critical thinking made ez

Amos, here are some examples where the we can prove the Bible is the Truth.

Amos only writes the Truth: The Amos-Bible was written by Amos: Therefore, the Amos-Bible is the Truth.

Given that God exists and only dictates the Truth: Given that the writers of the bible only wrote what God dictated and text was never changed or modified: The Bible is the Truth

______________________________________________
Here is a scary one:
God can dictate words but can't write on anything but stone: Therefore, to keep the Bible from weighing 50 tons, God had to have humans write the Bible.

[ January 07, 2002: Message edited by: critical thinking made ez ]</p>

Amos

______________________________________________
<strong>Here is a scary one:
God can dictate words but can't write on anything but stone: Therefore, to keep the Bible from weighing 50 tons, God had to have humans write the Bible.
</strong>[/QUOTE]

The bible is just the inspired word of God and was not written by humans because humans are not inspired. The bible was written by men who have the mind of God. Is that so difficult to understand? Just because you cannot conceive this to be possible only means that you do not have this mind and therefore cannot be the judge here. If you did "all would be clear" and there would be no paradoxes or obscurities in the bible and you would be able to "judge the living and the dead."

Amos

[ January 07, 2002: Message edited by: Amos ]</p>

Muad'Dib

I'm not quite sure what she means by Greek and Hebrew translations. The original manuscripts of Genesis were in Hebrew; the originals of the NT were in Greek; and the most frequently used Gk translation of the Hebrew OT (plus the apocrypha) that was considered to be "the scripture" by early Christians is called the Septuagint.

Logos means far more than just "word," and does not, so far as I am aware, refer specifically to written words above spoken. Rather, it symbolizes the fundamental reason, order, and rationality of the universe.

I would very much like to know what she means by "in literal context," as the context that she seems to claim is obvious is not one that I have ever seen before.

Genesis, being written in Hebrew, uses a Hebrew word, not "hRama," a Greek word.

It does not say explicitly that the Word was made flesh through Jesus, although such is certainly implied.

Since John was originally written in Greek, any of its subsequent translations into Hebrew are irrelevant in this discussion.

(clarity...)

[ January 07, 2002: Message edited by: Muad'Dib ]</p>

Muad'Dib

Biblical Criticism & Archaeology might be a better candidate for textual questions, though if it's a general discussion on religion you're after, you're in the right place.

[ January 07, 2002: Message edited by: Muad'Dib ]</p>

SaguaroJen

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I was the one who asked a group of moms if the Bible had to be true for Christianity to be true for them as individuals. Most of the responses I got were pretty straightforward yes or no types but the one I quoted threw me a bit. Thanks for the help with it. (Especially Muad'Dib who spoke nice and slowly for me!)

Jen

Amos

You're welcome Jen and come again to the place where wisdom is unlimited and scriptures are never confusing.

Muad'Dib

Glad to help, Jen. How's the discussion going, BTW?