What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Is the Bible rightfully the infallible Word of God?

W

WMD

Guest
I posted this in the general topics section, but this section seems to be a better place. There seems to be more discussion in this section and I am looking for some good dialogue about this.....

Before I begin let me explain myself and my question, so that people don't misunderstand me.

I am not trying to de-bunk the Bible, or prove anyone right or wrong. I have been exploring religion as of late, particularly Christianity because that is what I was raised.

As I explore the different religions, questions pop up that I cannot find an answer to. So here is one of those questions, and I hope to get some intelligent responses. If anyone has any good links to other sites pertaining to this I would appreciate those too.

and so....

Each book of the Bible was written by different people. Human beings with close relations to God and/or Jesus. These books were written with no intention of them ever being put together in a single book. The books that are currently contained in the Bible were not formally put together into a single piece of work until the late 4th century. It was a group of human beings that decided which books would go into the Bible and which would not. There are dozens of books written during the 1st century that are not even included.

With all of these variables, how do we know that the Bible is the truly infallible direct word of God, as many claim? How do we know that the Bible contains the correct books, and that man decided to not include the correct ones? Many books of the Bible, such as the four gospels are historical accounts. How do we know that writers did not inject their own views and opinions into their work? It is proven that multiple witnesses to the same event can have different views of that event and some may even believe to have seen somethings entirely different than the other witnesses.

What are your thoughts?
 
WMD said:
I posted this in the general topics section, but this section seems to be a better place. There seems to be more discussion in this section and I am looking for some good dialogue about this.....

Before I begin let me explain myself and my question, so that people don't misunderstand me.

I am not trying to de-bunk the Bible, or prove anyone right or wrong. I have been exploring religion as of late, particularly Christianity because that is what I was raised.

As I explore the different religions, questions pop up that I cannot find an answer to. So here is one of those questions, and I hope to get some intelligent responses. If anyone has any good links to other sites pertaining to this I would appreciate those too.

and so....

Each book of the Bible was written by different people. Human beings with close relations to God and/or Jesus. These books were written with no intention of them ever being put together in a single book. The books that are currently contained in the Bible were not formally put together into a single piece of work until the late 4th century. It was a group of human beings that decided which books would go into the Bible and which would not. There are dozens of books written during the 1st century that are not even included.

With all of these variables, how do we know that the Bible is the truly infallible direct word of God, as many claim? How do we know that the Bible contains the correct books, and that man decided to not include the correct ones? Many books of the Bible, such as the four gospels are historical accounts. How do we know that writers did not inject their own views and opinions into their work? It is proven that multiple witnesses to the same event can have different views of that event and some may even believe to have seen somethings entirely different than the other witnesses.

What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...

You really can't know. You have to trust the testimony of the writers.
 
So you think to yourself, "If God intended us to have Scripture, don't you think he'd have given us some way of knowing what Scripture he wanted us to have?" This question leads to some investigation.

As it turns out, the only way that we could have received the Scriptures is through some sort of Authority, and as it turns out the Authority that first decided what books should be included is the Catholic Church.

As to trusting the authority of the writer's themselves... you'll find plenty of writings that claim to be trustworthy but aren't. That's the whole basis for the Book of Mormon -- multiple witnesses to the truth contained therein. So you've got to move beyond what the writer's themselves are saying.

In the end, you can't escape the Catholic Church.
 
What a question!!
I am a Christian, so yes, I believe in the whole bible.
But since Jesus spoke in parables, would not have The Father had, too? I am not saying that is the exact truth, but it is something to keep in mind.
I am not saying that everything did not happen as it says, the historical scriptures, for instance,would not be parables.
It is hard to understand everything written in the Bible. I have trouble with some of the Prophets writings such as Ezekiel. I have a hard time understanding everything that is written there.
This story ahead from Ezekiel is one. When talking of this, did that really happen, did Ezekiel actually see God put these bones together, add flesh and then brought them to life,or was it a Parable? Was it a Parable to tell what will happen when the dead are brought to life? I can't say.
What are your thoughts on this?

Eze 37:1 The hand of Jehovah was on me, and brought me by the Spirit of Jehovah, and made me rest in the midst of a valley, and it was full of bones.
Eze 37:2 And He made me pass among them all around. And behold, very many were on the face of the valley. And lo, they were very dry.
Eze 37:3 And he said to me, Son of man, can these bones live? And I answered, O Lord Jehovah, You know.
Eze 37:4 Again He said to me, Prophesy to these bones, and say to them, O dry bones, hear the Word of Jehovah.
Eze 37:5 So says the Lord Jehovah to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath to enter into you, and you shall live.
Eze 37:6 And I will lay sinews on you, and will bring up flesh on you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live. And you shall know that I am Jehovah.
Eze 37:7 So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I prophesied, there was a noise. And behold, a shaking! And the bones came near, a bone to its bone.
Eze 37:8 And I watched. And behold! The sinews and the flesh came up on them, and the skin covered them above. But there was no breath in them.
Eze 37:9 And He said to me, Prophesy to the Spirit, prophesy, son of man, and say to the Spirit, So says the Lord Jehovah: Come from the four winds, O Spirit, and breathe on these dead ones so that they may live.
Eze 37:10 So I prophesied as He commanded me, and the Spirit came into them, and they lived and stood on their feet, an exceedingly great army.
 
I remember hearing that the 66 books of the Bible were assembled by the Apostle John but I don't know much about this.
 
Gendou Ikari said:
I remember hearing that the 66 books of the Bible were assembled by the Apostle John but I don't know much about this.
Click to expand...

If you heard this then it is false. The 66 books were assembled in the late 4th century and it was origionally more than 66 books. Whatever "authority" decided on the books trimmed some fat so to speak and finally canonized the 66 books that we have today.
 
ChristineES said:
....... I can't say.
What are your thoughts on this?
Click to expand...

I believe that Ezekiel's experience that you mention could have been what he really saw, although possibly not in real life. It could have been a vision or dream or maybe it really did happen. I don't know.

I do think that God spoke directly to people in the OT. I think the prophets did have visions and dreams from God, but why did God stop directly communicating with people like that?

The reason that I believe the above, is because there are prophesies in the OT that have been fullfilled. But again, OT authors wrote these things down or passed them on to future generations so that they may learn about God. Not so that they could all be collected and formed into a book.

The fact they they have been formed into a book does not make them less true, but my question is why are the books that are not included in the Bible considered false and or heresy. A fine example is the Gospel of Judas. Christians knee jerk reaction is that it is garbage. Maybe it is maybe it isn't.
 
Hyfrydol said:
So you think to yourself, "If God intended us to have Scripture, don't you think he'd have given us some way of knowing what Scripture he wanted us to have?" This question leads to some investigation.

Mutz said:
Yes it is called the Spirit.
Click to expand...

As it turns out, the only way that we could have received the Scriptures is through some sort of Authority, and as it turns out the Authority that first decided what books should be included is the Catholic Church.

Mutz said:
What difference does it make who or what God uses to bring about His purposes. Pharoah was God's servant too and he killed God's people.
Click to expand...

As to trusting the authority of the writer's themselves... you'll find plenty of writings that claim to be trustworthy but aren't. That's the whole basis for the Book of Mormon -- multiple witnesses to the truth contained therein. So you've got to move beyond what the writer's themselves are saying.

Mutz said:
It is the Holy Spirit that confirms & denies what is of God. As Paul said of those who after starting with the Spirit were then trying to achieve their goal by human effort, "who has bewitched you?"
Click to expand...

In the end, you can't escape the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...

Mutz said:
True, that's why I will never be in its grip. :wink:
Click to expand...
 
What difference does it make who or what God uses to bring about His purposes. Pharoah was God's servant too and he killed God's people.
Click to expand...

But why, Mutz, if you didn't think it had some authority, would you trust the Church's rulings on what books should be in the Bible?

And why, if you agree that the Spirit guided the Church to pick which books should be in the canon, do Protestants now disregard the Deuterocanonicals?

Mormons claim that their scriptures are also proven by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. I propose that simply making that claim isn't good enough -- you need some authority to back it up.
 
Do you mean the Apocrypha? I have read it and have no idea why it was left out.
I will some scripture from Baruch, which is part of the Apocrypha, for those who have never read it or any other of the Apocrypha books.

Bar 3:1 O Lord Almighty, God of Israel, the soul in anguish the troubled spirit, crieth unto thee.
Bar 3:2 Hear, O Lord, and have mercy; for thou art merciful: and have pity upon us, because we have sinned before thee.
Bar 3:3 For thou endurest for ever, and we perish utterly.
Bar 3:4 O Lord Almighty, thou God of Israel, hear now the prayers of the dead Israelites, and of their children, which have sinned before thee, and not hearkened unto the voice of thee their God: for the which cause these plagues cleave unto us.
Bar 3:5 Remember not the iniquities of our forefathers: but think upon thy power and thy name now at this time.
Bar 3:6 For thou art the Lord our God, and thee, O Lord, will we praise.


I am not a Catholic, but I often wondered the reasons why these books were left out. While others (like The Song of Solomon) were left in.
Baruch
Tobit
Judith
1&2 Maccabees
Sirach
Wisdom
and others, I believe.

We could have a whole thread on this alone.
 
Hyfrydol said:
What difference does it make who or what God uses to bring about His purposes. Pharoah was God's servant too and he killed God's people.
Click to expand...

But why, Mutz, if you didn't think it had some authority, would you trust the Church's rulings on what books should be in the Bible?

And why, if you agree that the Spirit guided the Church to pick which books should be in the canon, do Protestants now disregard the Deuterocanonicals?

Mormons claim that their scriptures are also proven by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. I propose that simply making that claim isn't good enough -- you need some authority to back it up.
Click to expand...

Any catholic or mormon group or any other religion or denomination for that matter that believes that right relationship with God can be attained by following a creed or doctrine is denying the righteousness that comes by faith in Christ. Those who are trying to attain your goal by human effort are denying that righteousness can only be imputed by faith in Christ through the Holy Spirit.

And I don't accept any authority no matter who they are if they preach another gospel or another jesus.
 
The Alpha course book, Questions of Life, by Nicky Gumbel, has a good chapter on this topic

As does 'Questions On The Christian Faith Answered From The Bible' by Roger Forster

& the classics, 'Evidence That Demands A verdict' & 'More -----' by Campus Crusade For Christ's magna cum laude genius, Josh McDowell

Lion Handbook To The Bible & others too

I have notes here that you can see in full on http://www.JohnAnkerberg.org - where you can get his book, 'What About The Missing Gospels?'

Very briefly, Irenaus says that, by 180AD, our 4 Gospels & all Paul's letters were well used & accepted, & that there is more than a strong thread of theology traced back to the earthly ministry of Jesus - no break in doctrine - 'alternative' theology just doesn't fit history: the Resurrection is solid vindication of Christ as God in human form & the only way of salvation

RC perversions only appeared gradually: it wasn't til the 4th century that any formal claim of pre-eminence was made for the bishops of Rome, as Constantinople threatened to eclipse the 'glory of Rome'

It wasn't till AD431 that they claimed that the pope had the keys of Peter - & they turned out to be the keys of pagan occult 2-faced 'god' Janus (& Cybele

As for the errors of the Apocrypha, consider only that posted verse about the dead praying: the dead don't - it's part of RC false teaching to pray to 'saints' - thus making them substitute gods

Link to longer threads...

http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopi ... highlight=

OP there links to other helpful threads (@ Da Vinci Code, Gospel of Judas, etc)

God bless!

Ian
 
The Alpha course book, Questions of Life, by Nicky Gumbel, has a good chapter on this topic

As does 'Questions On The Christian Faith Answered From The Bible' by Roger Forster

& the classics, 'Evidence That Demands A verdict' & 'More -----' by Campus Crusade For Christ's magna cum laude genius, Josh McDowell

Lion Handbook To The Bible & others too

I have notes here that you can see in full on http://www.JohnAnkerberg.org - where you can get his book, 'What About The Missing Gospels?'

Very briefly, Irenaus says that, by 180AD, our 4 Gospels & all Paul's letters were well used & accepted, & that there is more than a strong thread of theology traced back to the earthly ministry of Jesus - no break in doctrine - 'alternative' theology just doesn't fit history: the Resurrection is solid vindication of Christ as God in human form & the only way of salvation

RC perversions only appeared gradually: it wasn't til the 4th century that any formal claim of pre-eminence was made for the bishops of Rome, as Costantinople threatened to eclipse the 'glory of Rome'

It wasn't till AD431 that they claimed that the pope had the keys of Peter - & they turned out to be the keys of pagan occult 2-faced 'god' Janus (& Cybele

As for the errors of the Apocrylha, consider only that posted verse about the dead praying: the dead don't - it's part of RC false teaching to pray to 'saints' - thus making them substitute gods

Link to longer threads...
 
The Alpha course book, Questions of Life, by Nicky Gumbel, has a good chapter on this topic

As does 'Questions On The Christian Faith Answered From The Bible' by Roger Forster

& the classics, 'Evidence That Demands A verdict' & 'More -----' by Campus Crusade For Christ's magna cum laude genius, Josh McDowell

Lion Handbook To The Bible & others too

I have notes here that you can see in full on http://www.JohnAnkerberg.org - where you can get his book, 'What About The Missing Gospels?'

Very briefly, Irenaus says that, by 180AD, our 4 Gospels & all Paul's letters were well used & accepted, & that there is more than a strong thread of theology traced back to the earthly ministry of Jesus - no break in doctrine - 'alternative' theology just doesn't fit history: the Resurrection is solid vindication of Christ as God in human form & the only way of salvation

RC perversions only appeared gradually: it wasn't til the 4th century that any formal claim of pre-eminence was made for the bishops of Rome, as Costantinople threatened to eclipse the 'glory of Rome'

It wasn't till AD431 that they claimed that the pope had the keys of Peter - & they turned out to be the keys of pagan occult 2-faced 'god' Janus (& Cybele

As for the errors of the Apocrylha, consider only that posted verse about the dead praying: the dead don't - it's part of RC false teaching to pray to 'saints' - thus making them substitute gods

Link to longer threads...
 
Thanks for the response, Mr V. I will check out some of the book titles you mentioned.

As a side note... The Da Vinci Code, by Dan Brown is a FICTION novel. Why does everyone want to debunk a book that the author admits is fiction?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top