Is the Bible the Word of God?

[GTAVercetti 0]

Very nice post. One thing I never understood is the whole, "no, those are Israel's laws. They do not apply to us."

And yet, the same people who say that are the ones who say, "The Bible is the WORD OF GOD. Everything in it is what He wants."

So, how then, is it okay to say that certain portions only apply to a theocracy and not to everyone who follow what the Bible teaches?

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Very nice post. One thing I never understood is the whole, "no, those are Israel's laws. They do not apply to us."

And yet, the same people who say that are the ones who say, "The Bible is the WORD OF GOD. Everything in it is what He wants."

So, how then, is it okay to say that certain portions only apply to a theocracy and not to everyone who follow what the Bible teaches?

From post #76: "The Bible is not only a book of morals. It also gives a long historical account of the Jewish people and the Nation of Israel."

It describes their trials, tribulations, mistakes, accomplishments, etc. Because of this, the Bible IS the Word of God. Everything in it, however, is not necessarily "what He wants." Plenty of people did things in the Bible that God did not approve of.

[billvon 2,990]

>So, how then, is it okay to say that certain portions only apply to a
>theocracy and not to everyone who follow what the Bible teaches?

Because people today disagree with a lot of what the bible teaches. To continue to claim that one adheres to it, one needs a way to invalidate the parts one disagrees with. I've always found it easier to just realize that it's a moral guide, not a lawbook or science book - but some people fear that will dilute its power, I think.

[rasmack 0]

Quote

... I've always found it easier to just realize that it's a moral guide, not a lawbook or science book - but some people fear that will dilute its power, I think.

Well, they're right aren't they? Anyone can make a book of morals. If you boil the Bible and christianity down to that, then there's no difference to any other religion.

HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...

[billvon 2,990]

>Well, they're right aren't they?

If their objective is to prove their religion is right and everyone else's is wrong, then I suppose that would weaken the power of their primary document. I think that's a silly use of the bible, though. It's a guide to living your life and fitting religion into it, not a battering ram to knock down other religions.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Well, they're right aren't they? Anyone can make a book of morals. If you boil the Bible and christianity down to that, then there's no difference to any other religion.

But you can't just boil it down to that...

Here's why...

Why believe in Christianity over all other religions? ---Don't all paths lead to God?

Quote

"Why should anyone trust in Christianity over Islam, Buddhism, Mormonism, or anything else? It is because there are absolute truths, because only in Christianity is there accurate fulfilled prophecies of a coming Messiah. Only in Christianity do we have the extremely accurate transmission of the eyewitness documents (gospels) so we can trust what was originally written. Only in Christianity do we have the person of Christ who claimed to be God, performed many miracles to prove His claim of divinity, who died and rose from the dead, and who said that He alone was the way the truth and the life (John 14:6). All this adds to the legitimacy and credibility of Christianity above all other religions -- all based on the person of Jesus. If follows that if it is all true about what Jesus said and did, then all other religions are false because Jesus said that He alone was the way, the truth, and the life and that no one comes to the Father except through Him (John 14:6). It could not be that Jesus is the only way and truth and other religions also be the truth."

[GTAVercetti 0]

Quote

Quote

Very nice post. One thing I never understood is the whole, "no, those are Israel's laws. They do not apply to us."

And yet, the same people who say that are the ones who say, "The Bible is the WORD OF GOD. Everything in it is what He wants."

So, how then, is it okay to say that certain portions only apply to a theocracy and not to everyone who follow what the Bible teaches?

From post #76: "The Bible is not only a book of morals. It also gives a long historical account of the Jewish people and the Nation of Israel."

It describes their trials, tribulations, mistakes, accomplishments, etc. Because of this, the Bible IS the Word of God. Everything in it, however, is not necessarily "what He wants." Plenty of people did things in the Bible that God did not approve of.

So God just wanted to tell us history for a greater portion of the Bible? He was just making a record of events? I really don't see this equality:

history of a nation == Word of God.

Who decided that God's Law is different than Israel's? If Israel was a theocracy following God, why would their laws be different than His? They should be the same, and since Jesus says we should follow God's Law, why do we not follow Israel's?

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

So God just wanted to tell us history for a greater portion of the Bible? He was just making a record of events? I really don't see this equality:

history of a nation == Word of God.

That’s part of it, though. As you said, a large portion of the Bible is comprised of history. It illustrates a big learning curve on the part of humanity. It shows examples of people’s failings in the past to follow God and the consequences of such. God’s commandments, expectations and foretelling are incorporated within that. It appears that you’re really trying to simplify the whole concept. Nothing “real” is every really that simple.

Quote

Who decided that God's Law is different than Israel's? If Israel was a theocracy following God, why would their laws be different than His? They should be the same, and since Jesus says we should follow God's Law, why do we not follow Israel's?

I never said they were “all different.” I explained earlier the different laws of the Old Testament and why they either still apply or don’t. Anyway, why would the laws of Iran not be exactly the same as those of Sudan? They’re both Islamic Theocracies controlled by leaders who follow Allah. Do their laws coincide exactly with what is illustrated in the Qu’ran? I’ll bet they don’t.

[GTAVercetti 0]

Quote

I never said they were “all different.” I explained earlier the different laws of the Old Testament and why they either still apply or don’t. Anyway, why would the laws of Iran not be exactly the same as those of Sudan? They’re both Islamic Theocracies controlled by leaders who follow Allah. Do their laws coincide exactly with what is illustrated in the Qu’ran? I’ll bet they don’t.

Ahh, but the difference is that Iran and Sudan's laws are NOT all within the Qu'ran. However, Israel's are in a book which is the word of God. I know that Jesus negated burnt offering laws and food consumption rules, but is there a place in the bible which says that the remaining laws of Israel are NOT to be followed?

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Ahh, but the difference is that Iran and Sudan's laws are NOT all within the Qu'ran. However, Israel's are in a book which is the word of God. I know that Jesus negated burnt offering laws and food consumption rules, but is there a place in the bible which says that the remaining laws of Israel are NOT to be followed?

I've explained why God's word is within the history of the Jewish people. Maybe my example sucked. Sorry. Anyway, can you quote what you're talking about concerning "the remaining laws of Israel are NOT to be followed?"

[GTAVercetti 0]

Quote

Quote

Ahh, but the difference is that Iran and Sudan's laws are NOT all within the Qu'ran. However, Israel's are in a book which is the word of God. I know that Jesus negated burnt offering laws and food consumption rules, but is there a place in the bible which says that the remaining laws of Israel are NOT to be followed?

I've explained why God's word is within the history of the Jewish people. Maybe my example sucked. Sorry. Anyway, can you quote what you're talking about concerning "the remaining laws of Israel are NOT to be followed?"

I am simply going on what you said and what I know of the Bible. Jesus did away with dietary laws (according to some)...and in fact, even this is hotly contested.

But when did he say, "hey guys, you don't have to follow all those other old Hebrew laws anymore."

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[tso-d_chris 0]

Quote

Definitely, but prophesying a humble birth is a bit different than comparing the Son of God to a pornstar. I mean, there's nothing inately evil about being poor.

Is there something innately evil about being a porn star?

[pajarito 0]

Quote

I am simply going on what you said and what I know of the Bible. Jesus did away with dietary laws (according to some)...and in fact, even this is hotly contested.

But when did he say, "hey guys, you don't have to follow all those other old Hebrew laws anymore."

He didn’t and neither did I. I never said that they were “all” invalid. I simply said that many of them don’t apply anymore (according to Jesus) or were never established as laws handed down by God. In reference to other Jewish laws of that time, I think that it’s safe to say that we should follow Jesus’ example {(WWJD – What would Jesus do?) based on (WDJD – What did Jesus do?)}. For example, he obeyed the Sabbath (Luke 4:16, Exodus 20:8) described in both the Old and New Testaments. He considered sexual immorality to be a sin (Lev. 18:22). Jesus said if a man even looks upon another woman with lust, he has already committed adultery in his heart. (Matt. 5:32; Matt. 5:19; Matt. 19:9). Tithing is an Old Testament concept (Leviticus 27:30; Numbers 18:26; Deuteronomy 14:24; 2 Chronicles 31:5) that Jesus also approved of (Matthew 23:23).

[Zenister 0]

Quote

Here's why...

Why believe in Christianity over all other religions? ---Don't all paths lead to God?

Quote

"Why should anyone trust in Christianity over Islam, Buddhism, Mormonism, or anything else? It is because there are absolute truths, because only in Christianity is there accurate fulfilled prophecies of a coming Messiah. Only in Christianity do we have the extremely accurate transmission of the eyewitness documents (gospels) so we can trust what was originally written. Only in Christianity do we have the person of Christ who claimed to be God, performed many miracles to prove His claim of divinity, who died and rose from the dead, and who said that He alone was the way the truth and the life (John 14:6). All this adds to the legitimacy and credibility of Christianity above all other religions -- all based on the person of Jesus. If follows that if it is all true about what Jesus said and did, then all other religions are false because Jesus said that He alone was the way, the truth, and the life and that no one comes to the Father except through Him (John 14:6). It could not be that Jesus is the only way and truth and other religions also be the truth."

this is completely a statement of FAITH, with very few FACTS to back it, and so has zero 'legitimacy' in relation to any other religions 'Truth'..... there are so many instances of self referencing arguments, inductive reasoning, and blatantly 'faith based' fallacy in that quote it is simply not worth picking apart logically....

but if your belief helps you sleep comfortably in the assurance that your faith is 'right' and all others are 'wrong' well....

MANY other paths lead to God, but only one to the vison of God created by the Xtian mythos... good thing God isnt limited by the vision of Man...

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

but if your belief helps you sleep comfortably in the assurance that your faith is 'right' and all others are 'wrong' well....

I sleep very well...
Well, most nights....
Thank you.

Added: Man, I wish I was at the WFFC. Instead........................here I am.

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

Perhaps you could talk a little more about why you feel what I said was disrespectful and why you feel it was an attack.

I definitely didn't feel like you were attacking any of us by those comments. It was just a bit over the top (in my world) to compare Christ to a porn star. But if you were raised in an uninhibited world where you didn't have to be considerate of others' "sensitivities" and watch what you say, it's understandable. Not excuseable, just understandable.

But we should get back to the real issue... Has God revealed himself to man? What IS the word of God?....

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[GTAVercetti 0]

Tithing is an Old Testament concept (Leviticus 27:30; Numbers 18:26; Deuteronomy 14:24; 2 Chronicles 31:5) that Jesus also approved of (Matthew 23:23).

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Matthew 23:23 states:

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier [matters] of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

He was bashing them for tithing, not saying how good it is.

Negative...
Re-read the last part of the verse. He said "these aught ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone." Or, as my NIV (easier for me to read ) states, "You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former."

He was chastising them for putting on a show and not really fulfilling their duties. He was accusing them of tithing, as they should, but only to demonstrate to the crowd how holy & righteous they were. Jesus was in fact labeling them as hypocrites.

[GTAVercetti 0]

Yeah, I noticed that part after I posted but was too lazy to delete.

Anyway, the bottom line for me is that this. Nearly everything Jesus said or did had a higher purpose. Therefore, I do not believe that God would spend his time making sure that laws and histories were written down that have no application to his followers TODAY.

Yes, I understand we can learn ideals and attributes from the stories of David or Joshua or whoever, but what exactly can we learn from the law that a woman was considered unclean after menstration and childbirth?

Hence, because I do not think God would have such now trivial information in His Bible, I do not believe the Bible is the direct Word of God.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Hence, because I do not think God would have such now trivial information in His Bible, I do not believe the Bible is the direct Word of God.

Except for the fact that Jesus endorsed it, preached from it (he was a Jew), proclaimed it to be an authoritative source, and his prophesy was fulfilled from it. The Old Testament writers claimed to be speaking God's words and not their own over 2600 times.

[GTAVercetti 0]

And I claim I am speaking the word of God. Therefore I am.

See how easy that is?

If I believe that the Bible is not the direct Word of God, then why would I think that the writers are correct in saying that? I can believe they BELIEVED it, but that does not mean it is true.

You have faith that they are correct. I have faith they are not. There is no way to disprove it without a recursive reference. In the end, it all comes down to faith.

And that is the end.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

And I claim I am speaking the word of God. Therefore I am.

See how easy that is?

I’d say Prove it.
Jesus did.
Talk is cheap.

[AlexCrowley 0]

Quote

[

I definitely didn't feel like you were attacking any of us by those comments. It was just a bit over the top (in my world) to compare Christ to a porn star. But if you were raised in an uninhibited world where you didn't have to be considerate of others' "sensitivities" and watch what you say, it's understandable. Not excuseable, just understandable.

I did not compare Christ to a porn star.

I said that I would not be surprised if the next coming of the messiah was in the form of an ex-junkie pornstar.

Now, if you think there's something quaint and romantic about being born in a barn to a poor carpenter, thats fine.

My point was that the Jews were expecting the Holy King of Kings Terminator and got a meek carpenter who had a way with words and told some decent stories to get across some very simple, yet important, concepts.

Christians say 'ahhh but the Jews misunderstood the prophecies, look, this is quite obviously Jesus - the New Testament tells us so quite plainly!'.

Ok, The Jews, they didnt have a New Testament to work from. Xtians have the benefit of hindsight, they didnt have an Old Testament, and this is what pisses me off..

How arrogant would you have to be to assume that an entire society would just happen to miss all the bits about 'the lamb' and therefor misunderstood Jesus.

Cmon, at that point in history that society was closer to their scripture than most Christians are nowadays. They quoted them from memory and if they blew a word or stumbled they went back to the beginning. People spent their lives studying scripture. And Xtians are arrogant enough to believe that Jesus was an obvious choice as messiah to those people who studied prophecy?!?

Hardly logical, I think.

So whats to say that Christians arent misunderstanding him again this time?

God's word of the day: Haddock.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[GTAVercetti 0]

Another question:

Jesus was prophecized to be of the line of David. Joseph was of the line of David. Mary was not. If Jesus's birth was virgin, how could Jesus be of the line of David?

If it was not a virgin birth, one prophecy goes down. If it was, another falls.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Another question:

Jesus was prophecized to be of the line of David. Joseph was of the line of David. Mary was not. If Jesus's birth was virgin, how could Jesus be of the line of David?

If it was not a virgin birth, one prophecy goes down. If it was, another falls.

Gotta go. I will respond later.

Jay