How can you believe what you read

[patrice_kell]

I was just talking to some friends about the Bible, and their outlook is how can you belive what is in the Bibile when it has been written so many times. I trust in what the Bible says but I don't know how to tell other why they should trust what they read. I have so many people in my life that argue the point--how do you trust in something that has been written over and over again by man. How do you argue that point. I just belive. I just have faith. Most of my friends can't understand that. What should I say to them ? I am at a total loss. Please give me your opinion on this? Thank you.

 

[Gamecock]

Well, consider this:

The oldest manuscripts (Old and New Testaments) show remarkable continuity with what we have today. The oldest copies we have of the OT were written before Christ.

Try this link for some compelling info: http://www.carm.org/evidence.htm

 

[Anthony]

Simple

If something was copied over and over and over again. And at the end of the process you collected all or most of those copies and compared them. And upon comparing them they were all essentially the same not only would it be remarkable it would be a miracle. Yet that is exactly what happen to the handwritten copies of the Bible Books.


http://home.earthlink.net/~ronrhodes/Manuscript.html

 

[Galadriel]

Yes, the wording might change a bit (language itself has changed much over time) but the concepts and principles and points have NOT changed at all. God will always be able to get His point across, I think He has seen to that.

 

[patrice_kell]

Hey! Thanks to everyone that reaplyed to me. My friend still will not believe what I tell her. I think that she is just using it all as an excuse to keep living how she wants. All we can do is pray for her. She will see the way. I did. It took me a long time, but it happened. I pray that it will happen for her to. Again, thank you!

 

[captkingdom]

I believe the Bible is the word of God as long as it is translated correctly, but I have to admit that your friend has a good point.

Have you ever tried to have a doctrinal discussion with a member af a different sect or denomination who uses a different version of the bible? It is terribly difficult.
Granted, in most versions, the general ideas are the same and most concepts are reconcilable, however, there are nuances and fine points that are completely lost from one to another. In my opinion the worst are the modern language versions where most subtleties are lost and many important ideas are oversimplified.
This is, in part, the reason that there is so much dissent on and disagreement over EVERY point of doctrine in Christianity. Even within what is considered the mainstream of Christianity, there are a miriad of different interpretations, and not just with regard to the trivial things, but on fundamental points of doctrine. Using the same verses you can be given scores of different interpretations. We may see evidence of these things happening within the people of the New Testament, and again in 325 AD when Christian leaders were required to come to consensus over doctrine and adopted a standard of beliefs known as the Nicene Creed. This consensus lasted only a short time. One need only to browse this website breifly to witness heated dissagrements over vastly differing beliefs all steming from the "same" Bible. We on this board can not even agree on what is required for salvation, and what is more significant than that? Do I believe this is the Bibles fault? Of course not. The fallibility is with man, not the Bible. Most make their interpretations with honest intention, but many interpret the scriptures to say what they want to hear.
The infallibility of a correctly translated Bible does not however mean that it contains everything that God has ever communicated to man through his prophets.
In the nearly 4000 years of the history of Gods people, prior to the time of Christ, it is not possible that more than a mere fraction of his word is contained in the Bible. There is much we do not have.
There have been recent finds of great significance such as the Dead Seas Scrolls, that continue to shed a great deal of light on things that biblical scholars continually debate. There are other records made by Gods people in ancient times that are available to us, that help us understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Throughout most of history God has given his people a prophet to teach and guide them. In Amos 3:7 we read; "Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." Would it not then be consistant and merciful for God to call a prophet for our time, to help us know which of the many versions of doctrine was correct? If ever it were necessary, it would be now.


I believe that there is a Prophet on the earth today guiding Christs church; and that through modern revelation from God, combined with ALL of the available records of Gods dealings with man a finer more clear understanding and knowledge of the Plan of Salvation may be had. I am very grateful for this guidance without which I am sure I would be as sceptical and lost as your friend, completly unable to decide which of the many sets of beliefs to subscribe to.

 

[oneiric]

http://www.carm.org/questions/rewritten.htm

 

[Krazeekkc]

Yes, the wording might change a bit (language itself has changed much over time) but the concepts and principles and points have NOT changed at all. God will always be able to get His point across, I think He has seen to that.

No offense, but I don't comepletely agree with Galadriel. I do think that some of the newest Bibles have had some meanings changed. Like the NIV. I have compared my Bible a King James version to a new King James version and have seen some small changes. I have even heard of a Bible that had every Jesus taken out of it. But I do think some Bibles are still ok.

 

[lands21]

The Bible is what we base all our beliefs on, I am always careful of people that do not believe in it at all. We need faith to be a Christian, without it, we have nothing.

 

[Andre]

The recently found Dead See Scrolls contain several copies of all books of the old testament except Ester, some are complete copies some are fragments, but they match the hebrew text that we have today word by word, and they are dated between 200 and 50 B.C. The copy of Isaiah found is about 1000 year older then the most recent manuscript and it matches it.
God preserves His word.

Check out this website it has some interesting facts.

http://www.centuryone.com/25dssfacts.html

 

[Andre]

Also 1/3 of the Bible is prophecy, 90% of it has been fulfilled without a single prophecy failling, the other 10% are being fulfilled now. The biggest recent prophecy fullfiled was the rebirth of Israel, it was destroyed for about 1900 years and it became a nation again just like the Bible predicted.

 

[Fire-Proof]

what i say is that God loves us and He would do nothing to make the Bible different and change the Truth. Even if it did change. That is God's will.

 

[captkingdom]

The Dead Sea Scrolls also contain many things that are not in the bible.

 

[sbbqb7n16]

Well this may just be my opinion being thrown in here... but here goes.

Your friend may be having trouble believing what you're saying because your friend probably thinks that Christianity is based off a book and not off a life. Common mistake for those that don't believe. Christianity in the minds of many people is doing what the Bible says to do. But Christianity in acutality is letting Christ live through you. There are too many ways to contest the Bible ("well, what about original languages?," "apochrypha?," "no one interprets it the same way?" - you see my point) But you are hard pressed to find a good way to refute the life of Christ within the believer. Very hard pressed to refute the works of the Spirit. When the focus becomes on having the life of Christ dwelling in you, the only way that can be dealt with is "you'll just have to try for yourself and see if I'm wrong."

Then your friend must have to choose to participate in seeking Christ, or you'll see whether she just doesn't want Jesus... or she just doesn't care... which is the saddest of all.

But that's my thoughts. Maybe it can help. have a great day!

 

[angelicradianse]

I researched the history of the New Testament especially. I would have to agree with your friends.

 

[Svt4Him]

The Bible has not been redone. Different translations of the Bible are not done because one gets translated, then another takes that and retranslates it, then one takes that and retranslates that like the infamous telephone game. The translations we have are from the Greek and Hebrew scriptures. Although there are no autographs, or originals left, there many manuscripts. To understand the job of a scribe, and how detailed they were in copying the manuscripts is important, but how well they do can be seen in how little change there was between the Bible we have now and the manuscripts found in the dead sea scrolls. Now the reason we have different translations becomes clear to anyone who's studied a different language. Although I believe the Bible in English is good in any translation, you get a deeper meaning if you use different translations, as well as understand the culture, as well as the Greek and Hebrew words. The KJV is a more poetic style, with a lot of Thee's and Thou, and Thine, where the NIV tries to capture the feelings of the words. ASV is more literal, the Message is like a modern story, NKJV uses You, Your etc, but they are all good. Let me give an example. When Jesus was with Peter His death, He asked "Peter, do you love me?" three times. That is an interesting story if you don't know the Greek, but it is more interesting if you do. Every time Peter answered he said, "You know I like you." Jesus said love as an unconditional love, Peter answered love as affection or friendship. The third time Jesus said "Peter, are you my friend?" If you didn't know the difference, it's fine, but when you do it opens different things up.

 

[Serapha]

I was just talking to some friends about the Bible, and their outlook is how can you belive what is in the Bibile when it has been written so many times. I trust in what the Bible says but I don't know how to tell other why they should trust what they read. I have so many people in my life that argue the point--how do you trust in something that has been written over and over again by man. How do you argue that point. I just belive. I just have faith. Most of my friends can't understand that. What should I say to them ? I am at a total loss. Please give me your opinion on this? Thank you.

Hi there!




The Word of God stands as its own witness... God said He would preserve His Word.

How do I argue the point... well, don't argue, just state facts. There are no unreconciled passages in the Bible, it all aligns up. The Bible is not a science book or a legal document, but a history of a people and the teachings of their prophesied messiah. The fulfillment of prophesies are unique to the Bible and not to teachings of other prophets. THAT should be a good basis to built a discussion (not argument) upon.


~malaka~

 

[Carico]

People are simply stupid, myself included. So many people don't believe the bible because so much of it doesn't seem believable. Yet, thousands of years ago, would people have believed that there would be thousands of machines flying in the air daily, that men would walk on the moon, that there would be space stations, or boxes in people's living rooms for them to watch whta's happening in another country, and on and on? Those things would have seemed preposterous to men in earlier generations. Why then would the things that the bible recorded as happening thousands of years ago not be believable? Have we learned nothing in all these years? The medical technology that we consider so new and improved and miraculous will seem archaic 50 years from now. It is man's arrogance that keeps us from believing things we can't see right today.

 

[Lillithspeak]

People are simply stupid, myself included. So many people don't believe the bible because so much of it doesn't seem believable. Yet, thousands of years ago, would people have believed that there would be thousands of machines flying in the air daily, that men would walk on the moon, that there would be space stations, or boxes in people's living rooms for them to watch whta's happening in another country, and on and on? Those things would have seemed preposterous to men in earlier generations. Why then would the things that the bible recorded as happening thousands of years ago not be believable? Have we learned nothing in all these years? The medical technology that we consider so new and improved and miraculous will seem archaic 50 years from now. It is man's arrogance that keeps us from believing things we can't see right today.

Of course people in ancient times couldn't have forseen our modern technology, but how does that equate to believing ancient stories that cannot be proven? There is no arrogance in questioning historical information, although it is arrogant to assume that because you believe it, everyone else should, when there is no evidence of any sort.