Is the Bible True?

by UnDisfellowshipped 16 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • UnDisfellowshipped
    UnDisfellowshipped

    Is the Bible True?
    I encourage everyone to post on this thread the main reasons WHY you DO believe that the Bible is the true inspired Word of God.

    I want to examine BOTH SIDES of this subject, so I am also posting another thread entitled "Is the Bible False?" at: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/100532/1.ashx

    If you want to post your reasons WHY you DO NOT believe that the Bible is the True inspired Word of God, please post them at that second thread.

    Thank you and I look forward to seeing your posts.

  • Qcmbr
    Qcmbr

    While it is true that nearly all of the doctrines of the gospel are at least mentioned in the Bible, they are not presented in an organized form or in logical proximity to one another; rather, they are scattered throughout the Bible in such a manner that they are not easily recognized nor properly associated. After a person has learned the gospel and become acquainted with the plan of salvation from latter-day revelation, he can then see traces of the plan and discover references to it in the Bible; but he can't construct the plan and fit it together initially from the Bible alone.

    I didn't write the above!

    I think that the idea that the bible is 'true' is a good starting point to suggest that:

    1/ Some parts of the bible are totally true (factual refrences to historical events for example)
    2/ Some parts are utter garbage (where it disagrees in its story)
    3/ Some parts are only as 'true' as the interpretation (ie we are thousands of disagreeing churches who can't get one cohesive doctrine between us out of our 'true' book.)
    4/ Some parts are judged harshly for accuracy reasons when it is perfectly probably they were allegorical stories (Job?)
    5/ As a historical document revealing the religion and culture of the time it is true as long as we recognise that the Catholic church , modern day translators etc.. have all added their particular slants to a hebrew cultural creation.

    Going back to the statement at the top I think there is truth in it but you have to have the code it was written in to understand it - i.e. only if God exists and there is a Holy Spirit that can re-reveal it to you as you read will you know what interpretation / parts are true. So if you don't believe in God its all cobblers. If you do believe in God but don't believe you need the Spirit to interpret it you'll just reflect yourself. If you do believe in God and you do have a spiritual translation process occuring then you will by definition receive any truth contained therin.

  • Nate Merit
    Nate Merit

    If you are serious, and not simply trying to convert people back to Joe Hovah and the Brooklyn Oracles, here's a website that will keep you busy for several hours, blowing the Bible systematically into it's constituent parts: stinking bits of brain-dung.

    http://jcnot4me.com/Items/table_of_contents/set_free_table_of_contents.htm

    Nate

  • Qcmbr
    Qcmbr

    Nate - I'm LDS. That website is just a set of viewpoints that I've heard before and have some value and some tosh - the bit about the Mormons is as blase and misinformative as you would expect from someone just shooting spitballs at people to prove their belief system is correct.

  • Hellrider
    Hellrider

    True or false? Hm, that`s an odd question. What do you mean exactly? Did God create the world and the creatures on it in six days, or in six thousand years? Of course not, but on the other hand, that particular story isn`t, and never was, meant to be read that way. That "a thousand years is like a day in the eyes of God", only means that time is relative to God, time isn`t to him what it is to man. And for someone to write something like that, thousands of years ago, is pretty impressive, imo. Some parts are allegories, and to be interpreted symbolic. It`s pretty clear to me which parts this is. As for parts that are historical accounts, like Babylons reign over Judah, and things like that, the Bible is pretty accurate, but there are of course many things the Bible doesn`t mention, which has led to a lot of confusion. As for the rest, it`s a matter of belief. Did Christ rise from the dead? That`s a question of belief, as it can`t be proven nor disproven. Instead I think you should be more precise, point to particular passages that you are confused about, and things like that. Anything in particular you are interested in discussing?

  • Nate Merit
    Nate Merit

    Nate - I'm LDS. That website is just a set of viewpoints that I've heard before and have some value and some tosh - the bit about the Mormons is as blase and misinformative as you would expect from someone just shooting spitballs at people to prove their belief system is correct.

    Hi Qcmbr

    I'm the Nate Merit that is the co-writer of a LOT of the material on SET FREE FROM JESUS!
    Mark Smith, the site owner, has been my best bud for 32 years, since I was 20. Mark send all his materials to me for testing and suggestions before posting. Mark periodically holds public debates with ministers and fundiot 'scholars' of various types and shadings.

    If you live in southern Cal, why not email Mark Smith at [email protected] and arrange a public debate between him and your Stake President? Mark LIVES to stomp hell out of fundiots.
    He won the entire state of Florida in Lincoln-Douglas debate back when he was in college, and he has gotten far deadlier as the years have gone by.

    So, please inform Mark Smith as to his mistakes. If they are in fact mistakes, you can bet Mark will fix things PRONTO! I am on him like stupid on a fundy when I find he has made a mistake. NO don't be chicken and tell ME his mistakes, tell HIM. Thank you.

    Also, if you are not currently or formerly a JW, you must be here fishing for converts from among the former JW's.

    BTW, I have a sneaking admiration for your ballsy founder, Joe Smith. A fascinating character. Brother Brigham too. But, my fav is Orrin Porter Rockwell. I'm convinced I'm his reincarnation. When my next book comes out, which is a recounting of my JW daze, you'll see why I would even remotely entertain such a notion.

    NNNNNNNNNNate
    "Keep on dreaming and someday you just might amount to nothing" Rev Jebediah Thunder DD (Dead Drunk)

  • Nate Merit
    Nate Merit

    Mark Smith HAS NO "belief" system. What he HAS is a LACK OF BELIEF as far as gods go. Atheism is not a 'belief' as you fundiots love to claim and slap each other on the back because you're so clever. Atheism is a LACK OF belief. If Mark Smith were to find some COMELLING, UNAMBIGUOUS empirical/scientific proof of the existence of a loving personal God, he would accept it. He's my bud for 32 years. I know him better than his family or ex-wives do.

    NNNNNNNNate
    "Raining on the parade since 1953"

  • Qcmbr
    Qcmbr

    Nate, I'm UK based so organising some debate contest isn't even in my remit. As for emailing your mate - why would he listen to me? I'm sure he gets plenty of correction emails but has to ignore them otherwise his site would descend into chaos.

    I'm not here fishing for converts - if anyone believed in the LDS church because of anything I said I'd be the first to whup them up their head. I originally came because the JWs fascinate me and I found a place here where I (thought I) could critique my faith without having to continually defend it (you'll see from my posts why going to an ex-LDS site for some discussion would just end up with me having raging arguements!), and understand why people leave their religion. I'm responsible for looking after members of my own faith who leave. While I'm here however, I'll ding dong with anyone who tries to 'attack' my faith rather than making balanced comments.

    If you have respect and balance I'll generally agree with what I think is valid and agree to disagree on the rest, if someone just makes wild accusations in inflamatory words I'll go a round or two with them.

    Orrin Porter Rockwell is an awesome git. I often wish the LDS church had been a bit more militant in its early days - we'd have kicked serious butt if we'd been allowed. Instead we allowed ourselves be driven by thugs into trekking to Utah.

    For anyone who worries about religious nutters there is a simmering desire in the LDS to retake our land one day - it won't be today though.

  • Sam the Man
    Sam the Man

    The problem I have with the LDS is that they are still based around an organization, and it's big business. They use that big business to buy into Politics in the states. They have my name on system for when the end finally comes. They arrogantly believe that if you are good, you can live with Christ on earth, but if you are really good, you can get to live with Joseph Smith in heaven. Or is that the other way round...whatever. They are equally as annoying as JW's, and Donny Osmond is a moron, if that isnt a big enough factor for hating them then I dont know what is. Just another bunch of wacky Bible nuts.

  • tetrapod.sapien
    tetrapod.sapien

    Q,

    your five points seem fair enough to me. it seems that you have been more liberal as of late in some discussions. is this true, or have i misread you all along? (possible).


    are there any others who hold the bible to be "true" in a meaningful sense, with reasons for such holdings?

    it's sunday. maybe they're all at church still.

    TS

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit