Is the bible authoritive and truly inspired?

Gday, Pardon?
No, he doesn't have to be "anal" or please me.
I just showed many cases where the NT has been CHANGED.
Which you said never happened. There is plenty of EVIDENCE for that as I showed
But you just ignored all the evidence. Forget? That's my whole point!
That men ALTERED the writings.
Now you agree they did change it, when before you said there were NO changes. What a laugh!
You showed no discernment at all, you ignored the facts, you just preached faithful beliefs.And why do apologists love this word "valid"?
Valid?
What matters is whether it's contents are true.
And the NT books certainly aren't.Kap

it wasn't changed and if all four authors wrote the exact same words you and the rest of the secularists would charge fraud and copying or plagerism, among other charges you could think of. people like ehrman and dever have been saying these things for years and NOT one of them have produced one shred of real evide3nce. it is all hearsay, conjecture, speculation. i do NOT agree with you, you are leaping on a set of words without clarifying and putting your spin to it. the original words have not changed.my point stands secularists do not use discernment, they look for things to exploit to justify their unbelieve and make them feel good about following sin.

Greetings, It was changed many times, as the evidence I posted shows.
You just ignored it.
Will you ever address the facts?
Such a this obvious change : Luke 3:22
The words of God at the BaptismEarly MSS and quotes have the same as the Psalm :
"...and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou are my son, this day have I begotten thee"

But later versions have changed it to :
"...and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved son; in thee I am well pleased"

Here we see Christian scribes have CHANGED the very words of God, or the alleged words of God. And we know the reason - it supports the view called Adoptionism - later called a heresy.Clear and present evidence of editting to the NT.
Will you ignore that fact? Then why did YOU say :
Post 149:
"you forget that many men altered the writings on their own, because they did not accept what was written."YOU agreed that men "altered the writings".
And YOU claim they were "not changed".Well, WHICH is it, archeologist ? But we don't have any originals.
All we have is copies of copies, all different to each other, showing evidence of many many changes.Such as the Lord's Prayer :
Matthew 6:13
The Lord's PrayerEarly and important MSS (Aleph, B, D, Z, 205, 547) as well as some fathers (Tertullian, Origen, and Cyprian) have :
"And lead us not into temptation, But deliver us from evil"Other MSS have :
"And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen"And a few MSS have another version :
"And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, of the father, the son, and the holy spirit for ever. Amen"A few MSS exclude the words "the power" or "the glory" or "the kingdom".The Lord's Prayer is one of the more variant parts of the NT. Now,
this prayer was supposedly taught by Jesus himself.
But
early Christians could not agree what the prayer said !

​

Christians CHANGED this prayer to suit themselves.
The very prayer allegedly taught by Jesus!
CHANGED by Christians.Kapyong

and i have answered you--the Bible wasn't changed. we have the original words that God spoke or God lied and didn't keep His promise. just because forgeries are put out there doesn't mean that God's word changed, it just means it is a little more work and a little harder to find the correct mss and translations.What was GOd's word to Adam, to Moses, to David, Zto The disciples is still God's word. your argument is like claiming that because there is counterfeit money out there america changed its money. that is a ridiculous argument. see above. this is a problem with dealing with unbelievers in discussions concerning the Bible. you want a strict, one way to do everything and if it doesn't follow your ideas then there is a problem with the Bible. you all forget that even today people forget words to the Bible and 'paraphrase', or 'or leave words out' or 'substitute the wrong ones' but that doesn't mean they are changing the Bible or what it says.get a little realistic in your criticism of God's word.

Yes, it was. Since we don't have the originals, I guess that leaves the option of god lying in your false dichotomy. Have you ever thought of another option, like, men changed it regardless of god's promise? And how would you determine what the "correct" ones are, since you have no originals to compare them to? You don't know, you weren't there, and nobody was there to record them at that point in time. America did change it's money. Since it did in fact change, both in value as in looks, I wouldn't call it ridiculous. Since it is you who is like this, I would suggest you stop projecting. No, since it was already changed in the past. We are not critisizing god's word, we are critisizing the people who wrote it down and changed it.

asked and answered--it wasn't changed. moot. then God still didn't keep His word. we have the originals, God promised to prreserve His word. Your argument i sbart ehrman's and this is his main point--we do not have the originals so we can't be sure what was written. yet, according to his argument, if we do not have theoriginals then he cannot say there were scribal errors for we do not know what the originals said. it works both ways using that line of thinking.and you cannot say the God's word was changed either. By the way Craig Evans mentioned that we have 99.9% of the Bible
( follow this link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zf1pbTF0q0w&feature=related to hear his words. there are 3 epsiodes of 3 segments each) now you are just getting nit-picky because they only changed some features NOT the money itself--there are still 1, 5, 10, 20, 50, & 100 dollar denominations and still on paper. no, you are criticizing God for failing to keep His promise, according to your argument. you also cannot prove that man changed His words, you do not have the originals to compare with.as i said, God's word is the same, from the beginning onward. if you cannot trust God to keep His promise forthislittle thing of preserving His word, thenhow can you trust Him about heaven, salvation, security protection etc.?

I think this is a very good point. Given how many variations we have in translations, how early mss show differences across them, how various books have obviously been extended over time, it is blatently obvious that the Bible has been changed countless times. Saying that the changes are minor so do not matter, or that larger changes are a sign of heresy, simply does not refute the charge that the Bible has changed.And so the conclusion by your own reasoning must be that we cannot trust your god when it comes to heaven, salvation, security protection, etc.

Yes it was (getting tired of blind assertion yet?) Yes he did, he preserved it, men were the once that chnaged it. Please point me to the original manuscripts then. But we have examples of differeing texts of the same passage. We can't say which ones were the "original" ones, so we know it was changed. Then he's a liar. There are a lot of denominations that aren't made anymore (half cents, for example, or bills larger than $ 100). And dollars today are printed on cotton, not on paper. No I'm not. I think I know what argument I am making. We have however several versions of texts, which proves they were changed. Sure, we just don't know what those words were. I never said god didn't keep his promise, I said men changed it regardless. You can't know what the original words were. God could've easily preserved it, it's just that we have no way of telling what the original texts were. you cannot claim they were unchanged, you don't know if they were.

Where exactly is this promise? Chapter and Verse please.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Gday, Then why did YOU say :
Post 149:
"you forget that many men altered the writings on their own, because they did not accept what was written."And you just keep ignoring the facts that it WAS changed, such as : Luke 3:22
The words of God at the BaptismEarly MSS and quotes have the same as the Psalm :
"...and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou are my son, this day have I begotten thee"But later versions have changed it to :
"...and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved son; in thee I am well pleased"Here we see Christian scribes have CHANGED the very words of God, or the alleged words of God. And we know the reason - it supports the view called Adoptionism - later called a heresy.Clear and present evidence of editting to the NT.
Will you ignore that fact for ever ? So, you preach faithful beliefs as fact?
But your faith is actually contradicted by the facts.
You just ignore the facts. We see direct evidence of changes, you ignore them all. There are NO correct ones - just many different ones showing many signs of being changed.As you admit :
"you forget that many men altered the writings on their own, because they did not accept what was written."
Your words.KapyongEdited by Kapyong, : No reason given.

but i am not doing blind assertion, i am looking at all the facts which you are ignoring. there is so much you do not know about the dpiritual world, you keep trying to put this on a humanlevel so you can feel justified in not believing. you have proven my point why it is impossible to have a good and honest discussion with an unbeliever. they reject any evidence they do not like or can't refute. he isn't the only one saying that.there is no real point in continuing discussion with you we do know. again, you just want excuses to ignore God's word and trust science. not worth giving you more details.

since you have taken my words out of context and applied your own conclusion to them, i will not be responding to these words. this is another problem with having discussions with unbelievers--they complain that christians are too literal, then when it suits the unbeliever they become very literal over minute points that do not matter.

The problem with playing the I-know-because-God-told-me-so card is that anybody can do it. In fact, God told me personally, just this very morning, that you don't know what you're talking about.Your conversations with your god have no more value than my conversations with the real God, so we need to ascend to the human level to have a meaningful conversation.

---

Life is like a Hot Wheels car. Sometimes it goes behind the couch and you can't find it.

And the words are all English and sound sort of Shakspearian, right?That's idiotic, Arch.

Again I say What evidence? If you have this evidence then show it.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008