Political Crossfire Forums

[John]

Saracen wrote: John wrote: Well duh...it's the revelation from Satan....600 years AFTER the warning given in the New Testament.

I'm not trying to piss you off....I'm hoping that you're soul is saved.

Well, how would you like it if I told you that your Bible was not what it was 2000 years ago and that if you believe that Jesus is the Son of God, you're not going to be saved?

We all have our beliefs, and our convictions in those beliefs. ;)

I would appreciate your honesty.

And I would challenge your claim. There is plenty of proof that the Bible has not been corrupted.




Question: "Is there proof for the inspiration of the Bible?"



Answer: Here are some evidences that the Bible is from God:



1) Fulfilled prophecy. God spoke to men telling them of things that He would bring about in the future. Some of them have already occurred. Others have not. For example, there were more than 300 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ's first coming 2,000 years ago. There is no doubt that these are prophecies from God because of manuscripts and scrolls dated before the birth of Christ. These were not written after the fact. They were written beforehand. Scientific dating proves this.



2) The unity of Scripture. The Bible was written by approximately 40 human authors over a period of approximately 1,600 years. These men were quite diverse. Moses, a political leader; Joshua, a military leader; David, a shepherd; Solomon, a king; Amos, a herdsman and fruit pincher; Daniel, a prime minister; Matthew, a tax collector; Luke, a medical doctor; Paul, a rabbi; and Peter, a fisherman. The Bible was also written under a variety of circumstances. It was written on 3 different continents, Europe, Asia, and Africa. Yet, the great themes of Scripture are maintained in all the writings. The Bible does not contradict itself. There is no way apart from God the Holy Spirit supervising the writing of the Bible that this could have been accomplished.



Contrast this with the Islamic Koran. It was compiled by one individual, Zaid bin Thabit, under the guidance of Mohammed's father-in-law, Abu-Bekr. Then in A.D. 650, a group of Arab scholars produced a unified version and destroyed all variant copies to preserve the unity of the Koran. The Bible was unified from the time of its writing. The Koran had to be unified through the editing of men.



3) The Bible presents its heroes truthfully with all of their faults and weaknesses. It does not glorify men as other religions do about their heroes. When you read the Bible, you realize that the people it speaks of have problems and do wrong just as we do. What made them great was that they trusted in God. One example is David. David is described as a man after God's own heart (1 Samuel 13:14). Yet, David committed adultery (2 Samuel 11:1-5) and murder (2 Samuel 11:14-26). This could have been left out of Scripture to hide these details of David's life. But, God included these things.



4) Archaeological findings support the history recorded in Scripture. Though many unbelieving people throughout history have tried to find archaeological evidence to disprove what is recorded in Scripture, they have failed. It is easy to say that Scripture is untrue. Proving it to be untrue is a different story. It has not been done.



The Bible’s claims of being from God should not be understood as arguing in a circle or by circular reasoning. The testimony of reliable witnesses - particularly of Jesus, but also of others such as Moses, Joshua, David, Daniel, and Nehemiah in the Old Testament, and John and Paul in the New Testament - affirmed the authority and verbal inspiration of the Holy Scriptures. Consider the following passages: Exodus 14:1; 20:1; Leviticus 4:1; Numbers 4:1; Deuteronomy 4:2; 32:48; Isaiah 1:10, 24; Jeremiah 1:11; Jeremiah 11:1–3; Ezekiel 1:3; 1 Corinthians 14:37; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Peter 1:16–21; 1 John 4:6.



You also might be interested in the writings of Josephus. He was an historian who recorded much of the history of Israel during the first century. In this he records some events which coincide with Scripture. Beware though - his writings are rather lengthy.



Considering the evidence given, I have no choice but to accept the Bible as being from God (2 Timothy 3:16). I pray this information helps you and adequately answers you question. Keep Studying the Word! 2 Timothy 2:15

http://www.gotquestions.org/proof-inspiration-Bible.html

[Saracen]

We can leave that for another discussion, John.

There's plenty of evidence that the Koran is from God as well, but I'd rather not bring it up because we're talking about something else here. ;)

[John]

Saracen wrote: We can leave that for another discussion, John.

There's plenty of evidence that the Koran is from God as well, but I'd rather not bring it up because we're talking about something else here. ;)

I'd love to see you start a thread with evidence that the Koran is inspired by God. I'd love to see some fulfilled prophecy for example.

[Saracen]

John wrote: Saracen wrote: We can leave that for another discussion, John.

There's plenty of evidence that the Koran is from God as well, but I'd rather not bring it up because we're talking about something else here. ;)

I'd love to see you start a thread with evidence that the Koran is inspired by God. I'd love to see some fulfilled prophecy for example.

Will do as soon as I have time on my hands again.

[John]

Saracen wrote: John wrote: Saracen wrote: We can leave that for another discussion, John.

There's plenty of evidence that the Koran is from God as well, but I'd rather not bring it up because we're talking about something else here. ;)

I'd love to see you start a thread with evidence that the Koran is inspired by God. I'd love to see some fulfilled prophecy for example.

Will do as soon as I have time on my hands again.

Good luck.

[psholtz]

John wrote: 1) Fulfilled prophecy. God spoke to men telling them of things that He would bring about in the future. Some of them have already occurred. Others have not. For example, there were more than 300 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ's first coming 2,000 years ago. There is no doubt that these are prophecies from God because of manuscripts and scrolls dated before the birth of Christ. These were not written after the fact. They were written beforehand. Scientific dating proves this.
Not one of these so-called "prophecies" of Christ's coming (or more appropriately, the Jewish Messiah's coming) was ever fulfilled..

Not one.

At least not if the "Messiah" you have in question was Yeshua ben Yosef. Yes, a great man indeed, and someone who's teachings I look to for inspiriation each and every day, but he had absolutely nothing to do w/ fulfilling a single OT prophecy. Not even one, as can be proven quite easily (and objectively) if you'd like to carry on this debate further.

[psholtz]

John wrote: Saracen wrote: We can leave that for another discussion, John.

There's plenty of evidence that the Koran is from God as well, but I'd rather not bring it up because we're talking about something else here. ;)

I'd love to see you start a thread with evidence that the Koran is inspired by God. I'd love to see some fulfilled prophecy for example.
I'd love to see the same thing in the NT.. :rotf:

[psholtz]

John wrote: 2) The unity of Scripture. The Bible was written by approximately 40 human authors over a period of approximately 1,600 years. These men were quite diverse. Moses, a political leader; Joshua, a military leader; David, a shepherd; Solomon, a king; Amos, a herdsman and fruit pincher; Daniel, a prime minister; Matthew, a tax collector; Luke, a medical doctor; Paul, a rabbi; and Peter, a fisherman. The Bible was also written under a variety of circumstances. It was written on 3 different continents, Europe, Asia, and Africa. Yet, the great themes of Scripture are maintained in all the writings. The Bible does not contradict itself. There is no way apart from God the Holy Spirit supervising the writing of the Bible that this could have been accomplished.
The entire Hebrew OT was written by about three people working over a very small, concentrated span of time. The Christian NT is slightly more "diversified" (in terms of authorship and timespan), but not as diversfied as you probably believe it to be..

Quote: 3) The Bible presents its heroes truthfully with all of their faults and weaknesses. It does not glorify men as other religions do about their heroes. When you read the Bible, you realize that the people it speaks of have problems and do wrong just as we do. What made them great was that they trusted in God. One example is David. David is described as a man after God's own heart (1 Samuel 13:14). Yet, David committed adultery (2 Samuel 11:1-5) and murder (2 Samuel 11:14-26). This could have been left out of Scripture to hide these details of David's life. But, God included these things.
Same w/ the Greco-Roman mythologies.. the "heros" are presented in both good and bad light.

Quote: 4) Archaeological findings support the history recorded in Scripture. Though many unbelieving people throughout history have tried to find archaeological evidence to disprove what is recorded in Scripture, they have failed.
Except for:

* Adam and Eve
* Eve's philosophical tete-a-tete w/ a talking snake
* Noah's Flood
* Joshua telling the Sun to stop moving in the sky
* Balaam's talking donkey
* Moses parting the Red Sea
* 12 tribes wandering around Sinai for about 40 years

and a few others..

Quote: It is easy to say that Scripture is untrue. Proving it to be untrue is a different story. It has not been done.
You're quoting a paradox that's common to all systems of logic.. it has nothing to do w/ the "Bible" per se. I could tell you that "it's untrue that all moonbats have yellow eyes".. It would be very difficult for you to actually "prove" (or for that matter, "disprove") this statement. For starters, you'd have to actually go find a moonbat.. then you'd have to go capture each and every one in the Universe, and verify whether or not they have yellow eyes.

Since moonbats don't even exist (just like Adam and Eve didn't really exist), you're going to have a hell of time trying to prove or disprove anything concerning them.

Quote: Considering the evidence given, I have no choice but to accept the Bible as being from God (2 Timothy 3:16). I pray this information helps you and adequately answers you question. Keep Studying the Word! 2 Timothy 2:15
The verse says "Scripture", Einstein.. not "Bible".. The Bible didn't even exist when St. Paul penned these words, and it would not exist for another 300 years still..

[John]

Mr. Paul Sholtz,

I hope you can understand that you've lost any credibility with me a long time ago. I'm not going to respond to your posts anymore because it has shown to be a waste of time. To be perfectly honest with you sir, I don't even read your posts anymore. I’m done worrying about how you are misleading people. All I can do is present the truth….if they’re foolish enough to believe what you have to say, that’s on them and you.

Regards,

John

[psholtz]

John wrote: I hope you can understand that you've lost any credibility with me a long time ago. I'm not going to respond to your posts anymore because it has shown to be a waste of time. To be perfectly honest with you sir, I don't even read your posts anymore. I’m done worrying about how you are misleading people. All I can do is present the truth….if they’re foolish enough to believe what you have to say, that’s on them and you.
Except, of course, for this one... :lol:

Look, you're free to speak your mind on whatever you choose, and if you choose to represent Christianity in silly ways w/in the Christian community, that's one thing. Most God-fearing Christians are familiar enough w/ the Gospels to be able to discern the sheep from the wolves who masquerade in sheep's clothing. But Saracen strikes me as being a sincere seeker after the Truth, and one who is not as familiar w/ Christian doctrines as you or I are. As such, when you go forward and represent "Christianity" in your characteristically unorthodox way to people who are (to some extent) unfamiliar w/ the religion and its practices, and who desire to know more about the religion and its practices, you're going to have to expect that I'll be there to speak my mind as well (just to make sure you've got all your facts straight).. :-D

[psholtz]

cap'n queasy wrote: I also find it interesting that Mohammed is generally pictured as being surrounded by a halo of fire. As I understanded it, Djinn are comprised of fire.
As I understand, the God of the Old and New Testaments is a "consuming fire" (Exodus/Shemoth 24:17, Hebrews 12:29)

I wouldn't worry too much about fires and halos.. Your Christian apostles have halos of light, the Muslims seem to sometimes use halos of fire. Either way, fire or light, it signifies the same Divinity. Of course, on the other hand, if you utterly and truly hate Islam, you'll probably be able to find any reason in the world to justify why it's "Satanically" inspired and nothing that Saracen or anyone else tells you will be able to open your eyes or change your mind..

Just don't expect to get too far in the Kingdom of Heaven while harboring such emotions in your heart.

[psholtz]

John wrote: Saracen wrote: John wrote: How do you know? The New Testament epistles of Paul warned against this very thing.

I highly doubt that. The Koran is not 100% contrary to what is taught in the Bible or Torah, and even so, there still is conviction in the Koran that it is a Revelation from God/Allah/Jehovah.

Highly doubt what? I gave you the references.

A revelation from an angel that contradicts the Gospel is a trick from Satan according to the New Testament.
Does that mean the Gospel itself is a trick from Satan? :lol:

After all, the Gospel certainly does a fine job of contradicting itself all on its own, w/o any help from outside sources. Also, I wouldn't give Satan too much "credit" in these matters.. Satan is an accuser, but little more. Most of the evil that plagues this world originate in, and is the result of, evil resident w/in the heart of man himself, and nowhere else.. (nor does man have anyone else to blame for it but himself).

[cap'n queasy]

Quote: Quote:
Apart from Michael, he is the only angel mentioned in the Old Testament. The name Gabriel, which means "God is my strength," is of Chaldean origin and was unknown to the Jews prior to Babylonian captivity.
This is odd for an entity that would appear in "no other context" don't you think?

Gabriel means "man of God". I find it odd that a female angel angel would have that particular name.

[psholtz]

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: Quote:
Apart from Michael, he is the only angel mentioned in the Old Testament. The name Gabriel, which means "God is my strength," is of Chaldean origin and was unknown to the Jews prior to Babylonian captivity.
This is odd for an entity that would appear in "no other context" don't you think?

Gabriel means "man of God". I find it odd that a female angel angel would have that particular name.
Dooesn't Gabriel mean "strength" of God? (or "might" of God)?

[psholtz]

psholtz wrote: John wrote: 1) Fulfilled prophecy. God spoke to men telling them of things that He would bring about in the future. Some of them have already occurred. Others have not. For example, there were more than 300 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ's first coming 2,000 years ago. There is no doubt that these are prophecies from God because of manuscripts and scrolls dated before the birth of Christ. These were not written after the fact. They were written beforehand. Scientific dating proves this.
Not one of these so-called "prophecies" of Christ's coming (or more appropriately, the Jewish Messiah's coming) was ever fulfilled..

Not one.

At least not if the "Messiah" you have in question was Yeshua ben Yosef. Yes, a great man indeed, and someone who's teachings I look to for inspiriation each and every day, but he had absolutely nothing to do w/ fulfilling a single OT prophecy. Not even one, as can be proven quite easily (and objectively) if you'd like to carry on this debate further.
For those who are interested in following up more on this topic, Thomas Paine gives an excellent examination of (and refutation of) all the OT "prophecies" which allegedly "prophesized" the coming of Christ:

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/thomas_paine/examine_prophecies.html

Each and every last OT "prophecy" is soundly debunked by Paine..

Even Paine admits that when he set out to write this essay, he didn't think he would debunk EACH AND EVERY last prophecy.. He figured that at least a couple couple get through the seize.. but alas... :lol:

[sladeh]

psholtz wrote: psholtz wrote: John wrote: 1) Fulfilled prophecy. God spoke to men telling them of things that He would bring about in the future. Some of them have already occurred. Others have not. For example, there were more than 300 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ's first coming 2,000 years ago. There is no doubt that these are prophecies from God because of manuscripts and scrolls dated before the birth of Christ. These were not written after the fact. They were written beforehand. Scientific dating proves this.
Not one of these so-called "prophecies" of Christ's coming (or more appropriately, the Jewish Messiah's coming) was ever fulfilled..

Not one.

At least not if the "Messiah" you have in question was Yeshua ben Yosef. Yes, a great man indeed, and someone who's teachings I look to for inspiriation each and every day, but he had absolutely nothing to do w/ fulfilling a single OT prophecy. Not even one, as can be proven quite easily (and objectively) if you'd like to carry on this debate further.
For those who are interested in following up more on this topic, Thomas Paine gives an excellent examination of (and refutation of) all the OT "prophecies" which allegedly "prophesized" the coming of Christ:

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/thomas_paine/examine_prophecies.html

Each and every last OT "prophecy" is soundly debunked by Paine..

Even Paine admits that when he set out to write this essay, he didn't think he would debunk EACH AND EVERY last prophecy.. He figured that at least a couple couple get through the seize.. but alas... :lol:

I knew Paine was a fantastic plagerist (like the material in your blogs), but I did not know how superficial his "original thinking" was. Thanks for the long, boring, defeatist, agenda-driven waste bandwidth. Both you and Paine should have tried to understand that holy scripture is profoundly multifacted and has a depth that will never be fully comprehended by our meatloaf brains.

Isaiah gives some of the clearest prophecies of Messiah, but these utterances were applicable to the moment, and were only later understood to be prophetic. It's likely the prophet himself was unaware that he was making prophetic utterances, as we believe that his words were inspired by God.

Here is an example of Jesus illuminating a Messianic prophecy from Isaiah, extracting it from the mundane surface meaning:

4:17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Isaiah. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
4:18 The Spirit of the Lord [is] upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
4:19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
4:20 And he closed the book, and he gave [it] again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.
4:21 And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.

When Jesus comes to teach us in person, he will explain the levels of meaning, the holographic structure of holy scripture. Thomas Paine will gnash his teeth, and hide his face in shame for the simpleton version of a "rebuttle" that he was foolish enough to pen. But Jesus may forgive him in time, like I forgive my little child for saying something like "I hate you" when he has no understanding of the meaning of those words, much less how much Dad truely loves him...more than his own life.

[psholtz]

sladeh wrote: I knew Paine was a fantastic plagerist (like the material in your blogs), but I did not know how superficial his "original thinking" was.
At least he "plagarizes" better than you can spell.. :lol:

(and no, for the record, I wouldn't characterize Paine's thinking as "plagarism")..

Quote: Thanks for the long, boring, defeatist, agenda-driven waste bandwidth. Both you and Paine should have tried to understand that holy scripture is profoundly multifacted and has a depth that will never be fully comprehended by our meatloaf brains.
Did you bother trying to read Paine's article, or was it too far over your head?

Quote: Here is an example of Jesus illuminating a Messianic prophecy from Isaiah, extracting it from the mundane surface meaning:

4:17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Isaiah. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
4:18 The Spirit of the Lord [is] upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
4:19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
4:20 And he closed the book, and he gave [it] again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.
4:21 And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.
This is hardly "prophetic" of anyone.. You could have made the same prophecy about Mother Theresa..

This is the essence of what Paine is saying, btw.. he's saying you can't just take one blurb in the OT about someone who's going to have his clothes "parted" amongst soldiers (which was a very common practice in Roman times, as it was frankly in colonial America + late 18th century France when Paine was writing), and then assume that this "prophecy" uniquely describes Jesus Christ.

Find a prophecy in the OT that takes about the Veil in the Temple being rent in twain, and the earth shaking when the Messiah is crucified, etc, and you'll be onto something. This would be a little more specific and unique to the life story of Jesus.. Of course, you're never going to find such references in the OT, b/c they don't exist.

Quote: When Jesus comes to teach us in person, he will explain the levels of meaning, the holographic structure of holy scripture.
If you expect Jesus to ever "come in person", you're going to be waiting a long, long time! :lol:

Moreover, I'm not sure Jesus' sermons are *quite* going to be directed towards the "holographic" nature of the Universe.. I think you're confusing him w/ Stephen Hawking or something.. :?

Quote: Thomas Paine will gnash his teeth, and hide his face in shame for the simpleton version of a "rebuttle" that he was foolish enough to pen.
Thomas Paine will "gnash" his teeth? Yes, I suppose that might be true, if Paine would have teeth to gnash, which he doesn't and won't, since he's dead now.. Be that as it may, would you care to catalog this here and now, in front of everyone, as a "prophecy" of sorts? You know what they did to the "false" prophets back in Biblical times, don't know? :wink:

Quote: But Jesus may forgive him in time, like I forgive my little child for saying something like "I hate you" when he has no understanding of the meaning of those words, much less how much Dad truely loves him...more than his own life.
Wow.. so your kids hate you.

Speaks volumes about your parenting skills.. it really does.

[sladeh]

I read enough of the article to understand the premise on which all the prophecies were "debunked". Paine thinks that since O/T passages that are later understood by Christians to be prophetic utterances had secondary mundane applications in the moment spoken, that the mundane existence of the application constitutes debunking. From my vantage point, this can only be considered simpleton, superficial, diminished thinking.

BTW, Paine is well know for regurgitating the bile of Voltaire, that's why I called him a plagiarist

Sorry I misspelled plagiarize, but I believe you misspelled it too while laughing at me. And to be fair, go back and read a few of your posts in this thread, and you will see it's not hard to get a letter out of place. I don't hold spelling as any indication of a persons mental capacity.

My son does not hate me. It's an example I made up to illustrate a point.

Do you really think that the architect of the Universe could not explain the holographic nature of scripture or even explain concepts that yet lay beyond the frontiers of science? Illuminated patriarch, eh?

I used the example from Luke 4 because Y'shua revealed the prophecy of himself in Isaiah, not because I find it to be one of the more astounding Messianic visions.

Isaiah also prophesied that Messiah would be crucified, centuries before the practice was invented. There are many, many more that I could mention, but I'm not sure that God is honored by me offering them to you in this venue to ridicule from your place self-imposed blindness.

[psholtz]

sladeh wrote: I read enough of the article to understand the premise on which all the prophecies were "debunked". Paine thinks that since O/T passages that are later understood by Christians to be prophetic utterances had secondary mundane applications in the moment spoken, that the mundane existence of the application constitutes debunking. From my vantage point, this can only be considered simpleton, superficial, diminished thinking.
Paine simply thinks the "prophecies" that the "Christians" believe fortold of their "Miessiah" are absurd. I would have to agree w/ him.

This is, of course, the position that all thinking men have taken on the issue for over 2,000 years. If Paine is saying the same things that Voltaire and others have said before him, it's simply b/c the fundamentalists have yet to catch a cluebrick on the whole issue.. :wink:

Quote: Do you really think that the architect of the Universe could not explain the holographic nature of scripture or even explain concepts that yet lay beyond the frontiers of science?
Architect of the Universe? Now you're talking like a Mason.. :lol:

Jesus mission on Earth was not scientific in nature, it was moral. I wouldn't look to Jesus if lessons in science is what you seek.. (although, arguably, science w/o a sense of morals can lead to great catastrophe, but that's another topic).

Quote: Isaiah also prophesied that Messiah would be crucified, centuries before the practice was invented. There are many, many more that I could mention, but I'm not sure that God is honored by me offering them to you in this venue to ridicule from your place self-imposed blindness.
Can you prove this?

For starters, can you prove that Isaiah said the "Messiah" would be crucified? Then can you prove that this practice did not exist in Isaiah's time?

[sladeh]

The passage I was thinking of is actually in Psalms.

The Messiah would have his hands and feet pierced:
Old Testament (Psalm 22:16) says:
Dogs have surrounded me; a band of evil men has encircled me, they have pierced my hands and my feet.
New Testament (Luke 23:33) says:
When they came to the place called the Skull, there they crucified him, along with the criminals--one on his right, the other on his left.

Taken alone, a scoffer could consider this prophecy (and any other) to be an amazing coincidence. One must consider all the Messianic prophecies to fully appreciate the overwhelming odds of all them pointing to peculiar and unique events in the life of Y'shua. At this point, the denial becomes a calculated act of rebellion, because God left no excuse, especially for a "thinking man".

BTW, Sholtz, why do you (by inference) tell me that you do not consider me to be a thinking man? Do my thoughts not provoke responses from you? I hold an office many would consider more cerebral than that of web developer, yet I certainly consider you to be a thinking man.