is the bible true ??

[OzSpen]

Thanks!!

Are you asking whether the Bible is truthful in what it states? Or are you asking if the Bible is a historically reliable document?

 

[th1b.taylor]

Are you asking whether the Bible is truthful in what it states? Or are you asking if the Bible is a historically reliable document?

I'm not at all sure it matters because I find the History recorded in the Bible has been proven over and over, As I studied to come up to speed after my conversion I read some accounts of people that set out to prove the Bible inaccurate historically and one gentleman was using a city that had long been considered to be mythical by everyone but the Christians and the Jews,When He found the site the ancient town was located on he ended up converting. here are a lot of these stories that prove the historical value of the scriptures.

As for the spiritual truths and principals stated in the Bible, they are either impossible or they are, incredibly simpler to establish. For the man that is pumped up on himself it is impossible to prove the truths of the scriptures because even if he were to read and to learn of how to approach God, he will never be found to be in total submission to God and without that submission God will not reveal Himself to a person. This is why the Barna Survey of Believers demonstrates that less than teo percent of the Church Membership is saved.

For the man that can find him or herself on their knees in total submission, crying out for God, God will come to him or her and the spiritual truths become obvious. So it is on either account, the Bible is true.

 

[OzSpen]

I'm not at all sure it matters because I find the History recorded in the Bible has been proven over and over, As I studied to come up to speed after my conversion I read some accounts of people that set out to prove the Bible inaccurate historically and one gentleman was using a city that had long been considered to be mythical by everyone but the Christians and the Jews,When He found the site the ancient town was located on he ended up converting. here are a lot of these stories that prove the historical value of the scriptures....

I do not find this kind of statement helpful as you have provided no names or references to document this research. 'Has been proven over and over' is not adequate when engaged in conversation with others who are wanting specific evidence. I urge you to be specific with the research that you are wanting to present.

Here is one piece of archaeological evidence to support biblical history that is documented by archaeologist John McRay:

Erastus Inscription

Before A.D. 50, a 62-square-foot area was paved with stone near the northeast corner of the theater. In April 1929, a slab of gray Acrocorinthian limestone was found in situ during excavation of this pavement. The original height of the stone was 2.1 feet and the width was 7.4 feet. On it was part of a Latin inscription in letters 7 inches high. Two other pieces, containing most of the rest of the inscription, were found in 1928 and 1947 in other parts of the theater. The inscription reads:

ERASTVS-PRO-AEDILIT[at]E S-P-STRAVIT
In full: Erastus pro aedilitate sua pecunia stravit.​

The translation thus would be, "Erastus in return for this aedileship laid (the pavement) at his own expense." From other evidence found in the excavation this Erastus was identified as none other than the "city treasurer" mentioned by Paul in Romans 16:23, a letter written from Corinth. Three primary reasons favor this identification. First, the pavement was laid around A.D. 50, the time when Erastus would likely have been converted; second, the name Erastus is uncommon and is not found in Corinth other than in this inscription. Third, the particular Greek word used by Paul for "treasurer" (oikonomos) describes the work of a Corinthian adeile. The editor's description of the office sheds light on the position of this prominent citizen of Corinth, who is mentioned twice elsewhere in the New Testament (McRay 1991:331-332, online source

If the Bible is not demonstrated to be a historically reliable document, how can it be a truthful document? I have above given but one example to demonstrate that what has been found of Erastus on the Erastus inscription demonstrates reliability.

In Christ,
Oz

Works consulted
McRay, J 1991. Archaeology and the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House.

 

[reba]

The Foyer
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
Open to the public. No registration required.
All messages must first be approved before becoming publicly viewable. Approval response time depends on staff presence at the time of posting.
This is not a debate forum. Staff

 

[Deborah13]

I do not find this kind of statement helpful as you have provided no names or references to document this research. 'Has been proven over and over' is not adequate when engaged in conversation with others who are wanting specific evidence. I urge you to be specific with the research that you are wanting to present.

Here is one piece of archaeological evidence to support biblical history that is documented by archaeologist John McRay:

If the Bible is not demonstrated to be a historically reliable document, how can it be a truthful document? I have above given but one example to demonstrate that what has been found of Erastus on the Erastus inscription demonstrates reliability.

In Christ,
Oz

Works consulted
McRay, J 1991. Archaeology and the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House.

Here's another really exciting one, even the LA Times wrote an article about it.
The Tel Dan Inscription is the first proof as to the existence of the "House of David".
http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/...rical-evidence-of-the-king-david-bible-story/

 

[OzSpen]

Here's another really exciting one, even the LA Times wrote an article about it.
The Tel Dan Inscription is the first proof as to the existence of the "House of David".
http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/...rical-evidence-of-the-king-david-bible-story/

Thanks, Deborah, this provides some excellent supporting evidence, external to the Bible, that confirms the Bible's accuracy.

I have written a series of 4 articles for my homepage where I've attempted to address this issue in some depth.

See:

1. Can you trust the Bible? Part 1
2. Can you trust the Bible? Part 2
3. Can you trust the Bible? Part 3
4. Can you trust the Bible? Part 4

 

[Brother Mike]

The wisdom of God and the fact nothing contradicts should be enough.

The Word is alive, and produces something nothing else can that is real. It's called faith. I have issues trying to prove anything spiritual with natural things.

 

[Christ_empowered]

Along with what Brother Mike says...

...I recall some Pentecostals telling me that, if you want to see if Christianity is true, try to apply Christian morality to your life for a while, just to see. Nobody's promising you great changes with behavioral change sans faith, but even simply applying Biblical morality brings about positive changes in one's life.

 

[brother Paul]

Archaeologist Yosef Garfinkel reporting to CBN News tells us…

In 1868, a stone tablet was discovered…written by a Moabite king named Mesha, an enemy of Israel. The stone dates to around 840 BC, less than 200 years after David and it provides the first known reference to the "House of David" outside the Bible. "And 'House of David,' it means 'dynasty of David.' So we know that there was a person called David, and he had a dynasty,"

More than a hundred years later the same phrase, "House of David," turned up on another stone, this time in northern Israel. It was written about 200 years after David's rule -- again, by one of Israel's enemies, Hazel, the king of Damascus. He said, “I killed 70 kings. I killed a king from Israel, and a king from the House of David,"

So now we know David’s house was a kingly house (not the place where he lived) and this proves his lineage was a dynasty not a small local chiefdom. Hazel confirms the presence of the divided Kingdom. Israel ruled in the north and the House of David in the south.

Then there were places mentioned associated with David that for centuries were only mentioned in the Bible and are now confirmed: David’s desert oasis now called Ein Gedi; description of ancient Hebron is precise; the Philistine city of Gath; the Fortress of David forever called “Khirbet Daoud” by the Bedouins (nomadic chiefdoms) which Garfinkel says "It turns out that this beautiful city and all the finds is from about 1020 to 980 BC, and this is exactly the time of King David,"; the Valley of Elah which served as a neutral zone between the Israelites and the Philistines has unearthed many proofs. In Daoud which we now call Qeiyafa, which was right on the frontlines, excavators discovered a large cache of weapons. Garfinkel said “I'm telling you that this indeed was an area of conflict between two political units. In the Bible, this fortress is mentioned with a different name, Sha'Araym, "The city of two gates." In 1 Samuel 17, Sha'Araym is the place where the Philistines fled after David killed Goliath. In KQ, we have two gates. So if you take the biblical tradition, the location, the chronology, the meaning of the name -- all these aspects fit Khirbet Qeiyafa perfectly".

See Did David, Solomon Exist? Dig Refutes Naysayers - Inside Israel - CBN News - Christian News 24-7 - CBN.com

Then more recently we uncovered the Orphel Inscription of which Hebrew scholar and University Professor Gershon Galil says "We are dealing here with real kings…the kingdom of David and Solomon was a real fact" this inscription “places the ancient Israelites in Jerusalem earlier than previously believed, under a time the Bible indicates was King Solomon's rule.”

Not common at all for any small local nomadic chiefdom…

Then National Geographic News (Published February 26, 2010) posted an article about Solomon’s Wall, which states, “The tenth-century B.C. wall is 230 feet (70 meters) long and about 6 meters (20 feet) tall. It stands along what was then the edge of Jerusalem—between the Temple Mount, still Jerusalem's paramount landmark, and the ancient City of David, today a modern-day Arab neighborhood called Silwan”… according to archaeologist Eilat Mazar, who led the dig, “The stone barrier is part of a defensive complex that includes a gatehouse, an adjacent building, and a guard tower, which has been only partially excavated,”

“Over the years, the structures have been partially demolished—their building materials scavenged for later structures—and what remained was buried under rubble,”

1 Kings talks all about the wall of Jerusalem that Solomon built. The ancient artifacts associated with the massive 270 foot wall all date to around the mid-10th century B.C.! So the archaeologist concludes, "We don't have many kings during the tenth century that could have built such a structure, basically just David and Solomon"….

But wait….“No, no, no” says the anti-Biblicists…”nomadic chiefdom…nomadic chiefdom…haven’t you been listening to those modernist liberal scholars? Stop inundating me with real facts, I have already made up my mind.”

 

[Edward]

I've read about those brother Paul. How much more do people want?
How about the discovery of Noah's Ark?
How about the discovery of the Ark of the Covenant?
How about the discovery of chariot wheels and horse bones under the red sea?

All archaeological finds which all point to the historical accuracy of the bible. All of which is easily found on youtube.
I didn't need these proofs to know the bible was true, but after I chose to put my faith and trust in God, then His Spirit bear witness with my spirit and revealed truths to me. I have also had a few minor and major (to me was major!) miracles that had no explanation except God. Can I prove these miracles in a secular way? Of course not. God doesn't work that way, he wants faith of our own free will.

 

[brother Paul]

I second that motion Ed...

 

[Willie T]

When I was pondering this same question, as many of us did, I didn't really give too much thought as to the verification or the historical proofs. I looked at it from another perspective.

I reasoned that there is only one thing the majority of the world has always been against, and that is not only our God, but, more specifically, Jesus. Now, if much of the world has always seemed to be in a battle against my God, and has tried to still the witness of Him at every turn, then how much more would they be intent on making sure they could destroy the most visible and easily accessible route to information about Him and His Kingdom........ The Bible? Yes, a simple book that could easily be scooped up, and burned every time one was found.

But has that happened? Yes, of course Satan has tried. Oh, has he ever! Bible burnings were very commonplace at one time. in many parts of the world. He would be stupid NOT to try all those things! But how successful has he been?

The answer is all around us, in every country in the world, and in almost every language.......... with more and more Bibles showing up all the time. I had to come to the conclusion that there was a reason for that. Even today, when millions of powerful and influential people would like to see the Bible disappear, what is happening? People are on every corner, with one of those books in their hands.

So, I figure if Satan wants it gone, and all it does is multiply.... I'm going with the likelihood that this must, indeed, be God's true word.

Of course, none of this is scientific, nor forensically solid. But it was the answer God knew I needed, since I really don't put much stock in "facts" as related by authorized reporting authorities. Maybe it's the way you might relate to the world around you, too. It is, however, something to put in your, "Hummmmm?" box, and think about.

 

[Edward]

When I was pondering this same question, as many of us did, I didn't really give too much thought as to the verification or the historical proofs. I looked at it from another perspective.

I reasoned that there is only one thing the majority of the world has always been against, and that is not only our God, but, more specifically, Jesus. Now, if much of the world has always seemed to be in a battle against my God, and has tried to still the witness of Him at every turn, then how much more would they be intent on making sure they could destroy the most visible and easily accessible route to information about Him and His Kingdom........ The Bible? Yes, a simple book that could easily be scooped up, and burned every time one was found.

But has that happened? Yes, of course Satan has tried. Oh, has he ever! Bible burnings were very commonplace at one time. in many parts of the world. He would be stupid NOT to try all those things! But how successful has he been?

The answer is all around us, in every country in the world, and in almost every language.......... with more and more Bibles showing up all the time. I had to come to the conclusion that there was a reason for that. Even today, when millions of powerful and influential people would like to see the Bible disappear, what is happening? People are on every corner, with one of those books in their hands.

So, I figure if Satan wants it gone, and all it does is multiply.... I'm going with the likelihood that this must, indeed, be God's true word.

Of course, none of this is scientific, nor forensically solid. But it was the answer God knew I needed, since I really don't put much stock in "facts" as related by authorized reporting authorities. Maybe it's the way you might relate to the world around you, too. It is, however, something to put in your, "Hummmmm?" box, and think about.

Yeah, a lot of the things that Satan has done to try and stop the gospel and Christ...shows his desperation in a way.

Oh yes, it is not that we are 'winning'...We have won! When Christ was on the cross, and said, "It is finished"...oh my, this was very true and very deep. We, as believers, must keep this mindset! It's not, get thee behind me Satan...he's already behind us! lol lol!

All we have to do is to believe it and receive it, and the authority of Christ that comes with it. Ohh, praise the Lord, Praise The LORD!

 

[What do should I do]

Dear people of the forum,
I am torn. I used to be a Lutheran, but now I am an atheist. I thought Christianity was just mythology, to explain things we didn't know. But I have watched testimonies, and now I am torn. Part of me still is an atheist, but half wants to repent. What should I do?

Sincerely
Carter

 

[Gary]

Dear people of the forum,
I am torn. I used to be a Lutheran, but now I am an atheist. I thought Christianity was just mythology, to explain things we didn't know. But I have watched testimonies, and now I am torn. Part of me still is an atheist, but half wants to repent. What should I do?

Sincerely
Carter

Repent. What you're feeling is God calling you back. He hasn't given up on you, don't give up on Him.
.

 

[YosefHayim]

Humanity is fallen due original sin: Eve at the fruit off the tree. Adam ate too. By Adam's disobedience we all became sinners. He tried to become God, and fell from life to death. God became man, manifest as Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ died the death we deserved for our sins. He rose from death to life. God loved the whole world, that he gave his only begotten son Jesus Christ that whosoever believes on him shall not perish but come to ever lasting life. He died on the cross, was buried for three days, and rose to life and is alive today. We can't save ourselves. No good deed or work can save us because one sin separates us. Believe in Christ and be saved.

That is the ultimate testimony and proof of Jesus Christ: The Holy Spirit bringing Jesus Christ back to life and drawing people to him, resulting in saving faith and changed lives. Does in mean happy utopia on earth - no. Does it mean joyful endurance through sufferings, revelation, wisdom, and assurance, and a changed paradigm - yes.

Ask Jesus Christ to soften your heart and to come into your heart. Believe what he said and did is true and you will be saved.

Then after that we have fulfilled prophecy (Revelations says the spirit of prophecy is the testimony of Christ), we have history, geology, and more.

And if you're the type misled by Zeitgeist-esque lies saying Jesus is a copy of other religions, I suggest watching Aquarius: Age of Evil by Keith Thompson, and Age of Deceit by facelikethesun on YouTube.

 

[Count Duckula]

Thanks!!

The question should be which one. The answer is, God's Edition, the King James Version.

 

[Sandy Zalecki]

Which revision of the King James are you talking about? There are five different revisions of the Old King James Bible. The scholars fought from 1611 to 1832 over which revision was correct. They finally settled on the one we have today. If you want to go back to what you call "God's Edition" then you have to go back to the Hebrew and Greek. Those original texts were destroyed. Some of them on purpose so that people would not worship them. There are so many different versions of the Bible now because we have copywrite laws. They are each changed so that they can be copywritten. We need to read the Bible and ask the Holy Spirit to illuminate us on what is correct.

 

[YosefHayim]

Which revision of the King James are you talking about? There are five different revisions of the Old King James Bible. The scholars fought from 1611 to 1832 over which revision was correct. They finally settled on the one we have today. If you want to go back to what you call "God's Edition" then you have to go back to the Hebrew and Greek. Those original texts were destroyed. Some of them on purpose so that people would not worship them. There are so many different versions of the Bible now because we have copywrite laws. They are each changed so that they can be copywritten. We need to read the Bible and ask the Holy Spirit to illuminate us on what is correct.

(8) When was the KJV "given by inspiration of God"? - 1611 ... or any of the KJV major/minor revisions in 1613, 1629, 1638, 1644, 1701, 1744, 1762, 1769, and the last one in 1850?

The KJV was first published in 1611. However, there were revisions that followed soon after; all of which were completed by 1629. The revisions that occurred between 1611 and 1638 were due to printing errors. The KJV translators themselves, namely, Samuel Ward and John Bois, corrected these errors. In the course of typesetting, the printers had inadvertently left out words or phrases; all such manifest typographical errors had been corrected. For example, Ps 69:32 of the 1611 edition read "good" instead of "God." This was clearly a printer's error, and was corrected in 1617.

Apart from a slight revision in 1638, there followed several facetious attempts to revise the KJV between 1638-1762 but none were successful.

The final revision of the KJV was done between 1762 and 1769. The 1762 revision had to do with spelling. For example, old forms that had an "e" after verbs, and "u" instead of "v," and "f" for "s" were all standardised to conform to modern spelling. For example, "feare" is "fear," "mooued" is "moved," and "euill" is "evil," and "alfo," is "also." All these Gothic and German spelling peculiarities have been Romanised. 1769 saw an updating of weights, measures, and coins. This 1769 edition of the KJV is the one popularly in print today. It is important to note that the 1769 edition is essentially the same as the 1611.

1850? Is this Hudson's typo? There was an 1805 (not 50) edition which accidentally printed a proofreader's note "to remain" in the text of Gal 4:29 that made the verse to read "him that was born after the Spirit to remain ...." The only significant revision in the 1800s was in 1873 when Scrivener worked on the KJV's marginal notes, orthography, and cross references.

There are not two or more KJVs but only one, and the one that is used today is basically the 1769 edition.

Source: http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/KJBible/answers.htm​

More extensive explanation:
http://www.chick.com/reading/books/158/158_05.asp



I am not here to argue whether KJV is it or not, just merely providing an answer.


One thing to be sure is to be careful of your version.

The Message (MSG) is clearly corrupt. It changes "In earth as it is in heaven" to the demonic occult hermtic phrase "as above so below" which basically encapsulates an idea of monism or pantheism which is a lie contrary to scriptural truth.

If you were given a cup of 100% milk you would drink it. If it was 98% milk and 2% poison, you would not drink it.

 

[Count Duckula]

The King James. Also known as God's breath.