".....She never knew at this point, Bible, people in the Bible or religion, etc.I believe God reveals Himself to us all at some point in our lives. We just have to listen. The Bible best book ever to learn more about Him. Faith, a Gift from God, He offers this for our unbelief. Carol wis
 
Top