Why I Believe the Bible is the Word of God

[Twilight Hue]

I didn't post the thread to prove anything. I answered the question I was asked. I stated why I believe the Bible is the word of God. I'm not trying to convert anyone here to my way of thinking. What you or others believe is your choice. As for me, I'm happy with the choice I've made to follow Jesus and live my life according to His word to the best of my ability.

My response just provided a point - counter point in light of this being a scriptural debate section. Please don't take it personally. I use a very sterile approach at times. Every debate needs a bad guy with a white hat or is it a good guy with a black hat for these kind of things.......?

Im old.

:0)

 

[fantome profane]

.
But let me remind you that Jesus referred to the Scriptures as the word of God.

But of course to Jesus the term "scripture" would have referred only to the Old Testament. And perhaps not even all of that.

I didn't post the thread to prove anything. I answered the question I was asked. I stated why I believe the Bible is the word of God. I'm not trying to convert anyone here to my way of thinking. What you or others believe is your choice. As for me, I'm happy with the choice I've made to follow Jesus and live my life according to His word to the best of my ability.

This is fine, but this is a debate forum. You will find debate here. Your logical fallacies and inconsistencies will be pointed out. (It's what we do )

 

[Ingledsva]

Hi Carlita,

Thank you for your $0.02 worth.

Yes, Jesus is the word.

But let me remind you that Jesus referred to the Scriptures as the word of God.

• Matt 15:6, "he is not to honor his father or his mother. And thus you invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition."
• Mark 7:13, "thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”
• John 10:35 “If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken)."

3056 (logos)from 3004 /légō, "speaking to a conclusion") – a word, being the expression of a thought; a saying.

3056/lógos ("word") is preeminently used ofChrist (Jn 1:1), expressing the thoughts of the Father through the Spirit.

3056 (logos)is a common term (used 330 times in the NT) with regards to a person sharing a message (discourse, "communication-speech"). 3056 (lógos) is a broad term meaning "reasoning expressed by words."

Blessings,

Katie

VERY OBVIOUSLY this does NOT mean the books scraped together LATER, AFTER Jesus' DEATH, are that WORD! He was likely talking about the Laws given to the Hebrew.

*

 

[Unveiled Artist]

50 more cents:

Katie and Nazz

I was talking in a Christian chat one time and had this same conversation actually. She said that without scripture there is no Christ. So, she said the w-ords are the Words.

She also said, the only way she knows Christ is by reading scripture since she had no
other Christian relation in her environment and in her family, only online. So to her, scripture was the Word.

On another token, another woman who has read the Bible spoke with me and said even without scripture, she still has Christ. Without the Word (Christ), the words (scripture) wouldn't mean a thing. She said she doesn't need to bring the Bible with her every where she goes.

So, both views are equally valid..

However, the point is, when you say scripture is the Word that's like saying, if I wrote a poetry book, that poetry book IS me not the expression or message I REPRESENT.

Aka.. that is similar to saying that bread/wine IS Jesus Christ not what the bread/wine represents as His Blood and Body. (Please no Catholicism bashing)

God is not a book neither is Christ. I think He'd honestly laugh if people were actually worshiping scripture rather than His Father. (Why call me good, the only one is good is the Father)

Gosh, ooh! there is a scripture on this... let me think. (Goes to check her bible)
John 5:39: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." KJV

I don't care for KJV, so here's another version.

"You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me" NAB

Basically, saying, people look to scripture as if IT holds eternal life as if what it says IS God.

However, scripture testifies to Christ's words and Christ's Words testifies to His Father.

Its all about Christ not scripture. Some people need scripture to believe in Christ others don't. That's okay. I just get anzy when people mistake one for the other.

Carlita

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Wrong...
the Scripture has very little 'wrong' with it, if you are a real follower of Jeshua. It's sacred text, just because you don't think so doesn't mean you have the authority to be telling others your incorrect opinion as if it's fact.

Yes, the scripture is sacred. All religious text is sacred in themselves. All texts have been copied from their original language so that people of other languages and cultures can understand them.

Every time a language is translated into another it looses some of its authenticity because no language can be translated to another 100 percent. A lot of it is paraphrased. Try writing Spanish into English verbatim and you will see it doesn't translate well. Even more so, American Sign Language into English, that doesn't translate well either.

So, you can have errors in a sacred text but no errors in the message itself. If Christ had 15 disciples instead of 12, would that change what He did for mankind? If Christ was stabbed in the wrists rather than the palms of the hands as what every other picture depicts of Him, would that change Him dying for others? If Christ was a female, does that mean He can't die for us either?

Don't get hung up on the text. Follow Christ. He's in your heart even if the book is millions of miles away. Some people don't have a chance to read the Bible and still believe in Christ because of His "words" in their heart.

Also, errors happen because religon was transmitted orally first. Anyway, I could go on...my point, dont get stuck on the words unless thats the only way you connect with Christ. If so, don't put down other people who don't share your views.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Exactly, in the New Testament, the scripture He referred to was that of the Old, the Torah.

VERY OBVIOUSLY this does NOT mean the books scraped together LATER, AFTER Jesus' DEATH, are that WORD! He was likely talking about the Laws given to the Hebrew.

*

 

[McBell]

Is the Bhagavad Gita "the word of God"? If one believes it's not, please provide some objective evidence.

Actually, I have no reason to believe the Bhagavad Gita is "the word of god".
Nor is it on me to prove it is not.

It is on those who make the claim that the Bhagavad Gita is "the word of god" to show that it is.

 

[Excaljnur]

I was once catholic like many of yourselves, them I shifted to Protestantism like many of yourselves because I found a stronger study of the scripture to be more applicable to my life, but I eventually became an atheist. The catalyst for me becoming an atheist is that prayer became irrelevant in my life. Whether I prayed or didn't pray for something, I noticed that there are typically several causes to a result. And that adding God as a cause was pointless, that he was actually the least likely cause. I don't want this to sound like it happened in one night, be cause it took six years from when I began to doubt to when I felt comfortable calling myself an atheist. I'm am curious to for anyone to explain why and how prayer brought you closer to God since it actually brought me further from God. I just find it interesting that the same thing (prayer) can cause both more belief and less belief. How is this resolved?

 

[nazz]

Are you going to ignore the definition of logos that I posted? Even if I took the time and made the effort to provide Scripture that proves the NT is also the inspired word of God, it wouldn't change your mind. So what would be the point? You won't even agree with the basic definition of logos.

I ignored nothing. It's you who continues to ignore what the Bible clearly says about the Word of God. Which can only mean that you are not really interested in understanding it. Despite what you claim you prefer your beliefs to what the Bible actually says.

You are right that you won't change my mind because I know better. I know the view you are expressing is wrong. And once you know something you can't unknow it.

 

[nazz]

I didn't post the thread to prove anything. I answered the question I was asked. I stated why I believe the Bible is the word of God. I'm not trying to convert anyone here to my way of thinking. What you or others believe is your choice. As for me, I'm happy with the choice I've made to follow Jesus and live my life according to His word to the best of my ability.

You may have started out just answering a question but in subsequent posts you began to defend your position.

May I make a suggestion since you are new? Stick to posting in the Christianity DIR or the other non-debate sections. Because if something is put in a debate section it will be debated. Oftentimes heatedly. As the saying goes if you can't take the heat stay out of the kitchen.

 

[nazz]

I was once catholic like many of yourselves, them I shifted to Protestantism like many of yourselves because I found a stronger study of the scripture to be more applicable to my life, but I eventually became an atheist. The catalyst for me becoming an atheist is that prayer became irrelevant in my life. Whether I prayed or didn't pray for something, I noticed that there are typically several causes to a result. And that adding God as a cause was pointless, that he was actually the least likely cause. I don't want this to sound like it happened in one night, be cause it took six years from when I began to doubt to when I felt comfortable calling myself an atheist. I'm am curious to for anyone to explain why and how prayer brought you closer to God since it actually brought me further from God. I just find it interesting that the same thing (prayer) can cause both more belief and less belief. How is this resolved?

It depends on what you are looking for. If you view prayer as some kind of magic spell to alter external reality you will no doubt be disappointed. If, on the other hand, you view it as means to draw closer to God and produce tangible internal changes you won't be.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I was once catholic like many of yourselves, them I shifted to Protestantism like many of yourselves because I found a stronger study of the scripture to be more applicable to my life, but I eventually became an atheist. The catalyst for me becoming an atheist is that prayer became irrelevant in my life. Whether I prayed or didn't pray for something, I noticed that there are typically several causes to a result. And that adding God as a cause was pointless, that he was actually the least likely cause. I don't want this to sound like it happened in one night, be cause it took six years from when I began to doubt to when I felt comfortable calling myself an atheist. I'm am curious to for anyone to explain why and how prayer brought you closer to God since it actually brought me further from God. I just find it interesting that the same thing (prayer) can cause both more belief and less belief. How is this resolved?

Good question.

I never understood how prayer can lead someone away from their faith. For me, I love prayer and religious practice. However, I never had a relationship with Christ; so, prayer to Christ seemed like I'm praying to someone across the street whom I've never even met. It didn't hold so much significance to my life that I'd give my life on it.
I never felt comfortable praying to the Christian God because in Christianity, everything goes through Christ.

However, prayer in itself, is healthy for the body and mind as well as spirit. Prayer brought me closer to my faith because to me it helped me communicate (which you can use in exchange of prayer) with my loved ones as well as giving thanks for being alive. It's like your heart opens up when you communicate even without having someone/thing to focus on. If you've ever had a loved one pass away and maybe you hear his/her voice or signs they are speaking to you maybe in ways not just by voice you are speaking to them too. It kindles the relationship between you and the person you are with.

Sometimes I ask for things in prayer but I don't look for them to come true. Sometimes that can make someone fall astray given unanswered prayers. Prayer is like saying thank you without expecting anything in return. What brought me closer to my faith is trying not to expect things in return for what I ask. Gradually, I stop asking altogether, and let things come as they come. I see more blessings when I am aware of what other people say and do, and take the focus from myself and try to put it on others.

I think the basis of prayer itself should pull someone towards their faith rather than leading them from it. It depends, though, on what one expects from prayer and the faith they follow.

 

[Excaljnur]

So common things that I would pray for would be for sick relatives to become healthy, prayer before meals, praying for my gratitude towards achievements I've made in life. I would say when it came to prayer, I wouldn't ask for much besides for others to be delivered from a certain illness. Most my prayers would be in gratitude, but I'd feel like it served no true purpose to thank the Lord Jesus christ for giving us the opportunity to share a meal, or allowing us to come together as a family because I would feel it is more relevant to thank my mother for making the meal or my father for working to make enough money to afford the meal, or even to thank the people who need my father's services which supply my father's salary. If you keep taking these causes and effects to their end, I would eventually lead to questions of human nature and why we have certain desires, behaviors or why we were created and wHo or what created us. But by that point this chain of responsibility no longer has a bearing on my day to day life. The influence that God may have had on this world is insignificant compared to the effect that others have historically had on my life. Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Martin Luther King Jr, and even George Bush have had more significant and direct impaimpacts on my life, why don't we worship John Locke? His political theories played an enormous part in out conatitution, not just the declaration of independence. I just struggle to see the relevancy in praying to God

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Exactly. That makes a lot more sense to me. I guess prayer to God is rather than praying for the act of praying itself one needs to contribute his or her prayer to someone outside of themselves. I see the reason of needing an authority that governs our lives... it is like saying thank you to our parents. That's the closest reason I can see why most pray to God because He is a parent. However, I agree with all you said; and, I add, we can give gratitude because gratitude is prayer in itself and, to give it, there doesn't always need to be a source from which it comes from. It simply exists.

So common things that I would pray for would be for sick relatives to become healthy, prayer before meals, praying for my gratitude towards achievements I've made in life. I would say when it came to prayer, I wouldn't ask for much besides for others to be delivered from a certain illness. Most my prayers would be in gratitude, but I'd feel like it served no true purpose to thank the Lord Jesus christ for giving us the opportunity to share a meal, or allowing us to come together as a family because I would feel it is more relevant to thank my mother for making the meal or my father for working to make enough money to afford the meal, or even to thank the people who need my father's services which supply my father's salary. If you keep taking these causes and effects to their end, I would eventually lead to questions of human nature and why we have certain desires, behaviors or why we were created and wHo or what created us. But by that point this chain of responsibility no longer has a bearing on my day to day life. The influence that God may have had on this world is insignificant compared to the effect that others have historically had on my life. Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Martin Luther King Jr, and even George Bush have had more significant and direct impaimpacts on my life, why don't we worship John Locke? His political theories played an enormous part in out conatitution, not just the declaration of independence. I just struggle to see the relevancy in praying to God

 

[katiemygirl]

I ignored nothing. It's you who continues to ignore what the Bible clearly says about the Word of God. Which can only mean that you are not really interested in understanding it. Despite what you claim you prefer your beliefs to what the Bible actually says.

You are right that you won't change my mind because I know better. I know the view you are expressing is wrong. And once you know something you can't unknow it.

I would very much like to continue to dialogue with you about this topic. I am always opened to learning. I know I don't have all the answers. None of us do. However, if there is going to be animosity between us, I'm not interested in further conversation. So here are my questions if you're interested.

Tell me what does the Bible say about the word of God that you think I'm ignoring? Give me verses please, so I can examine them. Explain to me why Jesus referred to the Scriptures as the word of God if they are not the word of God. Post the definition of logos from the verses where Jesus does this: Matt. 15:6, Mark 7:13 and John 10:35 and then tell me what logos means and how it is used.

Blessings,

Katie

 

[metis]

Actually, I have no reason to believe the Bhagavad Gita is "the word of god".
Nor is it on me to prove it is not.

It is on those who make the claim that the Bhagavad Gita is "the word of god" to show that it is.

You missed the point in that I was questioning why someone would say the Bible is "the word of God" as if this was some sort of slam-dunk fact but that other scriptures are supposedly not. Personally, I have no reason to believe that any scripture is "the word of God".

 

[McBell]

You missed the point in that I was questioning why someone would say the Bible is "the word of God" as if this was some sort of slam-dunk fact but that other scriptures are supposedly not. Personally, I have no reason to believe that any scripture is "the word of God".

you are right.
I missed that point.

 

[nazz]

I would very much like to continue to dialogue with you about this topic. I am always opened to learning. I know I don't have all the answers. None of us do. However, if there is going to be animosity between us, I'm not interested in further conversation. So here are my questions if you're interested.

I am very glad you want to continue this conversation, katie Let me say there is no animosity on my end. It may seem I am attacking your faith but nothing could be further from the truth. It may be hard to believe but I am actually trying to strengthen you faith by exposing its weak spots. Because if one's faith is based on false beliefs it cannot withstand and sustain the criticism that will inevitably be levied against it.

Tell me what does the Bible say about the word of God that you think I'm ignoring? Give me verses please, so I can examine them.

I'll just c/p my earlier response:

... the bible itself informs us that the Word of God is not the Bible itself. This can easily be shown by trying to substitute the word "bible" wherever the phrase "word of God" occurs in Scripture. It makes no sense to do so and is even ludicrous. I'll just give a few examples:

1Ki 12:22
But the Bible came to Shemaiah the man of God, saying,

Luk 3:2
while Annas and Caiaphas were high priests, the Bible came to John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.

Act 6:7
Then the Bible spread, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith.***

Heb 11:3
By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the Bible, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.

Rev 19:13
He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Bible.

***there are many such examples similar to this that speak of the apostles preaching the Word of God. This cannot mean the Christian Bible as it did not exist at that point in time. And it also cannot merely mean the Hebrew Scriptures either. Rather it was the message about Christ and his teachings.

Explain to me why Jesus referred to the Scriptures as the word of God if they are not the word of God.

He never did. Let's go back to one of the verses you supplied:

John 10:35 “If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken)."

You have taken this out of context and if you back up a verse something very, very important is revealed:

Jhn 10:34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are gods” ’?

Did you get that? "Is it not written in YOUR law...?" First it is important to understand that what is translated as law should be understood to mean the Torah. In Judaism the Torah means the Law of Moses, the books of the bible where the law is found, and by extension the Jewish scriptures as a whole. That Jesus means it in the last sense is made clear by the fact that he is quoting from the Psalms. So to make it more understandable we could render the whole passage like this:

Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Scriptures, ‘I said, “You are gods” ’? If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken)..."

In saying "your" he is clearly saying they are not "his", that he does not recognize them as his own. Otherwise he would have simply said "the Scriptures' or "our Scriptures". He is addressing THEIR belief that THEIR Scriptures cannot be broken (that is that all of it must be taken as a whole) and he is making a point about what THEIR Scriptures say.

As for the other examples you gave Jesus is not referring to the Bible but the genuine laws that God gave. That is part of God's word.

Post the definition of logos from the verses where Jesus does this: Matt. 15:6, Mark 7:13 and John 10:35 and then tell me what logos means and how it is used.

I did this above but I will just address the meaning of logos you supplied (it is a little more than that but this will suffice for now):

3056 (logos)from 3004 /légō, "speaking to a conclusion") – a word, being the expression of a thought; a saying.

3056/lógos ("word") is preeminently used ofChrist (Jn 1:1), expressing the thoughts of the Father through the Spirit.

3056 (logos)is a common term (used 330 times in the NT) with regards to a person sharing a message (discourse, "communication-speech"). 3056 (lógos) is a broad term meaning "reasoning expressed by words."

All of this fits in perfectly with what I expressed before. The Word of God is Christ, his message, and the message preached about him.

 

[katiemygirl]

You may have started out just answering a question but in subsequent posts you began to defend your position.

May I make a suggestion since you are new? Stick to posting in the Christianity DIR or the other non-debate sections. Because if something is put in a debate section it will be debated. Oftentimes heatedly. As the saying goes if you can't take the heat stay out of the kitchen.

Nazz, I haven't defended my positio

I am very glad you want to continue this conversation, katie Let me say there is no animosity on my end. It may seem I am attacking your faith but nothing could be further from the truth. It may be hard to believe but I am actually trying to strengthen you faith by exposing its weak spots. Because if one's faith is based on false beliefs it cannot withstand and sustain the criticism that will inevitably be levied against it.


I'll just c/p my earlier response:

... the bible itself informs us that the Word of God is not the Bible itself. This can easily be shown by trying to substitute the word "bible" wherever the phrase "word of God" occurs in Scripture. It makes no sense to do so and is even ludicrous. I'll just give a few examples:

1Ki 12:22
But the Bible came to Shemaiah the man of God, saying,

Luk 3:2
while Annas and Caiaphas were high priests, the Bible came to John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.

Act 6:7
Then the Bible spread, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith.***

Heb 11:3
By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the Bible, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.

Rev 19:13
He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Bible.

***there are many such examples similar to this that speak of the apostles preaching the Word of God. This cannot mean the Christian Bible as it did not exist at that point in time. And it also cannot merely mean the Hebrew Scriptures either. Rather it was the message about Christ and his teachings.


He never did. Let's go back to one of the verses you supplied:

John 10:35 “If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken)."

You have taken this out of context and if you back up a verse something very, very important is revealed:

Jhn 10:34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are gods” ’?

Did you get that? "Is it not written in YOUR law...?" First it is important to understand that what is translated as law should be understood to mean the Torah. In Judaism the Torah means the Law of Moses, the books of the bible where the law is found, and by extension the Jewish scriptures as a whole. That Jesus means it in the last sense is made clear by the fact that he is quoting from the Psalms. So to make it more understandable we could render the whole passage like this:

Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Scriptures, ‘I said, “You are gods” ’? If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken)..."

In saying "your" he is clearly saying they are not "his", that he does not recognize them as his own. Otherwise he would have simply said "the Scriptures' or "our Scriptures". He is addressing THEIR belief that THEIR Scriptures cannot be broken (that is that all of it must be taken as a whole) and he is making a point about what THEIR Scriptures say.

As for the other examples you gave Jesus is not referring to the Bible but the genuine laws that God gave. That is part of God's word.


I did this above but I will just address the meaning of logos you supplied (it is a little more than that but this will suffice for now):

3056 (logos)from 3004 /légō, "speaking to a conclusion") – a word, being the expression of a thought; a saying.

3056/lógos ("word") is preeminently used ofChrist (Jn 1:1), expressing the thoughts of the Father through the Spirit.

3056 (logos)is a common term (used 330 times in the NT) with regards to a person sharing a message (discourse, "communication-speech"). 3056 (lógos) is a broad term meaning "reasoning expressed by words."

All of this fits in perfectly with what I expressed before. The Word of God is Christ, his message, and the message preached about him.

Hey Nazz,
I'm not so sure we are really disagreeing. Your last paragraph says exactly what I believe I really think we're splitting hairs here. Whether we call the Bible the word of God or not does not change the fact the the words found in the Bible are God breathed. At least that's what I believe.Now if you disagree with that, that is a different argument, and I respect your take on it whatever it is. I am not a person who thinks she has all the answers about everything, and on more than one occasion, I've had to walk my opinions back. Anyway thank you for your very respectful answer. I want to read what you wrote again, and possibly respond with more thoughts. God bless and have a great day!
Katie

 

[nazz]

Nazz, I haven't defended my positio


Hey Nazz,
I'm not so sure we are really disagreeing. Your last paragraph says exactly what I believe I really think we're splitting hairs here. Whether we call the Bible the word of God or not does not change the fact the the words found in the Bible are God breathed. At least that's what I believe.Now if you disagree with that, that is a different argument, and I respect your take on it whatever it is. I am not a person who thinks she has all the answers about everything, and on more than one occasion, I've had to walk my opinions back. Anyway thank you for your very respectful answer. I want to read what you wrote again, and possibly respond with more thoughts. God bless and have a great day!
Katie

Yes, that is another question and let's cross one bridge at a time

It may seem that I am splitting hairs but I think they are important hairs to split One analogy I like to use is to think of the bible as a radio and the Word of God as the transmission coming through it. The medium is not the message. And you might also hear a lot of static. You've got to properly tune it