Validity of the Bible

Debates: 0

Posts: 6,160

3

4

8

08.04.2024 04:01PM

3

4

8

08.04.2024 04:01PM

Genesis 3

8

Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden.

9

But the LORD God called to the man, "Where are you?"

10

He answered, "I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid."

11

And he said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?"

12

The man said, "The woman you put here with me--she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it."

13

Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?" The woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate."

14

So the LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all the livestock and all the wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.

15

And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring [1] and hers; he will crush [2] your head, and you will strike his heel."

16

To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."

17

To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, `You must not eat of it,' "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life.

18

It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field.

19

By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return."

20

Adam [3] named his wife Eve, [4] because she would become the mother of all the living.

#32

Debates: 0

Posts: 6,160

3

4

8

08.04.2024 04:04PM

3

4

8

08.04.2024 04:04PM

You can see why Albert Einstein said: "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish.

#33

Debates: 3

Posts: 56

0

5

08.04.2024 06:28PM

0

5

08.04.2024 06:28PM

-->

@Stephen

I guess I may have misunderstood the question then. If you ask me how much of the Bible on a literal and surface level, then I think there are many human flaws. However, those flaws do not translate to the corruption of the message. I believe the Bible is true, but it has also been written through humans, and thus it contains human elements and mistakes. But I do not believe that these human mistakes in the Bible invalidate its divine inspiration or authority.

I hope this answers the question once and for all.

#34

Debates: 3

Posts: 56

0

5

08.04.2024 06:35PM

0

5

08.04.2024 06:35PM

-->

@Mall

Do believe the scripture teach all reject God?

Do I believe that the scriptures teach that everybody rejects God? That's a great question. The scriptures teach us that all people are sinners and fall short of God's glory, but they do not teach that all people consciously or definitively reject God. The Bible presents a nuanced view of human sinfulness and the relationship between humanity and God. Passages such as Romans 3:23 tell us we have all sinned and fall short of God's perfect standards for heaven. In Acts 17:26-27, Paul acknowledges that people have the potential to seek God and find Him because He is near to everyone. The Bible also states God wants everyone to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4), and it would be rather cruel if there was no way to obtain this salvation.

While all people are affected by original sin and personal sin, this does not mean that everyone rejects God outright. The Church believes in the possibility of salvation for all and emphasizes that God’s grace is available to everyone. Through free will, individuals can accept or reject God’s grace, but the potential for repentance and conversion remains.

#35

Debates: 0

Posts: 8,566

3

2

08.04.2024 06:48PM

3

2

08.04.2024 06:48PM

-->

@CatholicApologetics

I guess I may have misunderstood the question then. If you ask me how much of the Bible on a literal and surface level, then I think there are many human flaws. However, those flaws do not translate to the corruption of the message. I believe the Bible is true, but it has also been written through humans, and thus it contains human elements and mistakes. But I do not believe that these human mistakes in the Bible invalidate its divine inspiration or authority.

I hope this answers the question once and for all.

As I suspected from the beginning. You would be, and are, full of contradiction/s.

#36

Debates: 379

Posts: 1,589

4

08.04.2024 06:49PM

4

08.04.2024 06:49PM

-->

@CatholicApologetics

Well being that you used the words "definitely" and "consciously", do they teach all people non definitely and non consciously reject God?

#37

Debates: 3

Posts: 56

0

5

08.04.2024 06:52PM

0

5

08.04.2024 06:52PM

Wylted, I was not originally going to respond to your argument, but I feel like I have to respond to the following:

However. Hell is not fire and brimstone. It is merely separation from God, or as far away as you can get from an omnipresent entity. Basically you have been lied to about what hell is. There is less pain and suffering in hell than there is on earth.

Hell is fundamentally the state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed. This separation is the most profound suffering, as it is the ultimate loss of the beatific vision and the presence of God, who is the source of all goodness and joy. Descriptions of hell in the Bible often use vivid imagery, such as unquenchable fire (Mark 9:43), outer darkness (Matthew 25:30), and a place where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matthew 13:42). Revelation 14:11 depicts hell as the eternal torment and unrest for those there. It definitely seems that there will be more pain and suffering in hell than there is on Earth. Catholic teaching holds that the suffering in hell is greater than any suffering experienced on Earth because it is eternal and involves the complete absence of God’s grace and love.

Because God is the source of all goodness and joy, separation from Him would mean to be excluded from happiness, peace, and love. The Bible certainly does not depict hell to be a peaceful place. It seems like there will be more suffering in hell than on Earth.

#38

Debates: 3

Posts: 56

0

5

08.04.2024 06:55PM

0

5

08.04.2024 06:55PM

-->

@Stephen

As I suspected from the beginning. You would be, and are, full of contradiction/s.

I have remained steadfast in the beliefs I have been trying to communicate with you. I guess we had a different understanding of the question, but not once have I changed by opinion. Which remains: I believe the Bible is God's Word, and humans have not corrupted the salvific message. On the surface level, which was not the question I was initially attempting to answer, there are elements you can consider to be human flaws (such as grammatical mistakes).

#39

Debates: 3

Posts: 56

0

5

08.04.2024 07:02PM

0

5

08.04.2024 07:02PM

-->

@Mall

I'd say it's up for interpretation. For example, the Bible teaches that all born with original sin have sinned, so you can interpret our sinful nature as a rejection from God. Because everyone has sinned, then everyone has rejected God in one form or another.

This is only one interpretation. I'd recommend reading the Bible, starting with the Gospels.

#40

Debates: 0

Posts: 8,566

3

2

08.04.2024 07:27PM

3

2

08.04.2024 07:27PM

-->

@CatholicApologetics

As I suspected from the beginning. You would be, and are, full of contradiction/s.
I have remained steadfast in the beliefs I have been trying to communicate with you.

You are even now contradicting you own statements.

You have, on one hand claimed the bible is without flaws, while on the other have admitted to there actually being flaws i.e. mistakes: human mistakes and on a few occasions now. Its all there for anyone following the thread to see for themselves. And in very typical apologist fashion, you have attempted to divert from your original claim concerning as you say "the perfect and flawless words of the bible" and are attempting to make this thread about "the message", of which the OP mentions nothing.

I guess we had a different understanding of the question

DID YOU NOT READ THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD?

Here you go;

Validity of the Bible

Author Owen_T

You see, nothing either in the title nor the op that asks about, comments about or even touches on "the message".

There are elements you can consider to be human flaws (such as grammatical mistakes).#38

I am glad it was you that wrote that. You do realise the massive implications of what you have written there, don't you?

I shall await Owen-T' return

#41

Debates: 3

Posts: 56

0

5

08.04.2024 07:39PM

0

5

08.04.2024 07:39PM

-->

@Stephen

I had assumed we were initially talking about the message of the Bible. I later had a suspicion that we were not talking about the same thing, so I made an attempt to clarify [1]. Since then, I have accommodated my response to answer your question [2] [3] [4], which was not about the message but about the literal text of the Bible. I thought I was articulating my responses in a manner which was easy to understand. I initially thought we were on the same page in regards to what the question entails but I suppose we were not. Ultimately I answered two different questions for your understanding. I hope this clears up the miscommunication once and for all.

As for the title of your threat, Validity of the Bible, once again I would assume you are talking about its message. The question "Is the Bible true or false?" rephrased as "Is what the Bible claims, like the resurrection, true or false?" seems pretty logical to me so I assumed we were talking about the message. I apologize if I understood this incorrectly.

#42

Debates: 332

Posts: 9,824

4

6

10

08.04.2024 07:40PM

4

6

10

08.04.2024 07:40PM

-->

@WyIted

Hell is not fire and brimstone. It is merely separation from God, or as far away as you can get from an omnipresent entity. Basically you have been lied to about what hell is. There is less pain and suffering in hell than there is on earth.

Uh, stop trying to make Christianity look good.

#43

Debates: 0

Posts: 8,566

3

2

08.04.2024 08:01PM

3

2

08.04.2024 08:01PM

-->

@CatholicApologetics

I had assumed we were initially talking about the message of the Bible.

"we"?

Stop it! You attempted to divert to "the message" only once your own contradictions had been pointed out to you by me. Your claim of "the message" didn't even enter the dialogue until YOU mentioned it HERE> #11

As for the title of your threat, Validity of the Bible,

I'll assume you mean thread? And once again you fail to take in whose THREAD this is and who authored it although I have clearly pointed both out to you.

once again I would assume you are talking about its message.

I gave you absolutely no reason to assume that.

The question "Is the Bible true or false?"

Nope there is no question to the title , Go see for yourself. The question/s come in the OP. Please learn to read what it is that you actually intend to comment on.

rephrased as "Is what the Bible claims, like the resurrection, true or false?"

Wrong again. The OP, unless he wants to clarify further, appears to be content that the resurrection is valid because he makes the point of saying; " Gra[n]ted, there is evidence for Christianity and the resurrection" #1. Which I may challenge him on later.

Ultimately I answered two different questions for your understanding.

I understood perfectly both the TITLE and the two part question posed by the OP. I had no misunderstanding whatsoever. I also know that I am not the author of this thread, whereas , you don't.

#44

Debates: 379

Posts: 1,589

4

08.04.2024 08:03PM

4

08.04.2024 08:03PM

-->

@CatholicApologetics

If you're sinning , you're going contrary to God. How can you go contrary without rejection?

I believe the answer to the original question is flat out "yes".

You can say man has freewill but it will never be the will of the spirit but the will of the flesh according to the scripture .

#45

Debates: 332

Posts: 9,824

4

6

10