|
Post by Helpmehere on Jul 22, 2007 17:48:52 GMT -5
In a different thread Gene wrote: Have you ever wondered whether God left us the Bible or the Koran? Yes, I have wondered the same thought, and even more. Why would God speak to some ancient man (is it Moses?) that we have never met, conveniently a long time ago, where none of us who are alive can witness to, and ask him to write the bible? If that man was so perfect that God could speak to him, why not find another one in these times? On the other hand, if someone claimed that God spoke to him/her, we would just plainly think he or she is crazy and delusional. If God spoke to Moses, why won't God speak to us. After all we are his children. Are we that unworthy? Jesus' cleansing of us is not good enough? Many people have mentioned on this board how contradicting they find the bible to be, and I think it is contradicting because it is man made. I am thinking that God does exist, but the bible and jesus are man made stories. Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Answerman on Jul 22, 2007 18:03:20 GMT -5
In a different thread Gene wrote: Have you ever wondered whether God left us the Bible or the Koran? Yes, I have wondered the same thought, and even more. Why would God speak to some ancient man (is it Moses?) that we have never met, conveniently a long time ago, where none of us who are alive can witness to, and ask him to write the bible? If that man was so perfect that God could speak to him, why not find another one in these times? On the other hand, if someone claimed that God spoke to him/her, we would just plainly think he or she is crazy and delusional. If God spoke to Moses, why won't God speak to us. After all we are his children. Are we that unworthy? Jesus' cleansing of us is not good enough? Many people have mentioned on this board how contradicting they find the bible to be, and I think it is contradicting because it is man made. I am thinking that God does exist, but the bible and jesus are man made stories. Any thoughts? The reason I believe in the Bible is spiritual Truth bears witness to Jesus Christ. I did something involving God in Faith and just as promised. God fulfilled his promises and God saved me and Jesus set me free. I did not have to speculate! I loved
|
|
|
Post by diet coke on Jul 22, 2007 18:56:51 GMT -5
It sounds a bit trite, but we believe what God reveals to us, eh?
I am fascinated by stories of people who grew up atheist and had their eyes opened to see the Bible as true. And equally fascinated by those who grew up in Christian homes really believing, and then had their eyes opened to see the Bible as just a collection of man-made stories. Both stories are inspiring, because both are earth-shattering revelations.
I confess that people who never question anything bore me, lol...it's like they never grow up.
|
|
|
Post by diet coke on Jul 22, 2007 18:59:35 GMT -5
as a side note, I am equally fascinated by people who discover the Book of Morman to be God's truth, or the Koran. I know a couple of the former, and would love to converse with somehow who converted to Islam.
|
|
|
Post by beliveverrofGd on Jul 22, 2007 19:14:25 GMT -5
I have also wondered why God does not speak to at least someone. I have prayed and prayed that He would speak to me or show me a sign that I am okay for His kingdom. No speaking and no sign. I know there is a God, but just am confused of the things He did in the Bible, but now stopped it. ?
|
|
|
Post by Hope For All on Jul 23, 2007 11:22:18 GMT -5
"He who confesses that Jesus has come in the Flesh is of God".
This is still true today- in that Jesus wants to dwell in our human flesh TODAY.
When you see Jesus dwelling in human flesh over and over in the lives of others right in our day-that convinces me that the Bible is true!!
"By their fruits you shall know them".
Love, HFA
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jul 23, 2007 12:24:18 GMT -5
"He who confesses that Jesus has come in the Flesh is of God". This is still true today- in that Jesus wants to dwell in our human flesh TODAY. When you see Jesus dwelling in human flesh over and over in the lives of others right in our day-that convinces me that the Bible is true!! "By their fruits you shall know them". Love, HFA Ah, but those same fruits are borne by non-Christians, too!
|
|
|
Post by helpmehere on Jul 23, 2007 14:47:00 GMT -5
~~ Today God speaks to us through His Son Jesus Christ, His words (the Bible), His teachings, His disciples and apostles... They are His living Witnesses today. [/color][/quote] Nathan, Can you honestly testify that Jesus speaks to you the same way God supposedly spoke to Moses? Apparently God spoke to him and Moses heard him, no mystical experiences here. I would love to read your sharing a time when Jesus actually spoke to you. I, of course, know beforehand that Jesus doesn't speak to you. You read the bible and you meditate, and/or pray, and whatever conclusion you come to afterwards, you choose to believe that Jesus somehow led you to this answer. In your case, you choose Jesus because you are a christian/bible believer. But like Gene has mentioned, someone from a different faith does exactly the same thing, has the same spiritual experience but chooses Allah or Shiva as the helping deity. Hence the question: "Have you ever wondered whether God left us the Bible or the Koran?", I should add the name of the Hindu version of the bible, (but don't know it), as well.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jul 23, 2007 15:05:26 GMT -5
The choice of book in which you place your faith is directly correlated to the part of the world in which you find your roots. Americas? The Bible. Northern Africa and the Middle East? Koran. Do you really think that if you had grown up in Saudi Arabia you would be Christian? Do you think God, while not being a respecter of persons, is a respecter of national origin? Below: Relative distribution of Christianity (red) vs. Islam (green) Take a look at the maps on this page: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_religions
|
|
|
Post by black on Jul 23, 2007 15:26:13 GMT -5
What religion is the black ? hindu, or no reigion?
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jul 23, 2007 15:31:16 GMT -5
Penguins. Damned infidels.
|
|
|
Post by helpmehere on Jul 23, 2007 16:22:40 GMT -5
~~ Today God speaks to us through His Son Jesus Christ, His words (the Bible), His teachings, His disciples and apostles... They are His living Witnesses today. [/color][/quote] 1) Nathan, Can you honestly testify that Jesus speaks to you the same way God supposedly spoke to Moses? Apparently God spoke to him and Moses heard him, no mystical experiences here. I would love to read your sharing a time when Jesus actually spoke to you. ~~~ I have never claimed Jesus speaks to me the same way God supposedly spoke to Moses in an audible voice.Yes, I read your first post. It is a very vague answer to my question which was: If God spoke to Moses, why won't God speak to us. After all we are his children. Are we that unworthy? Jesus' cleansing of us is not good enough?
You wrote "God speaks to us Through his son Jesus Christ..etc."
I assumed you were answering my very explicit question.
I guess I shouldn't take you seriously if you are going to dance around the bush.
Thanks anyway.
|
|
|
Post by diet coke on Jul 23, 2007 17:02:58 GMT -5
I thought Nathan's answer was very clear. God doesn't speak in an audible voice as he did through the prophets. That ended with Jesus. From Jesus forward, He is our connection.
It helps to understand that N.T. writers all thought they were already in the "last days", like the verse Nathan quoted. Who needs any more prophets if that's the case? This world wasn't supposed to last another 2000 years.
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Jul 23, 2007 18:35:03 GMT -5
[Someone Wrote] Have you ever wondered whether God left us the Bible or the Koran?
Although I should be now heading down to the gym before work, having read this text, I rent my dressing-gown in anguish and decided I cannot leave a lie unchallenged. I write because there is a distortion that must be corrected; a falsehood that must be exposed.
Anyone who knows anything about textual criticism will appreciate that the Bible and the Koran belong in entirely different classes when it comes to textual purity, and transmission. Anyone who has read the Hadith - the authenticated traditions regarding Muhammad, written by Muslims themselves - will appreciate that Muhammad was a very unusual individual, and in fact, not a nice man. He was petty, vindictive, murderous, and died rich and powerful on his favorite wife's lap (whom he had married when she was 12 years of age).
Koranic Faults God would never have left us with a book so faulty, so extensively revised, and so completely impossible to read or understand as the Koran. Firstly, Muslim doctrine states it cannot be truly read in any other language besides Arabic, which means for the vast majority of human beings, its "true" nature is closed to them. (Indeed, a great number of Muslims have memorised great slabs of the Koran without knowing a word of Arabic!)
Secondly, the book does not run in any coherent order (besides the order established by the length of the suras). This is because after Muhammad's death - when the Koran existed only in oral form, or written on bits of bark or stone (this fact regarding the Koran's transmission is recorded in the Hadith themselves, and is acknowledged by Muslims; no written Koran was produced in Muhammad's lifetime) - the Caliph Uthman decided to produce an official edition of the Koran.
Having once done so, he ordered all other versions to be destroyed by fire. It is mentioned explicitly that Muhammad's loyal companions (most of whom converted to Christianity after the death of the prophet - a little known fact rarely mentioned by Muslim apologists) disagreed with Uthman's version, and left to teach their own "true" Koran to the masses.
Recently, in a renovation of a Mosque, a Koran was found in one of the walls from this period. This Koran bears marked differences to the official version now in circulation, with a different order of suras, extra material, and some existing text not in its contents. Consequently, the responsible government has siezed the Koran, placed it under lock and key after only cursory scholarly study, and it is probably a capital offence to even run one's eyeballs over the text.
We are taught by God Jesus Christ, the true Son of God, and the only authetic teacher of divine truths, told us, "By their fruits you will know them. Does a fig bear thorns, or a thorn bush grapes?" When we contrast the lives of God's Holy Prophets, Holy Apostles, and God's only begotten Holy Son with the life of Muhammad and his own sad collection of "companions", we see a distinction that is great between the two.
No sooner had Muhammad breathed his last, there was a great contention over who should lead the Islamic community. There was also strife over whom should inheirit Muhammad's vast estate. Muhammad's uncle ended up assuming the caliphate, whilst Muhammad's probable designated successor was murdered on a camel heading into Mecca.
Someone Wrote Why would God speak to some ancient man (is it Moses?) that we have never met, conveniently a long time ago, where none of us who are alive can witness to, and ask him to write the bible?
When Moses wrote the Pentateuch it was not "a long time ago" for the Hebrew people for and to whom he wrote. But because what he put down on paper, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, was true, it is scripture. Moreover, the Lord himself says, "I am the LORD, I change not", (the bedrock of Christian belief), and so we declare that the writings of Moses are relevant to all people, in all places, at all times.
Furthermore, the people who were alive to witness the writing of Jeremiah's book, for example, did not recieve it any more than the individual above. The king in Jerusalem burnt Jeremiah's first manuscript, by cutting it to shreds and placing it into a braisier. Jeremiah was then thrown into a pit, and was eventually sawn in half for his "traitorous" prophecies (which history nevertheless records came true).
Given the level of knowledge demonstrated in these questions, I would say that the author of these rhetorical questions understands little of the Bible, or of biblical doctrine, and furthermore, has no interest or desire in understanding. Hence the creation of flimsy excuses and justifications for not bothering - "written by some ancient man" etc, etc, etc. (As though nothing that came from the ancient world could be true, or even remotely relevant to us today - for we have aeroplanes and electric lights!)
[Someone Wrote] If that man was so perfect that God could speak to him, why not find another one in these times?
One of the chief failings of modern evangelicalism, and indeed, of modern thinking, is the failure to recognise what I call "the lordship of God" over his own creation. God is Sovereign. He has the right to govern us in whichever way most suits his purposes which he has maintained since before the foundation of the world.
God spoke to Moses (who was by no means perfect, the perogative of God alone, and his Son Jesus Christ), because God so desired to speak to Moses. For God must be recieved by faith, and those who do not listen to Moses, will in no way listen to Christ, even if he should come again in human form this very day to tell us the same truths he taught the world centuries ago.
To measure time by the span of our own life is a grave foolishness. God is eternal. His truths are eternal. And what he gave to Moses is as relevant to the moral comportment of humanity, as what he gave to the Church in Christ.
[Someone Wrote] On the other hand, if someone claimed that God spoke to him/her, we would just plainly think he or she is crazy and delusional.
Speak for yourself. God has spoken to us through his holy prophets and apostles. I believe. I worship and celebrate God. Yea, I believe.
There are no more prophets, or mediators between man and God as it was in the old times, because in these last days God has spoken to us directly, through God the Son, Jesus of Nazareth.
[Someone Wrote] If God spoke to Moses, why won't God speak to us. After all we are his children. Are we that unworthy? Jesus' cleansing of us is not good enough?
I doubt very much that you have recieved the cleansing of Jesus, for you do not participate in the faith he declared, "If they will not believe Moses, neither will they believe if one should rise from the dead". God speaks to us through his word. The same words he addressed to the world through his prophets, apostles and Son, he addresses by extension to us. Those words are true - they are permanently true, and hence God has no need to speak further to us. He has done his speaking, and it is up to us to hear.
God's words are spirit and life, Jesus told us, but they are foolishness to the man dead in trespasses and sins who persists in living in his carnal mind. As the Apostle Paul taught us regarding the character of scripture, "The things of the Spirit must be spiritually discerned". If you cannot understand, it is because the eyes of your vision have not been enlightened. Moreover, if you will not hear, the Apostle John tells us, "Those who hear us are of God. Those who do not hear us are not of God". Our confession of scripture goes hand-in-hand with our confession of the Lord Jesus Christ, and God the Father Almighty.
[Someone Wrote] Many people have mentioned on this board how contradicting they find the bible to be, and I think it is contradicting because it is man made.
Show me a contradiction in the Bible and I will answer it for you! In my experience of dialoging with athiests and agnostics, this is an easy escape hatch for not actually engaging with what the Bible has to say. It is a way of covering up ignorance. "Hey! I can't be bothered reading the Bible, but that's because it's an archaic collection of writings by ancient men, and anyway, it's full of contradictions. But it's still false. And you ain't gonna convince me otherwise." (That level of scholarly approach is sadly all too common - as I have discovered from many years of online apologetics.)
I am persuaded and convinced that the Bible is without error. It is infallible and inerrant, because it is "God-breathed". Moreover, the Bible interprets itself, with one verse explaining another. When a man synthesises this verse with that, he finds answers to his questions, and true orthodox doctrine. It is the cornerstone of our faith that our God, Almighty and Omniscient, has preserved his word accurately for the Church, so that we may be, on the last day, the Church Victorious, through Christ Jesus our Lord.
[Someone Wrote] I am thinking that God does exist, but the bible and jesus are man made stories.
How do you know anything about God? You of course make assumptions about his nature, which whether you like it or not, are derived from Christianity (which you have absorbed, osmosis-like, from what has been declared in your environment). You doubtless believe God to be good, loving and kind. But why? What objective basis do you have for believing this anymore than believing in a God that is distant, unloving, hard-hearded and cruel? Perhaps those Greek myths are right after all! And God is really a childish, impulsive individual who lives by caprice.
I challenge you to explain what you know about God, and why you believe such things about God in absence of a divine, authenticated teacher sent by God, and the Holy Writings spoken by God the Spirit. What do you know, and how do you know it? Tell us all about your God, if you indeed can.
Since it is madness and folly for God to speak to people (you have suggested such individuals are delusional), how does God communicate with you, and how you to God? If God does not speak, then you have literally no way of knowing anything about him, apart from conjecture and speculation. Your faith is a species of emotionalism; you want to believe certain things (eg, God does not condemn, is tolerant, kind, gentle etc, etc, etc) and so you believe them. And that is the extent of your faith.
In contrast, we Christians believe in a God who speaks. God communicates to us, because it is only through God's initiative that we can learn anything about him. We know, and are persuaded, that God is Almighty, Omniscient, and Eternal. All of his characteristics are unlimited and infinite. He possess glory unlimited, love unlimited, justice unlimited, wrath unlimited. We know and believe, for God has told us. And we submit to God's speakings because we belong to God's Holy Son, Jesus of Nazareth, who is the only true teacher of God.
Besides our God, there is none other! Men may worship all kinds of beings, but if they do not worship the LORD God, YAHWEH, the Father Eternal, through his Holy Son Jesus Christ, they worship in vain unto their own damnation. Because besides Jesus, there is no other source of truth! Jesus Christ is our fountainhead of knowledge, power, and understanding, because he is God incarnate.
The Church thanks God for his commandments and laws, and for giving us an objective basis to our faith besides some vague feelings.
|
|
|
Post by Brick on Jul 23, 2007 19:15:40 GMT -5
If God spoke to Moses, why won't God speak to us. He already said it. Weren't you listening? It's even written in a book, commonly called the Bible. Check it out sometime.
|
|
3
Senior Member
Posts: 206
|
Post by 3 on Jul 23, 2007 21:47:07 GMT -5
I have to smile because Gloryintruth could be talking about the bible when he/she says:
'God would never have left us with a book so faulty, so extensively revised, and so completely impossible to read or understand as the Koran. ' and 'Secondly, the book does not run in any coherent order (besides the order established by the length of the suras). '
The Bible is full of contradictions, has been extensively revised (seems new versions come out weekly) and, although it's not impossible to read, in many ways it's definitely difficult to understand.
The Bible also is not in any perfect order. Psalms is a good example. Psalms 90 was written by Moses therefore should be placed in the beginning of the OT. Other Psalms were penned by different authors spanning many centuries.
|
|
3
Senior Member
Posts: 206
|
Post by 3 on Jul 23, 2007 22:18:02 GMT -5
Oops - hit the reply key too soon...
'Recently, in a renovation of a Mosque, a Koran was found in one of the walls from this period. This Koran bears marked differences to the official version now in circulation, with a different order of suras, extra material, and some existing text not in its contents. Consequently, the responsible government has siezed the Koran, placed it under lock and key after only cursory scholarly study, and it is probably a capital offence to even run one's eyeballs over the text.'
Again, this could be the Bible! We all know that today's bible does not contain all the original written books. Some material was omitted. And governments of old have held the bible hostage for policital purposes and revised it as well, for the same purposes.
Based on these reasons, I see no difference between the Koran and the Bible....
Gloryintruth states:
'Jesus Christ, the true Son of God, and the only authetic teacher of divine truths,
I don't believe Jesus was and only authentic teacher of divine truths.
Divine may refer to:
the concept of divinity, related to holiness and the supernatural or, a person learned in theology in Anglican terminology (wikpedia definition)
I think there have been many teachers throughout the ages & even current day who taught/teach divine truths: Ghandi, mother Theresa, Mary mannin Morrisey, Julia Sweeney, etc, etc.
I take umbrage to Gloryintruth's statement: 'Given the level of knowledge demonstrated in these questions, I would say that the author of these rhetorical questions understands little of the Bible, or of biblical doctrine, and furthermore, has no interest or desire in understanding. Hence the creation of flimsy excuses and justifications for not bothering - "written by some ancient man" etc, etc, etc. (As though nothing that came from the ancient world could be true, or even remotely relevant to us today - for we have aeroplanes and electric lights!)'
Having been raised religious (Bible) and, having done extensive research upon leaving the 2x2 way after professing for 21 years and, having immersed myself into mainstream Christianity for 5+ years, including many Bible study groups, programs, etc. I, for one, am not ignorant of the Bible nor do I rely on flimsy excuses b/c I don't want to bother with in depth studying or real effort!
As I've explained in other threads I spent YEARS of my life begging & pleading with God to reveal himself to me in a way I would know he is real. When I finally mustered up enough courage to suspend my beliefs, I was able to do research with my only motive: discovering God.
To date, I haven't found him/her/it.
|
|
|
Post by Jessi on Jul 23, 2007 22:24:49 GMT -5
I have also wondered why God does not speak to at least someone. I have prayed and prayed that He would speak to me or show me a sign that I am okay for His kingdom. No speaking and no sign. I know there is a God, but just am confused of the things He did in the Bible, but now stopped it. ? When they had the pillar of fire and column of smoke, they still did not believe and have faith. When God spoke to them, they did not heed him. They (OT people) are a picture of us. We wouldn't do anything different than what they did. We look at them and think, "What were you thinking??" The Duh-sciples in the NT were almost worse. They got to touch Him and still didn't understand . . . But . . . the many of the same people who sang "Hosannah" later shouted, "Crucify Him!" Because we are so fickle and self-absorbed, we can't see ourselves in the Scriptures. But they are us. I Cor 18-31 pretty much says it all. . . . 21For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. 22For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: 23But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; The preaching of the gospel, which is only found in the Holy Word is His plan. If they do not respond to the words in the Bible, they are not His -- His sheep know His voice . . . The reason they know His voice, is because His words are written on their hearts (Jer 31:33, Heb 8:10). And the Holy Word will accomplish what he sent it to do (Is 55:11). So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.God doesn't speak (audibly) to anyone anymore. There is no Elijah anymore. There was one who came in the spirit of Elijah -- declaring the Word of the Lord. They cut his head off. Then there was the Holy One, the Just One, who came to die. They killed Him. His Work is finished and His story lies on the pages of Holy Living Scripture (which Law is written on the hearts of those who are His). Christ's Forever, Jessi
|
|
|
Post by Jessi on Jul 23, 2007 22:34:36 GMT -5
But if they do not give Him the glory for it, then they are not good works done in the Name of Christ--therfore, they do not count. A person's "good works" done in his own power are as filthy rags to God (Is 64:6).
2 Corinthians 10:17 But he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.
Ephesians 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Christ's Forever, Jessi
|
|
|
Post by mrleo on Jul 23, 2007 23:28:27 GMT -5
Gene's statement made no reference to the doing of "good works", but to those observable qualities/states of being that are referred in the NT as fruits of the spirit - and which can be seen in people of all creeds.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2007 2:13:59 GMT -5
I am being blunt here... the Koran makes two serious errors a) it adds to the bible - ie its Arabic mythologies b) it takes from the bible - in particular, the grace of Jesus Christ.
And it boils down to one question - do you believe the bible, or do you not?
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Jul 24, 2007 6:16:41 GMT -5
[Someone Wrote] I have to smile because Gloryintruth could be talking about the bible when he/she says:
Here a skeptic presents the usual collection of arguments against the Bible. Despite no evidence ever being furnished, despite the arguments being trite and recycled, and despite even the textual criticisms to demonstrate a complete misapprehension of the nature of the Koran as opposed to the Bible, it is implied that we Christians who believe in the inspiration of the Holy Bible are silly and gullible fools.
Let us examine the claims and allegations advanced by our friend, and see whether they have any shred of credibility.
[Someone Wrote] The Bible is full of contradictions
I have come across this ex cathedra statement many times during my apologetic encounters. Note that my textual interlocutor does not merely say that there are several contradictions in the Bible, or that some doctrines seem to be at odds with other doctrines. Instead he states, unequivocally, without qualification, that the Bible is "full" of contradictions. "Full" implies a degree of saturation and completion. Therefore, the thought being maintained is that more-or-less on every page of biblical text it would be possible to find myriad statements which refute other statements.
If the Bible is "full" of contradictions, as we are here informed, why does this individual not present an example? Which verses are allegedly contradictory, which is to say, cancel each other out? I have yet to come across a "biblical contradiction" which is actually a contradiction - usually the fault lies with the theologically-ignorant individual who is attempting to "refute" the Bible with minimum of effort, and minimum of understanding.
[Someone Wrote] has been extensively revised (seems new versions come out weekly)
I cannot believe it! And this is supposed to be a clinching argument! Such a statement beggars belief. Here we are told that because translations of the Bible are not identical, that the Bible is being revised. What utter nonsense.
As most Christians know, the all reputable Bible translations are made from very ancient Greek manuscripts, of which there are many. Of all the books from the ancient world, the New Testament must rank as the best attested. There are over 5,000 (mostly completed) manuscripts of the New Testament texts known to biblical scholarship, and these hail from all over the known world. For instance Alexandria in Egypt, Byzantium, Asia Minor, Greece etc.
Translators use two different paradigms or principles when translating the original Koine Greek (or Hebrew), a language which is no longer spoken, but about which we know a great deal thanks to Greek scholars through the ages, like the celebrated Erasmus, who kept this body of knowledge alive and added additional learning in the process.
The first principle is that of capturing the thought behind the Greek text without necessarily worrying about word-to-word correspondance. Thus, the thought behind "repentance" - that of "turning away from" - may be the rendering of this more doctrinal term, because it better speaks to a modern reading audience. This principle is used a lot in Pauline Epistles, and in the poetic sections of the Bible, which use idioms which are only familiar to someone who can read Greek or Hebrew.
The second principle of translation is that of word-for-word correspondance. The King James Version follows this principle in favour of the first. Moreover, I have a library of Literal Greek Translations, which are difficult to understand in parts, but definitely preserve the structure and word arrangements of the original language. I cannot read Koine Greek, although I can recognise some very, very basic words and symbols. Hence these Literal Translations function as the next best thing for my purposes.
Some translations favour one principle over the other. For instance, "The Living Translation", or "The Bible for Today" follow the paradigm of reflecting the thought rather than the actual language of the original texts. Other translations use a mixture of these principles. My translation of choice is the New International Version, because it preserves the organisation and physical arrangement of the poetic texts, and the prose composition, yet it strikes a good balance between capturing thought over word-for-word correspondance (although the NIV does emphasise the second principle more).
Although there are numerous versions of the Bible, the message in all of them is identical. Even the New World Translation of the Jehovah's Witnesses - which is extremely deficient in many respects - conveys the essential message and doctrines of grace of the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.
It is a schoolboy mistake to confuse translational differences with differences in content. No Bible version contains a whole bunch of extra verses, for instance, or "lost" chapters of the Pauline Epistles. All Bibles (at least Protestant Bibles) are identical, containing the same 66 books, in the same order, each conveying the same message and content.
[Someone Wrote] and, although it's not impossible to read, in many ways it's definitely difficult to understand.
Says who? And who are you to establish a universal rule? Perhaps your difficulties in understanding the scripture are owing to a lack of theological knowledge, an embrace of extra-biblical philosophy and ideas, and a failure to participate in a church which presents an authoritative teaching the word. No man is an island, and we are not expected to be able to understand the word of God without help from others more knowledgable than ourselves. Whether we accept that help or not is a personal perogative, and depends largely on whether we have recieved the Spirit of God.
[Someone Wrote] The Bible also is not in any perfect order.
You forget, of course, that the Koran was written by one man (allegedly) within a short chronological period, and is meant to be a single unified book. The Bible was written by many people over the course of centuries, and each book is internally arranged in a specific, and correct chronological order. Moses for example, chronicals developments in a progressive framework perfectly consistent with any forward moving narrative. Jeremiah does not jump all over time, but also arranges his book in an orderly way.
On the other hand, the arrangement of all the books within the canon is an entirely different process. They have been grouped together for specific reasons. The Pentateuch comes first, and is arranged in the correct order as they would have been written by Moses. Joshua comes next, as an epilogue to the Pentateuch. The national biographies follow after, then the Wisdom Literature and so on and so on. They are grouped according to theme, as a general rule.
[Someone Wrote] Psalms is a good example. Psalms 90 was written by Moses therefore should be placed in the beginning of the OT.
Why should it be placed there? What confected basis could one dream up for placing Psalm 90 there? Contextually, it would make absolutely no sense to a reader to come across Psalm 90 without all the background details regarding the development, sin, and redemption of the Hebrew people. And more to the point, it would be utterly unintelligible without all the subsequent revelations about the character of God - his justice, wrath and mercy.
Should we also scatter all of the Davidic Psalms throughout the narrative of Samuel? Should we scatter all the Levitical psalms throughout Leviticus? What absurdity! Moses did not include his psalms in the Pentateuch and so therefore they do not appear there. Samuel did not include the Davidic psalms in his writings, so thus neither do we Christians (or the Jews, for that matter).
Moreover, it makes infintely more sense to collect the psalms together on the basis that they all represent the same kind of literature - sacred songs - and place them within one section of the Bible.
Strangely enough, this is precisely what the Hebrew people did. And we Christians inherit the Book of Psalms from them. The Psalms were songs used primarily in temple worship, and of course, in the days when writing was on long strips of rolled up parchment, it would be totally ridiculous to not organise them into one contiguous book for the purposes of worship.
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Jul 24, 2007 6:44:33 GMT -5
[Someone Wrote] Again, this could be the Bible! We all know that today's bible does not contain all the original written books. Some material was omitted.
The level of misapprehension. The 14 books of the Apocrypha does not appear in the Bible because it was never recognised as scripture, even by the Jewish communities that gave birth to it. Moreover, the Gnostic Books of the New Testament have no validity. I have already structured essays in respose to claims about the validity of the so-called "Infancy Gospel of Thomas" and other pseudographia.
[Someone Wrote] And governments of old have held the bible hostage for policital purposes and revised it as well, for the same purposes.
I think we are entering into the realm of conspiracy theories. [Insert spiel about Emperor Constantine, Council of Nicea, etc, etc, etc] I have heard it numerous times before, and I doubt this individual is going to be able to put it more convincingly that others in the past.
[Someone Wrote] Based on these reasons, I see no difference between the Koran and the Bible....
Even the character of the two texts are fundamentally different. But if I had to vouch a guess, I woud say this individual has never read the Koran, or the Hadith, and is unfamiliar with the Bible despite his ever-so-many years of being in a "biblically-based" religious environment.
[Someone Wrote] I don't believe Jesus was and only authentic teacher of divine truths.
Christ is and Christ was.
[Someone Wrote] Divine may refer to: the concept of divinity, related to holiness and the supernatural or, a person learned in theology in Anglican terminology (wikpedia definition)
I am familiar with the term divine as used in both contexts. I was using it to refer to one with a supernatural origin, teaching truths about the character of the highest spiritual being, God.
[Someone Wrote] I think there have been many teachers throughout the ages & even current day who taught/teach divine truths: Ghandi, mother Theresa, Mary mannin Morrisey, Julia Sweeney, etc, etc.
Depends on your standard for divine truth. Mine is obviously higher than yours. But you are quite entitled to synthesise the largely inconsistent sentiments of these individuals together into one philosophical structure. (Although, in the case of Mother Theresa, I was not aware she ever claimed to teach divine truths apart from those identified as the Magesterium of the Roman Catholic Church.)
But I do wonder upon what basis you determine who is or who is not a teacher of divine truths. What criteria do you look at when you make this judgement? What qualifications do you follow; what objective standard do you uphold in order to confidently say that this individual over here is a teacher of divine truths, while that individual over there is merely a spouter of foolish rhetoric?
I'll bet that your faith is no different from the previous skeptic who wrote. It rests on a very subjective system of determination which equates to something like this: if you personally like what a person has to say, then you are quite happy to pronounce them a teacher of divine truths. If they give you a warm and comfortable glow, validating your political, social and religious perspectives, then they are most certainly great teachers indeed! (At this point the Apostle Paul makes his unwelcome entrance, when he teaches us in the gospel saying: "The days will come when they will have itching ears and will not bear sound doctrine, heaping to themselves teachers according to their own lusts". Poor Paul! He does not promote feel-goodism, so we'll consign him to the deluded wannabe teacher category.)
But let us consider other spiritual teachers. What, we might ask, do we think about a warlike prophet, such as Muhammad or even Ghengis Khan who proclaimed himself a prophet? What about the prophets who lead their followers to suicidal deaths? What makes these people not worthy to fit into your list of spiritual teachers?
Perhaps because, like most skeptics, you have sucked at the fountainhead of Christianity and you have absorbed part of our teaching regarding the character of God, and used this is the foundation upon which you construct your own beliefs. From Christianity you take the concept of a universal bias toward moral good (although why without a God, is beyond understanding), and also the celebration of love, mercy and goodness. With this as your basic stock, you are free to innovate and include a mish-mash of ill-connecting religious philosophies.
[Someone Wrote] Having been raised religious (Bible) and, having done extensive research upon leaving the 2x2 way after professing for 21 years and, having immersed myself into mainstream Christianity for 5+ years, including many Bible study groups, programs, etc. I, for one, am not ignorant of the Bible nor do I rely on flimsy excuses b/c I don't want to bother with in depth studying or real effort!
Yet your arguments so far advanced are vapourous.
Moreover, I do not care how long you have professed, how much research you have done, or how many study groups you have joined, anyone who rejects the Holy Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of the Eternal Father, who is the only true God, is misguided.
[Someone Wrote] As I've explained in other threads I spent YEARS of my life begging & pleading with God to reveal himself to me in a way I would know he is real. When I finally mustered up enough courage to suspend my beliefs, I was able to do research with my only motive: discovering God. To date, I haven't found him/her/it.
Unspeakably sad. (Though not the first time I have heard such stories from skeptics.) Truly a little learning is a dangerous thing.
Yet Jesus of Nazareth taught us saying, "If any man will obey my words, then he will know the truth."
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 24, 2007 7:16:42 GMT -5
If the Bible is "full" of contradictions, as we are here informed, why does this individual not present an example? Which verses are allegedly contradictory, which is to say, cancel each other out? I have yet to come across a "biblical contradiction" which is actually a contradiction - usually the fault lies with the theologically-ignorant individual who is attempting to "refute" the Bible with minimum of effort, and minimum of understanding.One old, one new - 2 Samuel 23:6 The ... chief among the captains ... he lift up his spear against eight hundred, whom he slew at one time. 1 Chronicles 11:11 the chief of the captains: he lifted up his spear against three hundred slain by him at one time. +++++++++++++++++++ Matthew 27:5 And he [Judas] cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself. Acts 1:18 Now this man [Judas] purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2007 7:59:56 GMT -5
Rational. I do like these discrepancies - they show that the authors of the various books were not conspiring to create a contrived text of uniformity. If two thieves railed on Jesus, or one repented, then that is how the authors saw it. I believe the bible is written for everyone - even for those who want to ridicule.
GloryInTruth. We missed you!
|
|
3
Senior Member
Posts: 206
|
Post by 3 on Jul 24, 2007 8:40:21 GMT -5
Gloryintruth:
I will admit to be being out-gunned in this subject as I OBVIOUSLY do not have your fervent belief in the subject matter nor do I have done the level of study that you have. I do appreciate the time & effort you put into your post.
I wish I could take your arguments (backing up your faith in the validity of the bible and your faith in God) and make them my own. Unfortunately, it's not that simple. Nor would you want me to for then I'd just be assimulating someone else's authority on the subject.
Authority isn't evidence of truth, however. I'm looking for evidence; proof that God exists and evidence that the Bible is the inspired word of God.
|
|
|
Post by ranman77007 on Jul 24, 2007 8:45:37 GMT -5
proof don't work like that. if God has not revealed it, then we are not allowed to...hehe
|
|
|
Post by helpmehere on Jul 24, 2007 9:50:03 GMT -5
The choice of book in which you place your faith is directly correlated to the part of the world in which you find your roots. Americas? The Bible. Northern Africa and the Middle East? Koran. Do you really think that if you had grown up in Saudi Arabia you would be Christian? Do you think God, while not being a respecter of persons, is a respecter of national origin? Below: Relative distribution of Christianity (red) vs. Islam (green) Take a look at the maps on this page: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_religionsAmazing!! India and China together take care of the other half of the world population covered by their respective religions.
|
|