Which Religious Scripture Is Truly The Word Of God?

[Riverwolf]

You are plainly wrong. Humans failed to keep anything can be tracked as original. Show us one book which can be compared with the same contexts written in ancient scrolls!

...I have no idea what you're talking about.

Humans failed to keep any original scrolls at the point when paper was invented. To simply put, human documents can't last across the border of 2000 years (or even 1500 years), except for the Holy Bible.

The oldest story in the world, the Epic of Gilgamesh, is between 5000 and 4000 years old.

The oldest Sacred Hymns still sung today, the Vedas, are at minimum about 4000 years old, and possibly even older. (And, might I had, wholly unchanged, despite only recently being written down.)

Both are older than even the oldest texts of the Bible.

 

[Hawkins]

...I have no idea what you're talking about.



The oldest story in the world, the Epic of Gilgamesh, is between 5000 and 4000 years old.

The oldest Sacred Hymns still sung today, the Vedas, are at minimum about 4000 years old, and possibly even older. (And, might I had, wholly unchanged, despite only recently being writen down.)

Both are older than even the oldest texts of the Bible.

You miss the point. Show us the original document which is supposed to be an ancient scroll written not in paper. Humans can't even acquire scrolls in the form of a book!

What humans can acquire are discrete scrolls with something written on it. It's origin is always in double.

That's why secular history is never a reliable mean for the conveying of a theology. The Holy Bible is the only BOOK (pay attention to the word BOOK, with thousand pages) which is reconcilable.

 

[Riverwolf]

You miss the point. Show us the original document which is supposed to be an ancient scroll written not in paper. Humans can't even acquire scrolls in the form of a book!

What humans can acquire are discrete scrolls with something written on it. It's origin is always in double.

...what's with this fixation on scrolls? Gilgamesh was written on stone tablets, and the Vedas transmitted orally using mnemonic techniques for thousands of years before being written down. Those techniques are still used today.

Is English not your first language?

That's why secular history is never a reliable mean for the conveying of a theology.

That's more because theology and history have nothing to do with each other.

 

[Hawkins]

...what's with this fixation on scrolls? Gilgamesh was written on stone tablets, and the Vedas transmitted orally using mnemonic techniques for thousands of years before being written down. Those techniques are still used today.

Is English not your first language?

That's more because theology and history have nothing to do with each other.

Again, you miss the point. My point remains the same. Show us a BOOK of thousand pages which is reconcilable!

It has nothing to do with what technique you use to interpret writings on a stone. It's about how a book of thousand pages can last for more than 2000 years.

"Thousand pages" is the key word! Show us, if you think that you have book which has last for more than 2000 years.

1) it's a book with thousand pages
2) it lasts more than 2000 years
3) it is reconcilable with ancient scrolls

 

[Riverwolf]

Again, you miss the point. My point remains the same. Show us a BOOK of thousand pages which is reconcilable!

I have no idea what you're even asking, or what your point even is.

Again, is English your first language or not?

 

[Hawkins]

I have no idea what you're even asking, or what your point even is.

Again, is English your first language or not?

Because other than the Bible, no such a book exists.

Do you understand English or not?

My question is,

Do you have a book which

1) is a book with thousand pages
2) it has lasted for more than 2000 years
3) it is reconcilable with ancient scrolls

 

[Riverwolf]

Because other than the Bible, no such a book exists.

Except I still have no idea what you're describing the Bible to be, that nothing else apparently is.

Why are you not answering my question?

 

[Hawkins]

Except I still have no idea what you're describing the Bible to be, that nothing else apparently is.

Why are you not answering my question?

The Holy Bible is the only book which humans have with the following conditions met;

1) it is a book with thousand pages
2) it's a book lasted for more than 2000 years
3) it's a book which is reconcilable

God makes it so such that humans can get to the same message conveyed today as 2000 years ago. The above 3 conditions are the necessary factors for a godly theology to be brought forward for today's human to receive the same message consistently across a history of more than 2000 years.

 

[Riverwolf]

...you don't understand English.

Dude, English is my native language. Furthermore, I understand it significantly better than most other native English speakers, because linguistics is a hobby of mine.

So, let me illustrate exactly how your original reply to me makes no sense.

Humans failed to keep anything can be tracked as original.

This sentence is not grammatically correct.

The subject here is humans, with the primary predicate being "failed to keep". So the first part is fine, assuming "keep" here means "to hold on to". However, it's the second part that is meaningless.

Now, first of all, you're missing a word. It sems like it should read "anything that can be tracked as original." However, second of all, this is meaningless. When you say "tracked as original", this doesn't convey the information you want. The verb "to track" means to find or follow something or someone by way of the footprints they left behind. You're clearly using it metaphorically, and that's fine. However, the very next part, "as original", doesn't gramatically follow. The adverb "as" indicates comparative sameness, similarness, or equality with whatever it's modifying. In other words, it only applies when comparing two things, but your statement isn't comparing anything.

Perhaps you are trying to say "tracked to an original source"?

Now for the second part of that paragraph.

Show us one book which can be compared with the same contexts written in ancient scrolls!

Now the first part, "Show us one book which can be compared with" is perfectly fine. However, "the same contexts written in ancient scrolls" is not.

Are you, perhaps, trying to say, "contents", not "contexts"? Because "context" would not typically be written in those scrolls; it refers to the stuff happening around the scrolls. That is, the people writing them, the people reading them, the manner of storage, the time period. Putting "contents" in there, however, would make more sense.

 

[Riverwolf]

1) it is a book with thousand pages

So? Why does length matter?

I personally find the short and sweet Dào Dé Jīng, the oldest version of which is from about 2500 years ago, to be FAR more poignant than the Bible.

2) it's a book lasted for more than 2000 years

The Mahabharata is the longest poem in the world, and makes the Bible look like a novella by comparison. (The Bible is about 611,000 words, while the Mahabharata is about 1.8 MILLION words). It's also more than 2000 years old.

Also, when you take all the Vedic Samhitas together, they're FAR longer than the Bible. And that's not even including the Brahmanas, Aranyakas, or Upanishads which extend the length even further.

3) it's a book which is reconcilable

Reconcilable with what? The verb "to reconcile" has no meaning without both a subject AND an object. You have the grammatical subject (the Bible), but not a grammatical object.

God makes it so such that humans can get to the same message conveyed today as 2000 years ago.

Except when things get lost in translation, because Hebrew and Aramaic are Semitic languages, while Modern English and Ancient Greek are Indo-European languages.

The above 3 conditions are the necessary factors for a godly theology to be brought forward for today's human to receive the same message consistently across a history of more than 2000 years.

And how did you come to that conclusion?

 

[Jabar]

Okay. Fair enough.

See? THAT'S what it is to actually SHOW something. You can use the Qur'an when talking about what the Qur'an says.



I called it like I saw it, and what I saw indicated that it's his doing.

Then again, why would that "seal" be there in the first place?



Understanding is not a general thing.

I am not terribly familiar with Islam or the Qur'an, largely because I don't particularly care. So I don't have much "understanding" of it. I'm willing to stand corrected on matters of what Islam teaches, regardless of whether it's "true" or not.

I do, however, have plenty of "understanding" of my own way, and of how religion and religious behavior typically work. Tell me: how many other religions have you actually looked into in-depth?

Really...

I just explained to you it is not literally a seal.

Anyhow, i have looked at like many other religions.

 

[Jabar]

Knowledge can be divided into 2 parts, the part that humans have mastered and the part humans haven't yet acquired. (today's humans assume that second part is non-existence out of their arrogance)

History books are human accounts of witnessing about events/figures lying without today's human knowledge such humans can understand and comprehend.
Religious books are human accounts of witnessing about events/figures lying beyond human knowledge and thus may not be understandable to today's humans.

The Holy Bible is a multiple account human witnessing backed by the martyrdom of direct witnesses. It is the only book humans have which is reconcilable for us to tell that the message conveyed 2000 years ago is the same message conveyed today among humans. Humans don't have another book which allows you to compare today's contexts with ancient scrolls, or compare the contexts from 2 independent sources.

If a God exists, He will do so by ensuring that humans can get to the same message which conveys yesterday, today and tomorrow. The Holy Bible is the only book which does so!

Bible is corrupted in my opinion.

 

[Riverwolf]

Really...

I just explained to you it is not literally a seal.

Hence the use of quotes. I know what it's referring to.

Anyhow, i have looked at like many other religions.

Which ones, and how have you looked?

 

[rusra02]

When put into comparison, all religious scriptures, which prevails over the other?
They must contain the following

1) Complex literature
2) Prophecies and Scientific evidences
3) Logic
4) No Errors






Peace.

I believe the Bible stands alone as the word of God.

 

[Akivah]

I believe the Bible stands alone as the word of God.

You can't believe that anymore. Jabar at post #112 just said that the bible is corrupted.

 

[Jabar]

I believe the Bible stands alone as the word of God.

HAHAHAAHAHA


I kindly disagree.

 

[rusra02]

You can't believe that anymore. Jabar at post #112 just said that the bible is corrupted.

I think the facts show the Bible has been faithfully transmitted and not corrupted.

 

[rusra02]

HAHAHAAHAHA


I kindly disagree.

Why do you disagree?

 

[allright]

Bible is corrupted in my opinion.

Please state which parts are corrupted, what the orignal version said word for word and show
what evidence you have to prove it

 

[metis]

I think the facts show the Bible has been faithfully transmitted and not corrupted.

The discovery and publication of the DSS material has shown that most of what's found in the Tanakh today has been remarkably accurate as compared to those ancient texts. The Jewish tradition has long had it if that there's one even minor error on a page, that page must be rewritten from scratch.