Since my last topic became a preachy circle-jerk, I have decided to go a different route.

The Bible. The Christian bible (New Testament + old) to be more precise. Whenever someone asks a question about Christianity, it is the first and last. I mean, what would Christianity be without the "sacred book". NOTHING. Well, certainly not evangelical anyway.

My question is thus: how do you get your religion from a book? And not just any book, but one that has been edited, censored, and revised countless times. I have trouble taking literalists seriously. The ones who don't use the bible for inspiration or guidance, but like a fucking rulebook for life. Who wrote the bible? Not god, but men. You are so sure that it is the written word of god. How do you put your trust in fallible men? This is just the authors themselves. Not to mention are the censors, editor, translators, etc... Can you honestly tell me that they didn't inject their own prejudices into the text?

If you are a literalist, are you a King James literalist, or a new revised literalist, or an old greek literalist,...?

Maybe since you can't use bible quotes to annoy me, we will have a gen-uine discussion.

I agree with your ideas in this, but what happened to your other thread? i responded to it yesterday and now its not here.

Sorry, I had a tantrum. Deleted it on a whim. I kinda regret it, but I'm a little quick on the trigger.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by xcarc:

The Bible. The Christian bible (New Testament + old) to be more precise. Whenever someone asks a question about Christianity, it is the first and last. I mean, what would Christianity be without the "sacred book". NOTHING. Well, certainly not evangelical anyway.

Well, it would make sense, wouldnt it? Christainity is a religion that follows Christ, and His teachings.. which were recorded by His disciples.

Should we maybe use Time magazine?

My question is thus: how do you get your religion from a book? And not just any book, but one that has been edited, censored, and revised countless times.

Psalms 119:105 Your word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.

(taken from the evidence bible~~ Compiled by Jordan and Justin Drake)

...1. It is unique in its continuity.

If just 10 people today were picked who were from the same place, born around the same time, spoke the same language, and made about the same amount of money, and were asked to write on just one controversial subject, they would have trouble agreeing with each other. But the Bible stands alone. It was written over a period of 1600 years by more than 40 writers from all walks of life. Some were fisherman; some were politicians. Others were generals or kings, shepherds or historians. They were from 3 different continents, and wrote in 3 different languages. They wrote on hundreds of controversial subjects yet they wrote with agreement and harmony. They wrote in dungeons, in templeson beaches, and on hillsides, during peacetime and during war. Yet their words sound like they came from the same source. So even though 10 people today coulnt write on one controversial subject and agree, God picked 40 different people to write the Bible--and it stands the test of time.

..2.It is unique in its circulation. The invention of the printing press in 1450 made it possible to print books in large quantities. The 1st book printed was the Bible. Since then, the Bible has been read by more people and printed more times than any other book in history. By 1930, over one billion Bibles had been distributed by Bible societies around the world. By 1977, Bible societies alone were printing over 200 million Bibles each year, and this doesnt include the rest of the Bible publishing companies. No one who is interested in knowing the truth can ignore such an important book.

..3. It is unique in its translation. The Bible has been translated into over 1400 languages. No other book even comes close.

..4. It is unique in its survival. In ancient times, books were copied by hand onto manuscripts which were made from parchment and would decay over time. Ancient books are available today only because someone made copies of the originals to preserve them. For example, the original writings of Julius Caeser are no longer around. We know what he wrote only by the copies we have. Only 10 copies still exist, and they were made 1000 years after he died. Oly 600 copies of Homer's The Illiad exist, made 1300 years after the originals were writen. No other book has as many copies of the ancient manuscripts as the Bible. In fact, there are over 24,000 copies of the New TEstament manuscripts, some written within 35 years of the writer's death.

..5. It is unique in withstanding attack.

No other book has been so attacked throughout history as the Bible. In A.D. 300 the Roman emperor Diocletian ordered every Bible burned because he thought that by destroying the Scriptures he could destroy Christianity. Anyone caught with a Bible would be executed. But just 25 years later, the Roman emperor Constantime ordered that 50 perfect copies of the Bible be mad at government expense. The FRench philosopher Voltaire, a skeptic who destoyed the faith of many people, boasted that within 100 years of his death, the Bible would disappear from the face of the earth. Voltaire died in 1728, but the Bible lives on. The irony of history is that 50 years after his death, the Geneva Bible Society moved into his former house and used his printing presses to print thousands of Bibles.

The Bible has also survived criticism. No book has been more attacked for its accuracy. And yet archeologists are proving every year that the Bible's detailed descriptions of historic events are correct.

I have trouble taking literalists seriously. The ones who don't use the bible for inspiration or guidance, but like a fucking rulebook for life.

Actually, all of the above. Just think about it for a second...(and i'm going to speak as if i doubt)

If the bible is God's word, and if He is the Sovereign, then do you think that when He says,"Do this" and "Dont do that", He is meaning it as a suggestion or insipation?

Who wrote the bible? Not god, but men.

This was touched on, but the post is getting way too long already, so i'll hold back for now.

You are so sure that it is the written word of god. How do you put your trust in fallible men?

Again, speaking as if I doubted... If the Bible is God's word, dont you think that He would preserve what He wants written?

This is just the authors themselves. Not to mention are the censors, editor, translators, etc... Can you honestly tell me that they didn't inject their own prejudices into the text?

No, I can not honestly tell you that, but God can... read His Word. Go study the manuscripts for yourself, and let Him show you.



If you are a literalist, are you a King James literalist, or a new revised literalist, or an old greek literalist,...?

If you are asking what Bible i use, the answer is that i have many Bibles. The 3 main ones i use are NIV, King James, & Literal Translation of Greek and Hebrew. Which one i use depends on what my purpose is, and which one happens to be nearby. When i research something, i usually use at least 2.

Maybe since you can't use bible quotes to annoy me, we will have a gen-uine discussion. /QUOTE

My purpose was not to annoy. Neither is this, but it will explain why i was using God's Word.

Ephesians 6:11-17 ... take special note of vs.17

11. Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes.

12. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

13. Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand.

14. Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place,

15. and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace.

16. In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one.

17. Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.

The problem is, using the Bible to prove a point is useless against a non-believer. First off, if they don't believe in God, the Bible isn't infallible to them, which means it proves nothing.

quote:Originally posted by Hexadecimal:

The problem is, using the Bible to prove a point is useless against a non-believer. First off, if they don't believe in God, the Bible isn't infallible to them, which means it proves nothing.

I hate talking like this, but in this forum, it is the only way this will make sense...

Again, as if i doubt... If it truely is God's word, then God's Word says that it (God's Word) can be used for teaching and rebuking..

2 Timothy 3:16,17

16. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

17. so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

and in 2 Timothy 4:2

2. Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage--with great patience and careful instruction.

You expect to prove the accuracy of scripture by quoting said scripture? This is like saying that the bible tells me it's right so it must be true. What about the parts of the bible that have been removed? Were they not equally the "word of god"?

If I remember correctly, didn't Paul's prejudice against women and sex color his writings on the subject? Something about the other NT books being neutral or vague about the place of woman, while Paul put women as unequal and subservient and unable to have power.

quote:Originally posted by xtreem5150ahm:

read His Word. Go study the manuscripts for yourself, and let Him show you.

Exactly how is the bible his word any more than the Qur'an or the Bhagavad Gita or the Vedas? Would god not reveal himself to me through those? They were written by men too, which means that they have as much possiblity to be god's word as the bible.

This is not a matter of faith, but a matter of common sense. Asking me to find god by reading the much battered words of men no better than me is an exercise in futility.

quote:Originally posted by xcarc:

You expect to prove the accuracy of scripture by quoting said scripture? This is like saying that the bible tells me it's right so it must be true. What about the parts of the bible that have been removed? Were they not equally the "word of god"?

If I remember correctly, didn't Paul's prejudice against women and sex color his writings on the subject? Something about the other NT books being neutral or vague about the place of woman, while Paul put women as unequal and subservient and unable to have power.

Originally posted by xtreem5150ahm:

read His Word. Go study the manuscripts for yourself, and let Him show you.

Exactly how is the bible his word any more than the Qur'an or the Bhagavad Gita or the Vedas? Would god not reveal himself to me through those? They were written by men too, which means that they have as much possiblity to be god's word as the bible.

This is not a matter of faith, but a matter of common sense. Asking me to find god by reading the much battered words of men no better than me is an exercise in futility.



Again,

let God show you.



Study the manuscripts.



Read God's Word.

I've said it before, man does not have the ability to convert another man... that is between the Holy Spirit and the individual.

Um, you're not really answering my question are you?

Basically you are of the opinion "god said it, I believe it, that's it". You have little chance to convert my skeptical mind with bullshit circular logic. All I wanted was a decent conversation with people of differing philosophies. What I got was a headache from banging my head against the wall. Thank you very much. </sarcasm>

If anybody can offer some insight, please join in.

quote:Originally posted by xcarc:

Um, you're not really answering my question are you?

very perceptive... i figure you'll just have a topic deleting tantrum.

Basically you are of the opinion "god said it, I believe it, that's it".

no, far from it... in fact, i mostly wish that was the case.

You have little chance to convert my skeptical mind

Do you pay attention at all??!!

[quote]I've said it before, man does not have the ability to convert another man... that is between the Holy Spirit and the individual

This was not meant lightly. Ok, so your skeptical. If you are searching for the Truth, then SEARCH for it. If you are afraid of researching manuscripts and the Bible, try starting with reading some works of people who were skeptical, and converted due to their search. examples: C.S. Lewis, Gen. Lew Wallace (sp?), John Wesley (there are many more, but these are at the tip of my brain cell. Oh, and BTW, their conversion~~~their search had nothing to do with my Walk).

Or perhaps if your bold enough, research early writings of the early church and the way the ecumenical (sp? again, oh well, you'll get over it) councils decided what was canon... and compare it with the Bible and the manuscripts. Stop taking the easy road by believing in what someother mentally lazy person has said about those things...find it out for yourself.

Skeptical is one thing, but being a skeptic on the basis of what someone else has copied from someone else, who has copied from...never mind, i think you get the point.

You've said that the Bible has been altered and even written by fallible man. Don't worry about proving it to someone else, until you have proved it to yourself beyond any doubt.

If you really want the answers, God will lead you... and if your lucky (or unlucky, as the case might be) He will show them to you.

Back to me converting you (or anyone else, for that matter)... long before i stumbled onto TOTSE, I had prayed that I not know if I have planted any seeds that bore fruit, unless it was His Will. My reason for this request, was so I didn't get "big head disease", and allow my self to think it was me. My motives for sharing are not driven by pride (this is one reason why i've said that i am not here for arguement's sake). They are not driven by money or power (i gain nothing earthly for sharing, nor am i concerned about an "atta boy" from God, when i get to Heaven-- in fact, i would imagine that i would be embarrassed if i recieved crowns from God, but that is hard to know, since i am not there yet).

From deep down in the core of whatever is me, I know God is. And that not only brings me great joy (because I am forgiven), but also great fear and sorrow(because i know what kind of sinner i am.. that I helped nail Jesus to the cross like a macbre post-it..to use Tyrant's off colored remark. There are people that i know and love, that i would not want anything to hurt them... but i have... how much more sorrow could i have for having helped Jesus suffer because of my sins, when I Love Him dearly. (no question mark intended.)

I have avoided, and will avoid, my 'testimony' (unless it is the seed that i am to sew), but know this, I have not had blind faith. My Faith has been won by Christ. My Faith has been, is being, and will continue to be cultivated, pruned and shaped by the Holy Spirit (and it has been in spite of me "kicking and screaming" like a three year old.)

May God Bless you in your search for Truth.

xtreem

How about answering my question about Paul and his personal prejudices? And while you're at it, since you are a literalist, do you own slaves? Stoned anyone lately? If you take part of the bible literally, you must take all of literally, right? I mean, you can't just pick and choose.

I don't need to prove anything to myself. I cannot take any written text as "gospel", because of what it is. The bible, like all text, is the word of man, not god. What I wanted to know is how anybody can, knowing what the bible is, take it as the word of god. Is it self-delusion or something? See what you want to see, hear what you want to hear, regardless of the literal content.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by xcarc:

How about answering my question about Paul and his personal prejudices?

zzzzoooooommmmm... right over your head again.

Research it yourself. That is fine that you dont want to take my word for anything. But apparently, the only thing you are willing to accept, is your own ideas (based on something that someone else wrote down...i forget, is this called irony. Anyway, i am assuming that your belief is based off of someone elses work. But maybe it was a revelation from God, in which case then, your own arguement is against you).

The reason why i meantioned Lewis and Wallace, is that they also did not believe, and did there own research in order to prove the Bible wrong..once and for all...but because of there research, they came to believe. As far as Wesly, i can not remember his story, but i think it was the same situation (anyway, you mentioned slaves..check this guy out...as for me owning slaves, can a lowly serf own anything? I am owned).

And while you're at it, since you are a literalist, do you own slaves?

..as for me owning slaves, can a lowly serf own anything? I am owned... Jesus bought me..and if i recall, His Blood was the payment.

Stoned anyone lately?

You nearly were, but hey, literally, i should turn the other cheek.

If you take part of the bible literally, you must take all of literally, right?

If I were perfect, yes. But i am a sinner, so i fall short more times a day than you can shake a stick at.

I mean, you can't just pick and choose.

Sure i can. That is what is called 'sinful rebellion'. It is something that we all do.

I don't need to prove anything to myself.

So what are your motives? Trying to convert me to atheism? You'ld have to arm wrestle God just for the right to try. Or is your motive to prove how many times you can reject God,?

I cannot take any written text as "gospel", because of what it is.

So, if you were God, how would you give your creation proof of yourself, but still give them the option of choosing? Write it in stone, yourself? People would still say it was just an accident of nature or maybe they would say,"is that really what He meant?"... Hmmm, both of those things already happen, now-a-days, even.

The bible, like all text, is the word of man, not god.

Prove it.

What I wanted to know is how anybody can, knowing what the bible is, take it as the word of god.

Exactly why i take it literally. I take it literal, because it is the Literal Word of God, Divinely inspired.

Is it self-delusion or something?

Far from it. I could ask you almost the same question... oh ya, in so many words, i already have.

See what you want to see, hear what you want to hear, regardless of the literal content.

I would like to know if, in TOTSE, i have shown that i have not taken the Bible as literal. I would also say "in my life", but since i doubt if you know me personally, so I'll leave it as just "TOTSE". I dont know, maybe i have left that impression, but i doubt it.

*bangs head against wall repeatedly*

This thread has gone nowhere. I am walking away, but out of respect to all who posted, I will NOT have tantrum and go all stabbity on the thread. If anyone ELSE thinks they can respond to my original query with logic or even hateful opinion, they are more than welcome to post. In that event, I will respond.

PS-I have purposely kept my belief or nonbelief in a diety ambiguous. Tis not good to assume.

quote:Originally posted by xtreem5150ahm:



The Bible has also survived criticism. No book has been more attacked for its accuracy. And yet archeologists are proving every year that the Bible's detailed descriptions of historic events are correct.



Topic: Israel says important Biblical artifacts may be forged. (http://www.totse.com/bbs/Forum15/HTML/003396.html)

While I agree that a Christian can certainly communicate with God for truth, they can also be easily misled by the devil in disguise. Likewise, translations of the Bible can make GREAT difference in faith, not to mention interpretation. You cannot refute the dispute between Protestant and Catholic; primarily in the material state/s of Christ and the worship of graven images. There are matters of translation in ONE word that can change the course of doctrine, timshel; the matter of predestination or free will. The compilation of a Bible-and yes, there are many versions-derives themselves from ancient manuscripts that are regarded as credible by some sects and not by others. These are every Christian, the ones who may regard the Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus as contradictory and pagan in suggestion["His origins are from old, from ancient times", can be taken as demigod status like Egyptian kings, and that he was born prior to Micah.], to the Catholics who hold them as tradition and the way. There is certainly doubt in the credibility of each version, or else there would not be such division amongst denominations.

For one example: http://www.crossspot.net/ldprophet/KJV-1611-Only.htm

quote:Originally posted by xtreem5150ahm:

[QUOTE]



Tas for me owning slaves, can a lowly serf own anything? I am owned).



That's not a very good example. Many of the slave-owners in the States considered themselves very dutiful Christians, and cited Ham as one of the reasons why they could do so. By your logic, as a lowly serf one should not own the very land we work on. Being a lowly serf would be in spirit and humbleness to the Lord, not by the materials one recieves by work. The goods that I buy are certainly the products of slave labor, and I am by that reason just as guilty. My conscience does not call for me to throw coins or forbear eating in an feel-good act, but rather teach others to support themselves.

I find it interesting how pernicious some may become when there is percieved insult, rather than examining the words in their question. Have you not doubted? Is it not hypocritical to condemn that which you were? Did you not stop to examine those words in the context of today's world, where divisions in faith do exist? Original poster, I apologize for some of the responses and I understand your anger. I wouldn't suggest using human people, especially those quick to anger, as models for God, as they fall far short. Follow your heart first in prayer.

[This message has been edited by AngrySquirrel (edited 01-14-2005).]

Thank you. My bandaged head thanks you. This is the type of discussion I was looking for.

Take the Mormon religion as an example. Many regard the Book of Mormon as a plagiarised novel. Does this invalidate the whole religion? I don't think so. As long as the reader takes the book with a grain of salt, and finds inspiration with the lessons contained, they are as legitimate as any other. I wonder how a Mormon literalist lives in today's world thinking that people of color are descended from Cain? By the way, are there any Mormons on the board?

quote:Originally posted by xcarc:

Thank you. My bandaged head thanks you. This is the type of discussion I was looking for.

Take the Mormon religion as an example. Many regard the Book of Mormon as a plagiarised novel. Does this invalidate the whole religion? I don't think so. As long as the reader takes the book with a grain of salt, and finds inspiration with the lessons contained, they are as legitimate as any other. I wonder how a Mormon literalist lives in today's world thinking that people of color are descended from Cain? By the way, are there any Mormons on the board?



Heh, you actually banged your head against the wall. Bad habit. There are Mormons where I live[Princeton, NJ], but very few of them. I don't have the chance to speak with them because of that, and we don't have the phenomenon that is two Mormon men at your door. Since I don't have contact with Mormons, I tend to crack up whenever I hear stuff like Jesus being the human manifestation of the archangel Micheal, the spaceship to the planet, and the triangle underwear. But you do have to take it with a grain of salt, just as how the Old Testament was over-ruled in cultural aspects. Unfortunately I probably should go see a movie with a few friends, so I'll have to continue this later.