"I can defend the Bible" Can you?

[polonius]

JP Cusick posted:

I can defend the Bible, but Christianity needs to be given excuses.

On beginning this thread, I'd like to gather some opinions on the accuracy of the bible which some claim can be "defended."

I don't want to create a survey, but do some posters have reasoned arguments for or against defense of the Bible that they are willing to share?

[myth-one.com]

Let’s take a look at some Old Testament contradictions.


Genesis 2:17 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die.�

OR

Genesis 5:5New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
5 Thus all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred thirty years; and he died.

Which of these bible stories are “God breathed�?

Both.

The first verse refers to spiritual death, the second refers to physical death.

RESPONSE: Let's take a look at your answer and see what conclusions follow

Aren't we talking about physical death in Genesis 2:17? Recall that man's physical death only entered the world because he sinned.

Checkpoint argued.

Not exactly.

Which came first, and which thus became inevitable as a result of sinning by eating what was warned against?

The Bible is written to convey spiritual realities in our physical environment.

QUESTION: Then how do you explain the death of those who have not sinned?

http://www.therealpresence.org/archives/God/God_013.htm

The three gifts of bodily immortality, integrity and infused knowledge are called preternatural because they are not strictly due to human nature but do not, of themselves, surpass the capacities and exigencies of created nature as such. In other words, they are not entitatively supernatural.

Bodily immortality is the converse of mortality, i.e., the possibility of separation of soul from body. Adam was therefore capable of not dying. Yet the gift was conditional, provided he did not sin; it was gratuitous, since Adam's nature by itself did not postulate this prerogative but came from the divine bounty; and it was participated, since only God enjoys essential immortality.

"You shall surely die" is referring to physical death.

God the Author of Nature and the Supernatural - Part Two: Creation as a Divine Fact: Thesis V
THESIS V: In Man There is One Rational Soul, Which is Immortal and Imediately Created by God Alone
We shall examine three principal aspects of man's soul in the present thesis: how many souls are there in a human being, prove there is only one, and show that this soul is not material but spiritual and rational; see whether this soul is destined to pass away, by death if that were possible or otherwise by annihilation; and finally deal with the origin of the soul, as soul, while proving that it must always be immediately created by God, and by Him alone, for infusion into a predisposed human body. As an extension of the thesis we shall briefly review the dogmatic position on the nature of man as composite of body and soul, with special reference to the soul as essentially the form of the human body.

[JP Cusick]

Although the scriptures are sealed up from our understanding, God left a gaping hole in His security system! Consider what Jesus states regarding prayer:

And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive. (Matthew 21:22)

Therefore, each time before you begin reading the Bible, you should first pray and ask God to open your understanding of the scriptures, believing that He will do so!

I like the entire comment from above, but this one (1) part needs a little more.

To pray and prayer does not really mean asking God to open the scriptures to our understanding - no - prayer is meant to be an action word, as in we go out and do the action and live the action and thereby our life-activity becomes the prayer and the praying.

It takes more than words.

In example = pray to feed the hungry - no, that is just words = so go out and start feeding hungry people and then the action is the prayer.

Say the prayers for world peace is not enough - go out and start working for world peace - that would be the prayer in action.

So too if we read the Bible and believe what it says = then go out into thy life and live the principles and the commandments - and then thy life becomes thy prayer.

By doing it - then a person will come to understand the scriptures accurately and profoundly.

[JehovahsWitness]

Let’s take a look at some Old Testament contradictions.


Genesis 2:17 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die

OR

Genesis 5:5New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
5 Thus all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred thirty years; and he died.

Which of these bible stories are “God breathed?

QUESTION: Did Adam die the very "day" he was condemned?

Yes, he died spiritually (ie in God's eyes, he was "dead", cut off from God spiritually and rejected as His son) immediately.

Also he died literally (returned to dust/non existence) within the creative 7th "day" (period of time) which by all accounts was about 6,000 literal years long.





Contradictions: An overview
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 941#336941


Does the bible contain scientifically accurate insights about the origin of the Universe?
viewtopic.php?p=1032301#p1032301

Does the bible teach the earth is FLAT?
viewtopic.php?p=1032310#p1032310

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

EVOLUTION, THE BIBLE & SCIENCE and ...THE 7 CREATIVE DAYS OF GENESIS

[polonius]

Let’s take a look at some Old Testament contradictions.


Genesis 2:17 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die.�

OR

Genesis 5:5New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
5 Thus all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred thirty years; and he died.

Which of these bible stories are “God breathed�?

QUESTION: Did Adam die the very "day" he was condemned?

Yes, he died spiritually (ie in God's eyes, he was "dead", cut off from God spiritually and rejected as His son) immediately.

Also he died literally (returned to dust/non existence) within the creative 7th "day" (period of time) which by all accounts was about 6,000 literal years long.

click on image to enlarge



Contradictions: An overview
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 941#336941

RESPONSE:

While it is always interesting to have a apologist try to tell us that the bible is divinely inspired and therefore we have to accept it as being free from error but then have to strain the readers imagination arguing that the plain meaning of words don't really mean what they clearly say so that obvious contradiction is not real, in this case it is rather pointless since the has long been recognized by archaeologists and historians that Adam and Eve story is just a story written between 800 and 700 BC telling the legend of the founding epic of Israel.

We have long since reached the point of understanding that the first seven books of the bible are legendary not history. Unfortunately, fiction is a large part of "inspired" scripture.

You might enjoy watching the UTube article on the book the "Bible Unearthed"



or reading: http://www.nytimes.com/books/01/02/04/r ... ml?mcubz=3

[myth-one.com]

JP Cusick posted:

I can defend the Bible, but Christianity needs to be given excuses.

On beginning this thread, I'd like to gather some opinions on the accuracy of the bible which some claim can be "defended."

I don't want to create a survey, but do some posters have reasoned arguments for or against defense of the Bible that they are willing to share?

As regards the soul, we maintain it has both de facto and de jure immortality: the first because it will never die, and the second because it is immortal by an exigency of its nature, so that death for the soul is a physical impossibility.

This is the means by which God seals the scriptures from the knowledge of mankind.

If one believes that all mankind is born with an immortal soul, then they can never defend the Bible which repeatedly states that man is mortal and will die!

Here is the true originator of the immortal soul myth:

And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: (Genesis 3:4)

Satan lied when he informed Eve that she would live forever. Mainstream Christian theologians have incorporated that lie into their theologies for two thousand years!

Yes, the Bible can successfully be defended, but not by anyone who believes in the immortality of mankind.

Immortality is presented throughout the Bible as the reward of the saved, not something man possesses as a birthright:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

Believers will have everlasting life, and nonbelievers simple perish.

Living in everlasting torment is never listed as a possibility in the Bible for mankind.

[polonius]

http://www.religioustolerance.org/inerran1.htm

The teachings of the Church have evolved over the years. In recent decades, Catholic sources have given conflicting views about biblical inerrancy:

Absolute inerrancy: Some Catholic theologians have claimed that, in its original autograph version, the Bible is inerrant -- without error. This appears to be the consensus of popes, of most of the Catholic scholars and of other church leaders until the mid 20th century. This belief developed naturally from their conviction that God inspired the authors of the Bible. If God controlled the writers' words directly or indirectly, then he would not have led them into error. Deceit and error are not normally attributes expected of God.

Limited inerrancy: Other Catholics teach a more recent concept: that the Bible is without error in certain matters such as faith, morals and the criteria for salvation. However, the Bible contains errors when describing other matters, such as scientific observations and historical events. This belief had its origins in the church with the writings of Richard Simon (1638 - 1712) who rejected Moses as author of the Pentateuch. He partly inspired the literary-criticism method of analyzing biblical passages which became influential among some 19th century Christians.

No inerrancy: Still other Catholic theologians and scholars have deviated entirely from the church's official teaching. They agree with liberal Protestants in rejecting the inerrancy of the Bible. They interpret it as containing much legend, myth, historical and scientific inaccuracies, religious propaganda, etc.

[myth-one.com]

http://www.religioustolerance.org/inerran1.htm

The teachings of the Church have evolved over the years. In recent decades, Catholic sources have given conflicting views about biblical inerrancy:

Absolute inerrancy: Some Catholic theologians have claimed that, in its original autograph version, the Bible is inerrant -- without error. This appears to be the consensus of popes, of most of the Catholic scholars and of other church leaders until the mid 20th century. This belief developed naturally from their conviction that God inspired the authors of the Bible. If God controlled the writers' words directly or indirectly, then he would not have led them into error. Deceit and error are not normally attributes expected of God.

Limited inerrancy: Other Catholics teach a more recent concept: that the Bible is without error in certain matters such as faith, morals and the criteria for salvation. However, the Bible contains errors when describing other matters, such as scientific observations and historical events. This belief had its origins in the church with the writings of Richard Simon (1638 - 1712) who rejected Moses as author of the Pentateuch. He partly inspired the literary-criticism method of analyzing biblical passages which became influential among some 19th century Christians.

No inerrancy: Still other Catholic theologians and scholars have deviated entirely from the church's official teaching. They agree with liberal Protestants in rejecting the inerrancy of the Bible. They interpret it as containing much legend, myth, historical and scientific inaccuracies, religious propaganda, etc.

Since Catholics and most protestants believe that souls are immortal, can any of these "defend" the following simple seven word Bible verse?

The soul that sinneth, it shall die.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 26 by myth-one.com]

Since Catholics and most protestants believe that souls are immortal, can any of these "defend" the following simple seven word Bible verse?


Ezekiel 18:20 wrote:

The soul that sinneth, it shall die.

Good question and good challenge, but it will soon get lost here.

I suggest you make it the start of a new thread if you want a worthwhile debate on it.

[Justin108]

[Replying to post 1 by polonius.advice]

I have yet to find anything in the bible that is inaccurate.

Of course you haven't. Because whenever an inaccuracy is pointed out, you will forcibly interpret it to make it sound accurate.

Case in point
- Genesis 1 clearly states the sun, moon and stars were made after the plants

This is clearly and blatantly false. Your solution? A highly selective interpretation involving "volcanic gasses". Of course you'll never find any inaccuracies in the Bible when you refuse to acknowledge any inaccuracies when faced with them. I guarantee you that if you apply that mentality to just about any holy text or any text for that matter, it will be impossible to ever find any flaw in anything.

[JehovahsWitness]

Moderator removed one-line, non-contributing post. Kindly refrain from making posts that contribute nothing to debate and/or simply express agreement / disagreement or make other frivolous remarks.

For complimenting or agreeing use the "Like" function or the MGP button. For anything else use PM.