Determining a book's truth.

Nonsense. Of course the Church wanted common folk to read the Bible. That is another of those total falsehoods that many current Christian Pastors keep peddling. The first English language Bibles date all the way back to the late 1300's, over 250 years before the KJV.The other thing that gets overlooked is that there were Litanies long before the Bible was common. There was also the Book of Common Prayer which also predates the KJV.If you are not familiar with the BCP and the other Litanies, they are an order of Service. Part of the service are the Propers.Propers are those parts of the service that vary, they include the Readings, the Gospel, Psalms and Collects. The readings, Psalm and Gospel are directly from the Bible and it was expected that the family did have a Bible so they could find the material in the Propers.There has been a Daily Office for almost as long as there has been Christianity, and prescribed Propers for each day, and each of the Hours.Unfortunately, based on your posts so far, it really appears that you have been taught a very, very limited and biased history of Christianity.Just for your information, here is the Proper for today. You can also find the Proper for any day at that site. And in the Protestant movement.One of the things that gets ignored is that the issues raised in the Reformation were almost all actually resolved and adopted during the Councils of Trent.The separation of Western Christianity into Protestant and Roman Catholic camps was far more over politics, power, wealth, ownership and in the case of the Anglican Church, a conflict of calendars and the need to have an heir and a spare.Theology actually was a very small part of the movement.Unless you can establish some connection between the rest of your post and the question of how to Determine a book's truth, I don't see how it is important or relevant.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

What you say is unfortunately very true. Far too many Christians, particularly Pastors in many Christian sects, are woefully ignorant of Christianity or the History of Christianity, and an awful lot of what they preach is just plain nonsense and false.A good example is on Canons.Canons are the lists of what is included in a Bible. Different Churches have different Canons. The smallest Canon I know of includes only the first five books of the Bible, the largest I know of includes over 80 books.Translations are something entirely different. Frankly, all we have are translations and copies. There is not one original Biblical document that I know of.Translations abound even within Canons.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

If Jesus preached nothing, then there was no point in him having a three and half year ministry. He instructed his disciples to go out into the world and proclaim the gospel. He went out as well and proclaimed the gospel. Next post on this will help explain the significance (sorry this is taking so long). The question that will lead to that answer is what is the gospel? It is a very simple message and the basic message is summarized in one verse.MSG 106&7I'm of the opinion that things got mixed up very quickly in Christianity. The most when Constantine appeared and made it more nationwide. This will be addressed in later posts.The primary point I suppose that can be drawn from that tangent is that of corruption. Most of the regular system has been strewn with corruption. IE, all of the kings that wanted the pope on their side during wars because it made the other people look like they were fighting against God.Something about the overall message of the bible is that it is almost always viewed with pre-prejudiced ideals, because everyone already knows about basic things right? wrong. Some of the things that some would take to be "yeah, duh" type things, I think are actually not true. I won't get into that now though, as it will also be in connection with next post.As you've said, I will admit that I do have a limited view on things dealing with Canons. One way at least to determine what is or isn't true is if the messages agree with each other. Ex. If one said David killed Goliath by breaking his legs and then beating him to death with a camels leg, there is obviously a problem, and then work would have to be done to determine which was correct.
Not just in details would you have to look, but in principle as well. The books have to give the same overall message when talking about things, otherwise there would have to be two different whatever they're talking about, or one has to be wrong.

If what you're saying is that the average Christian is phenominally ignorant about what's held to be the foundational text of their religion, then yes, I agree completely. A considerable number of people are not aware that the Bible was not originally written in English.There's a reason that the Bible is responsible for producing so many atheists. A lot of people are astounded to find that the content of the Bible is completely inconsistent with Christianity and morality as they experience it. I'm not sure where you live, but the King James Version is the Bible I'm least likely to encounter at any given time. Churches invariably use the NIV or the NASB. Most people find the KJV nearly impossible to read

Apologies. I wasn't specific enough.I meant in saying different kinds, as in different canons and such.The canon most often seen, and what is generally reffered to as the Bible, and I believe in most cases the general authority on what is or isn't scripture, is the one that follows the 66 book pattern (KJV, NASB, ASV, CSV, etv, I mean etc).

Not at all. The fact that two stories agree with one another does not necessarily show truth.Let me try to explain.Often the police suspect that several people were involved in some crime. To try to determine the truth, they interview the people separately and then compare their stories.Often they find the stories match, sometimes even word for word. When that happens, the reaction is "Too much match, they got together and agreed on a story."Well, believe it or not, that is exactly what we find when we look at the Bible, particularly the Gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke.Those three Gospels are referred to as the "Synoptic Gospels" and based on the similarities, it is possible to say that Mark was written first, and that the authors of Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source.There are many other areas of contradiction.None of these though have a great bearing on the "Truth" of the Bible. I don't doubt that you hold that opinion, but what you are doing right now is called the "Gish Gallop", named after the favorite debating tactic of the Biblical Creationist Duane Gish. You are not addressing issues raised but instead galloping off to yet another unsupported assertion. But we find that is true from the very first Books of ALL Bibles regardless of the Canon.The God described in Genesis 1 is entirely different than the God described in Genesis 2.I have got to ask you, because we seem to be jumping all over the place.Have you ever read the Bible? Have you actually read the whole manual?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

That is because those books are part of the Western Christian Communion, Roman Catholics and Protestants.Of course they refer to the Books of their Canon as "The Bible". But the Ethiopian Orthodox Church has different Canons. They in fact have two Canons, a broad Canon that has over 80 books and a Narrow canon.But even in the Western Canon, there are variations. There are a group of book that most Protestants consider the Apocrypha while the Roman Catholics call them Deuterocanonical. As you can see, that means a "Second or Secondary Canon".You refer to your adopted Canon as the Bible, but other people, belonging to other equally old (and in the case of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, likely older) churches would refer to their Canon as the Bible.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I have read the entirety of the Bible. I've never sat down with the plan of reading and over the course of a month read it cover to cover. But I've read a lot, and have been reading it from a young age.If a message agrees it is truth. A cop cannot find the guilty person if one says the doctor shot the man, and the other says the lawyer did it.
It is about perspective, and two people very rarely ever have the same perspective of something.Please bring another contradiction, and though I did not do well on explaining the cock, perhaps I could shed some light on other areas.God seems to be different in Gen.1 & 2 because there is a principle involved called God Manifestation. Let me know if I should explain what this means. It is a fundamental principle in understanding God, the angels, and Christ.

quote:

---

But even in the Western Canon, there are variations. There are a group of book that most Protestants consider the Apocrypha while the Roman Catholics call them Deuterocanonical. As you can see, that means a "Second or Secondary Canon".

---

So a distinction is made even among them as to the two canons. However, even if there are two canons, that means they believe both. And if they believe both, they should be able to work out of either.

If you will look in Message 224 you can see where I addressed some of the differences between the God of Genesis 1 and the God of Genesis 2.One thing you need to remember is that the Bible, regardless of which translation or Canon, is simply the product of man. I am still not sure that you understand what I was saying, because you have a habit of using terms like "them" without making it clear who "them" happen to be.If you mean the Roman Catholics putting the books that many Protestants place under the heading of Apocrypha in their "Secondary Canon", then sure. But the Protestants do the same thing, just calling them by a different name.This is an old tradition, you can see it in the Torah where traditionally the Prophets were divided into the Former and Latter Prophets and the Later Prophets including the Minor Prophets.But you are still galloping.There is no difference between the Protestant Canon and the Roman Catholic Canon other than the naming of certain sections.The key feature of the Apocrypha is that they are of unknown authorship. That was particularly true about 1700 years ago when the Western Canon was first formalized. Since then though we have learned that many of the books we originally thought had known authors, actually too are of unknown origin. This is particularly true of the Synoptic Gospels and many of the Epistles.Remember as you read the Bible, you are not seeing God described, but rather you are seeing "how peoples of a given age, era, milieu and culture saw God".

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

p2 148 wrote: You can always use the “peek” button to see what the html text was for anyone’s post if you see something you like. In this case, quote boxes are done like this, without the spaces: [ q s ] text [ / q s ] . Cute, but meaningless. You had stated that there were no contradictions. If it is the glory of God to conceal things (in the Bible or a text, which is never mentioned in that Pr 25), then how can you claim there are no contradictions? Maybe God hid a contradiction. In other words, you first state that the Bible can be examined, and now say that it can’t be, since God could hide anything. I hope you can see why such a response as “god conceals things” only makes Christianity look silly and meaningless, not to mention that you are taking lines out of context (no mention of the Bible or even the scriptures in Pr 25) - again showing that Christians don’t actually respect the Bible, but instead use it as their personal quotemine source. Moving goalposts. You stated that there were no contradictions (and that even a miscopied number would “make you think”). Now, contradictions may exist, but they don’t matter unless they are approved as being a “core fundamental” or overall “message”?
About the language - it’s starting to sound a lot like the Catholic responses I got while growing up. If any error is pointed out, simply respond by saying “it’s a divine mystery, so shut up.”. In your case, you seem to be saying that “if there is a problem, then it’s either God hiding a deeper meaning, or a word that can’t be translated.” In either case, it means the hypothesis that the Bible is true becomes and unfasifiable hypothesis, which I hope you recognize as meaning that it’s a meaningless statement, no longer useful for actually learning things, and only useful to coerce behavior. I mean that the other translations take out a word here, a sentence there, a whole verse here and there, and end up taking out more text than the combined lengths of 1 and 2 peter. For instance, if 1 & 2 peter combined have 1,300 words, then that’s the number of words taken out of the KJV to make a more modern translation. If you prefer, you could instead listen to your fellow Christians saying that instead of me.Chick.com: Attack, The
http://www.av1611.org/nkjv.html etc. I’ve asked for clarification on this several times. You started by saying that the Bible is inerrant, without error or contradiction. Then you said that the human authors wrote it after being given divine knowledge or whatever and wrote whatever they wanted. They could obviously have written whatever, and your scenario doesn’t say why you think the Bible is inerrant (in addition to being unscriptural - there is no place in the Bible that the HS is described as being a memory enhancer). Please answer simply whether or not the HS, or the human authors are ultimately the author of the Bible. I could ask the same thing about Buddha. Part of God’s plan involved Buddha - what was his plan and why? What did Buddha come to do? Did Buddha doodha it? Have you read Buddha’s writings? (we actually have writings attributed to Buddha, unlike Jesus.) So did dozens of other people claiming to be the messiah and working miracles both before and after. Why? Pythagoras was said to be able to walk not just on water, but on air. Why? What did Pythagoras teach? Maybe. Maybe they are a waste of time. Maybe they are a waste of entire lifetimes that could be spent better focusing on this world instead of on some possibly fictional afterlife. Maybe it’s better to fully frame exactly what you are trying to say, and propose a thread on it, instead of bouncing all over in topic-space. Please find some other streetcorner to preach at. I can read J3:16 as well as you, and I’ve been over the whole thing many times over the past 20 years. No problem at all! There is no contradiction there, since one is David killing Goliath, and the other is David killing another person who happened to be named Goliath as well. Or, the second Goliath was actually Goliath’s brother, and the Bible just used “Goliath” for short. Or, there is a “deeper meaning” that we have to look for. Or, God is hiding things, like it says he will in Pr. 25. Or it’s a special principle called Goliath manifestation. Hey, when the real meaning doesn’t matter, and all we worry about is pretending there is no contradiction, then anything can be dismissed as we wish - just invent new details that aren’t in the Bible, such as saying that two different people were killed, and you are all set. Your mention of Goliath reminds me of these verses:From 2 Sam 21: From 1 Cr20: Of course, that could be two brothers with matching spears - but then why the omission in each book of the other brother, if this is an inspiration from the holey spirit? As we saw, other contradictions don’t have as much wiggle room. You also didn’t address the clear contradiction about the 10 commandments in Ex 34, nor have you touched the many others I listed in more than one post. You haven’t shed light on any areas, and even your mental gymnastics aren’t as polished as some more experienced faith-peddlers I’ve seen. We could keep doing this - I’ll bring a contradiction, you’ll say it is a hidden meaning - but it looks pointless. As Jar pointed out, you have some basic learning to do. Many of your statements were like saying that the first jet was invented by Thailand, allowing Thailand to beat Grant in civil war in 1765. Do you want to learn, or not? Have your ordered that course yet? Do you intend to order it? Absolutely false - internal consistency is a necessary, but not by any means sufficient, condition for truth. This could be one part of the problem here. The Qu’ran is very consistent in it’s message, much more so than the Bible - are you saying that the Qu’ran is the truth? If so, then what about the Newest Testament, the book of Mormon? It too is very consistent, giving the same message. Is it true? Please let me know which of the two (Islam or LDS) you have converted to. You don’t need a plan, just a bookmark, to read from one cover to the other. Did you read about the different times when God had a hitman slaughter a family, or when God had the severed heads of 70 children put in baskets, or when God demanded human sacrifice, or made a pie from monkey fingers, killed innocent children simply to make a political statement, ordered genocide, failed to follow through on his word, tortured an innocent person as part of a bet, and so on? Did you read about the flying people, jumping doorknobs, talking animals, and the army of zombies? Oh, and some of that is in the Bible, some I made up. Guess which is which . . .Anyway, I really have to stop spending time on this - it seems to be annoying me, taking time, and not helping anyone. I see so many Christians appear with hardened, stubborn views like the Bible is inerrant or such, and then they say many things that show they don’t know even the most basic facts (it looks like others have already addressed the KJV printing statement). I hope you are starting to see why it looks to me like Christianity is the worst thing that has happened to learning in a long time. It seems that talking with them is as effective as talking to a doorknob. Have a good weekend, and I’ll apologize now for my harsh tone (yet another reason why I should spend time in other ways), I’ll be out until Monday.-Equinox

On the contrary, Eq, seeing another frame their argument gives we defenders of the True Faith () ideas on improving our approach. Admittedly, it seems repetitive or circular at times, but if one wants to convince others, we should be open to new or varied themes to penetrate the religious fug. Should we explore the quicksand in the provenance of the Bible? Concentrate on contradictions? Hammer the lack of contemporary witnesses? Point out the inhumanity? Challenge the variations between the Gospels? Try to develop a common-sense approach to fantasy? So much grist for the mill, and so little time.:-p

First, let me give a clear example of how we can misunderstand something the bible says because of language barriers:Joh 2:4 And Jesus said to her, "Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come."Here we have the Christ, who is supposed to be our example addressing his mother as "woman". Is this grounds for being disrespectful to our parents? Is this a biblical contradiction because we are told to honor our father and mother?
No. In the Hebrew culture (language, custom, not quite sure what to call it), it was a respectful term, although its literal translation is woman, which to us is disrespectful.As for special principles, let me point out another contradiction to you:Exo 3:4 When the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called to him out of the bush, "Moses, Moses!" And he said, "Here I am."Act 7:30 "Now when forty years had passed, an angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in a flame of fire in a bush.So one says an angel calls, the other says God, so the question is then who called? The answer: God speaking through the angel. The angel spoke with all of God's authority, like a messenger proclaiming the kings orders.As for the proverbs, it is rare to find context in proverbs, as they don't always connect to each other. Some chapters have a common theme, not all of them. As for this, the point is that God has hidden things, and its like a treasure hunt. We find them, and take joy in the fact that we discovered a deeper meaning to what was said. Compare the glory of Kings.Look up the definition of paradox. It means something that is in fact true.
"I walk these crowded streets alone"
Contradictory? Yes. Paradox? Yes. What is says: Even though I'm surrounded by people, I'm alone. Do you see what I was getting at earlier? There aren't contradictions that hold water. It seems on the surface to contradict, but it in fact does not.Everything can be explained. I'm not throwing you "mystery" garbage. Let me ask you something, with all that I've been saying, discussing, and what knowledge I have of the Bible, how old and how intelligent schoolwise would you say I am?
I don't try and ask this to my own credit, but to show something next point.NIV is a translation in which the translators took a passage, read it, and then said, " we think it says..." And wrote down what they thought the author was trying to say. While that makes it more readable, it makes room for translator error. This makes some adverse to using it. Someone I know's favorite example is (I think this is the verse, I don't have an NIV on hand):2Sa 5:11 And Hiram king of Tyre sent messengers to David, and cedar trees, also carpenters and masons who built David a house.however, the NIV calls the house palace, because as a king, that is likely what David built.I'm sorry I have to answer a question like this, but the authors of the Bible were men; who were moved by the Holy Spirit to write what they did and as such did so without error. They were moved, not controlled. IE, if they went off, I suppose it corrected. Like Matthew thought "Jesus was crucified with four thieves" And then the HS steps in and gives him a refresher, and suddenly Matt is like "Oh, wait, that's not it"Something about the Church. What is the ultimate hope for believers? What is in it for them? Hint, its not what you think, and it is what positively screams at you if you read without preconceived ideas.Jn. 3:16 is true, but it wasn't Jesus purpose. He came to proclaim something, and that was that he was the messiah, and that something called the kingdom of God was coming soon.The verse answer I was looking for is:Act 8:12 But when they believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.The Good news of the Kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ (who he was). Jesus always talks about this thing called "the kingdom", yet we rarely hear about that do we?compare what he says in the Lords Prayer:Luk 11:2 And he said to them, "When you pray, say: "Father, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come."your kingdom come" what was meant by that? From what I've seen, it is something that got eliminated throughout the years from church doctrine.I as well have noted differences in the accounts of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicals. They are currently not my forte. I will however say, that the description of the spear is a metaphor for saying "it was really big". Any Giant would have a big spear if he used a spear.I disagree with your logic of the contradiction there in Exodus. I have explained my reasoning on it. It is part of the Torah, this part especially was likely written by the same dude, Moses or not, and if he would make a slip like that, there would be a ton more around it.Pythagoras. Perhaps this can prove a point. I've never really heard of this guy. Your everyday Joe has probably never heard of him at all.Mat 24:35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.Mar 13:31 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.Luk 21:33 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.Why is Jesus still here when so many other religions have fallen through the cracks? Why don't people still worship Baal because orgies are part of the religious service? Because there is something different. His words won't pass away, and to today, almost 2000 years later, they haven't passed away. Yet Pythagoras, he has passed away, in the sense of the world, his words have passed away.The Quran and the book of Morman claim to be (pretty much) the third Testament, and in that, they disagree with the first two. If it is the same God in all of them, why does his plan change throughout the books?Alright, lets give this a shot... Hopefully that quoted, now, to answer:hitman slaughter a family: Jehu killing the house of Ahab.
severed heads of 70 children: False, I think you misquoted. This is the house of Ahab again, and they weren't all likely children (a couple may have been), and the heads weren't ordered to be put in baskets by God, but by Ahab.
Human Sacrifice: Four or so examples. Abraham. However, it was a test of faith on his part, and he wasn't allowed to carry it out. Jesus, a form of human sacrifice I suppose. Jephthah, his only daughter given as a burnt offering. And I don't know if this one counts, but Joshua curses Jericho and for its gates to be set up, and it's foundations laid, it cost one their oldest, and youngest sons.
Pie from monkey fingers: false.
Killed children: Done during conquest of Canaan. Why, because if you are exterminating mice (not to equate people to mice, but bear with me), and you leave the babies because they haven't stolen food, spread disease, or anything, they grow up into those big mice you just finished exterminating.
Genocide: covered above. I may have mixed up the two... I know children were ordered not to be spared, but I do not think it was ever ordered specifically that children be killed.
Failed to follow through on his word: When? Does repenting of what he said count as failure to follow through with his word? Other examples are when he didn't give all the land to Israel because they didn't listen. I think all of the instinces when he 'goes back on his word', there were two sides to it.
Torture innocents as part of a bet: Job.
Flying people"...this ones a bit more tricky, I can't think of anything off of the top of my head, but it is said that angels at least flew, but as for people, I don't think so.
Jumping doorknobs. Unless it is in a prophecy I'm unaware of, it is not there.
Talking animals: Balaam. Oh, and some sheep, because Jesus said, "as a sheep before it's shearers is dumb..." So this means they talked on occasion, but not around their barbers : )
Army of Zombies: You are referring to Ezekiel, no? One, that was a vision, two, they were more than zombies.

arachnophilia Email me please hiphintech@hotmail.com

Psalms the whole philosophy of the Bible is contradiction with itself.Apologists have been working overtime for centuries to explain a way the numerous contradictions, typos, redacted and merged stories, obvious later additions, and opposing philosophies. You now have the internet to quickly look up and find these long and often unsatisfying "explanations" why, for example, Matthew clearly misquotes the OT scriptures in several places.In general and higher level terms, the Bible is contradictory in major themes of philosophy and clearly demonstrates an evolution of thought over its length of composition.As an example, consider the "evolution" of the major features of the Christianity such as salvation and its relationship with heaven and hell.In the OT these ideas are pretty murky and not well developed. In the OT, salvation was the saving from the troubles of this worldly life such as from mortal enemies, foreign domination or poverty and famine. In the NT, the concept changed to mean salvation from eternal condemnation and suffering. A very significant shift in philosophy on a fundamental issue.In the OT, paradise is a lush garden. In the NT heaven is remodeled, and is described as being paved in gold with walls of gemstones. This most likely reflects the transition of the prevailing culture from an agricultural to urban existence.In the OT, hell is not defined. There is mention of "the grave", "the realm of death", a dark gloomy place of the underworld; but pain and punishment is not associated with hell. In concept the OT view of hell of the afterlife is very similar to the Greek vision of Hades. Now in the NT we have a newly outfitted hell with lakes of fire and gnashing of teeth. Hell is now specifically a place of punishment, a staggering and monumental, if not inventive shift, in philosophy.These ideas evolved because extreme reward and punishment are very good recruiting tools and have durable value for specifically that reason.These philosophical transformations are so radical that I believe they are themselves contradictions. Consider also:

Love your neighbor (in the context of your fellow male Hebrew tribal member) and kill and vanquish your enemy as opposed to love your enemy and turn the other cheek.

​

Salvation by works or faith - take your pick, there is definite support for each.

​

Wealth and prosperity in the OT is a good thing as a reward for the righteous. Contrast this with Jesus who repeatedly emphasized not laying up treasures in this world and gave specific teachings on the snares and evils of wealth/possessions and value of giving all away.

​

The position and value of women in society and in the spiritual realm.