Why believe the Bible?

[vaguelyhumanoid]

Why believe in the Bible, as opposed to some other holy text? What evidence is there for the Bible being a message from God?

 

[bling]

I believe in Jesus, I have seen Jesus living in others. I find more out about Jesus from scripture, while other books contain little or nothing about Jesus.

 

[razeontherock]

What evidence is there for the Bible being a message from God?

God does very specific things to "confirm" this for us mere mortals, when we seek Him with our whole heart. Many, many posters on CF have had wildly different experiences along these lines. Our testimonies may (or may not) help you, but what matters is YOUR relationship w/ Jesus Christ, our Lord.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

God does very specific things to "confirm" this for us mere mortals, when we seek Him with our whole heart. Many, many posters on CF have had wildly different experiences along these lines. Our testimonies may (or may not) help you, but what matters is YOUR relationship w/ Jesus Christ, our Lord.

Could you elaborate on this? Religious experiences are not unique to Christianity, but is a noted phenomena among all religious practices. What specifically sets the Bible apart as being the only/true word of god?

 

[vaguelyhumanoid]

I believe in Jesus, I have seen Jesus living in others. I find more out about Jesus from scripture, while other books contain little or nothing about Jesus.

How do you know it's Jesus living in others?

 

[drich0150]

The question of which (if any) religious text is the true word of God is of utmost importance. To avoid circular reasoning, the first question we must ask is: how would we know if God communicated in the first place? Well, God would have to communicate in a manner that people could understand, but that also means that people could make up their own messages and simply claim that they came from God. So, it seems reasonable to think that if God wanted to authenticate His communication He would have to verify it in a manner that could not be duplicated by mere humans - in other words, by miracles. This narrows the field considerably.

Beyond the evidence for the Bible's correctness (manuscript evidence) and its historicity (archeological evidence), the most important evidence is that of its inspiration. The real determination of the Bible's claim to absolute inspired truth is in its supernatural evidence, including prophecy. God used prophets to speak and write down His Word and God uses miracles like fulfilled prophecy to authenticate His messengers. For example, in Genesis 12:7, God promises that the land of Israel was to be for Abraham and his descendants. In 1948 Israel was returned back to the Jewish people for the second time in history. This may not seem so astonishing until you realize that no nation in the history of the world has been scattered from its homeland and returned! Israel has done it twice. The book of Daniel predicts with accuracy the coming of the four great kingdoms from Babylon, to Medo-Persia, to Greece, to Rome centuries before some of those kingdoms came on the scene (a time span of over 1,000 years!) with details concerning how they would rule and be broken. This includes the reigns of Alexander the Great and Antiochus Epiphanies.

In Ezekiel 26 we can see in astonishing detail how the city of Tyre was to be destroyed, how it would be torn down, and how its debris would be thrown into the sea. When Alexander the Great marched on that area, he encountered a group of people holed up in a tower on an island off the coast near there. He could not cross the sea, so he could not fight those in the tower. Rather than wait them out, the proud conqueror had his army throw stones into the sea to build a land bridge to the tower. It worked. His army crossed the sea and overthrew the occupants of the stronghold. But where did he get so much stone? The rocks that were used for the land bridge were the leftover rubble from the city of Tyre . . . its stones cast into the sea!

There are so many prophecies concerning Christ (over 270!) that it would take more than a few screens worth of space to list them all. Further, Jesus would have had no control over many of them such as His birthplace or time of birth. Second, the odds of one man accidentally fulfilling even 16 of these are 1 in 10^45. How many is that? For comparison, there are less than 10^28 atoms in the entire universe! And Jesus, who affirmed the Bible as the Word of God, proved His reliability and deity by His resurrection (an historical fact not easily ignored).

Now consider the Quran - its author, Muhammad, performed no miracles to back up his message (even when he was asked to by his followers - Sura 17:91-95; 29:47-51). Only in much later tradition (the Hadith) do any alleged miracles even show up and these are all quite fanciful (like Muhammad cutting the moon in half) and have zero reliable testimony to back them up. Further, the Quran makes clear historical errors. Muslims believe the Bible is inspired but with some errors from editing (Sura 2:136 as well as Suras 13, 16, 17, 20, 21, 23, 25). The question they cannot adequately answer is: "When was the Bible corrupted?" If they say before 600 A.D. then how can the Quran admonish believers to read it? If they claim it was after 600 A.D., then they have jumped out of the frying pan and into the fire, for we have absolutely no doubt as to the accuracy of biblical manuscripts from at least the 3rd century forward. Even if Christianity were false, the Quran still has an insurmountable problem because it makes judgments against Christians for believing things that they do not (nor have they ever) believed. For example, the Quran teaches that Christians believe the Trinity is the Father, the Mother (Mary), and the Son (Sura 5:73-75, 116), and the Quran also teaches that Christians believe that God had sex with Mary to have a son (Suras 2:116; 6:100-101; 10:68; 16:57; 19:35; 23:91; 37:149-151; 43:16-19). If the Quran is really from God, then it should at least be able to accurately report what Christians believe.

Joseph Smith, the author of the Book of Mormon, tried to do some miracles such as prophecy (a test for a true prophet in Deuteronomy 18:21-22) but failed several times. He foretold of Christ's second coming in History of the Church (HC) 2:382. Joseph Smith preached that the coming of the Lord would be in 56 years (about 1891). The second coming did not occur in 1891, and the Mormon Church does not claim that it did. Nor has it occurred since. He also prophesied that several cities would be destroyed in Doctrine and Covenants (D&C) 84:114-115. New York, Albany and Boston were to be destroyed if they rejected the gospel according to Smith. Joseph Smith himself went to New York, Albany, and Boston and preached there. These cities did not accept his gospel, yet they have not been destroyed. Another famous false prophecy of Joseph Smith was his "END OF ALL NATIONS" in D&C 87 concerning the rebellion of South Carolina in the war between the states. The South was supposed to call on Great Britain for aid, and as a result war would be poured out upon all nations; slaves would revolt; the inhabitants of the earth would mourn; famine, plague, earthquake, thunder, lightning, and a full end of all nations would result. The South finally did revolt in 1861, but the slaves did not rise up, war was not poured out upon all nations, there was no worldwide famine, plague, earthquake, etc., and there was no resulting "end of all nations."

The collection of writings that Protestants call the Apocrypha (hidden writings), Roman Catholics call the deuterocanonical (later or second canon) books. These books were written between 300 B.C. and 100 A.D., the Intertestamental Period between the inspired writings of God's Prophets in the Old Testament and those of the Apostles and their contemporaries in the New Testament. These were "infallibly" accepted into the Bible by the Roman Catholic Church in 1546 at the Council of Trent. Now the Apocrypha would be covered under the evidence for the Bible if these writings were truly inspired - but evidence seems to indicate that they are not. In the Bible we find prophets of God whose messages are ratified by miracles or prophecy that comes true, and whose message is immediately accepted by the people (Deut 31:26; Josh. 24:26; 1 Samuel 10:25; Daniel 9:2; Col. 4:16; 2 Peter 3:15-16). What we find in the apocrypha is just the opposite - no apocryphal book was written by a prophet; in fact one book specifically states that it is not inspired (1 Maccabees 9:27)! None of these books were included in the Hebrew Scriptures. There is no ratification of the authors of any apocryphal book. No apocryphal book is cited as authoritative by later Biblical writers. There is no fulfilled prophecy in any apocryphal book. Finally, Jesus, who quoted from every section of Old Testament Scripture, never once quoted from the apocrypha. Neither did any of His disciples.

The Bible so far outshines every competing source for being God's revelation that if it is not God's Word, it would seem impossible to choose among the leftovers. If the Bible is not God's Word, then we have been left with no clear criteria by which to know what might be.

cut and pasted From: Gotquestions.org

 

[wanelad]

Could you elaborate on this? Religious experiences are not unique to Christianity, but is a noted phenomena among all religious practices. What specifically sets the Bible apart as being the only/true word of god?

Ahhh 'Life' havent seen you around of late we must be using different threads.

One of the many things is forgiveness, we do not have to earn it like other faiths. Rom 5:8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us

He also promises us the Holy Spirit Joh 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may be with you for ever,

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Ahhh 'Life' havent seen you around of late we must be using different threads.

One of the many things is forgiveness, we do not have to earn it like other faiths. Rom 5:8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us

He also promises us the Holy Spirit Joh 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may be with you for ever,

Thanks for the reply Wanelad.

Christianity offers absolution of sin as a gift, while other faiths require works. Why is one method preferable to another? Is one inherently superior to the other?

How about those who do not believe in the notion of sin, or the need of atonement?

 

[razeontherock]

Christianity offers absolution of sin as a gift, while other faiths require works. Why is one method preferable to another? Is one inherently superior to the other?

How about those who do not believe in the notion of sin, or the need of atonement?

First of all you asked why other books (besides the Bible) are not true. Christianity makes no such claim. What Christianity preaches is that it contains a fuller revelation of G-d Himself. And not surprisingly, the climax of that revelation is in the book of ... Revelation.

"Those who do not believe in the notion of sin, or the need of atonement" don't affect reality any more than if I were to flap my arms after jumping off a cliff.

"Christianity offers absolution of sin as a gift"

Since absolution means the formal remission of sin by a Priest, you have NOT described a gift, but a "work," just like all the religions of the world have. So in order to answer your question of "why is one method [Christianity] preferable to another," we'd have to start w/ a valid comparison.

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: Romans 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. But not as the offence, so also [is] the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, [which is] by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. And not as [it was] by one that sinned, [so is] the gift: for the judgment [was] by one to condemnation, but the free gift [is] of many offences unto justification. For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous."

That creates a valid contrast, but does not address the OP.

 

[razeontherock]

On one level, posts 6 and 9 in this thread address the OP quite well:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7522826/

I came to Faith initially via logic as expressed in the Bible, and then via experience, G-d proving it true to me. "O taste and see that the LORD [is] good: blessed [is] the man [that] trusteth in him." (Psalm 34:8)

 

[mrnobody]

Beyond the evidence for the Bible's correctness (manuscript evidence) and its historicity (archeological evidence), the most important evidence is that of its inspiration. The real determination of the Bible's claim to absolute inspired truth is in its supernatural evidence, including prophecy. God used prophets to speak and write down His Word and God uses miracles like fulfilled prophecy to authenticate His messengers. For example, in Genesis 12:7, God promises that the land of Israel was to be for Abraham and his descendants. In 1948 Israel was returned back to the Jewish people for the second time in history. This may not seem so astonishing until you realize that no nation in the history of the world has been scattered from its homeland and returned! Israel has done it twice.

I'm not sure that *is* particularly astonishing. The Jews were exterminated by Hitler, so there was a general consensus to establish for them a homeland in Israel. The holocaust was the direct cause of Israel's establishment. The Jews now have a homeland yes, but not before most of them were subjected to horrific genocide. Personally I think they were better off without the holocaust and without having their own religious state (Israel).

There are so many prophecies concerning Christ (over 270!) that it would take more than a few screens worth of space to list them all. Further, Jesus would have had no control over many of them such as His birthplace or time of birth. Second, the odds of one man accidentally fulfilling even 16 of these are 1 in 10^45. How many is that? For comparison, there are less than 10^28 atoms in the entire universe! And Jesus, who affirmed the Bible as the Word of God, proved His reliability and deity by His resurrection (an historical fact not easily ignored).

This strikes me as an appeal to mathematics without any understanding of it. Those odds appear to me to be simply fabricated.

The problem with Christ fulfilling prophecy is that there were no cameras there at His birth for instance, no record of births and deaths, so given that you note that the fulfillment of these prophecies was incredibly unlikely, the most logical explanation is that, given that the gospels attempt to prove Christ's divinity, they would be likely to embelish known facts, or add in completely new bits, such as the birth account, with the express purpose of showing Christ to be the messiah.

Anyone can write that such and such fulfilled prophecy; whether or not they did is unfortunately at 2000 years distance, unverifiable.

We can however note that we rely for the life of Jesus on just one book - the one Roman account of Jesus' life seems of dubious reliability, and in any case does not establish His divinity: Tacitus on Christ - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Things like the Star of Bethlehem are conspicuous by their absence from the historical record, (Star of Bethlehem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Now consider the Quran

Well no, that's not really necessary. Demonstrating that the Quran is unreliable doesn't tell us anything about the Bible.

Joseph Smith, the author of the Book of Mormon, tried to do some miracles such as prophecy (a test for a true prophet in Deuteronomy 18:21-22) but failed several times.

See above re the Quran.

 

[drich0150]

Perhaps you can explain something that has happened that could not be achieved by humans or something that was written that could not be written by humans.

If you continue to read, the "explanation" that you have requested becomes apparent.

The fact the book exists and its wording is accurate as first written does not in any way testify to its truth. Harry Potter is correct and certainly exists. Dozen’t mean that what is written down is actually something that happened. We call it fiction.

How old is are the copies of harry potter that we have? Not to mention wasn't Harry's book printed and not a hand written manuscript? If you make a fair and honest comparison to other "books" of the time you will see a stark contrast in the seer volume of manuscripts that we have of the various books of the bible, and the quality in which they were copied. There are thousands of texts that collaborate one another. Where the only other texts we have to even compare to the bible is Homers eliade (A couple of dozen copies) None of which tell the exact same tale.

Have you ever played telephone as a kid? Where your teacher lines up the whole class and tells a message at one end and then it is passed from child to child till it reaches the other. It never ends up the way it starts out. It seems the same can be said about the ancient literary world, except for the one exception. God has preserved His word, and no truth you can speak or type will ever darken that fact.

I think you’ll find that the scatter and return of the Jews from and to Israel was actually caused because of the bible texts. The belief in the holy land and the differing of opinion to the Muslims over who owns the land is the direct cause of the struggle.

"The struggle" you speak of predates the Muslims by several thousand years.. also predates the biblical texts. In that before Moses wrote any of the Pentateuch down (The first 5 books) Israel was a nation "owned" by Egypt, and then had it out with God in the desert for 40 years. The cause of Israels struggles was the covenant God made with Abraham. In that God was shaping and molding His people to set them apart from the rest of humanity.Israel was not scattered nor returned simply because of biblical texts.

This does not prove the prophecy (did the bible say it would happen twice?) and certainly is not something that could not have happened without the bible saying it would.

It happened quite a few times. The Assyrians, the Romans, The nation of Islam. Key aspects of the various occupations have all been noted in prophesy.

With respect to the great kingdoms, does the bible specifically mention the years of the kingdoms? ors it mention the names of the rulers? Does it specify exactly how long they would be in power and exactly how their demise would come about (other than stating obvious causes for the crash of an empire).
If it does not, then I would not consider it to have predicted with any sort of accuracy whatsoever.

Do you believe your line of questioning to be complete?
Do you think that having these details over those that are listed are any more relevant?
To whom?
To you?
To this generation?
Are you so foolish to think that the bible was written specifically to you and or to this specific generation?
What of the thousands that came before you?
Why should a loving God forsake knowledge and understanding from billions to satisfy the demands of the few who do not believe in this very specific time period?
What if time were to go on for another thousand years?
Should He have Written scripture to those people and simply forsaken us? And if He did, what you say or how would you interpret this new data? "Look at these fake nations the bible lists.. look at the crazy dates... anyone could have simply made it all up."

Your line of questioning is extremely short sighted.

Did it predict the British Empire or any other ruling powers? Does it speak of computers, the internet or the holocaust? A book inspired by an omnipotent and omniscient god would surely be able to predict these things with accuracy.

Again the bible is not a gypsy book of wonder, I think you are confusing reality with what you have seen in the movies.

This is not something that could not be predicted quite easily by anyone with a logical mind about a city that stands by the sea.

Lol, no.. Did you even read the account posted? Why would any "logical mind" assume that some future invading army would disassemble an entire ancient city brick by brick and cast it into the sea to attack another army on an island, in a defensive tower that has not been built yet?

The birthplace of Christ is still under debate. The book telling where he was supposedly born was written after the prediction was made. This is a self fulfilling prophecy and of no great importance. How do you get that math? I don’t think you can statistically weigh the likelihood of fulfilling a prophecy. You have either made these figures up or copied from someone else who also does not understand statistics. Can you perhaps example some other ‘miracles’ of Christ that hold more weight?

If I did would it truly matter? Belief in Christ is not a academic exercise. If it I made it out to be one you would have missed the underling point of the belief you are supposed to have in Him anyway.
The numbers you doubt in this example are no more credible in the next example. if you have the mind to trivialize this data then you will do the same parlor trick with the next set of 'numbers."

This is a perfect example of when "not to throw our pearls of wisdom before swine"

Fanciful like people coming back to life you mean? Or turning water into wine?

If you believe these things are hard to accept now, why do you not think they were just as hard to accept then? Especially in a time where telling or opposing the Temple priest was a capitol offense. The only way these accounts survived is because these accounts were established by many different wittinesses. What witness now would stake his life on his testimony now? Do you think these numbers were so different then?

Reliable testimony like scripture written hundreds of years after the events you mean? Give me break!

If you believe this to be true then you truly know not of what you speak. This is a prime example of when someone is looking to logically dismiss a fact, and he runs out of "logic" so he fudges the facts, trivializes them and then moves to dismiss.. Classic understatement!

I wouldn’t profess to be able to accurately write about specific events that happened during the time of the American War of Independence even though I have read about it.

The statement outlining the short comings in the qu'ran about it's founding prophet are not about accurately portraying past events. You misunderstand the point being made.

The bible predicts the return of Christ but that hasn’t happened yet. It holds about as much truth.

Which proves my point to the letter which I made earlier! in that if the bible was written to a later time you would just dismiss the predictions made. This closed minded comment proves your true intentions. You have no wish to explore anything here. your looking to disprove or dismiss all that you do not agree with.

You’vie hit the nail on the head here, none of them are ‘God’s Word’. You don’t need to choose between the others, they are all as full of myth and legend as each other. Just because one seems to you to be more likely, does not make it so.

In similar fashion just because something seems less likely to you, it doesn't make it any less so.

I have shown you simply by correcting your statements that your personal knowledge of the time period, circumstance in which scripture was written, and the content of scripture it self is all in great error. A true man of "thought" would do a little more research before he chose to close his mind off to something. On the other hand religious bigots are not faced the same dilemma.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

The four gospels are a classic exercise of the telephone game.

I suggest you list the events of the gospels side by side. It is surprising the number of discrepencies and blatant contradictions.

The bible is not quite so neat and tidy as you presume.

 

[drich0150]

I'm not sure that *is* particularly astonishing. The Jews were exterminated by Hitler, so there was a general consensus to establish for them a homeland in Israel. The holocaust was the direct cause of Israel's establishment. The Jews now have a homeland yes, but not before most of them were subjected to horrific genocide. Personally I think they were better off without the holocaust in Israel.

And what of the 2 thousand year time period between the exile of Israel by the Romans and the reestablishment of the nation after WWII? What other "nation" has held together that long without a land to center themselves on? The miracle here is not that they got the land back, it is that they were around to receive it even after the holocaust.

If you think they are better off, then it is apparent your not a Jew. Because even at such a high price, the return of Israel to the Holy Land was an answer to 2000 years of constant prayer and pleading. Millions may have died, but billions and billions prayed for what millions paid for with their blood.

Out of those billions who died with out a home or purpose, do you not think you would be able to find twice the number of those that Hitler killed, that would be willing to give their lives if it meant future generations could return home?

This strikes me as an appeal to mathematics without any understanding of it. Those odds appear to me to be simply fabricated.

Those numbers are easily verifiable, but I guess it is even easier still to simply trivialize and dismiss what you do not wish to engage.

ith Christ fulfilling prophecy is that there were no cameras there at His birth for instance, no record of births and deaths,

The Jews had a written record in the time of Christ. it held a genealogy of when and where every Jew was born from before David to the time of Adam. This was a place one had to go before they were married so as not to break any incest laws. It was also necessary to track blood lines for the specific purpose of verifying prophesy. Again another fact that is easily verifiable, but equally as easy to dismiss.

so given that you note that the fulfillment of these prophecies was incredibly unlikely, the most logical explanation is that, given that the gospels attempt to prove Christ's divinity, they would be likely to embelish known facts, or add in completely new bits, such as the birth account, with the express purpose of showing Christ to be the messiah.

So given the truth of this "new" data do you want to reconsider this statement?

Anyone can write that such and such fulfilled prophecy; whether or not they did is unfortunately at 2000 years distance, unverifiable.

Again...

We can however note that we rely for the life of Jesus on just one book - the one Roman account of Jesus' life seems of dubious reliability, and in any case does not establish His divinity:

There are far more manuscripts that verify the accounts found in the bible than there are of this Roman's meager works. You are intentionally over looking a wealth of knowledge to favor a neutered version of events.. I would Say if this man's accounts more closely followed scripture we would not even be discussing his body of work.

Things like the Star of Bethlehem are conspicuous by their absence from the historical record,

The Greek word that is translated “star” in the text is the word aster, which is the normal word for a star or a celestial body. The word is used 24 times in the New Testament, and most of the time it refers to a celestial body. It can be used to denote angels, as in Revelation 12:4, where it is used to describe the fallen angels who followed Satan’s rebellion. However, aster is used in the sense of "a celestial body" in Matthew 2. Basic rules of biblical interpretation state that we should take the normal sense of the word unless there is compelling evidence to suggest otherwise. In fact, many interpreters have done as much by suggesting a natural explanation for the Star of Bethlehem. Their suggestions range from calling it a supernova or a comet to saying it was the conjunction of several celestial bodies which provided a brighter-than-normal light in the sky.
Got questions.org
Just because we can not place the event does not mean there were not a host of celestial events that could have indicated the birth of Christ.

Well no, that's not really necessary. Demonstrating that the Quran is unreliable doesn't tell us anything about the Bible.

actually it does. Looking at the Quran and it's content by comparison to the bible creates a contrast that allows one to judge or make a determination of said content.

See above re the Quran.

See above re the Quran.

 

[drich0150]

The four gospels are a classic exercise of the telephone game.

I suggest you list the events of the gospels side by side. It is surprising the number of discrepancies and blatant contradictions.

The bible is not quite so neat and tidy as you presume.

It is in that it is four separate interpretations of the same event. It is not in that the gospels were not constructed from four people passing a story from one to another.

I would say that if the gospels were indeed a "neat and tidy" collaboration of accounts you would find fault in it's unity.

"These guys simply copied each other's work!"

A real honest look from 4 unique perspectives will always yield 4 different accounts of the same event. That my brother is the result of the diversity found in our individuality. Not a result of 4 men of passing a story between themselves.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Which of these two perspectives is correct?

Mark 11 records Jesus cleansing the Temple a week before he dies. John 2 has Jesus cleansing the Temple as his first public event.

What is the best explanation, in your opinion?

 

[salida]

Research the credibility of the bible concerning overwhelming evidence which is very high even though it’s a spiritual decision first. I have studied other religions and they don’t come close to this evidence.

Visit: www.TheBibleProofBook.com, (you will need acrobat reader for this), read The Evidence That Demands A Verdict by Josh McDowell a former agnostic- (its overwhelming circumstantial evidence of bible) and Examine the Evidence by Muncaster a former athiest/The Case for Christ and The Real Jesus by Lee Strobel a former athiest. www.equip.org (articles), http://www.gotquestions.org/,
http://christiananswers.net/

http://equip.org/articles/a-defense-of-sola-scriptura
http://equip.org/articles/bible-reliability


Internal Evidence (prophesies confirmed within bible)
Life of Christ
The Tribe of Judah, Gen 49:10 - Luke 3:23-28
(Genesis was written 4004 BC to 1689 BC)
(Lukes time period 60-70 AD)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Royal Line of David, Jer 23:5 - Matt 1:1
(Jeremiah 760 to 698 BC)/(Matthew 60 - 70 AD)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Born of a Virgin, Isaiah 7:14 - Matt 1:18-23
(Isaiah 760 to 698 BC)/(Matthew 60 - 70 AD)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Rise of Empires
In the book of Daniel, Chapter 2 - four kingdoms are described in the interpretation of a dream of
Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greek - Daniel 8:21, 10:20/and the fourth
great kingdom to follow- part iron and clay-which is the Roman Empire. During this empire Christ came and his church was established.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historical Accuracy
The bible is loaded with historical statements concerning events hundreds of years ago and has not
been proven incorrect in any.
(Bible compared to other ancient documents):
New Testament starts - at 25 years between original and first surviving copies
Homer - starts at 500 years
Demosthenes - at 1400 years
Plato - at 1200 years
Caesar - at 1000 years
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Manuscript Copies-New Testament - 5,686/Homer - 643/Demosthenes - 200/
Plato - 7/Caesar -10
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistency/Written by God
Written by at least 40 men over a period of time exceeding 1400 years and has no internal inconsistencies.
It claims to be spoken by God, 2 Timothy 3:16-17. No other religious book makes such claim.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
External Evidences (prophesies outside bible)
These cities were prophesied to be destroyed and never built again.
Nineveh - Nahum 1:10, 3:7,15, Zephaniah 2:13-14
Babylon - Isaiah 13:1-22
Tyre - Ezekiel 26:1-28
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bible before Science- He hangs the earth on nothing-Job 26:7/Earth is a sphere-Isaiah 40:22
Air has weight-Job 28:25/Gravity-Job 26:7, Job 38:31-33/Winds blow in cyclones, Eccl 1:6
(Job was written at least 1000 BC; some scholars think 3000 BC)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Documents that Prove Bible is True
Gilgamesh Epic, The Sumerian King List, Mari Tablets, Babylonian Chronicles
Archeological Finds
Excavations of Ur, Location of Zoar, Ziggurats and the foundation of Tower of Babel

 

[drich0150]

Which of these two perspectives is correct?

Mark 11 records Jesus cleansing the Temple a week before he dies. John 2 has Jesus cleansing the Temple as his first public event.

What is the best explanation, in your opinion?

Do you assume that all accounts are in chronological order?

If so what do you base this assumption on? Is this based on Modern method of popular story telling? Did you take into account the different type of Jewish writing styles that were accepted/expected at the time??

Have you ever wondered why there are four gospel accounts? And what each one of those four accounts represent? Why and to whom each specific message was written?

Any good basic study bible will explain these writing styles, and why there are 4 unique perspectives, and how they related to that all important first century believer. If you are truly interested.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Do you assume that all accounts are in chronological order?

If so what do you base this assumption on? Is this based on Modern method of popular story telling? Did you take into account the different type of Jewish writing styles that were accepted/expected at the time??

Have you ever wondered why there are four gospel accounts? And what each one of those four accounts represent? Why and to whom each specific message was written?

Any good basic study bible will explain these writing styles, and why there are 4 unique perspectives, and how they related to that all important first century believer. If you are truly interested.

One account had Jesus clearing the Temple as one of his first public events, and another the week before he died. This leaves you with four possibilites.

1. Jesus cleared the Temple twice.
2. According to the writer of John, Jesus cleared the Temple at the beginning of his ministry, and the writer of Mark is mistaken as to the chronology.
3. According to the writer of Mark, Jesus cleared the Temple at the end of his ministry, and the writer of John is mistaken as to the chronology.
4. Jesus never cleared the Temple.

I'm asking which of these is the most parsimonious?

 

[vaguelyhumanoid]

Research the credibility of the bible concerning overwhelming evidence which is very high even though it’s a spiritual decision first. I have studied other religions and they don’t come close to this evidence.

Visit: www.TheBibleProofBook.com, (you will need acrobat reader for this), read The Evidence That Demands A Verdict by Josh McDowell a former agnostic- (its overwhelming circumstantial evidence of bible) and Examine the Evidence by Muncaster a former athiest/The Case for Christ and The Real Jesus by Lee Strobel a former athiest. www.equip.org (articles), http://www.gotquestions.org/,
http://christiananswers.net/

http://equip.org/articles/a-defense-of-sola-scriptura
http://equip.org/articles/bible-reliability


Internal Evidence (prophesies confirmed within bible)
Life of Christ
The Tribe of Judah, Gen 49:10 - Luke 3:23-28
(Genesis was written 4004 BC to 1689 BC)
(Lukes time period 60-70 AD)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Royal Line of David, Jer 23:5 - Matt 1:1
(Jeremiah 760 to 698 BC)/(Matthew 60 - 70 AD)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Born of a Virgin, Isaiah 7:14 - Matt 1:18-23
(Isaiah 760 to 698 BC)/(Matthew 60 - 70 AD)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Rise of Empires
In the book of Daniel, Chapter 2 - four kingdoms are described in the interpretation of a dream of
Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greek - Daniel 8:21, 10:20/and the fourth
great kingdom to follow- part iron and clay-which is the Roman Empire. During this empire Christ came and his church was established.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historical Accuracy
The bible is loaded with historical statements concerning events hundreds of years ago and has not
been proven incorrect in any.
(Bible compared to other ancient documents):
New Testament starts - at 25 years between original and first surviving copies
Homer - starts at 500 years
Demosthenes - at 1400 years
Plato - at 1200 years
Caesar - at 1000 years
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Manuscript Copies-New Testament - 5,686/Homer - 643/Demosthenes - 200/
Plato - 7/Caesar -10
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistency/Written by God
Written by at least 40 men over a period of time exceeding 1400 years and has no internal inconsistencies.
It claims to be spoken by God, 2 Timothy 3:16-17. No other religious book makes such claim.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
External Evidences (prophesies outside bible)
These cities were prophesied to be destroyed and never built again.
Nineveh - Nahum 1:10, 3:7,15, Zephaniah 2:13-14
Babylon - Isaiah 13:1-22
Tyre - Ezekiel 26:1-28
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bible before Science- He hangs the earth on nothing-Job 26:7/Earth is a sphere-Isaiah 40:22
Air has weight-Job 28:25/Gravity-Job 26:7, Job 38:31-33/Winds blow in cyclones, Eccl 1:6
(Job was written at least 1000 BC; some scholars think 3000 BC)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Documents that Prove Bible is True
Gilgamesh Epic, The Sumerian King List, Mari Tablets, Babylonian Chronicles
Archeological Finds
Excavations of Ur, Location of Zoar, Ziggurats and the foundation of Tower of Babel

1. The authors of the gospels could have just made up claims about fulfilled prophecies. Also, I've read Bible prophecy-it's often very ambiguous, poetic, and allegorical. You could try and fit a Bible prophecy to pretty much anything, and have it make sense.
2. Where in the Bible does it predict Homer, Plato, or Caesar?
3. Number of manuscripts has no bearing on truth. If there were 50,000 manuscripts of Harry Potter, it wouldn't make it true.
4. "No internal inconsistencies" is a blatant falsehood. There are 2 conflicting creation accounts, 2 conflicting accounts of Judas' death, conflicting statements about whether God is all-powerful, and conflicting statements about whether God always does good.
5. The Bible's claims about itself don't prove a thing.
6. Just because a book occasionally gets things right doesn't mean it's inspired by God.
7. The "Earth is a sphere" actually says Earth is a circle, with the sky hanging over it like a canopy. The book of Genesis describes the sky as a semicircular dome over the earth, with the stars as separate from the sun and moon.
8. Who came first: the Israelites or the Sumerians?
9. The Tower of Babel may have existed, but the story of the Tower of Babel has been disproven pretty definitely by modern historical linguistics, as well as modern astronomy. Besides, just because sites from the Bible have been found doesn't mean the Bible, in general, is true.