Is the Bible God's word? Help please.....

by Freeandclear 47 Replies latest jw friends

  • cantleave

    Perry the article to which you refer talks about radiocarbon dating.

    "A radiocarbon study of select camel bones from the Aravah valley in the southern Levant extrapolates that the findings may indicate domesticated camels were not present anywhere in the region until the end of the 10th century BC"

    I thought you didn't believe in that science stuff!!

  • OneGenTwoGroups

    Just an FYI, (referenced by Perry) is owned by Matt Slick. His daughter came out as atheist a few years ago. You can Youtube Matt Dillahunty vs Matt Slick and see what a moron Slick is.

    Did you notice Perry's use of the phrase "the claims of skeptics"? As if what is being stated in this thread are just "claims" that are easily debunked. What Perry should have said, if he were intellectually honest, is that these sites have created apologetics for the many problems bibles have. Apologetics are many times, at their foundation, just baseless assertions made by fundamentalists that are desperate to square their beliefs with reality., Fox news, Watchtower, they should all go bowling together.

  • OneGenTwoGroups

    Where did Abraham get his Ishmael?

    This "friend of god" (you know, it was imputed up unto upon him as righteousness) boned a slave, that's how.

  • stuckinarut2

    You ask "is the bible gods word?"

    Well of course it is! It tells us that it is within its own pages...therefore it must be true...right?

    (sarcasm alert by the way)

  • jws

    OneGenTwoGroups wrote:

    Where did Abram get his Ismael?

    Aha! That brings up another contradiction:

    Genesis 22:2 - Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.

    Ishmael wasn't his son too?

  • Perry

    Thanks for bringing that up JWS. Some of the most powerful messages in the bible are regarding sonship.

    There are other instances where a different "sense" is sometimes applied to sonship:

    One example is Gideon, & his "seventy sons," and that other son, Abimelech, who never seems to get counted with the rest.

    Gideon had many sons:

    Now Gideon had seventy sons who were his direct descendants, for he had many wives. His concubine who was in Shechem also bore him a son, and he named him Abimelech. -Judges 8:30-31

    Note that while his concubine "bore him a son," the child was not counted amongst his "sons who were his direct descendants." In other words, the concubine bore a son for him, but the child was not his "son" in the same sense as these "direct descendants" were.

    Later, after the death of Gideon, Abimelech goes to the people of Shechem (where his concubine mother was from) and tries to persuade them to follow him instead of the seventy. Listen to how he appeals to them:

    And Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal went to Shechem to his mother’s relatives, and spoke to them and to the whole clan of the household of his mother’s father, saying, “Speak, now, in the hearing of all the leaders of Shechem, ‘Which is better for you, that seventy men, all the sons of Jerubbaal, rule over you, or that one man rule over you?’ Also, remember that I am your bone and your flesh.” -Judges 9:1-2

    Note that even Abimelech himself does not consider himself part of "all the sons of Jerubbaal." What the example from Abimelech's life shows us is that a "son" in one sense can be excluded from the list of "sons" in another sense. In the case of Abimelech, it was because he was born of a concubine and not by one of Gideon's wives.

    Was Ishmael a different kind of "son" than Isaac? It turns out he was, in a number of ways:

    Isaac was the "child of promise", Ishmael was the child of disobedience or unbelief. Ishmael was the result of Abraham and mainly Sarah's attempt to force the promises of God to come to pass through their own conniving and willfulness.

    Ishmael (like Abimelech,) was born of a concubine, and not by his father's own wife

    As a result, it was in Isaac that Abraham's descendants were to be named. (Gen. 21:12)

    So, was Ishmael Abraham's son? Yes! In one sense; according to the flesh.

    Was Isaac Abraham's "only son"? Yes! In another sense; according to the promise.

    I believe that this drama illustrates two powerful truths to the way life works in the universe that God has created:

    1. When a person, through their own willfulness tries to force the good things that God has promised to come to pass through their own designs and willfulness, then God allows this, but he also allows that person to be responsible for the results.

    Conversely, when a person allows God to work out his promises of good things in a believer's life, then He (God) becomes responsible for the results.

    We see a powerful testimony to this truth of what happens when believers take matters into their own hands with the Arab / Israeli conflict in the Middle East today - the descendants of the child of obedience (promise/faith through Issac) and the child of disobedience - (willfulness though Ishmael)

    2. Sonship with God does not come by way of our works, church affiliation, intelligence, etc., but only by faith.

    Abraham's "only son" came by his only wife, according to God's only promise, and thus, it was only in Isaac that Abraham's descendants would be named.

    Paul brings this theme to a conclusion in Galatians 3:

    Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. 8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. 9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham. 10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. 11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. 12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. 13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
  • FadeToBlack

    To the OP: I'd just like to second the recommendation to read "Who Wrote the Bible' by Richard Elliott Friedman. Nice intro to bible scholarship written in a way that non-scholars can appreciate.

  • jws

    Sorry Perry. The verse doesn't say anything about sonship according to a promise or according to anything else. It says "only son".

    This is what I'm talking about. Where a believer will squint and turn their head to the side and figure out a way, in a certain light and titled at the right angle, it might make sense. Which means the Bible is anything but the word of a creator - who would make his words clear for all. No, it's a puzzle to be solved. So God doesn't want followers unless they solve puzzles and riddles. Only problem is everybody solves those things differently. Thus hundreds of Christian faiths. And if on the other hand, you discard the book because the puzzles and riddles don't make sense, who's to blame? If you still believe god wrote it, then it's god's fault and you should suffer no ill consequences for not believing it. If you don't believe in god, then you can blame the mistakes on mere men who wrote it.

    Perry wrote:

    When a person, through their own willfulness tries to force the good things that God has promised to come to pass through their own designs and willfulness, then God allows this, but he also allows that person to be responsible for the results.

    This is another fallacy of poor deluded people. On the one hand they will tell you trust in God so that he can work his plan. But on the other you'll say things like "I'm praying for a job, or a spouse, or children" and it never happens. And they will tell you, well it won't happen just by praying. God will help you in your efforts. But you have to do something. Here, Abraham did something and you treat him as if he was being unfaithful.

    Here's another question about that whole incident. Why did God tell Abraham to sacrifice Isaac in the first place? Didn't god already foretell Isaac's destiny even before he was born? How could he let Abraham kill him? Of course, later in the story, god stopped it. So it was a test for Abraham? A little late wasn't it? Abraham was already promised his seed would become a mighty nation. Wouldn't the time to test be before this promise was made? See if he's worthy before you bless his seed? Or was this just a sick prank?

    That's an example of the logical fallacies of the Bible. A goat-herder telling a story might make those mistakes, but not the most intelligent being in the universe. And there are other such logical mistakes that make the Bible invalid.

    Perry, why don't you defend some of the other mistakes in the Bible. Like where Saul's daughter had 5 sons in one verse and "died without children" in another. Are you going to make up some stuff like they must have been adopted sons or sons by marriage. How about the choices Gad offered David? How many years of famine? Squint, tilt, dim the lights. See how you can spin the contradictions.


    Is the Bible God's word? Help please..

    Of course it is..

    All the stories are true as well,including the Flood and Noah`s Ark..


    Noah had a Wife named Joan..

    Joan was a Good Swimmer...But.. Always wore Armour..

    One day during the Flood..

    Joan fell over board into the water and drowned,because of the friggin Armour..

    We still have pictures of Noah's Wife to this Very Day..


    JOAN of ARK.......(Noahs Ark!)

    Image result for joan of arc

  • cofty

Share with others