The Bible - How do you view it ?

[GaryAnderson]

How do you all view the Bible?
Do you see it as The Word of God Verbatim with no errors or do you view it as Inspired by God with errors in human language and translations?

Personally I see the Bible as Inspired by God and the key takeaway points for me in the New Testament are that Jesus the son of God came down to our Realm, died for our sins and rose from the dead on the third day and will come again to judge the living and the dead.
When I read a sentence or a paragraph in the Old Testament for example, I realize that there’s a lot of symbolism which I don’t take literally and I realize that people at the time were confined to a limited language trying to explain something extraordinary like God. Then add translations throughout the ages and the probability for human mistakes increases.

Just wondering what your thoughts are in this topic.
Thank you.

 

[marks]

How do you all view the Bible?
Do you see it as The Word of God Verbatim with no errors or do you view it as Inspired by God with errors in human language and translations?

Personally I see the Bible as Inspired by God and the key takeaway points for me in the New Testament are that Jesus the son of God came down to our Realm, died for our sins and rose from the dead on the third day and will come again to judge the living and the dead.
When I read a sentence or a paragraph in the Old Testament for example, I realize that there’s a lot of symbolism which I don’t take literally and I realize that people at the time were confined to a limited language trying to explain something extraordinary like God. Then add translations throughout the ages and the probability for human mistakes increases.

Just wondering what your thoughts are in this topic.
Thank you.

I think of the Bible as the inspired Word of God. I think that we have sufficient manuscript evidence to have a very good confidence in it's readings for the most part. I also think that we have good translating capacity to render accurate readings, again, for the most part.

I think there are certain passages in the Hebrew that you simply have to make a choice in how you read it, and the readings can be very different. Koine Greek is more certain in it's interpretation, as the language is very precise in it's original form.

In the original form of Hebrew, accurate understanding often relied on the vowel pronunciation, which wasn't written down. Later, as this part of the language began to be lost, scholars added vowel points to try to clarify the reading, but even that allowed ambiguity to remain. It's the perfect example of a Dead Language. No native speakers remain, nor do any who are able to understand it as a native speaker.

But with all that being said, I find the message of the Bible knowable, as the Holy Spirit gives us understanding. I find there to be a solid foundation for my understanding of Who God is, and what is His desire for me.

Much love!

 

[Truman]

Lately? Through dark glasses. It is the written word of God. These are just my thoughts...I'm not a scholar. I'm still a student.
It is my belief that the original manuscripts were divinely inspired. What we have today are copies of copies of copies.
One may ask, "How can we tell if what we read is accurate?" There are many, many copies around the world and these have all been compared. With a few tiny exceptions, the vast majority of the message is identical.
The major challenge, I have found, is in the interpretation.
I've found the Apostle's Creed to be very helpful in framing exactly what I believe.
However, many of my previously-held beliefs are being challenged due to my God-given revelation that I am of Hebrew descent. A prime example is the sabbath. Though it is not a salvation issue, it is of God.
The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing.
I'm reaffirming much of what I believed, though there are some lesser issues that I've changed my viewpoint on. I'm learning to pick and choose my battles.
It's not easy finding the balance between love and truth. There is no inconsistency with these subjects and God. None of us have a complete grasp on the truth. I believe love, according to 1 Corinthians 13, is the great unifier, as it is the Spirit of God, the God of love, that will lead us into all truth.
I like to keep it simple...love God and love each other. And try to think before I act.

 

[Bob Estey]

How do you all view the Bible?
Do you see it as The Word of God Verbatim with no errors or do you view it as Inspired by God with errors in human language and translations?

Personally I see the Bible as Inspired by God and the key takeaway points for me in the New Testament are that Jesus the son of God came down to our Realm, died for our sins and rose from the dead on the third day and will come again to judge the living and the dead.
When I read a sentence or a paragraph in the Old Testament for example, I realize that there’s a lot of symbolism which I don’t take literally and I realize that people at the time were confined to a limited language trying to explain something extraordinary like God. Then add translations throughout the ages and the probability for human mistakes increases.

Just wondering what your thoughts are in this topic.
Thank you.

I think the Bible is what it appears to be. For example, Paul was a great missionary, so his writings had great respect, and it was decided to include them in the Bible.

 

[Jay Ross]

How do you all view the Bible?

Some would say on their Lap, others might tell you that they view their bible on their computer screen, while others do not view their bible but rather display it for others to view and observe.

Shalom

 

[Desire Of All Nations]

I couldn't help but notice the part where you said "When I read a sentence or a paragraph in the Old Testament for example, I realize that there’s a lot of symbolism which I don’t take literally and I realize that people at the time were confined to a limited language trying to explain something extraordinary like God". That is a huge red flag to me, because Moses wrote the Pentateuch, and Exo. 33:11 says he knew God like a friend. Acts also says David was a man after God's own heart, and he wrote a multitude of psalms that are in the Bible.

If you believe the OT was written from the perspective of men who didn't know God because the OT was written in a human language, then why do you believe anything the NT says? After all, the NT reinforces everything that was written in the OT and was also written in a human language. You can't say you believe the whole Bible was inspired by God and simultaneously speak as if the OT writers were uneducated rubes who didn't know God. That's a duplicitous proclamation of faith if i ever saw one.

 

[Agios]

The current translations today are very accurate when you compare to the Dead Sea Scrolls and other ancient writings. It's good God allowed these to be found so we can have great confidence with what we have today in the Bible. It's in error to discredit the accuracy, when this happens, it's too easy for people to have an anything goes attitude.

 

[GaryAnderson]

I’m glad you asked @Desire Of All Nations because maybe you can help me with some contradictions.
The story of Genesis to me carries a lot of symbolism and I can’t take it literally because observation or science tells us that the universe is 14 billion years old and that fossil remains tell stories of humans millions of years old. How can I reconcile this?
Also in the New Testament in the book of revelations, which is also heavy on symbolism how can you interpret those signs literally?
This is why I think there’s human language limitation in describing something like God and then there’s also choices one has to choose in translations when translation a word with multiple meanings as @marks explained.
So the two main points for me are:
1. There’s limitations in human language (especially ancient ones) when describing something extraordinary like God so we have to use Symbolism and
2. There are non intended consequences in interpretation when translating from an old language.

So how can I reconcile these two?

I see a lot of members here quoting Old and New Testament on lines or paragraphs which sometimes have multiple interpretations which have gone through translations from Greek or other languages and I see that there are opposing views sometimes. This is why I stick to main points from the Bible. God created the universe, God sent his begotten son who died for our sins and to tell us about the Kingdom of Heaven and that God will come again to judge the living and the dead and we will arrive back to a point very close to Eden where we will live through the glory of God for eternity.

 

[Jay Ross]

The current translations today are very accurate when you compare to the Dead Sea Scrolls and other ancient writings. It's good God allowed these to be found so we can have great confidence with what we have today in the Bible. It's in error to discredit the accuracy, when this happens, it's too easy for people to have an anything goes attitude.

What the Dead Sea Scrolls show us, is that the source texts from which our various translations where generated from are very consistent with the texts that have been found hidden in the caves and labelled as the Dead Sea Scrolls.

However, to state that the current translations that we have are very accurate in that they convey the same contextual message as the source texts, is not at all accurate and is a false claim on the part of the people who own the "copyright" on the various translations.

Stephen, before he was stoned in Acts 7 clearly stated that Abraham received no inheritance in the land of Canaan, and that his and his descendants inheritance was a distant future event for them. However, the usage of the Greek words with the embedded Root word G:1093, has not necessarily been used to convey the context of the Abrahamic Covenant as found in Genesis 12:1. In Genesis 13 this is what God said that He would do: -

14 And the Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him: "Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are — northward, southward, eastward, and westward; 15 for all the land/earth which you see I give to you and/, {that (entity)}, I will give to your descendants forever/for a long period of time whose ending is at the vanishing point, {of this particular time period}, in the future}. 16 And I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth; so that if a man could number the dust of the earth, then your descendants also could be numbered. 17 Arise, walk in the land/about the/my earth through its length and its width, for I give it to you/Me to give it to you. "​

The NKJV as I perceive it should read.​

Because of the "errors" in the translator's understanding of God's Promises and Covenants, our translations reflect those errors and many people accept that those errors in their understandings are not and blindly accept that the translations we use are very accurate when in fact they are not.

However, our present translations, are still our best means of beginning our walk in relationship with God within God's Grace as He reveals it to us.

What we must be careful of is not to make our present translations our idols and to worship those translations as the expressed "word of God."

Shalom

 

[Agios]

I’m glad you asked @Desire Of All Nations because maybe you can help me with some contradictions.
The story of Genesis to me carries a lot of symbolism and I can’t take it literally because observation or science tells us that the universe is 14 billion years old and that fossil remains tell stories of humans millions of years old. How can I reconcile this?
Also in the New Testament in the book of revelations, which is also heavy on symbolism how can you interpret those signs literally?
This is why I think there’s human language limitation in describing something like God and then there’s also choices one has to choose in translations when translation a word with multiple meanings as @marks explained.
So the two main points for me are:
1. There’s limitations in human language (especially ancient ones) when describing something extraordinary like God so we have to use Symbolism and
2. There are non intended consequences in interpretation when translating from an old language.

So how can I reconcile these two?

I see a lot of members here quoting Old and New Testament on lines or paragraphs which sometimes have multiple interpretations which have gone through translations from Greek or other languages and I see that there are opposing views sometimes. This is why I stick to main points from the Bible. God created the universe, God sent his begotten son who died for our sins and to tell us about the Kingdom of Heaven and that God will come again to judge the living and the dead and we will arrive back to a point very close to Eden where we will live through the glory of God for eternity.

Have you ever studied carbon dating and the problems with it?

 

[Agios]

What the Dead Sea Scrolls show us, is that the source texts from which our various translations where generated from are very consistent with the texts that have been found hidden in the caves and labelled as the Dead Sea Scrolls.

However, to state that the current translations that we have are very accurate in that they convey the same contextual message as the source texts, is not at all accurate and is a false claim on the part of the people who own the "copyright" on the various translations.

Stephen, before he was stoned in Acts 7 clearly stated that Abraham received no inheritance in the land of Canaan, and that his and his descendants inheritance was a distant future event for them. However, the usage of the Greek words with the embedded Root word G:1093, has not necessarily been used to convey the context of the Abrahamic Covenant as found in Genesis 12:1. In Genesis 13 this is what God said that He would do: -

14 And the Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him: "Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are — northward, southward, eastward, and westward; 15 for all the land/earth which you see I give to you and/, {that (entity)}, I will give to your descendants forever/for a long period of time whose ending is at the vanishing point, {of this particular time period}, in the future}. 16 And I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth; so that if a man could number the dust of the earth, then your descendants also could be numbered. 17 Arise, walk in the land/about the/my earth through its length and its width, for I give it to you/Me to give it to you. "​

The NKJV as I perceive it should read.​

Because of the "errors" in the translator's understanding of God's Promises and Covenants, our translations reflect those errors and many people accept that those errors in their understandings are not and blindly accept that the translations we use are very accurate when in fact they are not.

However, our present translations, are still our best means of beginning our walk in relationship with God within God's Grace as He reveals it to us.

What we must be careful of is not to make our present translations our idols and to worship those translations as the expressed "word of God."

Shalom

Hi Jay Ross,

I absolutely agree not making the Bible an idol.... in any format, translation, etc. God is not the Bible.

 

[Grailhunter]

Have you ever studied carbon dating and the problems with it?

Study modern dating technics. The process can take known objects and date them correctly. And they know what can cause problems.

 

[Grailhunter]

The Bible has around 50,000 additions, deletions, and modifications. That is saying nothing against the Word of God but rather the fingers of man. And after 50,000 addition, deletions, and modification the Bible still tell how to be saved....that is a miracle. Why?
If you could have a perfect book, the only way to keep it that way, would be to bury it and people never touch it. But that was not the purpose of the scriptures.

1. Old Testament...The earliest Paleo-Hebrew scriptures contained God's name. Then His name was removed and the tetragrammaton YHWH was inserted...a little under 6,000 times. Then the tetragrammaton was removed and the Words Lord or God inserted. Because this involve restructuring of the sentences this meant around something like 12,000 modifications. So at this point the name of God the Father was completely removed from most translations of the Bible....the fingers of man.

2. Some call it the Great Consonant Shift, I call it the J slam, and it effected many of the languages. In the Old and New Testament, any word for a person, place, or thing was effected. Any word that started with a Y was replaced with a J. Now the J was a new letter for the world. It came out 1400 years after Christ's ministry...so it cannot be in the Bible. The early prints of the King James Version used the Greek word for Yeshua.... Iēsous. Now why did they do this? Explanations vary but the best explanation I have heard was because the letter J became a fade....and they wanted to popularize it....maybe due to poetic writings and plays like from William Shakespeare, that is why the King James Version reads the way it does....beautiful sounding. But I am concerned about the intent, they didn't just change the Y in Yeshua to Jeshua, but they invented a whole new name....Jesus...no one knows were this word comes from. If I remember correctly, between the Old and New Testaments this constituted around 28,000 modifications. As it is the names of God the Father and God the Son does not appear in the Bible...unless you have a translation that has put them back in there....the fingers of man. Not a hard thing to confirm. My concern is that the scriptures say that only one name can be called upon for salvation....how many people know it?

3. In the New Testament we can look at the older texts and see that there were stories added and things added to stories. Modifications to the scriptures to support theological beliefs. I talked to a professor at Oxford and he believed that the Gospel of John was probably three times as large as it is today. Scriptures translated to support theological beliefs....the fingers of man.

 

[GaryAnderson]

Have you ever studied carbon dating and the problems with it?

No I haven’t. I do know that it’s not exact and it gives you an approximation but that’s good enough because when something is dated to be thousands of years, one or two centuries of errors in dating seems “good enough”.

 

[Stumpmaster]

How do you all view the Bible?

I agree with it.

Evolutionism and the attempt to reconcile it with the Bible is what is known as Theistic Evolution, which maintains God designed the environment and primordial microbes to evolve into all forms of life over millions of years of mutations and death, resulting eventually in the creation of humankind. The Bible shows that there was no death prior to the disobedience of Adam, so Theistic Evolution is incompatible with the Bible. God saw that all His Creation was good. Death, both physical and spiritual is God's enemy, so not part of Creation pre-fall when God saw that everything was good. The first animal to die was the one God killed to provide coverings for Adam and Eve, a prefiguring of the physical death of Christ to redeem His People and His Creation from the curse of death. Gen 3:21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them. The theistic evolutionist is as gullible as Eve, believing the Devil's lie.

 

[GaryAnderson]

I agree with it.

Evolutionism and the attempt to reconcile it with the Bible is what is known as Theistic Evolution, which maintains God designed the environment and primordial microbes to evolve into all forms of life over millions of years of mutations and death, resulting eventually in the creation of humankind. The Bible shows that there was no death prior to the disobedience of Adam, so Theistic Evolution is incompatible with the Bible. God saw that all His Creation was good. Death, both physical and spiritual is God's enemy, so not part of Creation pre-fall when God saw that everything was good. The first animal to die was the one God killed to provide coverings for Adam and Eve, a prefiguring of the physical death of Christ to redeem His People and His Creation from the curse of death. Gen 3:21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them. The theistic evolutionist is as gullible as Eve, believing the Devil's lie.

This is difficult for me because I love God and have no doubt that he is the Creator and that Jesus lived among us 2000 years ago but in the same time you’re asking me to be blind? Be blind and ignore fossil remains or Hubble telescope pictures?
Unless what we see is not the true reality and that’s a theory I can’t refute. A reality influenced by Satan? Maybe what we see is not the true reality and that’s an actual theory even scientifically, so I can get behind that. This would mean that I would have to accept the Bible more literally.

 

[Agios]

No I haven’t. I do know that it’s not exact and it gives you an approximation but that’s good enough because when something is dated to be thousands of years, one or two centuries of errors in dating seems “good enough”.

Lots of studies done on the errors, huge errors, not just by thousands of years.

 

[Grailhunter]

This is difficult for me because I love God and have no doubt that he is the Creator and that Jesus lived among us 2000 years ago but in the same time you’re asking me to be blind? Be blind and ignore fossil remains or Hubble telescope pictures?
Unless what we see is not the true reality and that’s a theory I can’t refute. A reality influenced by Satan? Maybe what we see is not the true reality and that’s an actual theory even scientifically, so I can get behind that. This would mean that I would have to accept the Bible more literally.

Like I said, I call it the Christian Matrix. Living in reality but believing fantasy or non-truths. Older people are better at this because they were introduced to it gradually. In 1878 we lite our homes with candles and oil lambs...less that 62 years later the first Atomic bomb was exploded. Then from candles to landing on the moon in less than a hundred years. It is a lot for people to adjust to.

Ole Joe grandpa can watch the football game on his big screen TV that is broadcasted from a satellite over 22,000 miles in space....then call his grandson over seas on his smart phone that has more than a thousand times the computing power than the computers that sent man to the moon....Microwave his lunch and cool down his house with central air conditioning. He then can get into his Ford pickup that has 35 processors in it and satellite radio and OnStar. He can drive to to church and see passenger jets in the sky. He can arrive at church and teach Sunday school saying that science is all bunk. It is fantasy.

The young people do not juggle this fantasy as well...so I am concerned about the youth....they know better and it does not help if they think their preacher is crazy. Or is so backward that they cannot relate to him. If he is wrong about science, what else is he wrong about. God is real, Christianity is real, history is real, and science is real....stay with the real. The youth is our future and the future of Christianity. Ancient concepts and understandings are best explained as such with God communicating with ancient people at their level of understanding. But still the message of the Bible is eternal and relevant.

 

[Stumpmaster]

Like I said, I call it the Christian Matrix. Living in reality but believing fantasy or non-truths. Older people are better at this because they were introduced to it gradually. In 1878 we lite our homes with candles and oil lambs...less that 62 years later the first Atomic bomb was exploded. Then from candles to landing on the moon in less than a hundred years. It is a lot for people to adjust to.

Ole Joe grandpa can watch the football game on his big screen TV that is broadcasted from a satellite over 22,000 miles in space....then call his grandson over seas on his smart phone that has more than a thousand times the computing power than the computers that sent man to the moon....Microwave his lunch and cool down his house with central air conditioning. He then can get into his Ford pickup that has 35 processors in it and satellite radio and OnStar. He can drive to to church and see passenger jets in the sky. He can arrive at church and teach Sunday school saying that science is all bunk. It is fantasy.

The young people do not juggle this fantasy as well...so I am concerned about the youth....they know better and it does not help if they think their preacher is crazy. Or is so backward that they cannot relate to him. If he is wrong about science, what else is he wrong about. God is real, Christianity is real, history is real, and science is real....stay with the real. The youth is our future and the future of Christianity. Ancient concepts and understandings are best explained as such with God communicating with ancient people at their level of understanding. But still the message of the Bible is eternal and relevant.

I don't debunk true science, just false science, and evolution is based on false science.

Criteria to meet for True Science:

• Observable.
• Measurable.
• Recordable.
• Repeatable.
• Predictable.

The Bible doesn't purport to be a science manual, and a long list of notable scientists have no problem being Bible-believers and Christians.

Answers in Genesis

 

[Grailhunter]

I don't debunk true science, just false science, and evolution is based on false science.

Criteria to meet for True Science:

• Observable.
• Measurable.
• Recordable.
• Repeatable.
• Predictable.

The Bible doesn't purport to be a science manual, and a long list of notable scientists have no problem being Bible-believers and Christians.

Answers in Genesis

LOL