I know this sounds like a silly question. But I actually consider it tremendously important.Almost every attempt to render Christian theology consistent requires extensive cross-referencing of the bible. For instance, in one case I saw someone attempt to justify gap creationism by filling a hole in the first two verses of Genesis with a quote from 2 Peter. This sort of thing happens all the time - one verse will make no sense unless supplemented with another verse from a completely different book - and, although I don't think these attempts at reconciliation are able to hold their own weight very often (though that is the stuff of many other topics), I consider the obtuseness of the justification itself to be a problem.If the bible is God's infallible word, why did he not make it more organized or readable? Why should one need to jump from book to book, spending hours and hours analyzing it, simply to be able to understand it? Many people do not have access to bibles in the first place, and many others do not have the time or skill to do this sort of analysis. God is clearly capable of making a book that is comprehensible to everyone - one that perfectly communicates his will. So why didn't he? Why did he even allow there to be any debate over Christian theology - much less produce the disjointed mess of theology that is the bible?Obviously God would not intend for someone's faith to be contingent upon their aptitude at critical literary analysis, but that is what it has come to. Why is this? Why couldn't the bible tell us exactly what we need to know, in words that even a child could understand?
Why is the Bible so confusing?
- Thread starter Lunar
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
God wants a "child-like" faith apparently.So.. we're supposed to accept that Jesus loves us, died for us, and we need to recognize that in order to get to heaven.While we can question things, there is obviously only so far you can go before it is a choice. You can choose to believe it, or you can choose to not believe it, or you can choose to dismiss the issue (which, in fact does nothing because it doesn't go away).I say it's not that easy, my parents think it's really easy.To me it's really confusing, my parents just think that i'm "reading too far into it all"here's another question, if the bible is the infallible inerrant word, why are there errors?also, i agree with you on the fact that how could God allow there to be 3509245985 different views on something and everyone claims to have the right one and its all a game to see whos right and in the end no one knows.
Sometimes the truth is complex and requires study. quantum physics or calculus can get very confusing very quickly to those who have not studied them. its the different people that come along in christianity and try to add things to it or take things from it. and his will is in fact communicated perfectly. Take the 10 commandments, or Jesus saying the will of God is for none to die and go to hell. the simple story is this --God created a perfect earth.Man sinned.The result of sin is death.Man must die.Jesus comes as the substitute to die in our place and take the judgment upon himself.Believe in him for eternal life.For example - the gap theory example you use - the theory only came about when ideas that the earth is billions of years old came about. so people tried to make the two fit, even though they dont, thus leading to disagreements and arguing that your talking about.
what about biblical inerrancy, it isn't inerrant.what about the laws that people choose to follow, and the laws that people choose to ignore.how do we choose? right or wrong, relevant or irrelevant, null and void or valid and important.
(eternalarcadia;56312)
For example - the gap theory example you use - the theory only came about when ideas that the earth is billions of years old came about. so people tried to make the two fit, even though they dont, thus leading to disagreements and arguing that your talking about.
Actually that is 100 % false. The gap theory existed before the evolution theory, actually a full 45 years before the evolution theory. So it is not a compromise about the earth being millions of years old at all. Furthermore, the gap theory has technically been in the Bible for thousands of years already it just took man to discover it a very long time. Thomas Chalmers was one of the first proponents of the gap theory. Before Darwin even wrote a single line.
For example - the gap theory example you use - the theory only came about when ideas that the earth is billions of years old came about. so people tried to make the two fit, even though they dont, thus leading to disagreements and arguing that your talking about.
Actually that is 100 % false. The gap theory existed before the evolution theory, actually a full 45 years before the evolution theory. So it is not a compromise about the earth being millions of years old at all. Furthermore, the gap theory has technically been in the Bible for thousands of years already it just took man to discover it a very long time. Thomas Chalmers was one of the first proponents of the gap theory. Before Darwin even wrote a single line.
(Lunar;56259)
I know this sounds like a silly question. But I actually consider it tremendously important.Almost every attempt to render Christian theology consistent requires extensive cross-referencing of the bible. For instance, in one case I saw someone attempt to justify gap creationism by filling a hole in the first two verses of Genesis with a quote from 2 Peter. This sort of thing happens all the time - one verse will make no sense unless supplemented with another verse from a completely different book - and, although I don't think these attempts at reconciliation are able to hold their own weight very often (though that is the stuff of many other topics), I consider the obtuseness of the justification itself to be a problem.If the bible is God's infallible word, why did he not make it more organized or readable? Why should one need to jump from book to book, spending hours and hours analyzing it, simply to be able to understand it? Many people do not have access to bibles in the first place, and many others do not have the time or skill to do this sort of analysis. God is clearly capable of making a book that is comprehensible to everyone - one that perfectly communicates his will. So why didn't he? Why did he even allow there to be any debate over Christian theology - much less produce the disjointed mess of theology that is the bible?Obviously God would not intend for someone's faith to be contingent upon their aptitude at critical literary analysis, but that is what it has come to. Why is this? Why couldn't the bible tell us exactly what we need to know, in words that even a child could understand?
[1]To fully understand the Bible, You need a Hebrew & a Greek Reference and, or Concordance, For instance, Genises 1: 1, says, "In the begining [The Hebrew says, AT FIRST] God created the heaven and the earth. V2 says [In the Hebrew] and the earth BECAME WITHOUT FORM.[[2] When the Bible writters wrote the Bible, thet opted out on some words, for instance, psalm 8: 5. says, "We were created a little lower then the ANGELS", But the original Hebrew says, "A little lower then GOD".
I know this sounds like a silly question. But I actually consider it tremendously important.Almost every attempt to render Christian theology consistent requires extensive cross-referencing of the bible. For instance, in one case I saw someone attempt to justify gap creationism by filling a hole in the first two verses of Genesis with a quote from 2 Peter. This sort of thing happens all the time - one verse will make no sense unless supplemented with another verse from a completely different book - and, although I don't think these attempts at reconciliation are able to hold their own weight very often (though that is the stuff of many other topics), I consider the obtuseness of the justification itself to be a problem.If the bible is God's infallible word, why did he not make it more organized or readable? Why should one need to jump from book to book, spending hours and hours analyzing it, simply to be able to understand it? Many people do not have access to bibles in the first place, and many others do not have the time or skill to do this sort of analysis. God is clearly capable of making a book that is comprehensible to everyone - one that perfectly communicates his will. So why didn't he? Why did he even allow there to be any debate over Christian theology - much less produce the disjointed mess of theology that is the bible?Obviously God would not intend for someone's faith to be contingent upon their aptitude at critical literary analysis, but that is what it has come to. Why is this? Why couldn't the bible tell us exactly what we need to know, in words that even a child could understand?
[1]To fully understand the Bible, You need a Hebrew & a Greek Reference and, or Concordance, For instance, Genises 1: 1, says, "In the begining [The Hebrew says, AT FIRST] God created the heaven and the earth. V2 says [In the Hebrew] and the earth BECAME WITHOUT FORM.[[2] When the Bible writters wrote the Bible, thet opted out on some words, for instance, psalm 8: 5. says, "We were created a little lower then the ANGELS", But the original Hebrew says, "A little lower then GOD".
(ps77;56316)
what about biblical inerrancy, it isn't inerrant.what about the laws that people choose to follow, and the laws that people choose to ignore.how do we choose? right or wrong, relevant or irrelevant, null and void or valid and important.
I am NOT trying to offend or upset anyone . . . I am a Christian, however I have a difficult time accepting the Bible as being without error. Why? Because, humans were involved in the writing of it. Yes, I believe God inspired men to write the scripture, however they were still human. No offense to anyone, but I don't believe these humans got it 100% right 100% of the time. I know I don't get my interpretations 100% right 100% of the time. That's where the forgiveness, mercy and grace of God comes in.Throughout time, as we know it, man has been translating the Word of God into easier reading, and it has been translated so many times that I just can't believe there are no translation errors. It has been translated into other languages, and it has been paraphrased so many times that I am very thankful for the Holy Spirit who witnesses to my spirit as to what God wants for my life. Don't get me wrong . . . I LOVE and HIGHLY RESPECT the Bible as God’s word. I do not dismiss the scripture as just another book of good stories. I have great REVERENCE for the things of God, and I do my best to live by the scripture as I am lead by the Holy Spirit. However, just because I don't believe the same way others do doesn't mean I am doubting. It just means that I am seeking and searching and doing my best with the help of the Holy Spirit to work out my own salvation with fear and trembling.
ray3: ray3: ray3:
what about biblical inerrancy, it isn't inerrant.what about the laws that people choose to follow, and the laws that people choose to ignore.how do we choose? right or wrong, relevant or irrelevant, null and void or valid and important.
I am NOT trying to offend or upset anyone . . . I am a Christian, however I have a difficult time accepting the Bible as being without error. Why? Because, humans were involved in the writing of it. Yes, I believe God inspired men to write the scripture, however they were still human. No offense to anyone, but I don't believe these humans got it 100% right 100% of the time. I know I don't get my interpretations 100% right 100% of the time. That's where the forgiveness, mercy and grace of God comes in.Throughout time, as we know it, man has been translating the Word of God into easier reading, and it has been translated so many times that I just can't believe there are no translation errors. It has been translated into other languages, and it has been paraphrased so many times that I am very thankful for the Holy Spirit who witnesses to my spirit as to what God wants for my life. Don't get me wrong . . . I LOVE and HIGHLY RESPECT the Bible as God’s word. I do not dismiss the scripture as just another book of good stories. I have great REVERENCE for the things of God, and I do my best to live by the scripture as I am lead by the Holy Spirit. However, just because I don't believe the same way others do doesn't mean I am doubting. It just means that I am seeking and searching and doing my best with the help of the Holy Spirit to work out my own salvation with fear and trembling.
ray3: ray3: ray3:(AlphabetSally;56423)
I am NOT trying to offend or upset anyone . . . I am a Christian, however I have a difficult time accepting the Bible as being without error. Why? Because, humans were involved in the writing of it. Yes, I believe God inspired men to write the scripture, however they were still human. No offense to anyone, but I don't believe these humans got it 100% right 100% of the time. I know I don't get my interpretations 100% right 100% of the time. That's where the forgiveness, mercy and grace of God comes in.Throughout time, as we know it, man has been translating the Word of God into easier reading, and it has been translated so many times that I just can't believe there are no translation errors. It has been translated into other languages, and it has been paraphrased so many times that I am very thankful for the Holy Spirit who witnesses to my spirit as to what God wants for my life. Don't get me wrong . . . I LOVE and HIGHLY RESPECT the Bible as God’s word. I do not dismiss the scripture as just another book of good stories. I have great REVERENCE for the things of God, and I do my best to live by the scripture as I am lead by the Holy Spirit. However, just because I don't believe the same way others do doesn't mean I am doubting. It just means that I am seeking and searching and doing my best with the help of the Holy Spirit to work out my own salvation with fear and trembling.
You're right, the newer versions are with error. If you want the truest/purest translation, read it in Hebrew/Greek. There you'll even get a 99.9% (if not a 100) correct Bible if you pick the right one. King James is the best English version because it's 99.7% correct.
We know those statistics from comparing our Bibles from REAL ancient archeological texts. Ones found in dig sites, etc. The dead sea scrolls are a fine example.
I am NOT trying to offend or upset anyone . . . I am a Christian, however I have a difficult time accepting the Bible as being without error. Why? Because, humans were involved in the writing of it. Yes, I believe God inspired men to write the scripture, however they were still human. No offense to anyone, but I don't believe these humans got it 100% right 100% of the time. I know I don't get my interpretations 100% right 100% of the time. That's where the forgiveness, mercy and grace of God comes in.Throughout time, as we know it, man has been translating the Word of God into easier reading, and it has been translated so many times that I just can't believe there are no translation errors. It has been translated into other languages, and it has been paraphrased so many times that I am very thankful for the Holy Spirit who witnesses to my spirit as to what God wants for my life. Don't get me wrong . . . I LOVE and HIGHLY RESPECT the Bible as God’s word. I do not dismiss the scripture as just another book of good stories. I have great REVERENCE for the things of God, and I do my best to live by the scripture as I am lead by the Holy Spirit. However, just because I don't believe the same way others do doesn't mean I am doubting. It just means that I am seeking and searching and doing my best with the help of the Holy Spirit to work out my own salvation with fear and trembling.
You're right, the newer versions are with error. If you want the truest/purest translation, read it in Hebrew/Greek. There you'll even get a 99.9% (if not a 100) correct Bible if you pick the right one. King James is the best English version because it's 99.7% correct.
No one has really answered the heart of the question.The source of truth, for Christians, is the bible. But that isn't enough for many people.Many people don't have access to bibles.Many people aren't literate.Many people have so many problems just trying to make ends meet that they have no time to read the bible.Many people do not have the intelligence, resourcefulness or analytic skill to comprehend all the cross-referenced prophecies and meanings of the bible.Do these people not deserve the truth, and the whole truth, that Christians purport to have access to? That someone would have a question about Christianity, and be told that they'll only understand it if they spend the time to figure out all its literary nuances, smacks of elitism and apathy. That the bible is presented the way it is - as a literary work, and a convoluted literary work at that - is a barrier between people and God. Why would God reveal the truth in such a way?
tim_from_pa
New Member
- Jul 11, 2007
- 1,656
- 12
- 0
- 65
(Lunar;56259)
I know this sounds like a silly question. But I actually consider it tremendously important.Almost every attempt to render Christian theology consistent requires extensive cross-referencing of the bible. For instance, in one case I saw someone attempt to justify gap creationism by filling a hole in the first two verses of Genesis with a quote from 2 Peter. This sort of thing happens all the time - one verse will make no sense unless supplemented with another verse from a completely different book - and, although I don't think these attempts at reconciliation are able to hold their own weight very often (though that is the stuff of many other topics), I consider the obtuseness of the justification itself to be a problem.If the bible is God's infallible word, why did he not make it more organized or readable? Why should one need to jump from book to book, spending hours and hours analyzing it, simply to be able to understand it? Many people do not have access to bibles in the first place, and many others do not have the time or skill to do this sort of analysis. God is clearly capable of making a book that is comprehensible to everyone - one that perfectly communicates his will. So why didn't he? Why did he even allow there to be any debate over Christian theology - much less produce the disjointed mess of theology that is the bible?Obviously God would not intend for someone's faith to be contingent upon their aptitude at critical literary analysis, but that is what it has come to. Why is this? Why couldn't the bible tell us exactly what we need to know, in words that even a child could understand?
It is fairly easy for me to understand, but then when it's explained the skeptics disbelieve and shoot it down and explain why it does not mean what it clearly says. Then it is said it makes no sense---- as it's been said before: circular reasoning.
I know this sounds like a silly question. But I actually consider it tremendously important.Almost every attempt to render Christian theology consistent requires extensive cross-referencing of the bible. For instance, in one case I saw someone attempt to justify gap creationism by filling a hole in the first two verses of Genesis with a quote from 2 Peter. This sort of thing happens all the time - one verse will make no sense unless supplemented with another verse from a completely different book - and, although I don't think these attempts at reconciliation are able to hold their own weight very often (though that is the stuff of many other topics), I consider the obtuseness of the justification itself to be a problem.If the bible is God's infallible word, why did he not make it more organized or readable? Why should one need to jump from book to book, spending hours and hours analyzing it, simply to be able to understand it? Many people do not have access to bibles in the first place, and many others do not have the time or skill to do this sort of analysis. God is clearly capable of making a book that is comprehensible to everyone - one that perfectly communicates his will. So why didn't he? Why did he even allow there to be any debate over Christian theology - much less produce the disjointed mess of theology that is the bible?Obviously God would not intend for someone's faith to be contingent upon their aptitude at critical literary analysis, but that is what it has come to. Why is this? Why couldn't the bible tell us exactly what we need to know, in words that even a child could understand?
It is fairly easy for me to understand, but then when it's explained the skeptics disbelieve and shoot it down and explain why it does not mean what it clearly says. Then it is said it makes no sense---- as it's been said before: circular reasoning.
The discovery of the dead sea scrolls helps prove the text has changed very little over thousands of years Even though it was not in the original manuscript to have chapter and verses designated. That came much later when men copied them and added it for clarity and to know which lines they were on. In the original Masoretic manuscript each Hebrew character has a number designation and each word and line must add up to a certain original sum or the whole copy was thrown out. This is how we know that the original Hebrew has been copied correctly for thousands of years. All nay sayers use this as their standard reason for not accepting the Bible without having any done any research to find out any facts. There are no major contradictions in the Bible any large ones you see are a lack to understand whats being said not in the Word there are a few minor very errors in a the translation a number here or there a word or two but thats it. as Wakka said KJV with a concordance will take you back to the Hebrew and Greek for a better understandingand the over all most accurate translations. There is so few people that have no access to a Bible or a person who preaches, teaches it, with Internet, TV, missionaries, second hand stores, free libraries, churches, ect ect. that I can not buy that people in large numbers do not have any access to the scriptures. Time to read/study I am sure there are many,who are strapped for time, but there again everyone has 10/15 min. a week its your free choice of what one finds important I doubt God will find this much of an excuse
(tim_from_pa;57135)
It is fairly easy for me to understand, but then when it's explained the skeptics disbelieve and shoot it down and explain why it does not mean what it clearly says. Then it is said it makes no sense---- as it's been said before: circular reasoning.
You misunderstand. The question is not whether the bible makes sense. That has been debated ad nauseum already, and my experience debating it with you inspires no eagerness in me to do so again.The question is whether it is accessible. You say you find it easy to understand, which I will believe for now, though I very much doubt that you thought of all your particular beliefs, like Anglo-Israelism, all by yourself. Frankly, I don't think it's easy to understand, and I found this to be true both when I was a Christian and when I was not. I don't think that the entire field of academics and theologians who debate the major issues of the bible are all stupid and making an unnecessary stink over a very clear issue. If the bible is consistent and does make sense - which, for the purpose of this argument, we are granting - it is extremely nuanced and requires a lot of critical thinking to analyze on one's own. A few of the main messages, like salvation and the role of Christ, are clear-cut and reiterated many times. But most of the rest of it is not.Furthermore, this is clearly not an issue of skeptics willfully ignoring an obvious message. Christians also disagree with one another on what the bible says. I see it happen all the time on this very site. Why do you think this is? Because every Christian that doesn't agree with you is a skeptic in disguise, or buying into demonic deception? Or do you think maybe it's more likely that the bible isn't as clear as you think it is?(kriss)
There is so few people that have no access to a Bible or a person who preaches, teaches it, with Internet, TV, missionaries, second hand stores, free libraries, churches, ect ect. that I can not buy that people in large numbers do not have any access to the scriptures.Time to read/study I am sure there are many,who are strapped for time, but there again everyone has 10/15 min. a week its your free choice of what one finds important I doubt God will find this much of an excuse
I'm not trying to make excuses for myself. I've had the luxury of quite a bit of spare time, thankfully, and I've spent a good deal of that studying the bible.But the statement that everyone else can find 15 minutes a week to study the bible - and that they should do it through the internet or TV - is appalling and demonstrates how much you take for granted. In many African countries the literacy rate is below 50 percent, to say nothing of rampant disease and starvation which would probably put studying someone's religious text near the bottom of their priorities. Try telling them to find the time to study the bible. The problem's not just limited to Africa, either - India's literacy rate is a mere 61 percent. Worldwide illiteracy rates are estimated at around 18 percent, and a much greater percentage than that do not have the luxury of internet access like you or I (heck, even within the U.S. 20% aren't online yet).You say that there are "so few" people without access to a bible, and that people should just find out about through the internet, TV, or free libraries. The second and third world would like to have a word with you.
It is fairly easy for me to understand, but then when it's explained the skeptics disbelieve and shoot it down and explain why it does not mean what it clearly says. Then it is said it makes no sense---- as it's been said before: circular reasoning.
You misunderstand. The question is not whether the bible makes sense. That has been debated ad nauseum already, and my experience debating it with you inspires no eagerness in me to do so again.The question is whether it is accessible. You say you find it easy to understand, which I will believe for now, though I very much doubt that you thought of all your particular beliefs, like Anglo-Israelism, all by yourself. Frankly, I don't think it's easy to understand, and I found this to be true both when I was a Christian and when I was not. I don't think that the entire field of academics and theologians who debate the major issues of the bible are all stupid and making an unnecessary stink over a very clear issue. If the bible is consistent and does make sense - which, for the purpose of this argument, we are granting - it is extremely nuanced and requires a lot of critical thinking to analyze on one's own. A few of the main messages, like salvation and the role of Christ, are clear-cut and reiterated many times. But most of the rest of it is not.Furthermore, this is clearly not an issue of skeptics willfully ignoring an obvious message. Christians also disagree with one another on what the bible says. I see it happen all the time on this very site. Why do you think this is? Because every Christian that doesn't agree with you is a skeptic in disguise, or buying into demonic deception? Or do you think maybe it's more likely that the bible isn't as clear as you think it is?(kriss)
There is so few people that have no access to a Bible or a person who preaches, teaches it, with Internet, TV, missionaries, second hand stores, free libraries, churches, ect ect. that I can not buy that people in large numbers do not have any access to the scriptures.Time to read/study I am sure there are many,who are strapped for time, but there again everyone has 10/15 min. a week its your free choice of what one finds important I doubt God will find this much of an excuse
I'm not trying to make excuses for myself. I've had the luxury of quite a bit of spare time, thankfully, and I've spent a good deal of that studying the bible.But the statement that everyone else can find 15 minutes a week to study the bible - and that they should do it through the internet or TV - is appalling and demonstrates how much you take for granted. In many African countries the literacy rate is below 50 percent, to say nothing of rampant disease and starvation which would probably put studying someone's religious text near the bottom of their priorities. Try telling them to find the time to study the bible. The problem's not just limited to Africa, either - India's literacy rate is a mere 61 percent. Worldwide illiteracy rates are estimated at around 18 percent, and a much greater percentage than that do not have the luxury of internet access like you or I (heck, even within the U.S. 20% aren't online yet).You say that there are "so few" people without access to a bible, and that people should just find out about through the internet, TV, or free libraries. The second and third world would like to have a word with you.
tim_from_pa
New Member
- Jul 11, 2007
- 1,656
- 12
- 0
- 65
You misunderstand. The question is not whether the bible makes sense. That has been debated ad nauseum already, and my experience debating it with you inspires no eagerness in me to do so again.
Oh, OK. I thought you meant that it made no sense.My personal experience with Anglo-Israelism is that after a straightforward reading of the bible as a boy, I knew that 10 tribes were unaccounted for. Then when pursuing it later in my young man years I came across that (Anglo-Israelism). A lot of people from the theological professions made all sorts of claims where they were. But when one came down to brass tacks, these people had to fit the descriptions in the bible such as the Genesis birthright promises and the directions they went and characteristics like in Isaiah (even apocryphal passages agree here). So it did not make sense to look for them in the remotest parts of the Himalaya's or an obscure tribe by a waterhole somewhere.These conclusions, even though someone beat me to it came to British-Israelism (a term I like better than Anglo-Israelism). As a personal experiment I already pointed out, I even described the people of Israel using only 7 of the biblical clues out of scores to others on a non-Christian forum and they had no idea I was using bible clues. Their conclusion was England or Great Britain unanimously (about 12 answered). I'd be foolish to overlook so much evidence (biblical and otherwise) as no other nation or nations have or presently fit the prophetic descriptions. Bottom line: I tested it to my satisfaction because any other conclusion I found fault with based on biblical descriptions and promises.
Oh, OK. I thought you meant that it made no sense.My personal experience with Anglo-Israelism is that after a straightforward reading of the bible as a boy, I knew that 10 tribes were unaccounted for. Then when pursuing it later in my young man years I came across that (Anglo-Israelism). A lot of people from the theological professions made all sorts of claims where they were. But when one came down to brass tacks, these people had to fit the descriptions in the bible such as the Genesis birthright promises and the directions they went and characteristics like in Isaiah (even apocryphal passages agree here). So it did not make sense to look for them in the remotest parts of the Himalaya's or an obscure tribe by a waterhole somewhere.These conclusions, even though someone beat me to it came to British-Israelism (a term I like better than Anglo-Israelism). As a personal experiment I already pointed out, I even described the people of Israel using only 7 of the biblical clues out of scores to others on a non-Christian forum and they had no idea I was using bible clues. Their conclusion was England or Great Britain unanimously (about 12 answered). I'd be foolish to overlook so much evidence (biblical and otherwise) as no other nation or nations have or presently fit the prophetic descriptions. Bottom line: I tested it to my satisfaction because any other conclusion I found fault with based on biblical descriptions and promises.
Jesus tells us to let every matter be established by 2 or more witnesses. So, we need to do the same when studing the Bible. Numbers 35:30: Deuteronomy 17:6; Matt 18:16; II Cor 13:1, OKay there are 4 witnesses, telling us to let every matter be establised by two or more witnesses. Most people believe EVERYTHING in the Bible from front cover to the back cover is God breathed SCRIPTURE. This is simply not the case. Yes, everything is the Bible was inspired by God to be in the Bible so we can learn from it. But, SCRIPTURE is the WORD OF GOD. This is why it sometimes seems so confusing to understand.Here's an example of something you will NOT FIND a second witness to:I Cor. 7:14 'For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, buth now they are holy' ----Sanctification means growing in holiness, produced by- God, Christ, Holy Spirit, & Christ's blood.Holy means spiritually perfect or pure; free from sin; perfect in a moral sense; deserving reverence or worship. Associated with Jesus and His life. Do you believe a unbelieving spouse can be 'SANCTIFIED' by the believing spouse? Or their children are made 'HOLY'? Hummmm, I THINK NOT!!!! Look for a second witness to what Paul said....or you could just read verse 12 where Paul said 'But, to the rest of you I say, not the Lord,...'.............Let's read that again. 'But, to the rest of you I say, NOT THE LORD,' NOT THE LORD, NOT THE LORD, this is why you will not find a second witness to confirm this is TRUTH, Paul said it. Paul also confessed he tried to be all things to all people. By, telling them what they wanted to hear. He didn't want to offend anyone. Jesus offended alot of people, and most of the were church going so called righteous believers.
(Lunar;56259)
I know this sounds like a silly question. But I actually consider it tremendously important.Almost every attempt to render Christian theology consistent requires extensive cross-referencing of the bible. For instance, in one case I saw someone attempt to justify gap creationism by filling a hole in the first two verses of Genesis with a quote from 2 Peter. This sort of thing happens all the time - one verse will make no sense unless supplemented with another verse from a completely different book - and, although I don't think these attempts at reconciliation are able to hold their own weight very often (though that is the stuff of many other topics), I consider the obtuseness of the justification itself to be a problem.If the bible is God's infallible word, why did he not make it more organized or readable? Why should one need to jump from book to book, spending hours and hours analyzing it, simply to be able to understand it? Many people do not have access to bibles in the first place, and many others do not have the time or skill to do this sort of analysis. God is clearly capable of making a book that is comprehensible to everyone - one that perfectly communicates his will. So why didn't he? Why did he even allow there to be any debate over Christian theology - much less produce the disjointed mess of theology that is the bible?Obviously God would not intend for someone's faith to be contingent upon their aptitude at critical literary analysis, but that is what it has come to. Why is this? Why couldn't the bible tell us exactly what we need to know, in words that even a child could understand?
There are *parts* that are hard to understand... but as a whole, it isn't hard. And, people who are hard to understand quite often
. God gives us His Spirit, and He helps us understand. So, all I can say is that I can't relate, and that I don't find the Bible, overall, hard to understand.
I know this sounds like a silly question. But I actually consider it tremendously important.Almost every attempt to render Christian theology consistent requires extensive cross-referencing of the bible. For instance, in one case I saw someone attempt to justify gap creationism by filling a hole in the first two verses of Genesis with a quote from 2 Peter. This sort of thing happens all the time - one verse will make no sense unless supplemented with another verse from a completely different book - and, although I don't think these attempts at reconciliation are able to hold their own weight very often (though that is the stuff of many other topics), I consider the obtuseness of the justification itself to be a problem.If the bible is God's infallible word, why did he not make it more organized or readable? Why should one need to jump from book to book, spending hours and hours analyzing it, simply to be able to understand it? Many people do not have access to bibles in the first place, and many others do not have the time or skill to do this sort of analysis. God is clearly capable of making a book that is comprehensible to everyone - one that perfectly communicates his will. So why didn't he? Why did he even allow there to be any debate over Christian theology - much less produce the disjointed mess of theology that is the bible?Obviously God would not intend for someone's faith to be contingent upon their aptitude at critical literary analysis, but that is what it has come to. Why is this? Why couldn't the bible tell us exactly what we need to know, in words that even a child could understand?
There are *parts* that are hard to understand... but as a whole, it isn't hard. And, people who are hard to understand quite often
tim_from_pa: Your reasoning on how you reached your belief in Anglo-Israelism is besides the point. Clearly, whether you see it as obviously true or not (a point which I have no desire to dispute with you at this point in time), most Christians do not agree, and that alone is problematic, because it means that the truth of the bible is not clear to most people.treeoflife: I'm glad that you don't find the bible hard to understand, but as I've said before, Christians have major disagreements on almost every point of the bible (and this is between Christians themselves, not between Christians and skeptics), so it obviously cannot be clear to everyone. Another major point which has been ignored is the issue of literacy: Many people cannot even read in the first place, so how could the bible be clear to them.A Christian coming in and saying "Well the bible is clear to me" solves nothing. No doubt that another Christian who completely disagrees with your take on the bible also thinks it is clear to him. So long as there are biblical disputes, and so long as there are impoverished, underprivileged and/or illiterate people, my point stands. There are two main questions which need to be answered here: 1) If the Bible is clear-cut than how do we account for the wealth of theological disagreements even among Christians themselves, and 2) How can the truth of the Bible be clear to people who are incapable of reading it?
treeoflife: I'm glad that you don't find the bible hard to understand, but as I've said before, Christians have major disagreements on almost every point of the bible (and this is between Christians themselves, not between Christians and skeptics), so it obviously cannot be clear to everyone. Another major point which has been ignored is the issue of literacy: Many people cannot even read in the first place, so how could the bible be clear to them.
Yes, and there are parts that are hard to understand. God conceals things in His Word, on purpose, so that only those who wish to hear will hear. It is the the glory of God to conceal a matter, and the honor of kings to find a thing out.Then, we are human... and we factor in our imperfection into the mix and sometimes we make the easy parts hard... and the hard parts easy. I believe the Bible is perfectly clear, and/or will become perfectly clear to those who diligently seek Him.The thing God wants for us most, and that is to choose Him and receive salvation... He made very easy, and uncomplicated. You don't have to know why, or exactly how it happens... but we are saved through faith, when we believe. Jesus died for our sins. Believe, be saved. See, there are hard parts, and then there are easy parts. God made that part easy for a reason... he doesn't want you to have to work for your salvation. He loves you, and just wants you to receive it like a child
.There is plenty of time to disagree about the hard parts later
.
Yes, and there are parts that are hard to understand. God conceals things in His Word, on purpose, so that only those who wish to hear will hear. It is the the glory of God to conceal a matter, and the honor of kings to find a thing out.Then, we are human... and we factor in our imperfection into the mix and sometimes we make the easy parts hard... and the hard parts easy. I believe the Bible is perfectly clear, and/or will become perfectly clear to those who diligently seek Him.The thing God wants for us most, and that is to choose Him and receive salvation... He made very easy, and uncomplicated. You don't have to know why, or exactly how it happens... but we are saved through faith, when we believe. Jesus died for our sins. Believe, be saved. See, there are hard parts, and then there are easy parts. God made that part easy for a reason... he doesn't want you to have to work for your salvation. He loves you, and just wants you to receive it like a child
(Lunar;57145)
You misunderstand. The question is not whether the bible makes sense. That has been debated ad nauseum already, and my experience debating it with you inspires no eagerness in me to do so again.The question is whether it is accessible. You say you find it easy to understand, which I will believe for now, though I very much doubt that you thought of all your particular beliefs, like Anglo-Israelism, all by yourself. Frankly, I don't think it's easy to understand, and I found this to be true both when I was a Christian and when I was not. I don't think that the entire field of academics and theologians who debate the major issues of the bible are all stupid and making an unnecessary stink over a very clear issue. If the bible is consistent and does make sense - which, for the purpose of this argument, we are granting - it is extremely nuanced and requires a lot of critical thinking to analyze on one's own. A few of the main messages, like salvation and the role of Christ, are clear-cut and reiterated many times. But most of the rest of it is not.Furthermore, this is clearly not an issue of skeptics willfully ignoring an obvious message. Christians also disagree with one another on what the bible says. I see it happen all the time on this very site. Why do you think this is? Because every Christian that doesn't agree with you is a skeptic in disguise, or buying into demonic deception? Or do you think maybe it's more likely that the bible isn't as clear as you think it is?I'm not trying to make excuses for myself. I've had the luxury of quite a bit of spare time, thankfully, and I've spent a good deal of that studying the bible.But the statement that everyone else can find 15 minutes a week to study the bible - and that they should do it through the internet or TV - is appalling and demonstrates how much you take for granted. In many African countries the literacy rate is below 50 percent, to say nothing of rampant disease and starvation which would probably put studying someone's religious text near the bottom of their priorities. Try telling them to find the time to study the bible. The problem's not just limited to Africa, either - India's literacy rate is a mere 61 percent. Worldwide illiteracy rates are estimated at around 18 percent, and a much greater percentage than that do not have the luxury of internet access like you or I (heck, even within the U.S. 20% aren't online yet).You say that there are "so few" people without access to a bible, and that people should just find out about through the internet, TV, or free libraries. The second and third world would like to have a word with you.
Do you ever read what anyone says I was nameing some of the places they could get find access I never said anybody should do anything. I said I find it hard to believe that massive numbers of people have not heard of Nor have any possabilities to hear about the Bible or what it says if they choose too. and your examples are excuses and guess's many millions in Africa have heard the word of God same in India if they choose most are not christians from their choice to be other religions iliteracy doesnt stop them from being religious they chose not to be christian, not for lack of ever hearing of a christian Holy Book
You misunderstand. The question is not whether the bible makes sense. That has been debated ad nauseum already, and my experience debating it with you inspires no eagerness in me to do so again.The question is whether it is accessible. You say you find it easy to understand, which I will believe for now, though I very much doubt that you thought of all your particular beliefs, like Anglo-Israelism, all by yourself. Frankly, I don't think it's easy to understand, and I found this to be true both when I was a Christian and when I was not. I don't think that the entire field of academics and theologians who debate the major issues of the bible are all stupid and making an unnecessary stink over a very clear issue. If the bible is consistent and does make sense - which, for the purpose of this argument, we are granting - it is extremely nuanced and requires a lot of critical thinking to analyze on one's own. A few of the main messages, like salvation and the role of Christ, are clear-cut and reiterated many times. But most of the rest of it is not.Furthermore, this is clearly not an issue of skeptics willfully ignoring an obvious message. Christians also disagree with one another on what the bible says. I see it happen all the time on this very site. Why do you think this is? Because every Christian that doesn't agree with you is a skeptic in disguise, or buying into demonic deception? Or do you think maybe it's more likely that the bible isn't as clear as you think it is?I'm not trying to make excuses for myself. I've had the luxury of quite a bit of spare time, thankfully, and I've spent a good deal of that studying the bible.But the statement that everyone else can find 15 minutes a week to study the bible - and that they should do it through the internet or TV - is appalling and demonstrates how much you take for granted. In many African countries the literacy rate is below 50 percent, to say nothing of rampant disease and starvation which would probably put studying someone's religious text near the bottom of their priorities. Try telling them to find the time to study the bible. The problem's not just limited to Africa, either - India's literacy rate is a mere 61 percent. Worldwide illiteracy rates are estimated at around 18 percent, and a much greater percentage than that do not have the luxury of internet access like you or I (heck, even within the U.S. 20% aren't online yet).You say that there are "so few" people without access to a bible, and that people should just find out about through the internet, TV, or free libraries. The second and third world would like to have a word with you.
Do you ever read what anyone says I was nameing some of the places they could get find access I never said anybody should do anything. I said I find it hard to believe that massive numbers of people have not heard of Nor have any possabilities to hear about the Bible or what it says if they choose too. and your examples are excuses and guess's many millions in Africa have heard the word of God same in India if they choose most are not christians from their choice to be other religions iliteracy doesnt stop them from being religious they chose not to be christian, not for lack of ever hearing of a christian Holy Book
(Alpha and Omega;57191)
Daniel 12:10"...none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand."
I suppose I and most of the rest of the world, and everyone that disagrees with you on anything, are wicked and unwise then. Too bad for us!(kriss)
Do you ever read what anyone says
I try to make a habit of it.Your hostility is unwarranted, kriss. Calm down.(kriss)
I was nameing some of the places they could get find access
Yes, and many people do not have access to any of these things. The internet, TV, and libraries are a luxury. Many people don't even have a home, or food to eat, or the promise of their immediate safety, much less easy-access sources of information.(kriss)
I never said anybody should do anything.
You said that God would not consider their lack of time or access to be an appropriate excuse. Let's not try and skirt around the obvious implications of that claim. (kriss)
I said I find it hard to believe that massive numbers of people have not heard of Nor have any possabilities to hear about the Bible or what it says if they choose too.
Hard to believe or not, it's true. In many parts of the world Christianity is nothing more than a phrase that gets thrown around. What opportunity would an impoverished nation have to learn about it?(kriss)
and your examples are excuses and guess's
No, they are statistics. I can give you the citations if you want.(kriss)
many millions in Africa have heard the word of God same in India
"Many millions" isn't good enough, since Africa's collective population is 922 million and India's is over 1 billion.(kriss)
if they choose most are not christians from their choice to be other religions iliteracy doesnt stop them from being religious they chose not to be christian, not for lack of ever hearing of a christian Holy Book
How can you possibly think they've been given a fair chance when the best that many of them have is word of mouth, and some of them not even that much? The vast majority of these people will never be able to read the bible. In many countries bibles are outlawed. They will never be able to subject the bible to the scrutiny it deserves or understand it in the supposedly infallible way it's been presented. All they will have is the fallible word of mouth of a man.Word of mouth is not good enough. By the Christian's own attestation, the only infallible word of God is in the bible. Because of this, the only person who has learned the real truth of Christianity is one who has read the bible. Who could blame someone in Africa or India for rejecting the secondhand, corrupted version of God's word that they hear?You are being startlingly insensitive to the plight of these people. You don't think that more people would choose to be Christian if they were able to read bibles?
Daniel 12:10"...none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand."
I suppose I and most of the rest of the world, and everyone that disagrees with you on anything, are wicked and unwise then. Too bad for us!(kriss)
Do you ever read what anyone says
I try to make a habit of it.Your hostility is unwarranted, kriss. Calm down.(kriss)
I was nameing some of the places they could get find access
Yes, and many people do not have access to any of these things. The internet, TV, and libraries are a luxury. Many people don't even have a home, or food to eat, or the promise of their immediate safety, much less easy-access sources of information.(kriss)
I never said anybody should do anything.
You said that God would not consider their lack of time or access to be an appropriate excuse. Let's not try and skirt around the obvious implications of that claim. (kriss)
I said I find it hard to believe that massive numbers of people have not heard of Nor have any possabilities to hear about the Bible or what it says if they choose too.
Hard to believe or not, it's true. In many parts of the world Christianity is nothing more than a phrase that gets thrown around. What opportunity would an impoverished nation have to learn about it?(kriss)
and your examples are excuses and guess's
No, they are statistics. I can give you the citations if you want.(kriss)
many millions in Africa have heard the word of God same in India
"Many millions" isn't good enough, since Africa's collective population is 922 million and India's is over 1 billion.(kriss)
if they choose most are not christians from their choice to be other religions iliteracy doesnt stop them from being religious they chose not to be christian, not for lack of ever hearing of a christian Holy Book
How can you possibly think they've been given a fair chance when the best that many of them have is word of mouth, and some of them not even that much? The vast majority of these people will never be able to read the bible. In many countries bibles are outlawed. They will never be able to subject the bible to the scrutiny it deserves or understand it in the supposedly infallible way it's been presented. All they will have is the fallible word of mouth of a man.Word of mouth is not good enough. By the Christian's own attestation, the only infallible word of God is in the bible. Because of this, the only person who has learned the real truth of Christianity is one who has read the bible. Who could blame someone in Africa or India for rejecting the secondhand, corrupted version of God's word that they hear?You are being startlingly insensitive to the plight of these people. You don't think that more people would choose to be Christian if they were able to read bibles?
Similar threads
