• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.

There are lots of evidence of the Bible

Discussion in 'Christian Apologetics' started by createdtoworship, Nov 7, 2019.

  1. createdtoworship

    createdtoworship In the grip of grace

    +1,392
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    I have one of his books (John Shelby Spong), I researched it when I was studying liberal theology about 15 years ago. Nothing to see here. If you are truly open about the Bible and it's defense I recommend norman geisler. He used to be an athiest and he converted to christianity and has a philosophy degree. He has a best seller called :" I don't have faith to be an athiest." But even if that book is too offensive to you, maybe something a little less direct. A book called "when skeptics ask." is a good starter book for a skeptic. IF you really think there are contradictions in the Bible then His book "when critics ask." Helps that out. I have most of his books, I really like how He thinks. He studied at dallas theological seminary (one of the most prestigious seminaries in the country), and started his own seminary in southern california called "veritas." Anyway take care. I just happened to see this post. I probably won't be watching this thread or replying I was just browsing. Take care I hope you find what you are looking for in life.
     
  2. createdtoworship

    createdtoworship In the grip of grace

    +1,392
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    thank you for your kind words, I won't be using this thread much. But I thought I would add a video that incorporated peter stoner's studies, I found a few videos: this one is a good you tube channel in general and I subscribed to it. but it's a good video:


    here is a more basic video that does not go in depth but I thought it was cute...
     
  3. BigV

    BigV Junior Member

    747
    +188
    United States
    Atheist
    Married
    US-Others
    What would you take as a defense of my divinity? Would you like to see some miracles or would a book be better?
     
  4. createdtoworship

    createdtoworship In the grip of grace

    +1,392
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    I was watching this series on evidence of the Bible, this may answer your question about john shelby sprong, another scholar similiar is bart ehrman, anyway, they are short videos, but here it is:

     
  5. createdtoworship

    createdtoworship In the grip of grace

    +1,392
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
  6. BigV

    BigV Junior Member

    747
    +188
    United States
    Atheist
    Married
    US-Others
    We cannot trust the Bible.
    1. Manuscript evidence only shows the manuscripts were copied reliably. It does not tell you whether the information in them is true. For example, if someone wrote that "BigV has divine powers" and this statement was reliably copied for the next two millenia, that would not be evidence that BigV had divine powers.

    2. There is a great deal of scholarship that challenges Mosaic authorship of the Torah. Gospels were written by anonymous authors and some of the NT Epistles are forgeries. So... good luck on finding the authors and evaluating them.

    3. Justin Martyr has a nice quote that you should familiarize yourself with:

    “And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter. For you know how many sons your esteemed writers ascribed to Jupiter: Mercury, the interpreting word and teacher of all; Aesculapius, who, though he was a great physician, was struck by a thunderbolt, and so ascended to heaven; and Bacchus too, after he had been torn limb from limb; and Hercules, when he had committed himself to the flames to escape his toils; and the sons of Leda, and Dioscuri; and Perseus, son of Danae; and Bellerophon, who, though sprung from mortals, rose to heaven on the horse Pegasus. For what shall I say of Ariadne, and those who, like her, have been declared to be set among the stars? And what of the emperors who die among yourselves, whom you deem worthy of deification, and in whose behalf you produce some one who swears he has seen the burning Caesar rise to heaven from the funeral pyre? And what kind of deeds are recorded of each of these reputed sons of Jupiter, it is needless to tell to those who already know. This only shall be said, that they are written for the advantage and encouragement of youthful scholars; for all reckon it an honourable thing to imitate the gods. But far be such a thought concerning the gods from every well-conditioned soul, as to believe that Jupiter himself, the governor and creator of all things, was both a parricide and the son of a parricide, and that being overcome by the love of base and shameful pleasures, he came in to Ganymede and those many women whom he had violated and that his sons did like actions. But, as we said above, wicked devils perpetrated these things. And we have learned that those only are deified who have lived near to God in holiness and virtue; and we believe that those who live wickedly and do not repent are punished in everlasting fire.”
    Quote by Justin Martyr: “And when we say also that the Word, who is the ...”
    4. Copying may be reliable, but see point no. 1 for a response.

    5. It should be noted that the very first Christian canon was probably that of a Marcion, the "heretic" of Christianity, who considered Pauline epistles and Luke's Gospel as the only genuine book. And the 'orthodox' had to come up with their own canon as a response. Very first Christian Scripture was probably Pauline letters. Gospels came later. At any rate, the council doesn't tell us how they have determined that the books in the Canon were true.



     
  7. createdtoworship

    createdtoworship In the grip of grace

    +1,392
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Yes there were gnostics that composed canons of scripture. But not our canon. We have early canonical evidence of the four gospels, from irenius I think. I believe he quoted them as scripture in the 2nd or 3rd century, I heard a lecture on it just this morning. But it may be a few days to compile me notes. I agree mostly with your post, just not the gnostic influence into the canon. I believe the only influence the gnostics had into the canon was that it prioritized the canonization process and expedited the process due to their questioning of doctrine.

    Just for your reference this is the video I was watching:



    it's good you should check it out.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  8. BigV

    BigV Junior Member

    747
    +188
    United States
    Atheist
    Married
    US-Others
    I found this table. Interesting how many of accepted writing did not make it into the NT.

    The Development of the Canon of the New Testament - Cross Reference Table: Writings and Authorities

    Bottom line, however, is that acceptance of the writings does not make them true. And another thing that you may notice from the above table, is how it's lacking any authoritative Jewish Church Fathers! Christianity from it's beginnings appears to be an entirely Gentile religion.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  9. createdtoworship

    createdtoworship In the grip of grace

    +1,392
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Sir I no one here said that because they were canonized by humans that that canonization process made the scriptures divine. What made the scriptures divine is their supernatural aspect to them. The video's above say that the chances of one man fulfilling 8 specific prophecies in the old testament regarding the coming messiah, is like taking one silver dollar and throwing deep into Texas from a helicopter, and having it land in a pile of silver dollars 2 feet deep, that covered the state. Then picking the right one. That is only 8 prophecies, and there are hundreds concerning the Messiah. As far as evidence of the divine aspect of the Bible, there really is no contest. But however you can go down a rabbit hole of canonization if you want. I don't mind talking about it. God wrote the books by divinely inspiring human authors then later gave them wisdom as to which ones He wrote and which ones He didn't. And you can see obviously that the apocrypha was widely rejected by the church, even in your own link. And if you watched the video above I posted, it mentions dozens of gnostic fragments, and why they preach a different religion as that of Biblical Christianity. Yes gnostics had books that were bent toward gnosticism, but they were universally rejected by the Christian church, as you chart shows. So again the canonization process had a human element as did the actual authoring of the Book (also had a human element), but the overall process of creating a torah, and creating a new testament on top of that, was guided by God. And every attempt to burn the manuscripts through history and kill the believers of those manuscripts failed, because God Himself said in the Bible that

    “For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled."

    Matthew 5:18 nkjv

    That scripture is important, because while humans were involved all along the way, God defends the scripture against not only attack, but corruption. He is promising that till the end of the world, we will have a copy of the scriptures. And the general church will realize the true Bible. And this is important because you can like famous athiest voltaire you can attack the Bible and even have a skeptic printing press, but that won't stop christianity or the Bible. In the apocrypha is a story of voltaires printing presses being used by geneva Bible society to print Bibles after his death. You see, God ultimately wins. For sources on that visit this site for eye witness accounts of that story:

    Voltaire’s Prediction, Home, and the Bible Society: Truth or Myth? Further Evidence of Verification
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2019
  10. NBB

    NBB Well-Known Member

    +667
    Uruguay
    Christian
    Single
    Imagine a christian mocking atheists in an atheist forum! the same as they do here,
    what conclusion should we make?

    And we have material to mock them, like how pretentiously think they have it right when they are actually the ones deluded. wow, well this world is upside down.
     
  11. createdtoworship

    createdtoworship In the grip of grace

    +1,392
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    I have not seen that in this thread. Yes in other threads for sure, but so far it has been a relatively polite discussion.
     
  12. BigV

    BigV Junior Member

    747
    +188
    United States
    Atheist
    Married
    US-Others
    But this is a point you must accept on faith. There is no evidence the Bible has a divine origin anymore so vs the Quran or Bhagavad Gita.

    What are the chances that a superman or a Batman would do the tricks that they had done? If you are writing a story, anything can be said and/or written.

    There is no evidence of that.
     
  13. createdtoworship

    createdtoworship In the grip of grace

    +1,392
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    well you would just have to watch the video's I posted at least two of them showing the prophecies of the Bible. Here I Will post both of them:



     
  14. BigV

    BigV Junior Member

    747
    +188
    United States
    Atheist
    Married
    US-Others
    CHURCH FATHERS: The First Apology (St. Justin Martyr)
    I recommend you consider the 'prophesies' as nothing special.

    There were parallels to Christ in the ancient world, which the ancient Christians (at least Justin Martyr) claimed were demonically inspired fulfillments.

    Please also consider that Christians manipulated the Old Testament. Hosea 11:1, for example, was not a prophecy, but Matthew took that verse as a fulfillment of one!

    It's easy to fulfil prophecies if you get to make them up as you go along.

    Isaiah 53 is a famous Christian 'prophesy' but Isaiah is speaking of a messenger in the past tense! As something that already happen. If Christians can have a liberty of interpreting, then there can be lots more prophecies fulfilled!

    Lets imagine for, example, that I travel to Egypt today and return and claim to be the Son of God. Does Hosea 11:1 apply to me now?
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2019
  15. createdtoworship

    createdtoworship In the grip of grace

    +1,392
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Sorry sir, I have posted my evidence. And your not following the format. If you don't agree with the video's posted, you actually have to find the prophecies that you disagree with and make a statement regarding them factually. We cannot simply "recommend....to consider the prophecies as nothing special." Well I guess you can recommend all sorts of things, but we are talking about evidence here. The prophecies of the Bible in some instances are at least a thousand years apart. It is very hard to self fulfill a prophecy 1000 years apart. Anyway, lets try this another way..... here is a video by an atheist with 226,000 subscribers on youtube, He is the president of some atheist society.....anyway.

    Here is his video mentioning prophecy cannot be real: (you can address any part of the video you wish, just post a time stamp and a quotation)...I already have a refutation video that was posted later that I also want to post.....I think this will address 90% of the most common allegations toward prophecy....Here is the popular athiest's objections and next I will post a christians response...




    Here is the refutation:
     
  16. BigV

    BigV Junior Member

    747
    +188
    United States
    Atheist
    Married
    US-Others
    Well, I already pointed out Hosea 11:1 was not a prophecy and neither was Isaiah 53. I am of the opinion that Christians used a method similar to that found in the book of Hebrews. Where the sayings of Christ are quoted exclusively from the Old Testament sayings of God/David or others. It's not a fulfillment of any prophecy, just some New Testament author reading the Old Testament and allegorizing it. I think the same thing happened with Hosea 11:1 and other New Testament texts.

    Born of virgin is not really a prophecy. Original Hebrew doesn't use the 'term' virgin in Isaiah 7. Greek translation uses 'virgin' and then, voila, Christian NT authors found a 'prophecy'!

    And your link, 'refuting' a prophecy is very bad. Listen around the 28:20 mark. The pastor claims both genealogies are for Mary and Joseph! This is patently false. Both genealogies are vastly different, and both of them are Joseph's genealogies. They both can't be right!

    But then they don't address the point that a Messiah will be traced to a MALE descendant of David, and Joseph was not Jesus' biological father! So how is Jesus fulfilling that prophecy, again?

    Let me ask you a question about John the Baptist. Why couldn't he be the Messiah? All of the prophecies that applied to Jesus could have applied, just as well, to John. Am I wrong? The only exception I can think of, is we don't know whether John went to Egypt.
     
  17. createdtoworship

    createdtoworship In the grip of grace

    +1,392
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    First of all I would like to thank you for this debate, and appreciate you being polite and kind and respecting other's viewpoints even though they are different than yours. To reply to the above statement you made, I guess you would have to elaborate on why specifically they are not prophetic.

    If I use a history book, and quote a previous history book. That is evidence of the later history book's accuracy. I only say this to say that there is no need to quote an old testament book if it was all allegory to begin with. It would be meaningless to quote something if it was allegory, unless one were writing a poem etc. One must prove that the Bible is not to be taken as historical. We know the Bible is a historical document because of the fact that it quotes many historical places, people groups, tribes, cultures, currency, etc. I post a few examples of video's of what I meant in the first post, and copied them at the bottom of this post.

    That is fine, I neither agree with him, nor you. So technically we have three views on the geneologies. If you have a specific error regarding the geneologies we can deal with that. But all this is neither here nor there. Just because there are three opinions on a text, does not make a text right or wrong. IF you are speaking about the issue relating to Joram, josephs father, I will quote geisler on that as well:
    "
    MATTHEW 1:8—Is Joram the father of Uzziah or of Ahaziah?

    PROBLEM: Matthew says “Joram begot Uzziah.” However, 1 Chronicles 3:11 lists “Joram [and then] his son, Ahaziah.” Which one is correct?

    SOLUTION: Ahaziah was apparently the immediate son of Joram, and Uzziah was a distant “son” (descendant). Just as the word “son” in the Bible also means grandson, even so the term “begot” can be used of a father or grandfather. In other words, “begot” means “became the ancestor of,” and the one “begotten” is the “descendant of.”

    Matthew, therefore, is not giving a complete chronology, but an abbreviated genealogyof Christ’s ancestry. A comparison of Matthew 1:8 and 1 Chronicles 3:11–12 reveals the three generations between Joram and Uzziah (Azariah):

    MATTHEW 1:8............1 CHRONICLES 3:11–12

    Joram.........................Joram
    …................................Ahaziah
    ….................................Joash
    ….................................Amaziah
    Uzziah...........................Uzziah (also called Azariah)


    MATTHEW 1:9—Did Matthew make a mistake concerning the father of Jotham?

    PROBLEM: In 2 Kings 15:1–7, the Bible mentions the father of Jotham as Azariah, and in 2 Kings 15:32 and 34, Jotham’s father is named Uzziah. Some have concluded that the Bible made a mistake by listing two different people as the father of Jotham.

    SOLUTION: These are two different names for the same person. For different reasons, the Bible occasionally gives two different names for one individual. For example, Paul was also named Saul (Acts 13:9).6:32; 7:1). Jehoiakim’s son Jehoiachin is also known as Jeconiah (cf. 2 Kings 24:6 and 1 Chron. 3:16). Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were all given new names. They are Belteshazzar, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego (Daniel 1:7). Also, some of Jesus’ disciples had two names, for example, Simon (Peter) and Lebbaeus (Thaddaeus) (Matt. 10:2–3).
    "- quote from "when Critics Ask- by norman geisler

    Knowing that Joseph was himself of the line of David makes Jesus the rightful legal heir to the throne of David even though he wasn't biologically related to his earthly father.


    "
    ISAIAH 7:14—Is this verse a prophecy about the virgin birth of Jesus Christ?

    PROBLEM: The prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 concerns the conception of a virgin and the bringing forth of a son whose name would be Immanuel. However, verse 16 seems to place the birth of the child before the invasion of the Assyrian armies and the fall of Samaria in 722 b.c., and Isaiah 8:3 seems to be a fulfillment of this prophecy. How can this be a prophecy about the virgin birth of Jesus?

    SOLUTION: The fulfillment of this prophecy may be two-fold. Because of the desperate situation which the people of Israel faced, God promised to give them a sign that would assure them that He would ultimately deliver His people out of bondage. Many scholars believe this sign came in two ways. First, it came as a sign of the physical deliverance of Israel from the bondage to which they were going under the invading Assyrians. Second, it came as a sign of the spiritual deliverance of all of God’s people from the spiritual bondage to Satan. The first aspect of the sign was fulfilled in the birth of Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz as recorded in Isaiah 8:3. The second aspect of the sign was fulfilled in the birth of Jesus Christ at Bethlehem as recorded in the Gospels.

    The word translated “virgin” (almah) refers to a young maiden who has never had sexual relations with a man. The wife of Isaiah who bore the son in fulfillment of the first aspect of the prophecy was a virgin until she conceived by Isaiah. However, according to Matthew 1:23–25, Mary, the mother of Jesus, was a virgin even when she conceived and gave birth to Jesus. The physical conception and birth of the son of Isaiah was a sign to Israel that God would deliver them from physical bondage to the Assyrians. But, the supernatural conception and birth of the Son of God was a sign to all of God’s people that He would deliver them from spiritual bondage to sin and death."
    -When Critics Ask- on Isaiah 7:14. By the way, all these are quotes from norman geislers work called "when critics ask." I highly recommend it for you. It may help you in your studies. If you like that one, there are probably half a dozen other works on Bible difficulties I could recommend. The book "when critics asked" has been revised and updated into a book called "the big book of bible difficulties." It has over 800 answers to Bible difficulties. reading this book really gave me faith in the Bible, I just had to really start believing in God. And it was not that I didn't want to believe in God, but I was letting these criticisms stump my faith, I sort of felt foolish after reading this book because the Bible, the Book that I had dismissed, was really a solid book after all.

    Here is a repeat of some of the archeological discoveries supporting the historicity of the Bible:

    • Scientific Evidence of Moses:
    • 9 Archaeological Discoveries that prove the Bible
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2019
  18. yeshuaslavejeff

    yeshuaslavejeff simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

    +10,599
    Anabaptist
    wise, sort of.
    debating here is not leading to instruction - no one (it seems) changes their mind, and unless someone breaks a rule or something, they cannot be silenced no matter how bad, how harmful, and how wrong a post is even when repeated for years (for recent and ongoing examples: u.r. and other false gospels) .
     
  19. createdtoworship

    createdtoworship In the grip of grace

    +1,392
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    It's hard to say, normally I lose my cool. So it's not them, it's me, I don't have the patience for it usually. And my words can, well how do you say, ....my words can egg them on I guess. If I truly had a love for others that disagreed with me, it would change the dynamic of the whole conversation. So I have been focussing on being more like Christ. And reducing my comments overall. I assumed the fights would start right away, so I unsubscribed. But then I noticed that people were calm and collective and respectful, and that type of debate I think is healthy. So I reposted some more posts. It just depends on how it goes. If it gets too heated I can't be here, because I had a one month ban already. Like I said, I can get argumentative. And that is not how it should be. We should honestly care about other people. Christ gives us love, and forgiveness for all of our sins, yet we cannot forgive one another for their rude behaviour. It's just not the way Christ is. We should forgive as we have been forgiven. That is how Christianity is supposed to operate.
     
  20. yeshuaslavejeff

    yeshuaslavejeff simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

    +10,599
    Anabaptist
    QUOTE= ]It's hard to say, normally I lose my cool. So it's not them, it's me, I don't have the patience for it usually. And my words can, well how do you say, ....my words can egg them on I guess. If I truly had a love for others that disagreed with me, it would change the dynamic of the whole conversation. So I have been focussing on being more like Christ. And reducing my comments overall. I assumed the fights would start right away, so I unsubscribed. But then I noticed that people were calm and collective and respectful, and that type of debate I think is healthy. So I reposted some more posts. It just depends on how it goes. If it gets too heated I can't be here, because I had a one month ban already. Like I said, I can get argumentative. And that is not how it should be. We should honestly care about other people. Christ gives us love, and forgiveness for all of our sins, yet we cannot forgive one another for their rude behaviour. It's just not the way Christ is. We should forgive as we have been forgiven. That is how Christianity is supposed to operate.[/QUOTE

    And what are the explicit first directions in Scripture for who we are obeying? (God or man)?
    >for instance, Whose evidence, and Whose Directions/Instructions/ are Ekklesia accepting and trusting ? (concerning always the Bible, and for everything else ?)

    Since God Himself Provides Eternal Evidence , and all through Creation/ the universe, and the world, and people,
    of Himself and His Word, should anything be allowed or able to persuade us to abandon the Bible? or Him? to reject Christ Jesus ?
     
Loading...