The supergenious that marks scripture

[tretothee350z]

The greatest evidence, for me at least, that the bible is inspired by the one true God is the profound unified theme that marks the scriptures.

The Bible is a collection of 66 books. It was written by different authors, in different places, on different continents, over a 1600 year period. In light of all these things, there is an impossibility that each and every book which has come to be called "the canon", would be so unified in theme, teaching, and structure. And further the Predictive prophecy clearly made in advance of its unquestioned fulfillment. The logical argument is as follows:

1. If the content of the Bible is characterized by a united simplicity and
inexhaustibility that is beyond mere human production, then the content of the
Bible is of divine origin.

2. The content of the Bible is characterized by a united simplicity and
inexhaustibility that is beyond mere human production.

3. Therefore the content of the Bible is of divine origin.

Even skeptics have admitted the uniqueness of the biblical message. Rousseau, the prominent eighteenth century thinker to whom such philosophers as Kant and Hegel acknowledged their debt said: "I will confess to you farther that the majesty of the Scriptures strikes me with admiration, as the purity of the Gospel has its influence on my heart. Peruse the works of our philosophers, with all their pomp of diction, how mean, how contemptible are they, compared with the Scriptures! Is it possible that a book, at once so simple and sublime, should be merely the work of man?"

The great simplicity associated with a length, and breadth, and depth of the
meaning in scripture far transcends the range and capacity of the most inspired genius.

If one is going to read the bible properly, he should look for foreshadows of Christ in every line of the old testament. The animals slain to cover the nakedness of our parents: That was Christ, slain to cover our shame and guilt. Moses, leading the Israelite people out of slavery to the Egyptian people: That was Christ leading his people out of slavery and bondage to s sin, and this fallen world. Abraham, ready to Sacrifice his Son Isaac on Mt. Horeb (the same mountain that Christ was crucified on), when God caused a lamb to get caught in the thicket as a substitute, that was Christ.

The extent to these foreshadows of the messiah are by no means exhaustive. hundreds, and hundreds mark the pages of biblical text, each story revealing something about the savior to come when read between the lines. This is not a farfetched position as even Jesus himself spoke in parables, and figurative language. The parables were told to reflect a higher spiritual reality deeper than the parables themselves. And for those with "eyes to see" it was revealed that the King in Jesus parables was actually Jesus himself.

The backdrop of scripture also has a common theme. It can be summarized depending on which theological point you wish to emphasize, but an example is as follows: The whole of redemptive history can be summarized as the Father seeking a bride for His son, separated into four stages... Creation, fall, redemption, and restoration.

In conclusion, it is this unity that makes scripture beyond human ability to improvise. The attempt of theology is to understand this unity, and what it is saying. It is a phenomenon on the Bible that is absolutely unique among the scriptures of the major world religions. I am referring to the amazing way that the Old Testament predicts and foreshadows the coming of the Messiah and how these predictions are fulfilled by Jesus of Nazareth. And this is what gives scripture its defense when properly understood. Jonathan Edwards called it the ineffable, distinguishing, evidential excellency in the Bible. Call it an objective divine glory in the Bible, but Gods fingerprint (as it were) truly is shown to us in the unified theme which points to the Christ, Gods Son, and when this reality is seen, the Bibles message is self authenticating. It needs no outside defense.

[Felix]

To appreciate the quality of the Bible, it would help to read non-biblical books of ancient origin. For example, the Bible makes no assertions about nature that we empirically now know are false. But, other ancient books make all sorts of assertions about nature that we know now are false. Even secular books are riddled with errors about things we know better now. An old edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica thinks California is an island or a peninsula.

And, no the virgin birth is not a translation scam. Skeptics have gone to great lengths to fault the Bible, but they have nothing convincing except to someone looking for reasons not to believe.

[Morphine]

I should have said in previous cultures and mythologies which people use to believe in.

Here is one source for the comparison to Greek mythology:
http://veronafair.hubpages.com/hub/the- ... -mythology

Another one with Mithraism:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa1.htm

I feel that's enough to get my point across on that matter. I'm sure you can easily find more.

This seems to be along the same line as the liberals on the History Channel saying that most of what is in the bible is copied from the surrounding countries, creation stories, flood stories etc. but why could it not have been that if they all descended from Noah after the flood they would have been taught these things and over the years the truth was lost because when separated from God the truth became fuzzy. They do not represent the righteous branch that God is preserving. They stole these stories from the Bible itself. The Lord taught his ways to Adam and His people who passed them on to there children. Noah brought these truths to the post flood world and his decedents spread these truths throughout the world, even though these developing cultures apostatized they held to the teachings of there ancestors. At least this is the way I have always seen it. I mean, look at how well Abraham was known, and his interactions with the kings of the earth. These apparent parallels were things that were known to all but have been distorted. They share a commonality because they share that similar source but they are copies or distortions of God's truth not the other way around.

But seriously, the order of recording is in question so they assume the position contra Scripture. Why is this?

One of the axioms that I live by is - "There is no religious thought or idea that was not copied from the Bible first." I have used this when people try to compare the old religious practices and say that Moses copied from them and blended them into his Bible that he wrote. (Well, that's how they say it) I'm sure the same would apply to the legal stuff too. For example: The Middle Assyrian laws (c. 1100 B.C.), The Hittite laws (c. 1500 B.C.), The Code of Hammurabi (c. 1700 B.C.), The Code of Lipit-Ishtar, The Code of Lipit-Ishtar (c. 1930 B.C.), The Code of Eshnunna (c. 1980 B.C.), The Code of Ur-nammu (c. 2050 B.C.), all legal codes from the Ancient near east, all share similarities when compared with the law of Moses.

There are indeed certain similarities of Greek mythology when compared with the Old testament, but as I suggested before, this is only to be expected. For instance in the flood of Noah, it is only reasonable that all the cultures of the earth would contain a flood story, if it were in fact a global flood, and that we do, as the story would have been passed down from Noah as the earth repopulated. So not surprisingly the story of the flood is by no means exclusive Greek mythology. to Many of the supposed parallels the websites you listed mention simply arent convincing. They do bare a vague appearance of biblical figures and events on some occasion, but nothing striking. and besides, there is a fine line between the spiritual principles, and philosophy emphasized in the Bible, and any other religious texts. At a superficial glance certain things may appear similar, but when properly understood, the meaning is always different, because the philosophy of the Bible is a phenomenon all its own. Christianity is the only religion of the world that works by grace. All of the other religions of the world are tied to self accomplishment. Having said all that, unless the very foundation of Christian theology (Christ) is attacked, the similarities pose no threat, because a copy cat of Jesus Christ that predates Christ, shows that his life is nothing more than a rewrite from ancient myth. This was attempted in the Zeitgeist claims, but basically long story short, the claims have no ugaritic text nor manuscript etc to back the claims, no serious scholar takes hold to these views, Wikipedia even has a section for bashing it. The guy who made this claim used a few uneducated ridiculous sources for his claims.

All About Horus: An Egyptian Copy of Christ? Response to Zeitgeist movie

Osiris. Horus. Jesus. Not Triplets!

Was the life of Jesus copied from Horus

And you say I'm being arbitrary and ambiguous. How? I was being serious. And it shows that you favor your God over any other possibly. Because honestly, all of the ideas are equally absurd.

What I am saying is that you're taking conjecture, and you're putting it in the place of research.

You also claim that the gospels would have never made it out of Jerusalem without the eye witness accounts. And yet we know of beings such as Zeus, Ares, Ra, and Anubis? Are you saying that there were eye witness accounts of those gods and they were telling the truth? Because people did actually believe that stuff for years. You can argue and say that they may have been mistaken, delusional or simply lying, but then you would have to also apply those possibilities to your own information.

Because the intention of the apostles was meant to portray actual events within the greco-Roman empire that they witnessed firsthand. The historical account of Jesus, and his divinity. If they meant it as myth, that means they were not meaning it literally.

Also, Jesus's birth did not fulfill the prophecy. He was to be born from the lineage of King David, whom Joseph, Mary's husband, was related to. You can claim that Mary is related to King David. But no where in the bible does it state such a thing. And we all know that Joseph and Jesus are not blood related.

The answer to this as I was told is that is why we have Luke's genealogy. Luke 3:31 in Mary's line is through Nathan, which was the son of David.

So Jesus is still is able to sit on the throne of David.

Forgive me. I would address each point, but I suck at the whole quoting thing and I'm using a tablet. So I don't have the patience.

But basically, all your points are good ones. But none if them really prove that the bible was inspired by an actual god. Maybe it was inspired by the "belief" in a god. As far as others corroborating the same story or people not being able to falsify records or what not, that is also question. I mean who's to say no one was bribed or blackmailed? Or just simply corrupt. I mean I know I may be coming off as an extreme skeptic, but the existence of an omnipotent being who can't be seen or felt by conventional means is an extreme claim.

Also, idk how true this is, but maybe you know more about it. I came across information a while back saying there are very few accounts of anyone writing about these things that the bible speak of. Especially since there were suppose to be so many witnesses. One could argue that those with the means to record such events were limited. But if that's the case, then that argument could be used to support the idea rip that higher ups on the social latter may have had some strong influence on what was written. With so few writers, it would be easy to govern what was written and who wrote it.

Of course most of what I'm saying are just my ideas and opinions, but they are all still possibilities. The more extreme the claim, the more extreme the evidence needs to be?

Btw.... Are there any other accounts or sources that mention the defining events in the bible? You know. To support that all those events in the bible even happened.

[Morphine]

To appreciate the quality of the Bible, it would help to read non-biblical books of ancient origin. For example, the Bible makes no assertions about nature that we empirically now know are false. But, other ancient books make all sorts of assertions about nature that we know now are false. Even secular books are riddled with errors about things we know better now. An old edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica thinks California is an island or a peninsula.

And, no the virgin birth is not a translation scam. Skeptics have gone to great lengths to fault the Bible, but they have nothing convincing except to someone looking for reasons not to believe.

So the people who wrote the bible did a better job. It only means the other people had a weaker education.

And I'm not saying the translation was a "scam", but wasn't the original hebrew word used to describe Mary, almah? Which means several different things. All of which would have made more sense.

[SailingCyclops]

The correct rendition of Deuteronomy 5:17 is "‘You shall not murder" which means "unjust killing"

The purpose of the eradication of the Canaanites was not a vendetta, its was for the purpose of displaying Gods justice, the same God who commands unjust killing as a sin against himself, because it contradicts his character

So, according to the bible:

4) And the Lord said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof.
5) And to the others he said in mine hearing, Go ye after him through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity:
6) Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women ....

16: But in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God gives you for an inheritance, you shall save alive nothing that breathes,
17: but you shall utterly destroy them, the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Per'izzites, the Hivites and the Jeb'usites, as the LORD your God has commanded

What you need to explain to us is how the mass killing of children, young girls, women, and the elderly is a just act and not murder. Mass murder actually. Do you not condemn such acts yourself? Even most of us lowly atheists see these crimes as murder, as crimes against humanity, and in the context of war, a war crime worthy of the death penalty. Either your god is a murdering war criminal, or your concept of "justice" (and that of your god) is at odds with what most civilized humans understand it to be. Which is it?

Bob

[Molly]

Alright... this is going to be a massive post, so please bear with me.

The greatest evidence, for me at least, that the bible is inspired by the one true God is the profound unified theme that marks the scriptures.

The Bible is a collection of 66 books. It was written by different authors, in different places, on different continents, over a 1600 year period. In light of all these things, there is an impossibility that each and every book which has come to be called "the canon", would be so unified in theme, teaching, and structure. And further the Predictive prophecy clearly made in advance of its unquestioned fulfillment. The logical argument is as follows:

1. If the content of the Bible is characterized by a united simplicity and
inexhaustibility that is beyond mere human production, then the content of the
Bible is of divine origin.

2. The content of the Bible is characterized by a united simplicity and
inexhaustibility that is beyond mere human production.

3. Therefore the content of the Bible is of divine origin.

Even skeptics have admitted the uniqueness of the biblical message. Rousseau, the prominent eighteenth century thinker to whom such philosophers as Kant and Hegel acknowledged their debt said: "I will confess to you farther that the majesty of the Scriptures strikes me with admiration, as the purity of the Gospel has its influence on my heart. Peruse the works of our philosophers, with all their pomp of diction, how mean, how contemptible are they, compared with the Scriptures! Is it possible that a book, at once so simple and sublime, should be merely the work of man?"

The great simplicity associated with a length, and breadth, and depth of the
meaning in scripture far transcends the range and capacity of the most inspired genius.

If one is going to read the bible properly, he should look for foreshadows of Christ in every line of the old testament. The animals slain to cover the nakedness of our parents: That was Christ, slain to cover our shame and guilt. Moses, leading the Israelite people out of slavery to the Egyptian people: That was Christ leading his people out of slavery and bondage to s sin, and this fallen world. Abraham, ready to Sacrifice his Son Isaac on Mt. Horeb (the same mountain that Christ was crucified on), when God caused a lamb to get caught in the thicket as a substitute, that was Christ.

The extent to these foreshadows of the messiah are by no means exhaustive. hundreds, and hundreds mark the pages of biblical text, each story revealing something about the savior to come when read between the lines. This is not a farfetched position as even Jesus himself spoke in parables, and figurative language. The parables were told to reflect a higher spiritual reality deeper than the parables themselves. And for those with "eyes to see" it was revealed that the King in Jesus parables was actually Jesus himself.

The backdrop of scripture also has a common theme. It can be summarized depending on which theological point you wish to emphasize, but an example is as follows: The whole of redemptive history can be summarized as the Father seeking a bride for His son, separated into four stages... Creation, fall, redemption, and restoration.

In conclusion, it is this unity that makes scripture beyond human ability to improvise. The attempt of theology is to understand this unity, and what it is saying. It is a phenomenon on the Bible that is absolutely unique among the scriptures of the major world religions. I am referring to the amazing way that the Old Testament predicts and foreshadows the coming of the Messiah and how these predictions are fulfilled by Jesus of Nazareth. And this is what gives scripture its defense when properly understood. Jonathan Edwards called it the ineffable, distinguishing, evidential excellency in the Bible. Call it an objective divine glory in the Bible, but Gods fingerprint (as it were) truly is shown to us in the unified theme which points to the Christ, Gods Son, and when this reality is seen, the Bibles message is self authenticating. It needs no outside defense.

[Molly]

And, no the virgin birth is not a translation scam. Skeptics have gone to great lengths to fault the Bible, but they have nothing convincing except to someone looking for reasons not to believe.

the 'virgin birth' prophesy has been exposed as a translation scam....

This is simply not true: http://carm.org/isaiah-7-14-virgin

Except that when the LXX was translated into Greek, the whole of the scriptures was not included. In fact, the earliest seem to just be the five books of Moses (according to the Letter of Aristeas). The Book of Isaiah (and other books) were added at least a century later, probably more (Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (ODCC), 3rd ed.).

Also, "parthenos" doesn't always mean virgin; in fact it generally seems to refer to unmarried women (some are virgin, others are not). Homer uses it in that manner (unmarried non-virgin) in the Iliad (Iliad 2.514). In the Septuagint, Dinah is also referred to as "parthenos" AFTER she was raped (another non-virgin) (Genesis 34:2-4). You can read it here: http://www.kalvesmaki.com/LXX/index.htm and http://books.google.com/ebooks/reader?i ... put=reader

[orthodox skeptic]

I qualify my response to this questionable perspective by stating up front that my source is, Bart Ehrman, 'Misquoting Jesus'. The author chairs the Dept of Theologic Studies at UNC. In the matter of Scripture authenticity we must accept that, not only do we not have the originals but only mere copies produced CENTURIES later. On top of that, as Ehrman posits, "there are more differences among the manuscripts then there are words in the N/T". If God had wanted us to know his words, he'd have given them to us in a language that we could understand. Instead the copies are all presented in Greek or Hebrew and subsequently translated from one to the other until finally they come to us in English. Historically we know that in ancient Greek texts contained no punctuation and words and sentences were not even separated. Think on that. Suppose you were given a scholarly text constructed in such style, in English. How long do you think it would take to get through it and do you believe that you would be able to guarantee that what you read was what precisely what the author intended. The Bible was written but different human authors at different times, in different places and were written to satisfy different religious needs. Your faith is admirable!

The greatest evidence, for me at least, that the bible is inspired by the one true God is the profound unified theme that marks the scriptures.

The Bible is a collection of 66 books. It was written by different authors, in different places, on different continents, over a 1600 year period. In light of all these things, there is an impossibility that each and every book which has come to be called "the canon", would be so unified in theme, teaching, and structure. And further the Predictive prophecy clearly made in advance of its unquestioned fulfillment. The logical argument is as follows:

1. If the content of the Bible is characterized by a united simplicity and
inexhaustibility that is beyond mere human production, then the content of the
Bible is of divine origin.

2. The content of the Bible is characterized by a united simplicity and
inexhaustibility that is beyond mere human production.

3. Therefore the content of the Bible is of divine origin.

Even skeptics have admitted the uniqueness of the biblical message. Rousseau, the prominent eighteenth century thinker to whom such philosophers as Kant and Hegel acknowledged their debt said: "I will confess to you farther that the majesty of the Scriptures strikes me with admiration, as the purity of the Gospel has its influence on my heart. Peruse the works of our philosophers, with all their pomp of diction, how mean, how contemptible are they, compared with the Scriptures! Is it possible that a book, at once so simple and sublime, should be merely the work of man?"

The great simplicity associated with a length, and breadth, and depth of the
meaning in scripture far transcends the range and capacity of the most inspired genius.

If one is going to read the bible properly, he should look for foreshadows of Christ in every line of the old testament. The animals slain to cover the nakedness of our parents: That was Christ, slain to cover our shame and guilt. Moses, leading the Israelite people out of slavery to the Egyptian people: That was Christ leading his people out of slavery and bondage to s sin, and this fallen world. Abraham, ready to Sacrifice his Son Isaac on Mt. Horeb (the same mountain that Christ was crucified on), when God caused a lamb to get caught in the thicket as a substitute, that was Christ.

The extent to these foreshadows of the messiah are by no means exhaustive. hundreds, and hundreds mark the pages of biblical text, each story revealing something about the savior to come when read between the lines. This is not a farfetched position as even Jesus himself spoke in parables, and figurative language. The parables were told to reflect a higher spiritual reality deeper than the parables themselves. And for those with "eyes to see" it was revealed that the King in Jesus parables was actually Jesus himself.

The backdrop of scripture also has a common theme. It can be summarized depending on which theological point you wish to emphasize, but an example is as follows: The whole of redemptive history can be summarized as the Father seeking a bride for His son, separated into four stages... Creation, fall, redemption, and restoration.

In conclusion, it is this unity that makes scripture beyond human ability to improvise. The attempt of theology is to understand this unity, and what it is saying. It is a phenomenon on the Bible that is absolutely unique among the scriptures of the major world religions. I am referring to the amazing way that the Old Testament predicts and foreshadows the coming of the Messiah and how these predictions are fulfilled by Jesus of Nazareth. And this is what gives scripture its defense when properly understood. Jonathan Edwards called it the ineffable, distinguishing, evidential excellency in the Bible. Call it an objective divine glory in the Bible, but Gods fingerprint (as it were) truly is shown to us in the unified theme which points to the Christ, Gods Son, and when this reality is seen, the Bibles message is self authenticating. It needs no outside defense.

[Waiting4evidence]

"Profound unified theme"???

Please

Exodus 20: Don't murder

Exodus 21: Murder your children if they misbehave



Please name one book that contradicts itself more than the Bible.

[Flail]

The books of the Bible were collated (and probably spun and edited) by religious propagandists in the fourth century for the exact purpose which so enthralls you. In addition, the chosen stories are so broadly written and vaguely referenced they can be turned and interpreted to have a meaning consistent with one another....which is precisely why they were chosen to be included and other stories were not.

[ThatGirlAgain]

The books of the Bible were collated (and probably spun and edited) by religious propagandists in the fourth century for the exact purpose which so enthralls you. In addition, the chosen stories are so broadly written and vaguely referenced they can be turned and interpreted to have a meaning consistent with one another....which is precisely why they were chosen to be included and other stories were not.

We see the core of the New Testament – the four Gospels and the seven so-called undisputed epistles of Paul - being widely accepted as early as the second century. There was debate about the inclusion or exclusion of various other books until the end of the 4th century, most notably about Revelation. There are certainly interpolations and modifications of the scriptures but most of these seem to have taken place fairly early on. There are textual differences between various manuscripts after the 2nd century but these are not of very great import. By the 4th century, the bulk of what we call the New Testament was pretty much already locked down.

The four Gospels and the core Pauline Epistles appear to have been chosen for inclusion so early on not merely because they agree with each other (they actually disagree on some vital points) but because they were widely read to congregations in the early days.