The bible

[Mr_Moore]

Which are the strongest proof that the bible contains the words of god?
Which are the biggest flaws in the bible? Include both big and subtle contradictions. Or what ever you wish to include.
Why are humans the middlemen to god? Why should another human direct me to him? Why communicate his words through a book which he knew people would question? Why should we believe in it? Why is questioning god bad?
Everything we have achieved so far we have achieved through knowing, not through hoping or guessing. Why accept an assumption?
How can i believe?

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Which are the strongest proof that the bible contains the words of god?
Which are the biggest flaws in the bible?


[/ QUOTE ]

Two books which might help:

Evidence That Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell.

Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties by Gleason Archer. ( I haven't read this one because I use the Tektonics web site, which I also recommend, but have seen many good reviews from theologians I respect).

[Mr_Moore]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Which are the strongest proof that the bible contains the words of god?
Which are the biggest flaws in the bible?


[/ QUOTE ]

Two books which might help:

Evidence That Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell.

Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties by Gleason Archer. ( I haven't read this one because I use the Tektonics web site, which I also recommend, but have seen many good reviews from theologians I respect).

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks, perhaps you want to share what you learned from the first book? You are religious?

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Thanks, perhaps you want to sha re what you learned from the first book? You are religious?


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm a conservative, evangelical, semi-Calvinist, Bible believing, old earth non-evolutionary Christian. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

The Evidence book is, for me, mostly a good introduction into things like how we got the Bible, why it's reliable, and some stuff on archeology. The best feature is it has an extensive bibliography of more scholarly works - if you get interested in one area, you have good references for in depth study.

[Mr_Moore]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Thanks, perhaps you want to sha re what you learned from the first book? You are religious?


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm a conservative, evangelical, semi-Calvinist, Bible believing, old earth non-evolutionary Christian. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

The Evidence book is, for me, mostly a good introduction into things like how we got the Bible, why it's reliable, and some stuff on archeology. The best feature is it has an extensive bibliography of more scholarly works - if you get interested in one area, you have good references for in depth study.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see, would it be possible to get some explanation to "why it's reliable".

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

I see, would it be possible to get some explanation to "why it's reliable".


[/ QUOTE ]

We know the texts we have are virtually 100% accurate relative to the originals. So we can believe we have the Bible as it was written.

Why we think it's God's Word is a much more complex question. One good indicator is the way archeology has confirmed much of what the Bible says about people, places and events of that time.

A good site dealing with science and the Bible is reasons.org. Though I think they somewhat overstate the case, they do go into a lot of detail as to why there is no real conflict and a lot of positive stuff of how they agree.

One of the best Bible scholars of the last 60 years was F.F. Bruce . This online book goes into some detail about the New Testament.

[Mr_Moore]

[ QUOTE ]
One good indicator is the way archeology has confirmed much of what the Bible says about people, places and events of that time.

[/ QUOTE ]

So the confirmation of places and events makes you certain that the rest of what's written is true as well?

[MiloMinderbinder]

[ QUOTE ]
Why we think it's God's Word is a much more complex question. One good indicator is the way archeology has confirmed much of what the Bible says about people, places and events of that time.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is meaningless.

Any contemporary book mentions people, places, and events. The only thing that is relevant is whether archeology confirms the "supernatural" aspects of the Bible, not the mundane aspects. Otherwise one could say that Joseph Smith's writings are supported by historical evidence as well -- as I do believe the people, places, and events he has written about are of ample evidence .... except all the angels, God speaking directly to him, and those other trifling details. There's also ample evidence that Waco did exist, as did the Branch Davidians and their compound. Hmmm, based on that overwhelming evidence, maybe David Koresh was the next messiah after all.

[Mr_Moore]

Don't forget that questioning the Bible is really held on par with blasphemy in the Christian church. Blasphemy is pretty important, as to some it's the only unforgivable sin (Matt. 12:31).

Any comments on this?

[MiloMinderbinder]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't forget that questioning the Bible is really held on par with blasphemy in the Christian church. Blasphemy is pretty important, as to some it's the only unforgivable sin (Matt. 12:31).

Any comments on this?

[/ QUOTE ]

"Christianity has done its utmost to close the circle and declared even doubt to be sin. One is supposed to be cast into belief without reason, by a miracle, and from then on to swim in it as in the brightest and least ambiguous of elements: even a glance towards land, even the thought that one perhaps exists for something else as well as swimming, even the slightest impulse of our amphibious nature- is sin! And notice that all this means that the foundation of belief and all reflection on its origin is likewise excluded as sinful. What is wanted are blindness and intoxication and an eternal song over the waves in which reason has drowned."

from Nietzsche's Daybreaks.