Title: The Reliability of the Bible (Proof-Positive Provided?) Source:
YT URL Source:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAH_-Du2428 Published:Jun 5, 2019 Author:GENESIS APOLOGETICS Post Date:2019-06-10 11:25:47 by Liberator Keywords:BIBLE, GOD Views:7446 Comments:25
Is the Bible reliable?
Does it include prophecies about Jesus Christ that have come true? Has it been reliably copied over the centuries?
Is the Bible inerrant?
The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls help answer these questions!
Poster Comment:
Sequential, repeated evidence is provided for over two millennia of the very same prophecies and information.
Seems the premise is that the prophecies were fulfilled via the tenants of Christian theology. That would, to an extent, make them self-fulfilling prophecies.
I.e. if Isaiah had not written about a man being whipped four our iniquities, would the belief that the whipping Jesus received was because of our iniquities be part of Christian theology today?
Seems the premise is that the prophecies were fulfilled via the tenants of Christian theology. That would, to an extent, make them self-fulfilling prophecies.
A "premise" is a theory; This video demonstrated a lineage and repeatable documentation and proof of fulfilled prophecy. Proof simply does not get any more valid and credible than 2700 years of documentation.
Btw, "Christianity" did not exist in the days of Isaiah. Jesus Christ would not appear for hundreds of years. Isaiah 53 speak to it.
Yes, I did, and I don't find it very compelling for the reason I gave.
It seems you missed my point about Isaiah being a "self-fulfilling" prophecy. To put the question another way: Is there any source in the Bible that claims that Jesus was whipped for our iniquities that cannot be traced back to Isaiah? I imagine Paul wrote of it in one of his letters that is now in the Bible but if so and he was referring back to Isaiah, then that would not count as Paul could be said to be retrofitting the prophecy to create a new piece of Christian doctrine. In which case, it is not fulfilled prophecy at all.
Prophecies about historic events are one thing. But prophecies that find their fulfillment in the form of developed Christian doctrine are quite another and can easily be the *direct* result of the prophecy itself rather than something that came to pass independently.
The speaker at the end argues that a skeptic is choosing to rely on his own judgment about the Bible instead of the Bible's judgment about the Bible. But anyone who chooses to believe the Bible is still relying on his own judgment that the Bible is the WoG, is he not?
It is not possible for any man to disable his own sense of judgment in what he believes, whether Christian or not, or whether he believes the Bible is the WoG or not.
The speaker at the end argues that a skeptic is choosing to rely on his own judgment about the Bible instead of the Bible's judgment about the Bible. But anyone who chooses to believe the Bible is still relying on his own judgment that the Bible is the WoG, is he not?
The Bible also tells us the truth is written in our heart. If He dwells in us we know the Truth.
The Bible also warns of those who shall remain blinded of their own volition.
I have cited scripture, and would in these cases, but I'm not sure it would do any good :-(
The Bible also tells us the truth is written in our heart. If He dwells in us we know the Truth.
That much I agree with. We all know the truth, deep down.
The Bible also warns of those who shall remain blinded of their own volition.
I believe it is a virtue to be honest enough to question our own beliefs and seek truthful answers, and that what we believe not be swayed by fear of retribution either in this life or the next, whatever that may be, but instead be the result of reasoned and rational thought.
I have cited scripture, and would in these cases, but I'm not sure it would do any good :-(
It's likely it would not, just as the evidence I have provided you re: the Newton model would do no good and showing evidence the earth may be round would do no good. Would we say that being wrong about the shape of the earth would not be detrimental to one's eternal soul, but being wrong about theology is? Does it makes any sense at all that God would care about academic correctness on one subject and not another?
I would say that those who think He does grossly underestimate Him.
With respect and without putting too fine a point on it, after having recently read the OT all the way through (and having reread the NT) I find that it's not possible for me to generate much reverence for the Canaanite deity represented in those pages with regard to common morality or a general sense of righteousness. In many ways to my mind, the Old Testament suffers from a major defect similar to that found in the Quran (which BTW is an infinitely inferior text rhetorically, poetically and philosophically to the OT). I have read that book also in parts and I find much of it repellent in the extreme.
Nevertheless, the religious books of the Judaic religion have much to commend themselves, and its authors display a deep understanding of human nature in many places. It is also the predecessor to the New Testament faith which has a whole lot to recommend it and which has been tamed over time. The Romans employed it as a civil religion that produced a reliable citizenry and when necessary a reliable soldiery. So far, so good. Over the centuries, it has been bridled and habituated to accommodate a range of beliefs, interpretations and actions. We are no longer burned to a crisp on a stake for example for translating or criticizing Scripture.
Some of the finest people I know are confessed Christians, but the Old Books in great part, I cannot swallow them.
