16 Bible Verses That Teach The Bible Is The Word Of God.

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by JAG*, Jul 2, 2020.

  1. JAG*

    JAG* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Durandal Wrote to JAG:
    "It's interesting that you're determined to post arguments you
    feel support your position, but entirely dismiss anything that
    does not support your position.
    That makes for a very
    one-sided "conversation" and "debate," you know.
    Like arguing with a wall."
    ___________

    JAG Attempts To Have A Conversation:
    ____________

    But Durandal Dismisses With This:
    Yet Durandal Wrote to JAG:
    "It's interesting that you're determined to post arguments you
    feel support your position, but entirely dismiss anything that
    does not support your position.
    That makes for a very
    one-sided "conversation" and "debate," you know.
    Like arguing with a wall.

    , , , LOL , , ,
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2020
    Giftedone likes this.
  2. Cosmo

    Cosmo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    2,720
    Likes Received:
    1,803
    Trophy Points:
    113
    World's Muslim Population Will Surpass Christians This Century, Pew Says
    Apr 2, 2015 · Islam is growing more rapidly than any other religion in the world, according to the Pew Research Center

    https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...will-surpass-christians-this-century-pew-says
     
  3. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,185
    Likes Received:
    62,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    many Christians pretend to believe
    many Muslims pretend to believe

    if their society makes it harder on those that disbelieve, many will choose to pretend to believe... look at Trump, anyone believes he really believes? or do they think he thinks it benefits him to pretend he does?
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2020
    Lucifer and Cosmo like this.
  4. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why are you blubbering on about "The Truth of Christianity" - the question here is whether or not the Bible is the "literal word of God".
    Most of Christianity does not believe what you call "Truth"

    We do know - as every denomination addresses the issue of inerrancy and infallability.

    Now you are trying to move the goal posts - and projecting your issues onto others. There is a difference between "inspired" and the "literal word of God. If you had gotten off the couch you would know this.


    It is not my fault that these groups are extreme in their beliefs - such as believing that the Bible is the "Literal word of God" - such as the belief that the earth was completely flooded around 2300 BC.


    It is not my proclamation - but that of Biblical Scholarship - the Pastorals are dated 100-140 AD - long after Pauls death. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/1timothy.html

    Running around crying "False False False" will not change this.

    Your assertion that "The Bible" is the literal word of God" - and that God assembled all the books in the Bible is demonstrably false.

    1) there is no one version of "The Bible" - so how would someone know which was the correct version and which was not. As soon as you say "This one is Gods version" this makes all the Bibles that differ "not Gods version".

    2) There were books in the original Bible that are not in the Modern Bible - and this is proven fact. What is also a proven fact is that there are passages in some Bibles that are different than others - or non existent in others.
     
  5. JAG*

    JAG* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I blubber not.
    But YOU do.
    You post blubber.

    False.
    Mere assertion.
    Go get the solid proof and post it, instead of continuing to
    merely issue proclamations and assertions.
    You don't know what "most of Christianity" believes. Fact.

    False.
    All of Christian orthodoxy believes that the Bible is God's word.
    Only the heresy-teaching Liberals say otherwise.

    False.
    You can't find the evidence to support you outrageous
    heresy claims.

    I have no issues.
    I have no interest in your Liberalism.
    I have no interest in your heresy.

    Don't just sit there at your computer starring at the screen
    go get clear and solid proof that the "vast majority" of the
    Christian Church does not believe that the whole Bible is
    the inspired word of God --- and put it up here in this thread.
    This is your opportunity to shine and demonstrate your
    research skills. Prediction: You will NOT do it. Because
    you CANNOT do it.



    False,

    YOU are the one that needs to get off the couch and go get
    the proof to support your nonsensical claims and post it here
    in this thread. You will not because you can NOT.

    Evangelicals are not extreme in their beliefs, like you accused
    them of being. YOU are no authority on what is, or is not,
    extreme.

    False.
    All that garbage is Bart Ehrman-type liberalism.
    I put zero stock in any of it, just as I put zero stock in most of
    what you post.

    You running around crying "True True True" will not change
    your Liberal heresy into orthodoxy.

    False.
    Nonsense.

    False.
    There are no significant differences in any of the actual
    translations of the texts of the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek
    Old and New Testaments into English. The substance is he
    same. I am talking about word for word translations and
    NOT talking about about paraphrases.

    My view is that you are wrong.
    I view most of your posts as Liberal heresy.
    I am sticking by what I said:
    "My view is that God is Sovereign and He was the one that supernaturally
    assembled the 66 books of the Bible and He did that by working through
    His chosen men who over the years assembled the Biblical canon. This is
    a Faith belief based on 2 Timothy 3:14-17"___JAG
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2020
  6. JAG*

    JAG* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Does that make you happy?
    Unhappy?
    Neither one?
    It may turn out that way for this century.
    Or it may not.
    Pew cannot predict outcomes for even 10 years let alone for an entire
    century.

    By the way, we do NOT know , , , using know to mean 2 + 2 = 4 certainty
    that the Muslims will not be included in those who are saved and who
    will stand AGAINST atheism and Secularism strong throughout the
    entire 21st Century.

    Some Christian theologians believe that people who live according to
    the "light they have" can be saved. This excludes atheists who refuse
    to do that. They have the light, but they refuse it. They mock it. They
    ridicule the light they do have. They pop into threads and accuse God
    of originating evil in the world, The ones that do not do this, refuse to
    believe. They refuse the light they do have.

    So it may be { ? } that you are rejoicing { ? } in the Pew study that
    ADDS billions of Muslims that will be AGAINST atheism and unbelief.
    And stand strong AGAINST all forms of Secularism.

    There is another Pew study out there that predicts a total of
    5.7 billion Christians and Muslims by 2050. That means
    that Theists will dominate the world for the rest of this century.

    Does the thoughts of that make you happy? Or unhappy?
    Or are you disinterested?

    Muslims will be saved? I don't know so I don't say.
    But if Billy is right down there, then atheists may find
    themselves to be a very small tiny dinky group of people
    who do NOT get Eternal Life, but rather get to perish
    as per John 3:16
    {1} believe and get Eternal Life
    {2} refuse to believe and perish

    Here is what Billy Graham said:

    "I think that everybody that loves or knows Christ, whether they are
    conscious of it or not, they are members of the body of Christ ... [God]
    is calling people out of the world for his name, whether they come
    from the Muslim world, or the Buddhist world or the non-believing
    world, they are members of the Body of Christ because they have
    been called by God. They may not know the name of Jesus but
    they know in their hearts that they need something they do not
    have, and they turn to the only light they have, and I think that
    they are saved and they are going to be with us in heaven.[134]"
    ___Billy Graham

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Graham#Ecumenism

    Thought For Today;
    "When its all said and done, Hell will end up being a
    very tiny corner of the Universe."


    ``
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2020
  7. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You are confusing "Inspired" with the belief that every word in the Bible is Literally True - penned by the hand of God.

    Not false - there are many significant differences. Entire books are missing from some versions of the Bible such as the Epistle of Barnabus and the Shepherd of Hermes.

    The Long ending of Mark is not present in the earliest Bibles - In the NIV it has "[The earliest manuscripts and some other ancient witnesses do not have verses 9–20.] right in the Text after Mark 16:8. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+16&version=NIV

    So tell me .. which version is the "Literal Word of God" ? Should the long ending of Mark be there - or should it not ?

    I am no liberal - but it is you who is wrong - which is why you have no ability to answer the above question and tell me which is the correct version of the Bible.

    The long ending of Mark is the "Smoking Gun" - the Proof of the Resurrection - where Jesus appears in the flesh.

    The idea that this is not significant - would be self delusion and simple nonsense.
     
  8. JAG*

    JAG* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    83
    The orthodox view of Scripture is that the words of the original
    manuscripts ONLY were inspired by God. Be back tomorrow to
    explain

    Be back tomorrow.
    Gotta go right now , , , got a problem to solve.
    JAG
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2020
  9. JAG*

    JAG* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    83
    The orthodox view of Scripture is that the words of the original
    manuscripts ONLY were inspired by God. We do not have the
    originals, but we have a huge number of copies of the originals.

    There are so many copies of the originals that when they are
    compared the originals have been restored. The logic here
    is that its impossible for say 100 people who copied the text
    of John's gospel to have made the same copy-mistakes in
    any one verse.

    I don't know if I made that clear or not.

    You write a lengthy letter to a friend.
    100 people copy your lengthy letter.
    They all make at least some copy-mistakes
    as all copyist do.
    But they all will not make the same copy-mistake
    on every sentence of your lengthy letter.
    200 years from today if scholars have all
    the copies but do NOT have your original
    lengthy letter, they can restore your original
    lengthy letter by comparing the 100 copies.

    The Bible's original manuscripts have been restored.
    The number of instances where it is unclear what the
    originals said is not significant to a single Christian
    doctrine.

    By the way, I remember who you are now. You were the
    one that told me there was no such thing as the Trinity.
    In that Christians To Be As Numerous As The Stars thread.


    That has nothing to do with what I believe.
    I am a Protestant and we have 66 books in the Biblical canon.
    My view is all the other books were rejected by the Protestant
    Church and were never a part of the Bible.
    I think the Roman Catholics may have a different approach
    to this issue --- I'd have to research it, but I have no interest
    is doing so, because it does not matter to me.
    The existence of the Apocrypha has not harmed Christendom
    even slightly. Christian literature is immense and has some
    of "everything on this earth" included in what is available.
    I mean some really "ultra kooky" stuff is out there within
    worldwide Christendom.

    Exactly correct.
    I use the NIV regularly.
    Mark 16:9-20 was probably added by a copyist and was never a
    part of the original manuscript of Mark. Mark never wrote it.
    You cannot prove otherwise. And neither can I.

    I think it ought to be left out.
    However, I have no problem with the NIV leaving it and including
    the explanation within the text.
    As the centuries unfold, the Christian Church is likely to agree
    to get rid of Mark 16:9-20 from its major English translations.
    But if not, no big deal.

    You post like one.
    You don't believe in the Trinity.
    You don't like the idea that the entire Bible is the word of God.
    So? So in my opinion, there is likely to be a rather long list
    of other unorthodox beliefs that you hold.

    You are wrong on this issue. I am not wrong.
    All the English translations of the Bible are the correct version.
    I'm talking about word for word translations and not paraphrases
    and not translations done by the cults like the Jehovah's Witnesses.
    Bible Gateway will let you see all the verses side by side. There are
    some 60 English translations and they all basically agree. Just
    because some translators have reason to believe that say
    "sad" should be used instead of "sorrowful" does NOT
    mean they do not agree.


    If you want to be picky and claim that because all English
    translations
    are not identical, that therefore the Bible is not
    the word of God, then
    you can do that. Christendom has
    rejected your conclusion
    .

    But you can try to "sell it" if you can.


    False regarding your "smoking gun."
    Mark 16 is not needed to support any major Christian doctrine.

    That's what YOU say.
    I have no reason to put any stock in what you say.
    I don't know who you are or what you believe.
    The Christian doctrine of Christ's Resurrection can
    be supported without an appeal to Mark 16.

    What I do know is that you desire to eliminate the doctrine
    of the Trinity from Christendom

    "The Trinity is a man made concept - given to us by a
    Pagan Emperor for political purposes."___Giftedone


    And I know that you desire to eliminate trust in the entire
    Bible from Christendom and you claim that the "vast majority"
    of the Christian Church does not believe that the whole Bible
    is the inspired word of God.

    So I say again:

    Don't just sit there at your computer starring at the screen
    go get clear and solid proof that the "vast majority" of the
    Christian Church does not believe that the whole Bible is
    the inspired word of God --- and put it up here in this thread.

    This is your opportunity to shine and demonstrate your
    research skills. Prediction: You will NOT do it. Because
    you CANNOT do it.

    Best.

    JAG
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2020
  10. JAG*

    JAG* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    83
    My opinion is that you hold liberal theological views. What I meant
    by "liberal" is holding theological views that are opposite of
    conservative theological views. My opinion is that your views
    are theologically Liberal --- or perhaps even out beyond
    theological liberalism
    . I said this was my opinion of your
    beliefs. You are free to deny it. Its only my opinion.

    The following are not views held by theological conservatives:

    "The Trinity is a man made concept - given to us by a
    Pagan Emperor for political purposes."___Giftedone

    "You say "God Created the Universe" - and had some plan.
    I say - God IS the Universe - and everything that is unfolding
    is part of God - the good - the bad - and the ugly"___Giftedone


    "My God is not too small :) Unfortunately however - it is many
    segments of Christianity - and certainly the Bible - that makes
    God small."___Giftedone


    "There may be many lesser Gods - as the Bible says - perhaps
    one is conducting an experiment on earth and other planets -and
    checks in from time to time."___Giftedone

    "It is a fact that the Bible - the OT in particular - minimizes God - in
    just the way you were describing. Why does this disturb
    you ?___Giftedone

    "Do you not like the idea that God might be the universe ?
    This idea connects to yours directly - you just don't get
    the connection."___Giftedone

    "If you say God is omnipotent and omniscient - as in "God is
    everywhere and is in control of everything" - then God is
    the Universe"___Giftedone


    "I didn't say that you minimized God - I said that the Bible
    minimizes God - and that one of your hypothesis minimizes
    God"___Giftedone

    "If you reduce God to a Person - you are minimizing God. When
    you add in human characteristics and emotions - many of which
    are nasty - you reduce God further. I call this "putting God in
    a box" - and that is what all religions do"___Giftedone

    "If you reduce god to a Person"___Giftedone

    Also my view is that Giftedone believes that the entire Bible
    is NOT the word of God and that Giftedone also believes
    that the "vast majority" of Christians do NOT believe that the
    entire Bible is the word of God. And my view is that Giftedone
    desires it to be this way.

    ______________

    Heh heh, all that up there is Conservative NOT.

    Maybe you are not a Liberal after all --- maybe you are a
    Space Man sent here to Earth for mysterious purposes?

    What planet did you say you were from?

    Best

    JAG

    ``
     
  11. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What you are claiming is that the Protestant version of the story is the only one that is inspired - this is kooky - not logical or rational.

    But even taking your claim as correct - Evangelical and Pentecostals represent the "Kooky Stuff" within Christianity - from the perspective of dogma.


    Good that you agree that there are two different versions of the story - and that neither you or I can prove which one is correct.

    "So tell me .. which version is the "Literal Word of God" ?
    Should the long ending of Mark be there - or should it not ?"



    You failed to answer the central question ... as predicted later on on the post which is interesting "Which version is the Literal Word of God"
    however - you then go on to defend and expand upon your "Protestants have the only inspired version" claim.

    You then go on some hair brained demonize the messenger path .. "Your a Liberal - You Post like a Liberal"

    I do believe in a Trinity - just not your nonsensical version - a version you really havn't thought about much which is why it is nonsense- more of an acceptance of spoon fed dogma without thought.

    You yourself have admitted "ABOVE" that the entire Bible is not the word of God - or sorry - any Bible that is not an Protestant English Translation. ...

    What my beliefs are is not relevant to the central question you failed to answer ..

    Then we have this Gem - where you contradict your previous words.
    You claimed that it was only the Protestant version that was "inspired" - now you are saying it is only modern English version of the Bible that is "inspired" but Catholics and others have English versions of the Bible.

    So you claim is now that only the English Protestant version of the Bible is inspired. You are lost. Orthodox is by far the closest to the original language of the Bible. How you figure the protestants and english speaking people have some monopoly on the inspired word is just patent discombobulated self delusion.




    OK - so the Physical Resurrection is not important to proof of the Resurrection Promise according to you.

    I believe there was a spiritual Resurrection - as did Paul - as did Mark. The problem is that neither seemed to know about any "Physical Resurrection" - nor do some of the early Church Fathers - including Clement 95-100AD - head of the Church at that time.

    You can cry "This proves nothing" all you like - but it certainly does not help the your version of events.

    I am interested in the Truth - you are not - you are interested in trying to fit reality into spoon fed dogma - and when it doesn't fit - ignore -deny - avoid - and demonize the messenger.

    Yes Jag - I am one of the minions of Sataniel - trying to destroy Christendom - "the other"

    Nice black vs white paradigm Pal - Good vs Evil - God vs Devil" - cult doctrine is "Good" anything that conflicts is "Evil" inspired by Satan.
     
  12. JAG*

    JAG* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    83

    I previously told you this:
    "I think it ought to be left out."___JAG
    You quoted it.
    Its is in the post you just quoted.
    You probably missed seeing it. Human error.
    "We're only human we're supposed to make mistakes." ___Billy Joel

    JAG
     
  13. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Avoidance and diversion yet again "Should the long ending of Mark be there - or should it not ?" is not the question you avoiding.

    What you cherry picked out is what the question under discussion

    "So tell me .. which version is the "Literal Word of God" ?
    Should the long ending of Mark be there - or should it not ?"

    Which Bibles are the literal word of God - in their entirety.

    A ) those containing the long ending of Mark - and if so which version of the long ending as there is more than one.
    B) those not containing the long ending of Mark
     
  14. JAG*

    JAG* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I never said that.
    I believe the Roman Catholic Douay Rheims Version is inspired.
    JAG is not all that hot for the Apocrypha though.
    ______

    Regarding "kooky" : have you read YOUR posts? , , , LOL , , ,
    Your posts are The King Of Kooky
    Seriously you write some very weird stuff.
    I can go get it.
    Have you ever give any serious thought to becoming a
    Pentecostal preacher?
    LOL

    I tell you the truth.
    Your posts in the Christians To Be As Numerous As The Stars
    thread is the King Of Kooky.
    I read that stuff and all my head-hairs stood straight up.
    And stayed that way for 2 hours.

    Your posts are The King Of Hair-Brained.
    Do you actually read what you write?
    You DO post like a liberal.
    I put a list of your "kooky" quotes in this thread.
    Reminded me of Allen Ginsberg.
    Go read his Howl.
    {Well sort of}

    YOU are no authority on what is, or is not, a rational
    view of the Trinity.
    Your version is nonsensical.
    Before the good Lord I do not understand how you can
    write the stuff you pen out.

    Why have you come to believe that I have an obligation to answer
    your questions?
    I mean its not like we had agreed to have a rational discussion.
    I vividly recall that YOU were the one in that Christians/Stars thread
    that went into "hurt mode" because you didn't like my response
    to your dismissal, as being wrong, of all 60 of Bible Gateway's English
    translations of John 1:1
    YOU made a BIG issue out of nothing. I can go get it and put it all here
    in the thread and I may do that.

    LOL
    Are you from Mars?
    So far as I know you're not a human being, but are a distinguished
    gentleman from Jupiter, a Jupertonian that has come here to
    experiment with Radical Liberal Unorthodox Christianity.

    A perfect description of your posts.
    But listen, you seem like a decent chap.
    I mean I don't sense any hate in your posts.
    Your posts are harmless enough.
    They just don't make any sense tome.
    But then I am from Pluto.

    I never said that.
    That is absurd.
    You read posts and you "see into them" that which you
    want to see, me thinks.

    More Liberal gobbly-gook.
    The Resurrection was physical.
    End of story.

    I have no hostility towards you.
    You may be Mr. Cool so far as I know.
    And I don't want to offend you , , ,
    , , but I really don't care what you think about my version of the
    story. Why not? Because I cannot vision you and I having any
    serious ongoing exchange of ideas. Why not? Because of your
    ultra-Kooky views. If it was just ONE {1} thing it would be
    different --- but you hold ultra-Kooky views on a lengthy list
    of subjects.
    But I do NOT dislike you.
    And I feel certain your parents loved you.

    I do not believe it.
    But if I am incorrect --- you have a very long way to go , , ,

    I want NOTHING to do with YOUR "truth." And I mean zero
    as in 0000.0000

    A perfect description of your posts.
    I mean you just described your posts to absolute perfection.

    Aww, come on now.
    It is unclear to me that you are demon-possessed.
    I have no Empirical evidence that you are one of
    Old Scratch's boys.
    I agree that you ARE trying to destroy Christendom.
    Repent and be baptized.
    LOL

    Yeah well I am a good old Baptist, Pal.
    And may the Farce be with you.
    I mean may the Force be with you.

    ____________

    Maybe we can chat some more.
    Your insults are not at all severe.
    Just mild personal attacks.
    On the 1 to 10 about a 3
    May God bless you as you attempt to
    make sense of what you post , ,
    and of the world.

    JAG

    ``
     
  15. JAG*

    JAG* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    83
    YOU first.

    YOU claimed that the vast majority of Christians did not
    believe that the Bible was the inspired word of god.

    Don't just sit there at your computer starring at the screen
    go get clear and solid proof that the "vast majority" of the
    Christian Church does not believe that the whole Bible is
    the inspired word of God --- and put it up here in this thread.
    This is your opportunity to shine and demonstrate your
    research skills. Prediction: You will NOT do it. Because
    you CANNOT do it.


    I will answer your question AFTER you produce.

    Go get it.

    And put the proof up here in this thread.

    Best.

    JAG


    ``
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2020
  16. Ronald Hillman

    Ronald Hillman Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2020
    Messages:
    1,690
    Likes Received:
    1,581
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Record Few Americans Believe Bible Is Literal Word of God
    BY LYDIA SAAD
    [​IMG]
    https://news.gallup.com/poll/210704/record-few-americans-believe-bible-literal-word-god.aspx

    Nonwhites, adults aged 50 and older, and adults with no college education all lean toward believing the Bible is the actual word of God rather than stories and history recorded by man.

    Men, whites, adults aged 18 to 29 as well as those aged 30 to 49, and college graduates lean in the other direction, with more being skeptics than literalists. Still, in all of these groups, the largest segment takes the middle position, believing the Bible reflects the inspired word of God.

    Naturally, there are also strong differences in Americans' perspectives on the Bible by religious preference. As a whole, more Christians take the Bible literally than say it is a book of stories and history recorded by man. However, within the broad group of Christians, Protestants (including those who generically refer to themselves as "Christian") lean toward the literalist view, while Catholics divide evenly between seeing the Bible as the literal word of God and saying it is a book of stories. .
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2020
  17. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    4,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The bible saying its the word of God is as groundbreaking as Biden claiming we should vote for him. Atheists won't believe the bible just because it says its the word of God. Christians already believe the bible is the word of God, so the bible telling them it is doesn't really change anything. I'm not opposed to the bible saying that, I just don't think it is useful for much.
     
  18. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Now you resort to falsehoods.. I never claimed that the majority do not believe the bible is "Inspired" I said that the majority do not believe "The entire Bible" is the literal word of God. I granted right off the hop that most - including myself - believe that some is inspired.

    Then - as predicted - you avoid the central question being discussed - because you can't deal with the reality that only an idiot does not realize that if you claim one entire Bible is inspired - and a different Bible contains different books - or says something different - then only one can be inspired.
     
  19. Ronald Hillman

    Ronald Hillman Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2020
    Messages:
    1,690
    Likes Received:
    1,581
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have posted above a report that confirms that indeed the majority of Christians do not believe the Bible is the literal word of god, but as you said they believe it to be the inspired word of god..
     
    Giftedone likes this.
  20. JAG*

    JAG* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I disagree.
    It is very comforting to we Christians to know that the Bible
    itself declares that it is the inspired word of God.

    2 Timothy 3:10-17
    "You, however, know all about my teaching, my way of life,
    my purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance, 11persecutions,
    sufferings—what kinds of things happened to me in Antioch,
    Iconium and Lystra, the persecutions I endured. Yet the Lord
    rescued me from all of them. 12In fact, everyone who wants
    to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, 13while
    evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving
    and being deceived. 14But as for you, continue in what you
    have learned and have become convinced of, because you
    know those from whom you learned it, 15and how from
    infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are
    able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ
    Jesus. 16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for
    teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
    17so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped
    for every good work.
    __2 Timothy 3:10-17

    Did you neglect reading the very first sentence in the thread
    that you quoted in its entirety, which said:

    JAG Wrote:
    "I wrote this for Christians only"
    .
    :
    I disagree.
    It changes their comfort level.
    The Bible's clear statements that it is the inspired word of God
    is a great comfort to we Christians. We have those Bible verse
    highlighted in our Bibles and we look at them several tines each
    week --- least a huge number of us do that.

    That is nice to hear.

    There is probably not one Christian on the planet that
    would not greatly appreciate that list of Bible verses.

    Think of it like this: You just came across 16 quotes
    from your favorite atheists that "just made your day."
    You said to yourself, "Wow! I am SO GLAD I came
    across these 16 quotes."

    Comprende?

    ``
     
  21. JAG*

    JAG* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    83
    False.

    From your own post.
    Start quote
    Nonwhites, adults aged 50 and older, and adults with no college education all lean toward believing the Bible is the actual word of
    God rather than stories and history recorded by man.


    Men, whites, adults aged 18 to 29 as well as those aged 30 to 49, and college graduates lean in the other direction, with more being
    skeptics than literalists.
    Still, in all of these groups, the largest segment takes the middle position, believing the Bible reflects the inspired word of God.

    Naturally, there are also strong differences in Americans' perspectives on the Bible by religious preference.

    As a whole, more Christians take the Bible literally than say it is a book of stories and history recorded by man.

    However, within the broad group of Christians, Protestants (including those who generically refer to themselves as "Christian")
    lean toward the literalist view,


    while Catholics divide evenly between seeing the Bible as the literal word of God and saying it is a book of stories. .
    End quote.
     
  22. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    4,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But this verse really shouldn't provide any comfort to Christians. If you trust the bible enough that you are willing to believe without question when it claims its the word of God, your faith is already really solid. If you were having some major doubts about your faith, the bible claiming it is the word of God won't really answer any questions.

    A source (the bible) claiming it is true logically does not improve its validity in any way. So logically, there is no reason to derive any comfort from the bible claiming it is the word of God because making that claim doesn't help anything.

    However, if you are desperate to believe and are trying as hard as possible to believe, but if you do have some nagging doubts you are trying to suppress, then I can see how this verse will satisfy your believe side and help sooth your doubts. But that soothing is irrational and purely emotional and not logical in any way. This is something you should be self-aware of when you do read these verses.
     
  23. Ronald Hillman

    Ronald Hillman Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2020
    Messages:
    1,690
    Likes Received:
    1,581
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Incredible, you do understand the english language! Only 30% of christians believe the Bible is the literal word of God and 14% believe it is just a book of stories written by man. Inm future before claiming something to be false try english comprehension!


    Americans' Views of the Bible -- 2017 Views by Key Subgroups
    Which of the following statements comes closest to describing your views about the Bible -- the Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally, word for word, the Bible is the inspired word of God but not everything in it should be taken literally, or the Bible is an ancient book of fables, legends, history and moral precepts recorded by man?
    Actual word of God Inspired word of God Ancient book of fables
    %
    % %
    U.S. adults
    24 47 26
    Men
    Women 26 48 24
    Whites 22 48 28
    Nonwhites 29 46 23
    18 to 29 12 54 30
    30 to 49 24 40 33
    50 to 64 31 49 19
    65+ 27 49 22
    College graduate 13 50 36
    Some college 27 44 26
    No college 31 47 19
    Total Christian 30 54 14
    Protestant/Other Christian 35 51 12
    Catholic 21 58 19
    No religion 7 21 68
    Religion very important 41 50 7
    Religion fairly important 13 66 17
    Religion not important 2 20 76
    GALLUP, MAY 3-7, 2017

    Either you are being willfully ignorant or you cannot understand simple english!
     
  24. JAG*

    JAG* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I am not interested in your nuances between "inspired" and "literal."
    YOU can believe whatever you want to believe.

    You have yet to prove that "the vast majority of the Church does not accept"
    the Bible to be literally God's word.
    YOU said :vast majority"

    Now prove it.

    In post 72 of this thread Giftedone said this:
    To suggest that God was the one who put together the 66 Books of the Bible does not pass the smell test.
    Faith should not include dispensing with logic and reason.

    This is not to say there was not some inspiration from God in some of the writings - but for the whole thing
    to be literally Gods word is something that vast majority of the Church does not accept - and for good reason.

    It is only the extremists that buy into this idea - Fundamentalist Evangelicals and Pentecostals.

    "2 Timothy" - written 100-140 ad - was not written by Paul - so you are suggesting that God is guilty of
    Pious Fraud ?

    and that is just for starters.
    End qquote.

    ____________

    You said "vast majority"___Giftedone
    Now prove it.

    Don't just sit there at your computer starring at the screen
    go get clear and solid proof that the "vast majority" of the
    Christian Church does not believe that the whole Bible is
    the LITERAL word of God --- and put it up here in this thread.
    This is your opportunity to shine and demonstrate your
    research skills. Prediction: You will NOT do it. Because
    you CANNOT do it.

    ``
     
  25. JAG*

    JAG* Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    425
    Trophy Points:
    83
    That was not what I responded to.
    You just now posted that.
    I do not click on your links.
    I responded to what you DID post.
    Which was this:
    ________

    From your own post.
    Start quote
    Nonwhites, adults aged 50 and older, and adults with no college education all lean toward believing the Bible is the actual word of
    God rather than stories and history recorded by man.


    Men, whites, adults aged 18 to 29 as well as those aged 30 to 49, and college graduates lean in the other direction, with more being
    skeptics than literalists.
    Still, in all of these groups, the largest segment takes the middle position, believing the Bible reflects the inspired word of God.

    Naturally, there are also strong differences in Americans' perspectives on the Bible by religious preference.

    As a whole, more Christians take the Bible literally than say it is a book of stories and history recorded by man.


    However, within the broad group of Christians, Protestants (including those who generically refer to themselves as "Christian")
    lean toward the literalist view,


    while Catholics divide evenly between seeing the Bible as the literal word of God and saying it is a book of stories. .
    End quote.
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2020

Share This Page