ChetSinger
Well-Known Member
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
No.In other words you are saying that Jesus said something along the lines of, "For the next three years or less, the Bible will be perfectly copied, as it has been up to this point, and then after this it is open season for scribal errors"?
Okay, I see your point now. What threw me was this:Straw man argument.
I thought your view was that the errors were so bad that God should have intervene to prevent them so the message would not be corrupted. Thank you for the clarification that your point is that the text was changed.…but why has God allowed the corruption of the text to get so bad that there is not a single perfect copy on earth?
I do not agree with this assumption. I’m sure there were some that prayed earnestly but it would be folly to assume that all were dedicated.…especially if we can agree that they are probably praying for such divine intervention…
I don’t presume to know why God does or does not do things. I can only look at the results and see that regardless of the errors the message is intact. That the validity of the text has been scrutinized by scholars, both secular and religious, over all these years and not one shred of proof has been submitted that discredits the Bible message as it now stands. Theories abound but not one shred of proof.…why has God allowed the corruption of the text to get so bad that there is not a single perfect copy on earth?
Okay, I see your point now. What threw me was this:
I thought your view was that the errors were so bad that God should have intervene to prevent them so the message would not be corrupted. Thank you for the clarification that your point is that the text was changed.
I do not agree with this assumption. I’m sure there were some that prayed earnestly but it would be folly to assume that all were dedicated.
I don’t presume to know why God does or does not do things. I can only look at the results and see that regardless of the errors the message is intact. That the validity of the text has been scrutinized by scholars, both secular and religious, over all these years and not one shred of proof has been submitted that discredits the Bible message as it now stands. Theories abound but not one shred of proof.
Not intentionally; you make it difficult to know the true intent of the OP. When I answered:You are completely ignoring the point of this thread.
You said it was a strawman and then in answer to my question if the word corrupt was used to mean that it is less valuable or that is it simply a change from the original” you said “Change from the original”. But all along you have been arguing that the errors are making the Bible less valuable and therefore we cannot put our trust in the text.I cannot fathom how an error in a list of people who Nebuchadnezzar carried away to Babylon would corrupt the message of how God wants us to live our lives.
Not intentionally; you make it difficult to know the true intent of the OP.
When I answered:
You said it was a strawman and then in answer to my question if the word corrupt was used to mean that it is less valuable or that is it simply a change from the original” you said “Change from the original”. But all along you have been arguing that the errors are making the Bible less valuable and therefore we cannot put our trust in the text.
.
And the New York Yankees win an obscene amount of World Series. Does that mean God is a Yankees fan?
If you want to say that the Bible is God's word because it's the most preserved, and yet you admit that it's not perfectly preserved, then your point is absurd to the highest degree.
1. Men accidentally corrupted the Bible despite trying not to (example: compare the list in Ezra 2 with the list in Nehemiah 7)
2. Satan is more intelligent and more powerful than any man
3. Satan is motivated to corrupt the Bible
4. ???
5. Satan cannot even corrupt the Bible to the same degree that man has
If you admit that Satan actually has corrupted the Bible, then boy are you in trouble. So premise 4 must be, "God manually prevents Satan from corrupting the Bible."
But then why doesn't God also manually prevent scribes from corrupting the Bible, especially if we can agree that they are probably praying for such divine intervention (John 14:13)? This would not be a vulgar miracle, nor would it be the overriding of free will. I know that some Bibles will be corrupted by man - I could easily type one up myself and change some things - but why has God allowed the corruption of the text to get so bad that there is not a single perfect copy on earth? And how does this reconcile with Psalms 12:6-7?
As long as faith is required, God won't do things super obvious. Other than the Bible, do you have another human document which you think it is perfectly preserved?
The Bible is one of the best preserved human documents you can find.
It remains theologically intact.
This is so because religion has been employed as a vessel in conveying the message of salvation.
How do you know this? We don't have the originals. We don't know what Satan did to them. All we know is that the earliest known manuscripts are preserved brilliantly. You haven't proven that Satan did not win that battle.
Huh?
You don't know that we compare today's documents to ancient scrolls available to us?
As for perfection, God's perfection is that He will save all His sheep without missing one with the Bible as one of the perfect means though the imperfect hands of humans though.
Perfection remains your own unrealistic wish if you failed to find an equivalent in reality. And "perfect" is actually a relative term to a "purpose". A perfect mirror won't talk or fly if that's your definition of "perfect". It only gives a clear image of reflection as its purpose shall define.
In the end, the message of salvation can pass through a history of 2000~3000 years as intact as possible is by means of a religion. There's no other means for such a message to be conveyed successfully.
Why would I expect a perfect mirror to talk or fly? Yes, I only expect a perfect mirror to reflect perfectly.
Can we get a religion without the parts where they molest thousands of children and instead sell their horded wealth to feed the poor?
That's what humans are to blame. Our religion correctly pointed out that humans are sinners. Which religion has pointed out the same and provided with a feasible redemption?
That was not the answer you gave me before.so changing that information would necessarily make the information less valuable
That was not the answer you gave me before.
I am not the one doing the dancing. In reply to my response in post #16 you called it a strawman. When I asked for clarification you lied and said the definition for ‘corrupt’ you used was a change from the original. Then you continue to argue the Bible had lost its message due to the errors and post this:Who cares? Just keep dancing around refusing to answer the OP.
If you consult a dictionary you will see that there is indeed a difference. A typo or list that is different is a change from the original but the message remains intact.Regardless, though, I don't even see a difference between a change in the text and the text being less valuable.
The premise of the OP assumes that the bible was corrupted by Satan. I dont think anyone has yet to agree with you on that topic. Which would probably explain why nobody brought up Satan. So in order to make your OP valid, you would first have to provide evidence to justify Satanic corruption of the bible. If you cannot provide such evidence, your OP is meaningless.On both pages of this thread I clicked to unhide hidden posts from members on my ignore and ctrl+F searched "Satan" and "devil." Only AV1611VET even bothered to use either word. No one else used such a word other than in quoting me. But AV1611VET is an inerrantist and thus disputes one of my premises (despite not addressing it) and also his question was formed in an incompetent manner suggesting that he did not even understand the argument. Seeing as how no one else even discussed Satan, my argument has been left unaddressed. In debate, this is taken as an admission of defeat.
Combined with a similar situation occurring in my "Backbreaker" thread, I have shown with no opposition that the Bible is untrustworthy and that the premise of Christianity is incoherent.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?