KFC WRITES:

This is what I believe as well. In the Holy Bible, God Himself speaks to us as a loving Father to His children. When we read it, God who is not limited by time or space speaks to us just as He did to Moses, the prophets, and the New Testament writers. Sacred Scripture isn't meant to confirm actual history (although it does in some cases) as much as it's written as salvation history. Through reading the Bible, God can give us insights and touch us in a way that will help us in our unique experiences through this journey called life.



Right. When we read it, it's like dialing God on the phone. He says Hello. His words invite a response from us...in prayer and through our life's choices...There is no other kinds of book out there that allows this kind of communication with God...from this I would say the Word of God is living and effective.


KFC WRITES:

Danielost posts:

Exactly. While none of the original manuscripts in the handwriting of the original writers exist, some of the very ancient transcriptions have survived the years. In centuries past there were drastic differences found in Protestant and Catholic translations and thus many disagreements about what the original books actually said. Progress in archaeology, linguistics, and history has helped scholars reach agreement regarding the texts.

These manuscripts were formed into the collection we know as the Old Testament. The Septuagint begun about 250BC and completed about 100BC was the most important and earliest translation in Greek and Aramaic, the only language that most of them understood at the time. It would be the one that was widely used in Palestine and distributed throughout the Mediterranian world during the time of Christ and for the 1st Century or longer into the Christian era. The Apostles of Christ used this translation most often in their teaching.

There was also another collection in use that came to be known as the Palestinian. The Septuagint and Palestinian collections were honored by different Jewish communities and neither of these collections reached their definitive form until after the time of Christ. The Alexandrian (Septuagint) collection was accepted by Christians as their Old Testament, and the Palestinian was set by a group of Jewish scholars about 100AD partially in reaction to the Christian use of the Septuagint collection.

One very important thing you completly missed. I light turning from green to red isn't History, it is just an event.

Peoples interperttion of how and event effects us is a better description of what History is, and more importantly, it is what gets written down in history books.

The exact datews of when a president was in office, isn't history, it is trivia. What that president did during office, what the political/social/economic conditions were are the important parts of history, and we all know that, that is open to interpertation.

For instance, if I ask the history of "President Clinton", what would I get?
If I went to Rwanda, and asked that question, what would I get?
If i asked a Republican, what would I get?
If i asked a Democrate, what would I get?

Bryan Harstad posts:

Everything in the Bible is true when it is understood and interpreted in its proper context. It's true becasue it's the inspired Word of God and God can neither deceive or be deceived. This means that God inspired the human authors to teach the truths needed for our salvation. Regarding history, the Holy Bible is our salvation history. God then gave us the Holy Bible to help us answer great questions in life...Why are we here? What's the source of created things? Is there a God? How ought we to live? What happens to us when we die? When reading Sacred Scripture we are conversing with the living God, challenged to believe and hope, to love and give, to sacrifice and share, to forgive and be forgiven, to grow and trust. For me reading the Bible is a starting point for prayer.

Also regarding the Holy Bible and history, aided by archaeological finds, historians have been able to obtain more accurate picture of ancient times as well as almost every aspect of life mentioned. They've been able to document real historical truth and to differentiate the non-historical parts of the Bible from the historical parts(which KFC has referred to as in parables, stories, songs, etc.).

It is no small wonder that we have problems discerning the meaning of Sacred Scripture...besides proper translations, the Bible must be interpreted--- by going back to the time and place and discover what the author originally intended to express. For example look at when Christ says in St. Luke 14:26, "If any man come to Me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife and children, and brethren and sisters, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." Does that mean we must detest our family? Or did the Aramaic spoken by Christ mean something else?

KFC POSTS in #8

Alas, even today we still have a discrepancy between our Holy Bibles. Catholic Bibles have 73 Books and the Protestant ones have only 66.

Above, I mentioned two different collections...the Septuagint collection that was completed in 100BC and the Palestinian one decided in 100AD. The Septuagint Old Testament collection consisting of an exact translation of the 46 Books of inspired Hebrew texts(later translated into Latin by St. Jerome in the early 400s and then translated into English in the Douay Rheims) is the one the Catholic Church, who from the time of Christ, has always used.

What is amazing is the story behind the Old Testament translation into the Greek called the Septuagint made in the 3rd century before the coming of Christ. Septuagint means seventy. The Septuagint was made by 70 Jerusalem Jews under 2 leaders who didn't participate in the work of the translation. They were translators learned in the Hebrew language, who were sent to ALexandria by the Jewish High priest Eleaser of Jerusalem to translate into Greek the Divine Books then extant.

The Septuagint was made by the 70 each working independently of each other and without consulting each other. There work was so identical, so exactly alike that it was said by rabbis to be as though some invisible prompter has whispered into the ears of each.

One can reasonably believe the Septuagint was providential. It enabled the knowledge of the Old Law, its Divine prophecies, and their culmination in the coming of the Messias to be spread among the Gentiles who did not know the Hebrew language. The general expectation of the coming of "the great king who was to arise among the Jews", such as caused the Magi to return to Bethlehem, was due to this Greek version of the OLd Testament.

Greek was the world language when the Septuagint translation was made. Heberew as a language was on the decline among Jews long before those days. That is no doubt why all but one of the NT were written in Greek. During the days of the second temple, Aramaic was the language spoken by Jews of Palestine. As a matter of fact, Hebrew was so hardly known that a translator stood beside the reader in the synagogue to translate the Hebrew into Aramaic.

The Septuagint translation was initially used by everyone. It's authenticity or integrity was not questioned by the Jews until after the Messias came into His own, after He was rejected by most of them, and the early Christian Church had taken the place of the synagogue.

It is the Catholic Chruch who has the authority that warrants Catholics believeing with absolute certainity that the Septuagint texts contains all of the Divinely inspired books of the OT and therefore the inadequacy and unauthenticity of the Protestant canon.

We know this first of all becasue in those days the integrity of the sacred books was so faithfully safeguarded from corruption by a body of Jewish scribes that the appearance of the Septuagint would not have been greeted with enthusiam everywhere if it were not an exact translation of the 46 books of inspired Hebrew texts.

The canon of the 39 OT books in Protestant Bibles is of unsound historic standing for it is definitively of Jewish non-Palestinian origin, having been agreed upon as the canon of the Jews during their dispersion after "the glory had departed" from Jewry, a "glory" which was theirs when they had an Aaronic priesthood, a Temple, a Sanhedrin, sacrifices, and a reasonable hope of the coming of the Messias, as He had not yet come.

Secondly, while the Catholic Church depends upon the use of the Septuagint by Christ and His Apostles, as well as Tradition, to sustain her declaration that the 46 Books are writings inspired by God, she has her infallible power exercised during the Councils at Rome in 382, Hippo in 393, and Carthage in 397 to eliminate all doubts on the part of Catholics as to their Divine authenticity.

LW posts #40:


There was little dissent until the 16th century when Martin Luther and other Protestants rejected the Alexandrian Septuagint in favor of the Palestinian Jewish list. In 1546, the Council of Trent defined the Alexandrian as the official list of 43 OT books for Catholics and reaffirmed the traditional 27 Books of the NT. As a result Catholics and Protestants today share the same NT, while the Catholic OT contains 7 more books: Tobit, Judith, First and Second Machabees, Wisdom, SIrach, sometimes called Ecclesiasticus and Barach plus additional Esther and Daniel. The Protestant churches do not nor do they assume to have such infallible power. So, the Protestant question of the authenticity and cononicity of the books in the Bible is dependent upon mere human judgment, which is faulty and thus questionable.

Everything in the Bible is true when it is understood and interpreted in its proper context. It's true becasue it's the inspired Word of God and God can neither deceive or be deceived.

Couple things wrong with above statement.
1. Man an be decieved.
2. Bible changes depending on what version of god you believe in.
3. Comes down to blind faith.

How ought we to live?

Society determins that, god had nothing to do with the following: slavery, womens rights, war, etc...

Also regarding the Holy Bible and history, aided by archaeological finds, historians have been able to obtain more accurate picture of ancient times as well as almost every aspect of life mentioned. They've been able to document real historical truth and to differentiate the non-historical parts of the Bible from the historical parts(which KFC has referred to as in parables, stories, songs, etc.).

How many historical inacuracys have been pointed out in the bible?

If you take out the double negatives in the scripture you quoted, it makes perfect sense to me, it says you have to love mother, father, etc.., then you can become a disciple.

"If any man come to Me, and love his father, and mother, and wife and children, and brethren and sisters, yea and his own life also, he can be my disciple."

Sorry, got my ouble negatives wrong on that last part.
Put it does point out one th8ing, either god is not so good at communicating (uses double negatives), or at some point, someone copied a scripture wrong (added the double negative, and screwed it up)

Danielost posts #7

KFC POSTS:

KFC posts #11

Danielost posts:


Sodaiho posts #45

Danielost, Thanks for bringing this point about the Red (Reed) Sea into the discussion. It sent me on a most interesting search.

Both history and Sacred Scripture testify to well travelled trade routes between Egypt and Arabia which cut directly toward the Gulf of Suez. But one may only postulate as to the exact route taken by the Israelites from the land of oppression toward the land of promise. For determining the route we'd have to mention places such as Etham, a site that lays at the northern tip of the Bitter Lakes, bordering the desert. Also, Rameses, Magdol and Soan. In Biblical times the Bitter Lakes was linked to the Gulf of Suez. Since the work on the Suez Canal, there have been many changes between the Gulf of Suez and the various lakes on the Mediterranean. Some have disappeared.

The Hebrew term yam sup signifies "Reed Sea". Ancient texts relate that 2 bodies of water lay near Rameses-Soan. ONe is the "water of Horus" the Shihor of Is. 23:3 and Jer. 2"18 of the Masoretic text, and the other was "the Papyrus Marsh", an equivalent of the "Reed Sea".

The the actual place of the marshy area of the Reed Sea is up for discussion. Most say its north of the Bitter Lakes and some say Moses crossed south of the Bitter Lakes. Scripture tells us that once the Israelites arrived in the area of the Bitter Lakes, they learn they are being pursued by their erstwhile masters. They cry out in alarm to the Lord God and complain to Moses, a reaction that occurs frequently throughout Exodus and Numbers.

KFC posts #11

I agree. The point of the actual crossing whether it was the Red Sea or the Reed Sea is a concrete historical event of the deliverance of Israel which constitutes a fundamental dogma in Israelite faith.

Yes, granted over the years there have been interesting embellishments to the basic elements of Scripture. The point is was there actual intervention of God Himself? Yes, indeed. Could He have used natural phenonomena in that instance? Yes, indeed. We know of the winds that drove back the waters of the lagoon and enabled Scipio to capture New Carthage. The text itself tells us of the part the wind played in facilitationg this crossing for the Israelites.

Quite different is the Egyptian pursuit who didn't want to lose their valuable slave force. The author informs us that the Egyptians rushed into the Reed Sea in the blackness on night. Again, we may postulate the providential use of natural phenomena as the reason for the destruction of the Egyptian forces...As the wind that caused the tide in turn subsided, the waters of the Reed Sea flowed back.

But the bigger question is what's the point to the reader as far as salvation history? It's to further enhance the glory of God and the singular position of Israel as the people of His choice. The Red (Reed Sea) incident is to achieve the divinely intended result of making people conscious of God's intervention on their behalf. Numerous other passages give concrete testimony to this. The OT is fulfilled in the New Testament and in Christian times, St. Paul alluded to the Red (Reed Sea) narrative and saw in this phenomenon a type of the waters of Baptism wherein the Christian is delivered from the tyranny of Satan.

Wow, some good discussion points here. Being gone for a week or so I won't be able to address each one but did want to comment on a few.

The bible is special and very unique. No other book has the credentials this book has. None come close.

"England has two books, the Bible and Shakespeare. England made Shakespeare, but the bible made England" (Victor Hugo, cited by Mead, Encyclopedia of Religious Qotes)

Archaeologist W.F. Albright said:

"The bible towers in content above all earlier religious literature; and it towers just as impressively over all subsequent literature in the direct simplicity of its message and the catholicity of its appeal to men of all lands and times." (The Christian Century, November 1958).



I agree with statement #1 but disagree with the other two. Let me ask you this....how do you know you are NOT deceived? I know I was and I recognize who the deciever is after years of being deceived myself. I still have to watch out for this and be on the alert.

The bible DOES NOT change; man changes but not the Scriptures. They are the same scriptures that have passed down from generation to generation. Go get youself an old family bible and do the comparison for youself. I have seen very old bibles and the word is exactly the same.

We are never called to a blind faith. God reveals himself to mankind through the Bible and other ways. The bible has demonstrated itself to be more than a mere book. The evidence is more than convincing to anyone who will honestly consider its claim. The blind are those who will NOT open their eyes to it. Jesus spoke of this blindness many times. Sin has a way of blinding our eyes to the truth of God.

Many have, over the years, sought to destroy this book? Why? If it's just a book, why the demand to rid the world of it? Martin Luther said:

"Mighty potentates have raged against this book, and sought to destroy and uproot it-Alexander the Great and princes of Egypt and Babylon, the monarchs of Persia, of Greece and of Rome, the Emperors Julius and Augustus-but they prevailed nothing."

Nothing's changed. Right now in North Korea a Church Sting Operation is in full swing. This is where the communists are setting up fake churches and asking for bibles and literature in hopes of trapping and routing out the Christians. Once they discover who these Christians are they ship them to Labor Camp along with up to three generations of their families. So if I were caught, my grown children and my aged parents would be regulated to this labor camp where they would be literally worked to death for the Communist Regime. Nothing is new under the sun. So why if this is just a mere book?

Even the French skeptic Rousseau, saw something different in this book. He said:

"I must confess to you that the majesty of the Scriptures astonishes me; the holiness of the evangelists speaks to my heart and has such striking characters of truth, and is moreover, so perfectly inimitable, that, if it had been the invention of men, the inventors would be greater than the greatest heroes."

Of course the greatest evidence is the appearence in human flesh of Christ. The people of his day could see, feel, touch, and hear him. Is that not evidence enough?

So we have the Bible and the person of Jesus Christ as two strong reasons arguing for the existence of God. God is not silent and continues to communicate to those who love and believe in him.

KFC,

How can you possibly think scripture does not change? Of course it does, with every version from the Torah on down to these Good News thingies and a plethora of others. KJV is but one version of a translation.

Now, one might argue that the "Word" never changes, but then that flies in the face of what God Himself says about himself, 'I Am That I Am" or "I Will Be What I Will Be" suggesting even God can and does unfold in different ways and perhaps even under different names and religious points of view. Because human beings vary so widely, so must God vary His presentation of Himself.

Be well.

Look KFC, I guess faith has completely blinded you. You have made several 'facts' that rely on blind faith.

I can do that too, Here are some 'facts' for you, basically they also come down to blind faith, but not bizarre blind faith.

God isn't real, he may be your imaginary friend, but he isn't real, it is that simple.

There are many versions of this imaginary god. Some are versions of the same god, such as the Jews god, Islamic god, Chirstian god, and Morman god, all of which have a basies of the old testiment god. Some versions of god, are completely different, scientology, FSM, greek gods, romab gods, etc...

There are many versions of the bible

If you believe otherwise, thats fine with me. But don't be completely blind to what others have to say.

Re: COLUMBUS

KFC POSTS:

For sure.

San Chonino posts:


SC, you're right that it was basically only the Churchmen who had copies of Biblical manuscripts. This is the time in the Middle Ages that they were being preserved by monks and nuns.



Christoforo Colombo (Christobal Colon in Castillian, the language of his choice) was born, raised and educated in a devout Italian Catholic family. From the time of the Apostles and their successors in the Infant Church, Scripture has been read and preached at daily celebrations of the Eucharist, first in catacombs, in private homes, and later in great cathedrals. Besides that, every educated person in the late 1400s knew the world was round. At 14, he went to sea and spent his life either on the ocean or in some maritime related work. He mastered navigation, geometry, astronomy, geography, and map-making. He also wrote books and kept records and journals as did his circle of friends, some of them Renaissance scholars. In other words, we know a lot about Columbus that doesn’t appear in most history books.

Many believe that his outstanding vision, religious sense and adventurous nature was by God’s Providence.....that America was discovered by a Catholic missionary. We know for certain that his courage and perseverance came from a deep understanding of the Supernatural and that he sustained himself from a pious prayer life and reflection. He became a third order Franciscan friar while in Spain.

Pope Leo XIII said of Columbus’ great discoveries that although he didn’t despise fame or scorn a hope of advantage to himself, that along with these human desires, he also experienced the consideration of Christianity that provided him with “strength of mind and will....and consoled him in the midst of the greatest difficulties”. Columbus’ overriding motivation “was to open a way for the Gospel over new land and seas.”

It wasn't a question of whether or not "the earth was round" but the size of the earth and the longitude of Japan that was debated...and this goes as far back as Ptolemy in 145AD who thought the earth spanned only 180 degrees. Columbus based his estimate on Marinus of Tyre at 225 degrees and calculated that 2,400 miles was the distance and place the longitude of Japan of San Juan, Puerto Rico.

Ever since men first built ships and put out from land they knew the earth was a sphere. The masts and spars of an approaching vessel appear over the horizon before the hull is seen.

Columbus first asked the king of Portugal to send him westward to Asia, but Portuguese geographers advised against it. So in May 1486, after leaving his son Diego with the Franciscon friars at LaRabida monastery, and with the support of the head of the Franciscans, Father Juan Perez, in Seville, Columbus sought help from Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand at Cordoba. At that time the sovereigns were engaged in war against the Moors of Granada and help would come once the war was won.

I believe that the above is a very selfish person, what right does he have to threaten 3 generatoins, just because of his imaginary friend?

If he wants to threaten his own future, that is fine, but did he ask his childern or parents if it was alright to threaten their future?

lula posts:

Bryan Harstad posts:

KFC POSTS:

Yes, it's true, man can be deceived...but let's put this in context with my original point.

Man CANNOT be deceived by God and since the Holy Bible is God's Word, therefore the Holy Bible is truth regarding our salvation history and cannot deceive us.

The faults, the errors, the deceptions, the mis-translations and misinterpretions all lie in man, not in God or in the Holy Bible.

It is man who deceives and is deceived.

Bryan Harstad posts:

KFC POSTS:



I think I understand what you mean by saying the Bible does not change...in that it is God and His Word that doesn't change. Those truths which God inspired for our salvation are without error and cannot change or be changed.

But, in reality, over the years and particularly since the printing press was invented, there have been hundreds upon hundreds of mis-translations. Every Protestant leader had to have their own version! Fact is they changed the Scriptures plenty. That thankfully, has long been corrected and we now have excellent translations based on the original Hebrew and Greek.

Sodaiho posts:

Sodaiho,

The Bible is the inspired Word of God through the work of human writers. Those truths which God inspired are without error and cannot be changed. But there are many elements (such as notions of science and history) in the Bible which are not directly related to our salvation. From this sense, the Bible can have limitations which come from its human writers. For example, the OT contains matters that are imperfect and provisional.

The human writers were people of their own times in terms of their scientific knowledge. While they understood the earth was a circle, they had no knowledge of the earth spinning through space. God inpsored those people (with their limited knowledge and mistaken notions) about the created universe and to teach basic truths that still apply today. God used their innacurate ideas to get across a true message: that God always was and ever will be and that from nothing, God created all that exists.

We humans learn things step by step including the knowledge of the fullness of God's Revelation. Those living hundreds of years before Christ did not comprehend the difference between causing and allowing. They thought that God had caused everything, including evil. In this they were mistaken, and God didn't inspire their limitations which are entirely human. As centuries pass, people grow in maturity and we can grasp more and more of God's truth. From ignorance we move gradually to knowledge. The Holy Spirit progressively guides us to a fuller understanding of the truth. St.John 16:13. Take the topic of eternal life for example. The inspired author of Ecclesiastes wrote 300 years before Christ was mistaken about eternal life...but his is not the last word on eternal life...Rather, it is the fact that we need a Savior. Later OT books such as 1 and 2 Machabees taught the existence of life after death and the Messias came, the Christ and taught the reality of eternal life clearly throughout the NT.

So, God did not/does not change...He is the same yesterday, today and forever....but people do in terms of their ability to hear and understand what God is saying to them. For anyone who has read even parts of the OT and the New Testament, we see there is clearly a development of doctrine in the Biblical books, and the more we know of history and the formation of the Holy Bible, the better we understand it. The OT passages are valuable because they show how humanity has evolved in our understanding of God's salvation message.
The OT message must be interpreted and understood in light of the New Testament, especially the teachings of Christ.

No it doesn't change. We still have the original 5,500 copies of the scriptures to go back on. Yes, the translations may change but it doesn't change the meaning of the same text. It's just that we are reading it in our own language. Every generation deserves to read the scriptures in their own language. We don't talk in the King's English anymore so therefore changes needed to be made to assist us. But changing a "thou" or "thee" or "thine" to "you" or "your" doesn't mean that scripture changes. Using a word "bird" instead of "eagle" doesn't either.

Most of the time a disagreement is not so much with the interpretation of the Scriptures but rather with the application of it.




God is an imaginary friend? Really? So Jesus was imaginary?

You actually have it backwards. When a Christian witnesses to another it's not our of selfishness....it's selflessness. Think about it. He's risking his/her own life telling another about Jesus. That's not selfish. Selfishness would be keeping this knowledge to himself. The disciples all lost their lives for this very reason. For others and as they died, the faith grew. There is no greater love than one who would give up his life for another.

As far as others in the family getting dragged into the picture, this is a hard one. I'm sure it's going to stop alot of weak or spiritually immature Christians from speaking out. So in effect, this is just another way to try and squash the gospel from going forth. But God will have his way and I'm sure many will have stories to tell about God's protection and providence along the way.

I would recommend your reading the book "Hiding Place" by Corrie Ten Boom written after WWII and how God protected and provided for Corrie in the concentration camp she found herself in after trying to protect and provide for the Jews hiding out.