How come so many people try to deny the Reliability of the Bible?
The most shocking part is some of them are Christians who do this... anyone got any answers? [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/whistle.gif[/img]
Printable View
How come so many people try to deny the Reliability of the Bible?
The most shocking part is some of them are Christians who do this... anyone got any answers? [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/whistle.gif[/img]
Not speaking for anyone in particular, but I have heard folks in the past speak about this, to a small degree. The translation from the original word into various languages then into to english over thousands of years, and the many many variations of the Bible that have come about since it was written in English have many skeptical that what they're reading was the original intent.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: elp6n</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not speaking for anyone in particular, but I have heard folks in the past speak about this, to a small degree. The translation from the original word into various languages then into to english over thousands of years, and the many many variations of the Bible that have come about since it was written in English have many skeptical that what they're reading was the original intent.
</div></div>
Yes I recall al those posts. But that is not a legitamate excuse because we have access to the original text of the Bible... The Hebrew and the Greek... do you think these have been changed also? I do not thnk they have. In Gods word it is said that "his" Word is infalliable and inspired by him.. do we believe that?
If you had proof of everything, faith would not be required (without faith it is impossible to please Him" Hebrews 11:6). Believing the Bible requires FAITH, and its mysteries can never be understood by a non-believer. True, its mysteries are hard enough for the believer who dedicates themselves to study.
"Faith is not believing God can, it is believing God will."
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes I recall al those posts.</div></div>
I never posted on those - just throwing in my 2 cents worth now.
We dont know if the original language texts have been changed or not, unless we have the one true original, and we don't.
I dont know many folks that go back and read the Bible through Hebrew and Greek texts either - they have no choice but to rely on the translated then translated and translated again versions.
I also understand that some books were orginally written in Aramaic - the language Jesus spoke.
We also know that some books were destroyed, some added, to the taste of whatever religious leader or ruler had the final word.
It has been altered to a great degree.
I'm not arguing the fact Faith is necessary.
He asked a specific question, and I gave one reason, that I have heard, why folks have trouble with taking the Bible literally. Something that has been altered over thousands of years cannot be taken literally in my opinion. It's open to interpretation and many folks have issues with that (taking faith in something that they think may or may not actually be the word of God).
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ut1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you had proof of everything, faith would not be required (without faith it is impossible to please Him" Hebrews 11:6). Believing the Bible requires FAITH, and its mysteries can never be understood by a non-believer. True, its mysteries are hard enough for the believer who dedicates themselves to study.
"Faith is not believing God can, it is believing God will." </div></div>
I think you may have misunderstood what i was trying to say. What I was trying to ask is do we believe that Gods Word is inpired by him, and is it infalliable? I understand we must have faith and all things cannot be proved.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: elp6n</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes I recall al those posts.</div></div>
I never posted on those - just throwing in my 2 cents worth now.
We dont know if the original language texts have been changed or not, unless we have the one true original, and we don't.
I dont know many folks that go back and read the Bible through Hebrew and Greek texts either - they have no choice but to rely on the translated then translated and translated again versions.
I also understand that some books were orginally written in Aramaic - the language Jesus spoke.
We also know that some books were destroyed, some added, to the taste of whatever religious leader or ruler had the final word.
It has been altered to a great degree.
</div></div>
The question was is the Word of God infalliable and inspired by him?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What I was trying to ask is do we believe that Gods Word is inpired by him, and is it infalliable?</div></div>
I think His word is infallable, but my point is some folks wonder what His word really is. Is what they're reading His word? Or was it the word of some ruler who ordered changes to the Bible maybe 1500 years ago...
Since we have the original texts...maybe someone will eventually translate them into contemporary language straight from the Hebrew and Greek texts sometime soon...the difference in my opinion would be quite signifigant.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: elp6n</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm not arguing the fact Faith is necessary.
He asked a specific question, and I gave one reason, that I have heard, why folks have trouble with taking the Bible literally. Something that has been altered over thousands of years cannot be taken literally in my opinion. It's open to interpretation and many folks have issues with that (taking faith in something that they think may or may not actually be the word of God). </div></div>
You are right, many do have issues with that. Is it because they chhose not to change the way they live and justify it? Is it because they have a hard time not being able to believe in something that they cannot see? Because to say everything has been changed, so therefor I will not read it nor apply it is inconceivable to me. How about you? [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/whistle.gif[/img]
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the difference in my opinion would be quite signifigant</div></div>
I agree with that statement. The Bible has been translated and altered numerous times, and there's no record of all the changes made. Is the gist of it the same? Perhaps so. Are specific stories, books the same? Likely not.
I take a quick look at bn.com and see over 20 different versions of the Bible for sale. If those 20 versions were taken and translated into another language/version another 20 times, and those taken and translated again another 20 times, there's 8000 new versions.
That was my general point way back when this was discussed previously.
Focus on the big issue, Jesus being the son of God, believe on him, etc.
Don't focus on well why did Jesus hang around a prostitute, why did he drink wine, etc.
Worrying about the small things is, in my opinion, why the church is so fractured. That is what splits the Christians, worrying about things that don't matter.
Did the Bible, in its original text say wine, did it say grape juice, was there really a word to translate it as anything but wine, did another language have a word for it, etc.
Honestly, I feel like one of the biggest things that is going to cause a lot of good Christians not to go to Heaven, is the fact that they are more worried about if someone should be allowed to wear makeup or not, or any other example you want to find.
A persons relationship with Christ, and them doing what they feel and are lead by their studies is what is going to be judged, not rather they followed through with what you thought.
Just a little addendum of what I mean
I took Spanish in high school and college. There was several phrases/words that we use daily, that didn't directly translate to Spanish, so you find something almost the same. Now translate the 'almost the same' word into another language and you get something that may be 30% different than what you started out as.
One thing I always heard mentioned was, we have the story of Jesus being born, we have him teaching, we have him in the wilderness and then into ministry. Where was the rest of his years? If he's the son of God why did his 'teens' not matter? Did he suddenly do nothing, did he go throw rocks at donkeys then? When you have incompletions, you have people asking about what happened.
Now you can think that something is right, something is wrong, because you read something or you read it and got something out of what you read. Obviously since there are so many study Bibles, with different opinions/views, its impossible to have a '100% set' view of what things are. If that was the case, you wouldn't have religious leaders who talk about 'getting something new' out of a particular verse.
Simple one for you, burning bush, burning shrub, burning tree....what was it? Now you can say its one or another, and maybe it doesn't matter, but how many other things are there that are like that.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I took Spanish in high school and college. There was several phrases/words that we use daily, that didn't directly translate to Spanish, so you find something almost the same. Now translate the 'almost the same' word into another language and you get something that may be 30% different than what you started out as.</div></div>
A HAH! That's it!
For those curious, try out babelfish.altavista.com
translate a few phrases into one language, and translate the result back into English and see what you get.
"Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer had a very shiny nose" translates into "Rudolph das rote gerochene Ren hatte eine sehr glänzende Nase" in German, and translates back into English as "Rudolph the red smelled Ren had a very much shining nose"
[img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif[/img]
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: elp6n</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I took Spanish in high school and college. There was several phrases/words that we use daily, that didn't directly translate to Spanish, so you find something almost the same. Now translate the 'almost the same' word into another language and you get something that may be 30% different than what you started out as.</div></div>
A HAH! That's it!
For those curious, try out babelfish.altavista.com
translate a few phrases into one language, and translate the result back into English and see what you get.
"Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer had a very shiny nose" translates into "Rudolph das rote gerochene Ren hatte eine sehr glänzende Nase" in German, and translates back into English as "Rudolph the red smelled Ren had a very much shining nose"
[img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif[/img]
</div></div>
Here is the big shocker........ God does not have a language like we use.... He speaks and every tongue will understand.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here is the big shocker........ God does not have a language like we use.... He speaks and every tongue will understand. </div></div>
Since when were we talking about what language God speaks? I dont think there's any doubt to that. That's not even at issue.
We're talking about the Bible and what WE earthly mortals understand. We are the ones translating this Bible hundreds - thousands of times over in hundreds of versions (if not more). Editing books, adding books, deleting books.
He can speak all and understand all, but we cannot.
Remember the Tower of Babel?
Genesis 11:6-7 as follows:
6 And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. 7 Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.
And here are 10 more versions of Genesis 11:6
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">NASB: The LORD said, "Behold, they are one people, and they all have the same language. And this is what they began to do, and now nothing which they purpose to do will be impossible for them. (NASB ©1995)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GWT: The LORD said, "They are one people with one language. This is only the beginning of what they will do! Now nothing they plan to do will be too difficult for them. (GOD'S WORD®)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KJV: And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASV: And Jehovah said, Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language; and this is what they begin to do: and now nothing will be withholden from them, which they purpose to do.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BBE: And the Lord said, See, they are all one people and have all one language; and this is only the start of what they may do: and now it will not be possible to keep them from any purpose of theirs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DBY: And Jehovah said, Behold, the people is one, and have all one language; and this have they begun to do. And now will they be hindered in nothing that they meditate doing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JPS: And the LORD said: 'Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language; and this is what they begin to do; and now nothing will be withholden from them, which they purpose to do.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WBS: And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WEB: Yahweh said, "Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is what they begin to do. Now nothing will be withheld from them, which they intend to do.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YLT: and Jehovah saith, 'Lo, the people is one, and one pronunciation is to them all, and this it hath dreamed of doing; and now, nothing is restrained from them of that which they have purposed to do.</div></div>
-----------
I'll use this as an example as to why people don't like to respond to your posts. You're condescending. Here's the big shocker - you're sarcastic. That post was an attempt at trying to shoot down my argument, but the only thing you could come up with was off target.
I think when you talk about reliability, you also need to realize how people communicated several thousand years ago. News, history, and culture was passed along through the spoken word more so than the written word. Remember that only the privelaged were educated. So, for centuries, there may have only been a few written copies of biblical texts. Throw in the language barriers and translations, as well as the changing ebbs and flows of the world, as a whole, and I'm convinced that what was said and written then is not the same as it is now. I will also go on record to say that it is way too easy to hide behind scripture as a means of justifying something. I used the Westboro Baptist Church as my previous example. Those folks justify all their hatred and venom as coming from the same book you all constantly harp on everybody reading. Televangelists are constantly coming up with passages on why we should send them money. As sinning human beings, we are all capable of twisting the words to make them say what we want. I seriously doubt that one author actually sat down and wrote the Bible in one sitting. As with any piece of work, even forum posts, one's own opinion can be included into stories and passages. Faith, to me, is the most important aspect of religion and spirituality. I think you find faith more in living than in reading. I've spoken my peace. Fire away preachers! [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/cool.gif[/img]
39 authors have been credited with the writing of the scriptures. From beginning to end, its all about Christ. I take the Bible to be a true and accurate account, and as I've mentioned in other posts: God doesn't need man to preserve His Word. 99% of modern theologians agree that the "modern" translations are accurate translations. I have a Bible printed in Oxford, England that dates back to 1896 that is exactly like my 2005 version, word for word.
So what some of you are basically saying is that it is not credible due to the time factor, poor education, word of mouth, phrases of the day, etc. Then, by using that logic, we shouldn't believe any of our history books either. After all, they were written by fallible men.
Very true, but history books have changed throughout time, also. I would never doubt the true number of authors who wrote the Bible, for that is not my point. My point is that the Bible, as we know it, has to have changed throughout history, in due part to some of the examples I gave. Remember that books and newspapers weren't massed produced until somebody invented the printing press. And I dare say that illiteracy was pretty high and those that could read had to spread the words in the Bible by preaching. I'm no historian, but I have enough common historical sense to know that for generations, knowledge was passed on by word of mouth. I'm sure that all the teachings and scriptures in the Bible were probably, and I say probably because I am making an educated guess rather than stating a documented fact, written down after they had been passed on verbally for quite some time.
Just going online, something simple.
I put Thou Shall Not Kill, translated it to Spanish than from Spanish to French, and then from French to English
You will not kill
Now then, thou shall not kill and you will not kill. Very similar but will 2 people take them the same? Not necessarily.
Go to your Bible and read, you'll have 2 gospels telling different versions of the same things. Why? Now was Luke, being a physician more adept at writing than say Mark? I would harbor a bit of yet.
A Bible dated 1896 is 111 years old. A nice number, but compared to nearly 2000 years, its a bit small, no?
Just found this and it was rather interesting, as it, I think proves we are both right.
The Bible is made up of sixty-six books. It was written over a period of roughly 1500 years by about 34 men. An exception to this is the Catholic Doughy version, which has seventy-two books. However, these additional six books added to the Bible by the Roman Catholic Church are spurious ,or of doubtful origin, which the Church itself admits. Nonetheless, the sixty-six books of all other versions convey God's message quite adequately.
There are many reasons for different versions of the Bible. Mainly the different versions of the Bible came about because of the codices used to translate them from ... some are lengthy in description others assume you already understand what the subject is. Often the language used does not translate well from one tongue to another. Hence, the old saying, "It loses something in the translation."
As an example of language problems there is a translation of the Bible that was written for Eskimos or the Inuet nation. Now sheep are not something that an Eskimo would find roaming past their igloo. In fact, it is not an animal that an Eskimo would be at all familiar with. Therefore the translators when they came to scriptures in the first chapter of John stating "Behold the Lamb of God", they translated the Lamb of God as "Behold, the animal that looks like a baby caribou of God." (Notice that the saying begins to make sense?)
Now if the first Bible you read referred to an animal that looks like a baby caribou, and you had no idea what a caribou was; cross referencing it with most any other Bible would clearly place the image of a lamb in your mind. So in spite of the fact that there is a big difference between a lamb and a caribou the translation does not effect the integrity of the message. The message itself remains the same.
Most of the codices used are incomplete and are completed from others that are complete in that portion. One codex may be physically missing the beginning, another may be missing the end. However, together they make up the complete manuscript.
Are there errors, accidental or deliberate, in the Bible? Yes there are. It has been stated there are as many as 20,000 errors in the King James Version. Most of these have to do with our indexing system and spelling. The verse of one Bible may begin two or three words above or below the verse of another. But in the end it comes down to this. One Bible might use the word 'water' and another might use the word 'aqua,' but they both clearly mean that wet stuff that fills up the oceans.
Q: The Greek word 'agape' is translated both as 'charity' and 'love' in many places in the new testament in the KJV. What is the difference?
A: Almost all common Greek or Hebrew words will be translated into more than one English word at different places in the Bible. There is no such thing as word for word translation from one language to another. That is, the words of one language do not perfectly correspond to the words of another language. As these words are used in different contexts and with different shades of meaning, a decision has to be made on which English word is the best to use in each case.
Charity is an interesting case in the King James Bible because the 1Corinthians 13 passage (which uses charity 9 times) had been translated using the word love in Tyndale's New Testament of 1526 - 85 years before the King James translation. Certainly, it was not the case that the King James translators did not know that love might have fit. Rather, they purposely chose charity as the word to use there. Evidently, they saw an importance in distinguishing some of the uses of agape in a specific way. We will look at scripture to see if we can discover what specific nuances of the word are being brought out when charity is used. The use of love is the more general use and will not be discussed here in detail.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ut1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">99% of modern theologians agree that the "modern" translations are accurate translations.</div></div>
This just in--65.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
Do you have anything to support that claim ut1? Or was it just an opinion that you hold of theologians as you see it, and it just so happened to support the rest of your point by coincidence? Came from a Gallup Poll maybe? [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif[/img]
Also, they can say they're accurate, but what about a quantity on that accuracy? I'm sure a lot of theologians have seen things they don't feel to be accurate about the Bible. You line up about 10 theologians (note: THEOlogians = experts on religion in general, not just Christian ones), I'd guarantee you at least 5 of them would count the Bible as being less than 80% accurate, and maybe 3 more would count it about 90% or less. That's just a bit of pure conjecture on my part, but when you've got a lot of conflicting stories and you take a historical view on things, the Bible is hard to believe 100% for it's historical accounts.
The remainder of the stuff that really shouldn't matter whether it's accurate or not are the things that give us guidance in times of need. The things that give us comfort, that give us insight into a Christian lifestyle and how to have a relationship with God daily.
To say the Bible isn't 100% accurate isn't blasphemy, it's common sense. What's really needed to be remembered by all of us is that it's the inspirational things in the Bible that need to be focused on, the things that uplift others and teach us how to live better lives for God. That's what's important.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoeburnCane</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=ut1]99% of modern theologians agree that the "modern" translations are accurate translations.</div></div>
This just in--65.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
Do you have anything to support that claim ut1? Or was it just an opinion that you hold of theologians as you see it, and it just so happened to support the rest of your point by coincidence? Came from a Gallup Poll maybe? [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif[/img]
I agree with UT 1... but anyway here is a statement that you made:"To say the Bible isn't 100% accurate isn't blasphemy, it's common sense". My question is this: Do you believe that the Word of God was inspired by God? Do you believe that the Word of God is infalliable?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Pac-Man</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you believe that the Word of God was inspired by God? Do you believe that the Word of God is infalliable? </div></div>
First question: Yes...anything spoken in prayer to you or anything that you read that you feel the presence of God in was inspired by God. Any "word of God" is inspired by Him--it's His words. If it doesn't have his inspiration and you as a believer can't feel his presence in it, I don't care what man claims it as a "Word of God", it's not.
Second question: The Bible? No, I don't believe in it's infallibility due to the fact that it's had too many men's hands and interjected opinions over hundreds of years of development & translation. Any true "word of God" would be infallible though.
That's the critical answers to both questions using a bit of common sense.
The answers of someone that's been indoctrinated from birth and afraid to use their common sense or knowledge of history would go like this...
First question: Yes, of course, it's His word.
Second question: Yes, it's God's word, He's perfect in all ways.
See the difference? THINK a little bit people. God created brains too. Don't forget to use them.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoeburnCane</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Pac-Man</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you believe that the Word of God was inspired by God? Do you believe that the Word of God is infalliable? </div></div>
First question: Yes...anything spoken in prayer to you or anything that you read that you feel the presence of God in was inspired by God. Any "word of God" is inspired by Him--it's His words. If it doesn't have his inspiration and you as a believer can't feel his presence in it, I don't care what man claims it as a "Word of God", it's not.
Second question: The Bible? No, I don't believe in it's infallibility due to the fact that it's had too many men's hands and interjected opinions over hundreds of years of development & translation. Any true "word of God" would be infallible though.
That's the critical answers to both questions using a bit of common sense.
The answers of someone that's been indoctrinated from birth and afraid to use their common sense or knowledge of history would go like this...
First question: Yes, of course, it's His word.
Second question: Yes, it's God's word, He's perfect in all ways.
See the difference? THINK a little bit people. God created brains too. Don't forget to use them. </div></div>
Good answer.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sup-rbeast</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Since we have the original texts...maybe someone will eventually translate them into contemporary language straight from the Hebrew and Greek texts sometime soon...the difference in my opinion would be quite signifigant. </div></div>
So, you're now a language expert...and I thought you were a mere English teacher! lol
Well..to major in English you have to have a "History of the English Language" class. And if English can morph as much as it has in 900 years, surely other languages morph as well. And I still think the difference would be quite signifigant.
You "think", huh? Based on conjecture? Bias? opinion?
Nope...based on common sense...and the ability to deduce.
Deduction is always performed through the eyes of the deducer!
Well that explains deduction...but I guess you are saying you agree about the common sense part.