on why the bible is a reliable resource

SteveB

Well-known member

Overview​

How did we get the Bible? How do we know it is reliable? How do we know we have the right books? What about translations?

The ability to answer these questions is an important component of the Christian life in the 21st Century. Applying his expertise to this area David Gooding explains why we can be confident that the Bible is God’s word.


A collection of articles, and audio lectures on the reliability of the bible.
 

Mr Laurier

Active member
Unlike the diplomatic records of Mittani, Hattusha, and Babylon, The bible fails to say anything about the Atenist period in Egypt.
The bible also fails to mention the bronze age collapse of 1500 bce to 1050 bce. A catastrophic drought and famine that ravaged the region, and brought down most of the states and empires of the Mediterranean and Tigris Euphrates basin areas.
The bible vaguely alludes to Hittites, as though they were a minor city state or tribe, instead of the massive and powerful empire that threatened Egypt for decades.
It also fails to mention the centuries when Palestine was under direct Egyptian rule.

We got the current bible through committees that decided what would be included, and what would be excluded.
And the Russian Orthodox church has 77 books in their bible. As does the Coptic church.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
Unlike the diplomatic records of Mittani, Hattusha, and Babylon, The bible fails to say anything about the Atenist period in Egypt.
The bible also fails to mention the bronze age collapse of 1500 bce to 1050 bce. A catastrophic drought and famine that ravaged the region, and brought down most of the states and empires of the Mediterranean and Tigris Euphrates basin areas.
The bible vaguely alludes to Hittites, as though they were a minor city state or tribe, instead of the massive and powerful empire that threatened Egypt for decades.
So.... your problem here is that the bible doesn't spend what you want to be sufficient time, on cultures the biblical narrative described as evil governments and societies that practiced extensive evils, which were directly responsible for destroying their own civilizations.

Ok.... and I'm supposed to be bothered by this......

Why?

It also fails to mention the centuries when Palestine was under direct Egyptian rule.
Again.....
And.....
Why?
We got the current bible through committees that decided what would be included, and what would be excluded.


And the Russian Orthodox church has 77 books in their bible. As does the Coptic church.

Hmm......
This Coptic bible has 66 books.

And the Russian orthodox bible is also 66 books.
I have numerous bible apps, and they show 66 books.

So I have to say.....
And?
If I wanted to read nice stories, I know that I can easily get the version you're talking about


If I wanted to follow Jesus, then I would get the version I have.

And just because you're making an unsubstantiated claim doesn't make it so.
 

The Pixie

Active member

Overview​

How did we get the Bible? How do we know it is reliable? How do we know we have the right books? What about translations?

The ability to answer these questions is an important component of the Christian life in the 21st Century. Applying his expertise to this area David Gooding explains why we can be confident that the Bible is God’s word.


A collection of articles, and audio lectures on the reliability of the bible.
Your linked web site seems to be addressing the question (and I quote from it) "When we read the New Testament can we be certain that we have substantially what the New Testament writers originally wrote?"

To me, and I guess most sceptics, the issue i about why the authors wrote it. Did they believe it was true? What did they do - if anything - to verify the truth of the stories they were recording? To what extend did they talk to the people who were actually there?

It is great that the gospels have - for the most part - being reliably transmitted, but that does not count for anything if what was originally recorded was not true.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
Your linked web site seems to be addressing the question (and I quote from it) "When we read the New Testament can we be certain that we have substantially what the New Testament writers originally wrote?"

To me, and I guess most sceptics, the issue i about why the authors wrote it. Did they believe it was true? What did they do - if anything - to verify the truth of the stories they were recording? To what extend did they talk to the people who were actually there?

It is great that the gospels have - for the most part - being reliably transmitted, but that does not count for anything if what was originally recorded was not true.
Curious....

Do you base your entire argument on one line of the article?
Do you really think that justifies your opinions?

Seems like a good way to shoot yourself in the face.
 

The Pixie

Active member
Curious....

Do you base your entire argument on one line of the article?
Do you really think that justifies your opinions?

Seems like a good way to shoot yourself in the face.
I read the whole article; I only quoted the one line. Do you understand the difference? You post seems predicated on confusing the two.

Do you actually have an argument to present here? Can you quote a part of the article you linked to that gives us reason to think what the authors wrote actually happened?
 

SteveB

Well-known member
I read the whole article; I only quoted the one line. Do you understand the difference? You post seems predicated on confusing the two.

Do you actually have an argument to present here? Can you quote a part of the article you linked to that gives us reason to think what the authors wrote actually happened?

My post is predicated on the premise that one can actually know the bible is verifiable through action on its principles and precepts.

This is something that atheists are most terrified by, because I think they're afraid it'll actually play out the way we who follow Jesus have been saying for millennia, and recognize the implications, and are not willing to abandon their lifestyle....

Which is pretty much what Jesus said in John 3:18-21

18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. 21 But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.”

I.e., they'd be exposed for who they genuinely are, before a righteous and holy God, who seeks to cleanse they from that which is destroying them, and free them to know genuine life.
 

The Pixie

Active member
My post is predicated on the premise that one can actually know the bible is verifiable through action on its principles and precepts.
Really?

Just reading through it again:

"Curious....
Do you base your entire argument on one line of the article?
Do you really think that justifies your opinions?
Seems like a good way to shoot yourself in the face.
"​

I would never have guessed anything there was predicated on the premise that one can actually know the bible is verifiable through action on its principles and precepts. Perhaps you could make that clearer next time.

This is something that atheists are most terrified by...
Like you know what atheists think.

... because I think they're afraid it'll actually play out the way we who follow Jesus have been saying for millennia, and recognize the implications, and are not willing to abandon their lifestyle....
As you say, those of you who follow Jesus have been saying this for millennia. And still no apocalypse!

Jesus said it would happen within the lifetime of some of his disciples. Paul said it would happen in his life time. Still nothing.

Why is that, do you think?
 

Authentic Nouveau

Well-known member

Overview​

How did we get the Bible? How do we know it is reliable? How do we know we have the right books? What about translations?

The ability to answer these questions is an important component of the Christian life in the 21st Century. Applying his expertise to this area David Gooding explains why we can be confident that the Bible is God’s word.


A collection of articles, and audio lectures on the reliability of the bible.
The guy that responded misquotes the Bible. One of the totally unique features of the Bible is how it puts detailed prophesy in writing. No other Book has such.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
The guy that responded misquotes the Bible. One of the totally unique features of the Bible is how it puts detailed prophesy in writing. No other Book has such.
Indeed. Even YHVH invites us to try our hand at it, and see how it works.





8 Bring out the blind people who have eyes,

And the deaf who have ears.

9 Let all the nations be gathered together,

And let the people be assembled.

Who among them can declare this,

And show us former things?

Let them bring out their witnesses, that they may be justified;

Or let them hear and say, “It is truth.”

10 “You are My witnesses,” says the LORD,

“And My servant whom I have chosen,

That you may know and believe Me,

And understand that I am He.

Before Me there was no God formed,

Nor shall there be after Me.

11 I, even I, am the LORD,

And besides Me there is no savior.

12 I have declared and saved,

I have proclaimed,

And there was no foreign god among you;

Therefore you are My witnesses,”

Says the LORD, “that I am God.

13 Indeed before the day was, I am He;

And there is no one who can deliver out of My hand;

I work, and who will reverse it?”
 

Hypatia_Alexandria

Active member

Overview​

How did we get the Bible? How do we know it is reliable? How do we know we have the right books? What about translations?

The ability to answer these questions is an important component of the Christian life in the 21st Century. Applying his expertise to this area David Gooding explains why we can be confident that the Bible is God’s word.


A collection of articles, and audio lectures on the reliability of the bible.
If these texts are so reliable why do they contain so many contradictions?
 

SteveB

Well-known member
Really?

Just reading through it again:

"Curious....
Do you base your entire argument on one line of the article?
Do you really think that justifies your opinions?
Seems like a good way to shoot yourself in the face."​

I would never have guessed anything there was predicated on the premise that one can actually know the bible is verifiable through action on its principles and precepts. Perhaps you could make that clearer next time.
Seems pretty clear--- I asked you a couple of questions, regarding your statements, and I then made a statement on how obtuse I thought the statements you made were, in a manner that would show the magnitude of the obtuseness.


Like you know what atheists think.
Well, they don't do a very good job of hiding their views, preventing the average thinking person, who's been observing their statements for over 17 years, from seeing them clearly.
Or is your point that no one who disagrees with the views of the atheists are allowed to think for themselves, and must, under all circumstances, regardless, only agree with the way that atheists want them to think?


As you say, those of you who follow Jesus have been saying this for millennia. And still no apocalypse!
As it is written.....
It is yet for a time appointed.

Dan 11:27 NKJV - "Both these kings' hearts [shall be] bent on evil, and they shall speak lies at the same table; but it shall not prosper, for the end [will] still [be] at the appointed time.

Dan 11:35 NKJV - "And [some] of those of understanding shall fall, to refine them, purify [them], and make [them] white, [until] the time of the end; because [it is] still for the appointed time.

So, don't think that because you have not yet seen, or heard about it taking place, it's not going to happen.
Even Peter deals with this in his letter.

1 Beloved, I now write to you this second epistle (in both of which I stir up your pure minds by way of reminder), 2 that you may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us, the apostles of the Lord and Savior, 3 knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, 4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.” 5 For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, 6 by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. 7 But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

The Day of the Lord​

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up. 11 Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, 12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.

Be Steadfast​

14 Therefore, beloved, looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless; 15 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.

17 You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked; 18 but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

To Him be the glory both now and forever. Amen.


So.... fret not. It's coming when God decides the time is right. Not a minute before, nor a minute later.

Jesus said it would happen within the lifetime of some of his disciples. Paul said it would happen in his life time. Still nothing.
No. Actually Paul did not say that.
Jesus said that the generation that sees all these things shall not pass away until all is fulfilled.
As the apostles, and disciples of his did not see all that was described in his sermon, it was for yet a time appointed, just as Daniel was told in Daniel 11.


Why is that, do you think?
Because you've bought into a lie, that is not stated in the bible, but by corrupted people who have rejected Jesus.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
If these texts are so reliable why do they contain so many contradictions?
I'd say it's because people who don't like the bible, don't understand the nature of paradoxes, and complex thought.
It appears they want easy, and are afraid of simple, so they need to conflate matters which are not conflateable.
I'm sure there's more to it than just those things, but I'd say you just need to slow down, and stop reading for the purpose of winning an argument--- which really is not winnable.
 

Tiburon

Member
I'd say it's because people who don't like the bible, don't understand the nature of paradoxes, and complex thought.
It appears they want easy, and are afraid of simple, so they need to conflate matters which are not conflateable.
I'm sure there's more to it than just those things, but I'd say you just need to slow down, and stop reading for the purpose of winning an argument--- which really is not winnable.
A paradox is supposed to make some kind of point. Contradictions just mean that someone has screwed up.
 

Tiburon

Member

Overview​

How did we get the Bible? How do we know it is reliable? How do we know we have the right books? What about translations?

The ability to answer these questions is an important component of the Christian life in the 21st Century. Applying his expertise to this area David Gooding explains why we can be confident that the Bible is God’s word.


A collection of articles, and audio lectures on the reliability of the bible.
Reliable in what way? Historically? Spiritually?
 

The Pixie

Active member
The Pixie said:
I would never have guessed anything there was predicated on the premise that one can actually know the bible is verifiable through action on its principles and precepts. Perhaps you could make that clearer next time.
Seems pretty clear--- I asked you a couple of questions, regarding your statements, and I then made a statement on how obtuse I thought the statements you made were, in a manner that would show the magnitude of the obtuseness.
So in fact nothing predicated on the premise that one can actually know the bible is verifiable through action on its principles and precepts.

As I said.

Well, they don't do a very good job of hiding their views, preventing the average thinking person, who's been observing their statements for over 17 years, from seeing them clearly.
We do not hide them. It is quite simple: We do not believe any God exists.

That is not the problem. The problem is that Christians insist we hate God (or worship Satan!), not realising that being an atheist means you do not believe God exists.

Or is your point that no one who disagrees with the views of the atheists are allowed to think for themselves, and must, under all circumstances, regardless, only agree with the way that atheists want them to think?
I would love it if you could think for yourself, Steve.

As it is written.....
It is yet for a time appointed.
Religion is in the business of marketing "jam tomorrow". Sure, no apocalypse yet, but some day, and soon, so join up fast. Sure, no benefit for you in this life, but some day, after you die.

What Christianity sells is exactly the same as Islam sells or Hinduism or all the rest. Empty promises.

Dan 11:27 NKJV - "Both these kings' hearts [shall be] bent on evil, and they shall speak lies at the same table; but it shall not prosper, for the end [will] still [be] at the appointed time.

Dan 11:35 NKJV - "And [some] of those of understanding shall fall, to refine them, purify [them], and make [them] white, [until] the time of the end; because [it is] still for the appointed time.

So, don't think that because you have not yet seen, or heard about it taking place, it's not going to happen.
Daniel is another great example of someone claiming the apocalypse is just around the corner. It was written around 165 BC (or at least the last few chapters, earlier chapters may be earlier). Chapters 10 and 11 make various so-called predictions about events up to when it was written, but at Dan 11:36 it moves into speculation, with Antiochus conquering Egypt (in fact he died of disease very shortly after), and then confidently predicting the apocalypse within just a few years - specifically 1,290 days.

Of course, the church has conditioned its followers to blindly believe any nonsense. Sure, the author of Daniel said the apocalypse would be in about 160 BC, but we can pretend he really meant something else. Sure Jesus said the apocalypse would be within the lifetime of his disciples, but we can pretend he really meant something else. Sure Paul said the apocalypse would be within his lifetime, but we can pretend he really meant something else.

I would love it you you could think for yourself Steve. But I am not holding my breath,

Even Peter deals with this in his letter.

1 Beloved, I now write to you this second epistle (in both of which I stir up your pure minds by way of reminder), 2 that you may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us, the apostles of the Lord and Savior, 3 knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, 4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.” 5 For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, 6 by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. 7 But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
Wow, you found a fourth example. Here we have Peter (or whoever) saying he is living in the last days. He wrote that letter to a specific group of people living at that time; the warning was to those people, alive when he was, and - as he believed - living in the last days.

8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.
And so all the failed claims of apocalypse coming are rationalised away.

Never mind what Jesus actually said. Never mind what Paul actually said. Just pretend it does not apply, and rely on the fact that theists cannot think for themselves.

No. Actually Paul did not say that.
Yes, actually he did. Go read 1 Cor 15. Paul talks about the coming apocalypse, when all the righteous will be resurrected. But what of those who are not dead at that time? Clearly they will not be resurrected! But they will be transformed, he assures us. And he counts himself among those who will be transformed, rather than resurrected.

1 Cor 15:51 Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised [r]imperishable, and we will be changed.

Jesus said that the generation that sees all these things shall not pass away until all is fulfilled.
Or so you have been told to think, anyway. Never mind what Jesus actually meant, just believe what you are told to think.

Here is the actual verse.

Mat 24:34 Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.

Again, Steve, I urge you to think for yourself. Read the verses, and see what they really say, not what you are told to see there.
 

Mr Laurier

Active member
So.... your problem here is that the bible doesn't spend what you want to be sufficient time, on cultures the biblical narrative described as evil governments and societies that practiced extensive evils, which were directly responsible for destroying their own civilizations.
Not at all.
My "problem" is that the writers of the bible were ignorant of real events in the fertile crescent. Events that were documented by everyone else.
Of course this "problem" goes away when you understand that the bible was written by men who had recently migrated into the Falastam region, from the west shore of the Persian Gulf.
Men who were just learning civilization from the Persians. And who knew nothing of life before the rise of Persia.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
Not at all.
My "problem" is that the writers of the bible were ignorant of real events in the fertile crescent. Events that were documented by everyone else.
then they were documented by everyone else.
I suppose I'm not real concerned by this.
I read a local paper. I see local news.
If I want regional news, I go to a regional paper. If I want national news, I look at a national paper. If I want global news, I use a global news source.
If this is why you're bothered, then you don't grasp the concept of local, regional, national, and global. And quite frankly, I don't know how to help you understand something that people in my generation never had a problem with.


Of course this "problem" goes away when you understand that the bible was written by men who had recently migrated into the Falastam region, from the west shore of the Persian Gulf.
So, you're bothered that people who lived in the western edge of the region, originally came from the eastern edge of the region, and received the western edge as their inheritance....
Again.... this is a lack of understanding of how local, regional, national, and global news works.
I just don't look at local sources for regional, or national news.
they may have more important stories--- per the perspective of the editor/publisher.
So, the stories depend on the observers to publish them. If observers from Israel did not exist, then they wouldn't have the stories to tell.


Men who were just learning civilization from the Persians. And who knew nothing of life before the rise of Persia.
I have a novel idea....
Build a time machine, bring several news reporters with you. go to ancient Israel, grab a few dozen people, and then go deeper into the middle east. Spread them out, get them engaged in what's happening elsewhere, and then afterwards, take them back, and have them spread the news of other's lives....
Then you'll have what you want.

Until you understand that the way people lived back then you'll never comprehend why the bible doesn't tell everyone's story, from every part of planet earth.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
A paradox is supposed to make some kind of point. Contradictions just mean that someone has screwed up.
No. what you call contradictions are simply writers speaking from different perspectives.

Ever seen the movie with Matt Fox, and Forrest Whitaker?
Vantage Point. It came out in 2008

It's a story about an assassination plot, told from several different perspectives.
It shows a great job of how they have to deal what appears to be a series of contradictions, but are in fact observations from unrelated sources.

The bible has the same thing.
Mark told Peter's account.
Luke interviewed numerous eye witnesses, and collected their accounts into a single document.
John told his from memory, some 60 years later.
And Matthew told his own account.

So..... why don't you try learning to understand how eyewitness testimony works from the perspective of the police.

It'll go a long way to help you understand the importance of what you consider contradictions.
 
Top