I need some proof that God wrote the Bible..

One could argue, nothing is new for all we are doing is discovering things that already exist but have not understood or yet discovered.

 

It's sort of Biblical.

Sirach 37:13-15 (GNT) = "13 And trust your own judgment; no one's advice is more reliable. 14 Sometimes your own intuition can tell you more than seven watchmen on a high tower. 15 Above all, pray to the Most High that he will show you the right thing to do."

 

Very good tWog: Even though that is not in the KJV,,, it is in my opinion very accurate.

 

Sure, all new information, comes from a field of some sort. We slowly discover it, from that field, and add it to the known, knowledge, which is contained in human memory. But there is still the known, and the unknown. The known is in memory, the unknown still in that informational field which memory cannot access. But something in consciousness can interface with it, pulling out the unknown, and making it the known.

 

Psa 46:10 Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth.

 

The God character died when the last Babylonian Emperor bit the dust. He isn't coming back.

 

Whatever floats your boat TWOG.. makes no difference to me what you believe. However, I will state again that your former post was a good one as it was IMHO an accurate piece of scripture.

 

And also to encourage ignorance and teach children not to question or challenge authority.

- - - Updated - - -

The twisted mental contortions necessary to maintain literalist beliefs are quite something to behold.

 

Unless this God has hands, access to paper and writing implements, and understanding of human languages....It did not "Write" anything at all.

 

My claiming that you have certain beliefs is not "playing the role of God". Speaking for God is what you do when you claim to know the literal truth of scripture through your daily convo's with the Holy Spirit.

Am I mistaken or did you not claim that the Noah's Ark story is the literal truth.

 

Your statement (claim) was " In general he believes the Bible is the Literal word of God ", which is a blatant lie, when considering that I have repeatedly stated in the past that the 'Bible' is not the 'word of God'... but is instead the writings of man. Whether or not those writings contain even one iota of truth is what is to be sought out by other men who read those words contained in the 'Bible'. My claim regarding my knowing the literal truth, was regarding "certain scripture" in which I had conversed with the HS about: NOT all scripture. You see, you seem to have a problem with quoting people when you make your own renderings of what people have stated. It is my guess that you expect people to accept what you say as 'true' regardless of fact that you have not quoted what that person has said... nor have you provided a link to a posting where that person was alleged to have said it. Try again.

 

I noticed you avoided the question. Do you believe in the literal truth of the story of Noah and his Ark or not ?

 

Now that the question has been restated in a manner in which I will answer: Here is the answer: YES, I BELIEVE the story of Noah and his Ark are true
As for whether or not it is the "literal" truth???? Who knows?
".lit·er·al (ltr-l)adj.1. Being in accordance with, conforming to, or upholding the exact or primary meaning of a word or words.
2. Word for word; verbatim: a literal translation.
3. Avoiding exaggeration, metaphor, or embellishment; factual; prosaic: a literal description; a literal mind.
4. Consisting of, using, or expressed by letters: literal notation.
5. Conforming or limited to the simplest, nonfigurative, or most obvious meaning of a word or words."

Definitively speaking, it is impossible for me to say that it is the literal truth, as I am not the one that was given the original story... therefore I cannot say that it is a verbatim rendering of what was originally stated. See definition #2 above.

 

Why must you insist on posting dictionary definitions. Half the time you even get those wrong.

In this case "literally true" simply means believing that the story happened in the way the Bible describes.

If you believe that roughly 4500 years ago (the timeline given in the Bible for the flood) there was a flood that covered the whole earth and all land animals that exist today had ancestors that walked off the boat ...

Then you are a literalist... at least to some degree. Getting into "word for word" nonsense is just semantics and a lame effort on your part to avoid tough questions.

The question was "never" whether or not the story is the "literal truth". The question is whether or not you believe the story is the literal truth.

So quit denying your own beliefs.

 

Apparently you did not comprehend what I wrote in my previous post. Read it again.
"avoid tough questions"... not hardly. Are you not willing to admit the truth that the 'Bible' is not a word for word translation of something that was originally written by some Hebrew fellow? There is a difference between telling the truth and saying what someone wants you to say. You are attempting to lead me into agreeing with you and you have not shown any evidence or argument that would compel my mind to accept what you say as true. Want to try again. BTW: it was the "literal truth" that you mentioned.
"
Am I mistaken or did you not claim that the Noah's Ark story is the literal truth."

 

If a coherent story that only made sense when the end was revealed but was somehow written over 2,000 years by over 70 different authors isn't a clue to a divine single author then I don't know how to help you have common sense.

Frankly to think such a book is not written by a God has to mean derrangement. It's like believing that hurricanes brought wild pigs on rafts of accidental garbage to 400,000 islands.

Atheists really aren't too bright when you expose their beliefs and ask the hard questions.

So how did those pigs get to so many islands? How many pigs you see swimming thousands of miles of ocean?

 

Have you actually studied any maps of island chains... or about the migration of groups of people?

 

While Buddhists don't discuss "heaven", they do talk a lot about reincarnation and bodhisattva. Both imply post mortem existence.

http://buddhism.about.com/od/thetriyaka/a/whatsabodhisatt.htm

 

Of course the Bible is not a word for word translation ... never said it was.

Why do you keep making up nonsense I order to avoid responding to my post. If you do not want to answer just don't

 

You "order" something.. greatest laugh of the week.

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=386650&p=1064532267#post1064532267
Don't forget this little goodie.

 

The post you cited has nothing to do with making an "order" However, it does remind me that you still have not given the PROOF of claim that was mentioned in that posting. Where is that PROOF?

 

Ah but it has a great deal to do with the other part of your statement.
The proof is in the pudding.

You're reminding me of that little old lady from the early 1980's and the Wendy's commercials.
'Where's the beef', 'Where's the beef', 'Where's the beef'.

 

You are reminding me of the little boy/girl who refuses to answer a question that could potentially resolve an issue. Why are you avoiding that question that you reminded me had not been answered?