Is the Bible True?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Will_Storm
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The trouble with this analogy is that that story was not written to be used (as) a fact
Neither is scripture. The ancient cultures that scripture comes out of placed a value on story, symbolism, etc…The fundamentalist attempt to fit ancient cultures into rigidly precise modern words is a modern thing. Don’t fall into that trap friend.
Fact is not the same thing as Truth.
and a basis for people generations to come to base their lives off of. If I had to write a story about factual events that I knew to be the inspired word of god I would drop the hyperbole and say what happened.
This assumes you recorded the story on the spot using videocams and tape recorders, like we do reporting today.
Some scriptures were passed orally through many generations before written in their current form. Precise details get fuzzy over hundreds of years.
Does it really matter whether we can prove Methuselah was literally 895 years old? Or was he a very old and wise person. Isn’t that the Truth? I’m 54 years old and still living, and sometimes I forget my own age. But I still live, and have a story to tell.
ie. if someone only walked 20 block I wouldn’t write they had to walk hundreds of miles I would write they had to walk 20 blocks.
Not if you wanted to make a picture of a person half frozen to death and fatigued.
Facts per se don’t necessarily inspire, Truth inspires.

None of what I am saying is meant to refute the miraculous. I am simply saying that proof of the miraculous is kind of beside the point, and is pointless anyway as none of it can be proven in a scientific way.
 
Originally Posted by ericc View Post
The Church came first. She was teaching this orally before there was even a Bible
Doesn’t require proof.
The alternative makes no sense. The alternative is “the book that testifies to the community fell from the sky pre-written” rather than “the community wrote the book”.🤷 Human beings write books, God does not (Inspiration is not God’s hand moving the pen. It is human beings committing to human words everything God wishes to be known.) Scripture has human authors.
The circle is: The Bible says there is an infallible, spirit-led Church. The Church says the Bible is inspired and led by the spirit.
And the problem with that circle is…? 🤷

Constitution says the founders have the authority to make binding law, because the founders had the authority to write it that way.

So…?

The authority of the community and the written witness of the community reinforce each other. The word and the body are inseparable. “The word” is a highly personal endeavor based in the life of the community, which is a group of persons unified in “The Word” himself.
 
Doesn’t require proof.
Sure it does, as do all claims that wish to be taken seriously. Otherwise, anyone else can claim that they have the correct oral traditions and not you, or that there were no oral traditions. All these claims will have to be given the same weight if there is no proof for any of them.
And the problem with that circle is…? 🤷
The problem with the circle is that it is fallacious thinking and reasoning. Sathiya Say Baba was believed to have been a god and he had many followers. All of his followers say and believed he was a god, therefore he is a god. Bad reasoning.
 
And no my disbelief is not proof that an evil spirit doesn’t exist however I also don’t need to disprove something that hasn’t been proven. And while you have continued to say we can “find reasons not to believe, even when afforded reliable evidence” you have not afforded reliable evidence.
There is one sure way to get reliable evidence, why don’t you ask Jesus Christ himself, do you think this is impossible, prove me wrong. Ask Him if the devil is real and preventing you from knowing the truth. The proof of the pie is in the eating. We Catholic Christians believe that Christ died to free us from sin, if He was willing to humble Himself and become man in order to accomplish this, then would he not grant you this proof which is nothing compared to what He did, how sincere are you?
 
Here is logical evidence for God.

peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existence.htm

Keep in mind there are many things in your life you believe, that you don’t have evidence for. Take love for example. This cannot be proven empirically through the weight of physical evidence. At best, all that could be proven empirically is utility, which is not the same as love. But we all claim to love our mothers.
 
There is one sure way to get reliable evidence, why don’t you ask Jesus Christ himself, do you think this is impossible, prove me wrong. Ask Him if the devil is real and preventing you from knowing the truth. The proof of the pie is in the eating. We Catholic Christians believe that Christ died to free us from sin, if He was willing to humble Himself and become man in order to accomplish this, then would he not grant you this proof which is nothing compared to what He did, how sincere are you?
The problem with this is I don’t believe that anyone hears prayers so I cannot sincerely ask in prayer.
 
The problem with this is I don’t believe that anyone hears prayers so I cannot sincerely ask in prayer.
It’s true you can’t give what you do not have, and apparently don’t wish to have, and God acknowledges that. We all have freedom of will. He forces Himself on no one.
 
Keep in mind there are many things in your life you believe, that you don’t have evidence for. Take love for example. This cannot be proven empirically through the weight of physical evidence. At best, all that could be proven empirically is utility, which is not the same as love. But we all claim to love our mothers.
If someone asked for all of my time, money, effort, energy, and very life, and told me, “Give it all to me because I love you”, I’d think they were a gold-digger and I would cut communication with such a person. I still require evidence for such a claim if they seriously expect me to give of myself for them. Ironic, that people who truly love us, don’t require anything of usfor them to love us.
 
I am catholic and recognize the Bible as an essential part of our faith. My questions is really meant to address a popular atheist sentiment that there is no reason to believe the supernatural (or otherwise) claims of the Bible.

I am not sure how to address such claims.
Hi,
I have never really been able to do that. Yet, I am no longer convinced that God is against Atheists. He certainly made comments about salt, meaning hopefully those who know God, and how too much of that salt, is not a good thing.
I think, and never did on this subject before, that in fact those who are merely just and right in the world, meaning they hate wrong and love what is right, in all matters of course, are not forgotten nor forsaken by God in the least.
LOVE and love,
…Katerina.,
 
If someone asked for all of my time, money, effort, energy, and very life, and told me, “Give it all to me because I love you”, I’d think they were a gold-digger and I would cut communication with such a person. I still require evidence for such a claim if they seriously expect me to give of myself for them. Ironic, that people who truly love us, don’t require anything of usfor them to love us.
But the existence of love does not even require a claim in the first place. I know my son loves me, even if he doesn’t say it. It also does not require an exchange of anything physical. It can exist without any empirical evidence at all.
 
I am catholic and recognize the Bible as an essential part of our faith. My questions is really meant to address a popular atheist sentiment that there is no reason to believe the supernatural (or otherwise) claims of the Bible.

I am not sure how to address such claims.
If the Bible states that certain things will happen, and in real life they happen, then common sense would tell me that the source of that information is reliable, The Bible has a prophetical quality. Did Jesus say “those that live by the sword shall die by the sword.” observe the happenings is the Mid-east. Did Jesus say there would be wars and rumors of wars, has this happened? Did St.Paul state that one can prove the existence of God by observing the world? Has this been done. Did the Bible state that men and women would lust for each other? Has this happened? Have there been many evils committed because of divorce? How about the infringement on the Ten commandments, and the results? How about the evils of adoring false gods, money, prestige, possessions, talent, even people? I can go on. These are very good reasons to prove that the Bible speaks the truth, and is a reliable source for truth. But because people have free will, they can simply ignore the Bible, and remain ignorant. One can speculate why people do this, but to avoid the dangers of judging people, many refrain from doing so.
 
If the Bible states that certain things will happen, and in real life they happen, then common sense would tell me that the source of that information is reliable, The Bible has a prophetical quality. Did Jesus say “those that live by the sword shall die by the sword.” observe the happenings is the Mid-east. Did Jesus say there would be wars and rumors of wars, has this happened? Did St.Paul state that one can prove the existence of God by observing the world? Has this been done. Did the Bible state that men and women would lust for each other? Has this happened? Have there been many evils committed because of divorce? How about the infringement on the Ten commandments, and the results? How about the evils of adoring false gods, money, prestige, possessions, talent, even people? I can go on. These are very good reasons to prove that the Bible speaks the truth, and is a reliable source for truth. But because people have free will, they can simply ignore the Bible, and remain ignorant. One can speculate why people do this, but to avoid the dangers of judging people, many refrain from doing so.
Saying there will be wars and rumors of wars, that men and women will lust after one another? Seriously that isn’t prophecy that is observation. If I say there will be earthquakes around the world that isn’t a prophecy it’s a useless exclamation because OF COURSE IT WILL HAPPEN. Also those that live by the sword die by the sword is a saying not a prophecy(mainly because people no longer use swords for fighting[well that is just the wording it should be translated into modern weaponry. In that case it isn’t a prophecy])
 
SonOfMan #30
Abu Fact 2: He claimed to be a messenger sent from God.
This is not a fact…
False.
The writings of these facts – the Gospels – are comparable with other ancient documents from writers such as Caesar, Tacitus, Thucydides and others, they are all reliable as history.
The Bible alleges that he claimed to be, but there are no writings outside of the inner circle of writers that coincides with these claims
Who else would know and be able to write this at that time?
Abu Fact 3: He did enough to prove that He was such a messenger
The Bible alleges that he proved things, but no other writings outside of the Bible corroborate these claims.
“No writings outside of the Bible corroborate these claims”? That is useless as a statement of reality, as writers come in all and no beliefs and intentions. Even the rationalist historian William Lecky wrote of Jesus “that it may be truly said that the simple record three short years of active life has done more to regenerate and to soften mankind than all the disquisitions of philosophers, and all the exhortations of moralists.” History of European Morals, George Braziller, New York 1955, Vol. II, P 8-9; Apologetics and Catholic Doctrine, Archbishop Michael Sheehan, revised by Fr Peter Joseph, The Saint Austin Press, 2001, p 123].
Abu Fact 4: Crowds followed Jesus and He had an inner circle to whom he spoke much more.
That’s what is written, but nothing else corroborates this.
When the Gospels were written, as Fr William G Most points out, many people who had seen and heard Jesus himself would have been alive at that time. And Quadratus, an early apologist writing about 123 A.D., tells us that in his day there were still persons around who had been cured or raised from the dead by Jesus – prime witnesses.
Abu Fact 5: He commissioned His followers to continue His teaching and founded His Church.
Maybe so, but the claim out there is that Jesus as the man-god is legend based upon a real man named Jesus. Just because there was a real man named Jesus does not mean he was God, nor does it mean he had divine powers. And since there are no reliable sources that corroborate what the Bible has claimed, we simply don’t know.
The fantasy that the Gospel writers, who lived with the “real” Jesus of Nazareth and died for Him because He proved to them by His miracles and His Resurrection that He is God, is a fiction totally against reason.
Abu Fact 6: Jesus affirmed that God would protect that teaching.
Jesus allegedly said the gates of hell would not prevail. That doesn’t neccessitate that the teachings would be protected and would be kind of a stretch, jump, and hop to say so based on that sentence alone
.
There is no “alleging” – the teaching is factual and Jesus ensured much more of that reality when he specifically founded His Catholic Church on St Peter and the Twelve, for His empowerment was clear in reality and declares and mandates:
All four promises to Peter alone:
“You are Peter and on this rock I will build My Church.” (Mt 16:18)
“The gates of hell will not prevail against it.”(Mt 16:18)
“I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven." (Mt 16:19)
“Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” (Mt 16:19) [Later, also to the Twelve].

**Sole authority: **
“Strengthen your brethren.” (Lk 22:32)
“Feed My sheep.”(Jn 21:17).
**Abu: So from the reliability of the Gospels as history, we now know that:
  1. An infallible Church was founded by the Son of God
  2. That infallible Church teaches that the Bible, as She has given us, is the inspired Word of God. **
    This is circular reasoning.
False.
 
Saying there will be wars and rumors of wars, that men and women will lust after one another? Seriously that isn’t prophecy that is observation. If I say there will be earthquakes around the world that isn’t a prophecy it’s a useless exclamation because OF COURSE IT WILL HAPPEN. Also those that live by the sword die by the sword is a saying not a prophecy(mainly because people no longer use swords for fighting[well that is just the wording it should be translated into modern weaponry. In that case it isn’t a prophecy])
It would help the discussion if you understood Christianity, and Catholicism specifically.

Prophecy is not fortune telling or merely prognostication.
Google up a Catholic definition of prophecy. The point of prophetic speech is not to predict the future in a literalist way.

It’s interesting in discussion with atheists…most all of you insist on biblical interpretation that is in step with fundamentalism. You simply disagree on the authenticity and meaning of the words.
 
Josephus is just regurgitating the stories he’s heard from others. Josephus wasn’t an eyewitness nor did he have any direct interaction with Jesus. He was born years after Jesus had died. The fact remains that there are exactly zero contemporary writings about Jesus as the man-god.

Secondly, some scholars also argue that the Josephus’ text regarding Jesus isn’t even authentic. Given these things, Josephus isn’t a relevant citation.
 
Isn’t that what historians do? Much of history doesn’t require the writer to be a living witness of the event. It is sufficient for them to know with reasonable certainty that such and such an event did happened. Since you have brought it up that, then demonstrate that it is required by scholars that history must be recorded in the manner you described. If not, then it is only your personal requirement that history ought to be recorded in the manner you described.
Real history is corroborated by multiple sources, not one source that uses itself as its own proof. Once you have a lot of corroborating evidence, you can reasonably conclude that such-and-such event happened. You don’t get that with the books of the Bible.

Also, much of history isn’t ran by an organization that requires me to give my entire being to them; time, money, energy, effort, the way I live my family life, the way I think, the way I do absolutely everything. If you seriously expect for me to give an organization these things, I definitely require more evidence. Hard evidence. Maybes, kindas, possibilities, likelies, aren’t going to cut it.
With such a requirement, one then can not write about the events of last century because one wasn’t born yet. One can not write about the World War 2, or Martin Luther King or the actors and actresses of the 50’s or 60s because one wasn’t born then. I hope you are not serious about this requirement.
We have a lot of corroborating evidence to paint a clearer picture and to know with certainty these past events occurred. We don’t have that with the books of the Bible, and in fact, we have many discoveries that disprove many of the stories of the Bible (no Flood, no mass exodus of Jews from Egypt, no order from King Herod to kill all first born males, etc). We just have books that were written by the same inner circle of people with an agenda to promote. Zero contemporary writings.
That’s easy. Catholics came out with the Bible. This is how we interpret it for thousands of years.
This is also questionable. It seems many of the early Christians and early church fathers held beliefs that would qualify as “heresy.” Christian belief hasn’t always been consistent and certainly not for thousands of years.
Who knows, the entire Roman history may be legend too!
There’s evidence to show that the Roman Empire wasn’t just legend.
Early Christians were being killed for being Christians, not because they were violent folks. They were not armed rebels. To put early Christians martyrs on the same footing as ISIS is disgusting and shows a lack of capacity to discern between the 2 groups.[/qote]

The similarities between the two is that they both die for their faith. The story of Christian martys is believed to be legendary, though.

My point is, just because you die for a cause, doesn’t make that cause true.
 
I am catholic and recognize the Bible as an essential part of our faith. My questions is really meant to address a popular atheist sentiment that there is no reason to believe the supernatural (or otherwise) claims of the Bible.

I am not sure how to address such claims.
Perhaps one way to address this issue is extra-biblical. Start with the evidence from more recent miraculous events such as Fatima. You can trace the testimony and evidence of such events from our time back to the time of Jesus. 1) Contemporary events are more difficult to dismiss. If you’ve ever heard a skeptic talking about Fatima or similar events you’ll know what I mean. 2) Catholicism is unique in this respect. Islam or protestant Christianity or modern Judaism makes no similar claims. I read a comment recently on another board that Fatima was the greatest defeat for the devil in recent centuries.

I think the historical truth of the gospels holds up under scrutiny. Many pepole have adopted a hyper sceptical attitude that is not likely to be overcome without the grace of faith. It makes such discussions a waste of time often enough.
 
It would help the discussion if you understood Christianity, and Catholicism specifically.

Prophecy is not fortune telling or merely prognostication.
Google up a Catholic definition of prophecy. The point of prophetic speech is not to predict the future in a literalist way.

It’s interesting in discussion with atheists…most all of you insist on biblical interpretation that is in step with fundamentalism. You simply disagree on the authenticity and meaning of the words.
And it would help this discussion if you read the quote I was responding to, the man I was speaking to was not using that definition of prophecy. They said the bible has prophetic qualities, and claimed that “if the bible says things will happen and then they happen it would testify that the source of these claims is reliable”. So if you say that the prophecy isn’t used to predict the future then fine, just don’t claim that the bible is true because is can predict the future
 
Saying there will be wars and rumors of wars, that men and women will lust after one another? Seriously that isn’t prophecy that is observation. If I say there will be earthquakes around the world that isn’t a prophecy it’s a useless exclamation because OF COURSE IT WILL HAPPEN. Also those that live by the sword die by the sword is a saying not a prophecy(mainly because people no longer use swords for fighting[well that is just the wording it should be translated into modern weaponry. In that case it isn’t a prophecy])
How does one know if a man is a prophet , if what he says comes to be. What is your interpretation? You can judge that there might be an earthquake around the world and say “Of course it will happen.” You also know we had many wars, but you don’t seem to judge the whole picture, or the signs of the times. Mankind has tried very hard to bring peace to humankind for centuries even to this day, only to find that history repeats itself. History testifies to man’s failure to insure peace even for the short time it is experienced. In my lifetime I am aware of World War l, World War ll, The Cold War with Russia ( and it doesn’t look good presently) Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the Iraq and mid-eastern country conflicts. These wars were predicted, not by name which isn’t necessary and we can’t stop them from happening. Like I said, people can always find reasons and excuses not to believe. They can’t see the forest for the trees! They overlook or fail to recognize the plight of humanity over the centuries.
If you live by the sword, you will die by the sword, simply means that use weapons to kill people, you will die by those weapons (in general), kill and be killed in short. But if you want a literal translation, just refer to the public media and read reports of beheadings, by what, and by whom. When things go good, people live rich, fat, and happy, and loosely, just like the Roman empire which was destroyed. Look at our society today, in spite of all the technological advancement, there is so much moral corruption, hackers stealing people’s money, ponography and drugs polluting society. Now men marrying men, and women marrying women, highly un-natural. We live in a society were some just do as they please whether it is morally right or wrong is given the least or no consideration. Where have you been? You must live in an isolated world, and it seems that you don’t know much about the Bible, of course that shouldn’t be a surprise. And how would you know prophecy without observation?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top