Why Do You Trust the Bible?

[Steven_R]

How can you have someone like Jesus saying the only way to salvation is through believe in his divinity but that the beliefs of a Buddhist still get one to God? What is the cut off point? Which religious systems are valid? If they're all valid why bother with Christianity or Islam or Shintoism instead of just going with some flavor of simple spirituality?

 

[Darkwind]

THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK on Christian beliefs as I respect the grand majority of Christians, see them to be wonderful people and wonderful contributors to the community, and have no right to say that what they believe is wrong.

However, I have a question; given that the New Testament was written ~30-60 years AFTER the death of Jesus Christ (correct me if I’m wrong), aren’t you at all concerned that the authors might have:

(1) Forgotten some key details, exact words, etc (I mean, do you remember what you ate for lunch March 3rd, 2009? I don’t)
(2) Altered some things to make the story more interesting

Fair question, right?

I mean, imagine if followers (ie disciples) of President Obama were to create a biography of his SIXTY years from now (specifically his followers) – from memory – don’t you think it’d be just a little bit skewed? Would you consider their account to be valid? I know I wouldn't, and would demand backup/proof! Would you?

These are just honest questions from a non-Christian. I'm not trying to be combative...

I often question the the new testament. I find that there is little in it that can be refuted. Please don't take that to mean that I follow church doctrine.

The two are wholly different animals, and even the pious are human and come with human frailties.

Thanks Darkwind. Yea, it’s seems like a common theme is that people trust the bible because much of what it says tends to ring true. The good book – to many – is a “good book”. That seems logical enough.

However, I’d challenge some to consider that there have been many “good books”/masterpieces written over the course of the past 2,000 years with spot on observations of the human condition that really “ring true” deep within the souls of the people who take the time to read the text.

My main point is that if someone who really liked a person said 60 years later that he walked on water, resurrected, etc I’d generally be pretty darn skeptical. I don’t doubt that Jesus was a fantastically enlightened individual, however it seems to me that it would be extremely logical for someone to slip in some supernatural/religious aspect to Jesus’s story simply to better promote the cause.

He preached a message of peace? Meh.

He preached a message of peace AND he could walk on water? Wow! Sign me up.

Then I would suggest a deeper reading of the material. You make the same mistake that others make and take what is said literally, rather than the lesson that is being taught.

Consider this. If you employ your imagination and rise above the level of the dumb beasts, you would give thought to what occurs today.

If God or his chosen one were to appear and heal the dead, walk on water, and provide words to live a good life, in a thousand years, the deeds of his or her miracle would be twisted and ridiculed. In 2000 years, they would not be believed.

Ask yourself why it is that people, when confronted with something beyond their ability to grasp, find what seems to be rational explanations for the irrational. We see it often in crime scenes and horrific events of natural and man made disasters. It is the flaw and limitation of our very nature that keeps us from realizing our full potential.

Yet, the words and good deeds and morality remain. Is that not enough for most?

In the end, it is only the primitive and un-evolved who lack that ability to conceive something larger than their own life.

I don't bother with church doctrine, because they have the same motivations as the non-believers. Power for powers sake.

 

[pacer]

And returning more to the OP, if someone who really admired a person (ie a disciple) said 60 years later that the person he absolutely admired walked on water, resurrected, etc I’d generally be pretty darn skeptical.

They forgot to mention it was near shore and Jesus was standing in about 2 inches of water.

 

[aris2chat]

THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK on Christian beliefs as I respect the grand majority of Christians, see them to be wonderful people and wonderful contributors to the community, and have no right to say that what they believe is wrong.

However, I have a question; given that the New Testament was written ~30-60 years AFTER the death of Jesus Christ (correct me if I’m wrong), aren’t you at all concerned that the authors might have:

(1) Forgotten some key details, exact words, etc (I mean, do you remember what you ate for lunch March 3rd, 2009? I don’t)
(2) Altered some things to make the story more interesting

Fair question, right?

I mean, imagine if followers (ie disciples) of President Obama were to create a biography of his SIXTY years from now (specifically his followers) – from memory – don’t you think it’d be just a little bit skewed? Would you consider their account to be valid? I know I wouldn't, and would demand backup/proof! Would you?

These are just honest questions from a non-Christian. I'm not trying to be combative...

so many errors and distrust of the writers. There is spiritual stories, not factual that give meaning to things in a time before science and understanding could logically explain. It served a purpose. The NT is highly political and not about Jesus the human, but what rome 70 yrs after Jesus want it to say. Books were picked and approved by constantine 300 yrs after jesus.
Even the first five books of the OT got it wrong, but it all makes a nice spiritual story.
Factual it is not. It is about religion, faith in a god and a moral code to live by.

 

[norwegen]

And returning more to the OP, if someone who really admired a person (ie a disciple) said 60 years later that the person he absolutely admired walked on water, resurrected, etc I’d generally be pretty darn skeptical.

They forgot to mention it was near shore and Jesus was standing in about 2 inches of water.

So Peter sank in two inches of water?

 

[pacer]

And returning more to the OP, if someone who really admired a person (ie a disciple) said 60 years later that the person he absolutely admired walked on water, resurrected, etc I’d generally be pretty darn skeptical.

They forgot to mention it was near shore and Jesus was standing in about 2 inches of water.

So Peter sank in two inches of water?

lol Peter was out further, in much deeper water.

 

[GISMYS]

THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK on Christian beliefs as I respect the grand majority of Christians, see them to be wonderful people and wonderful contributors to the community, and have no right to say that what they believe is wrong.

However, I have a question; given that the New Testament was written ~30-60 years AFTER the death of Jesus Christ (correct me if I’m wrong), aren’t you at all concerned that the authors might have:

(1) Forgotten some key details, exact words, etc (I mean, do you remember what you ate for lunch March 3rd, 2009? I don’t)
(2) Altered some things to make the story more interesting

Fair question, right?

I mean, imagine if followers (ie disciples) of President Obama were to create a biography of his SIXTY years from now (specifically his followers) – from memory – don’t you think it’d be just a little bit skewed? Would you consider their account to be valid? I know I wouldn't, and would demand backup/proof! Would you?

These are just honest questions from a non-Christian. I'm not trying to be combative...

The bible was written by Godly men inspired (God breathed) BY GOD EVERY WORD.

 

[norwegen]

They forgot to mention it was near shore and Jesus was standing in about 2 inches of water.

So Peter sank in two inches of water?

lol Peter was out further, in much deeper water.

Uh, Jesus and Peter were in the same place on the water. Jesus caught Peter as he sank.

 

[Steven_R]

THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK on Christian beliefs as I respect the grand majority of Christians, see them to be wonderful people and wonderful contributors to the community, and have no right to say that what they believe is wrong.

However, I have a question; given that the New Testament was written ~30-60 years AFTER the death of Jesus Christ (correct me if I’m wrong), aren’t you at all concerned that the authors might have:

(1) Forgotten some key details, exact words, etc (I mean, do you remember what you ate for lunch March 3rd, 2009? I don’t)
(2) Altered some things to make the story more interesting

Fair question, right?

I mean, imagine if followers (ie disciples) of President Obama were to create a biography of his SIXTY years from now (specifically his followers) – from memory – don’t you think it’d be just a little bit skewed? Would you consider their account to be valid? I know I wouldn't, and would demand backup/proof! Would you?

These are just honest questions from a non-Christian. I'm not trying to be combative...

The bible was written by Godly men inspired (God breathed) BY GOD EVERY WORD.

Assuming that is true, does it take into account political actions like committees deciding which books were good enough to be in a Bible or kings using Bibles for political reasons like King James I or even just the work of translators or stuff lost along the way when oral traditions were all we had?

 

[aris2chat]

Try this bible, it has more meaning

The Jefferson Bible

 

[GISMYS]

Jefferson bible??????? Why read man's ideas when you could read God's inspired(God breathed) eternal living Word?=THE HOLY BIBLE.

 

[Chuckt]

THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK on Christian beliefs as I respect the grand majority of Christians, see them to be wonderful people and wonderful contributors to the community, and have no right to say that what they believe is wrong.

However, I have a question; given that the New Testament was written ~30-60 years AFTER the death of Jesus Christ (correct me if I’m wrong), aren’t you at all concerned that the authors might have:

(1) Forgotten some key details, exact words, etc (I mean, do you remember what you ate for lunch March 3rd, 2009? I don’t)
(2) Altered some things to make the story more interesting

Fair question, right?

I mean, imagine if followers (ie disciples) of President Obama were to create a biography of his SIXTY years from now (specifically his followers) – from memory – don’t you think it’d be just a little bit skewed? Would you consider their account to be valid? I know I wouldn't, and would demand backup/proof! Would you?

These are just honest questions from a non-Christian. I'm not trying to be combative...

Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

They already had a system in place before the Apostle's passed off the scene (Acts 2:42).
They made their own disciples who knew what was going on.
They were willing to die for it and few people are willing to die for a lie.
This Bible changes people's lives.
Predictive prophecy that people try to lie about has come true.

What we have are some original fragments that were given a later date.
They wrote on papyrus that wore out and were copied down.

It wasn't a closed system. Jesus went to many towns, He healed many people, He fed the 5,000. There were many eyewitnesses. There were over 70 disciples. There were over 500 witnesses to His resurrection.

I believe it. I trust it.

What validity do the critics have when they hate it, they don't have the tools to study it and they are reading someone else's letters which aren't written to them so they are confused.

 

[pacer]

What validity do the critics have when they hate it, they don't have the tools to study it and they are reading someone else's letters which aren't written to them so they are confused.

Likewise, under whose authority do you say it is valid?

 

[norwegen]

THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK on Christian beliefs as I respect the grand majority of Christians, see them to be wonderful people and wonderful contributors to the community, and have no right to say that what they believe is wrong.

However, I have a question; given that the New Testament was written ~30-60 years AFTER the death of Jesus Christ (correct me if I’m wrong), aren’t you at all concerned that the authors might have:

(1) Forgotten some key details, exact words, etc (I mean, do you remember what you ate for lunch March 3rd, 2009? I don’t)
(2) Altered some things to make the story more interesting

Fair question, right?

I mean, imagine if followers (ie disciples) of President Obama were to create a biography of his SIXTY years from now (specifically his followers) – from memory – don’t you think it’d be just a little bit skewed? Would you consider their account to be valid? I know I wouldn't, and would demand backup/proof! Would you?

These are just honest questions from a non-Christian. I'm not trying to be combative...

The bible was written by Godly men inspired (God breathed) BY GOD EVERY WORD.

Assuming that is true, does it take into account political actions like committees deciding which books were good enough to be in a Bible or kings using Bibles for political reasons like King James I or even just the work of translators or stuff lost along the way when oral traditions were all we had?

Oral traditions were never all we've had. In fact, more texts have been found since the Bible was canonized.

 

[GISMYS]

Do you really think Almighty God would have problems having Godly men choose only those books inspired by God(God breathed) to be included in the Holybible????

 

[JakeStarkey]

What validity do the critics have when they hate it, they don't have the tools to study it and they are reading someone else's letters which aren't written to them so they are confused.

Likewise, under whose authority do you say it is valid?

Exactly the point.

 

[KevinWestern]

THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK on Christian beliefs as I respect the grand majority of Christians, see them to be wonderful people and wonderful contributors to the community, and have no right to say that what they believe is wrong.

However, I have a question; given that the New Testament was written ~30-60 years AFTER the death of Jesus Christ (correct me if I’m wrong), aren’t you at all concerned that the authors might have:

(1) Forgotten some key details, exact words, etc (I mean, do you remember what you ate for lunch March 3rd, 2009? I don’t)
(2) Altered some things to make the story more interesting

Fair question, right?

I mean, imagine if followers (ie disciples) of President Obama were to create a biography of his SIXTY years from now (specifically his followers) – from memory – don’t you think it’d be just a little bit skewed? Would you consider their account to be valid? I know I wouldn't, and would demand backup/proof! Would you?

These are just honest questions from a non-Christian. I'm not trying to be combative...

Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

They already had a system in place before the Apostle's passed off the scene (Acts 2:42).
They made their own disciples who knew what was going on.
This Bible changes people's lives.
Predictive prophecy that people try to lie about has come true.

What we have are some original fragments that were given a later date.
They wrote on papyrus that wore out and were copied down.

It wasn't a closed system. Jesus went to many towns, He healed many people, He fed the 5,000. There were many eyewitnesses. There were over 70 disciples. There were over 500 witnesses to His resurrection.

I believe it. I trust it.

What validity do the critics have when they hate it, they don't have the tools to study it and they are reading someone else's letters which aren't written to them so they are confused.

Again, just to challenge this idea... you say he fed 5,000 and there were over 500 witnesses to his other works, etc, but how do you know this? There are events that happened within our lifetimes that had cameras rolling, sound recording, and live written testimony and we STILL don’t know what the heck actually happened (ie the Kennedy assassination, for instance).

 

[GISMYS]

You get to choose,you will believe God's eternal living word or satan's lies! you choose!

 

[pacer]

What validity do the critics have when they hate it, they don't have the tools to study it and they are reading someone else's letters which aren't written to them so they are confused.

Likewise, under whose authority do you say it is valid?

Exactly the point.

lol Let me rephrase that. If we do not have the tools to study the bible, under whose authority can anyone say it is valid?

 

[Bumberclyde]

Likewise, under whose authority do you say it is valid?

Exactly the point.

lol Let me rephrase that. If we do not have the tools to study the bible, under whose authority can anyone say it is valid?

None of the major points in the bible can be proven. No one can say that the bible is valid. Science has even disproved a lot of it.