You all will beg for proof of everything. Is it not evident that if you look at a rock outside it has been created? Things can't be created without a creator. I'll repost something from another thread: The first cell: For amino acids to make one protein, they must arrange into a certain order. The odds of this ordes occuring is (brace yourself) one over 180 trillion octillion. That would be to make only one protein. 1000s of proteins are needed to make a cell. And even then, the cell would have to survive. The time it would take to make this one living cell: 130 billion years. Over 15 times as long as any evolutionist will say the earth is. The Bible is God's word, so why do you rephrase it as if God didn't write it? @Eons: God.. I don't know if I can reinstate this again. Jews believe in God, and obey God, if this is not true, they are not a jew. (No pun intended) God said to move on from the old covenant? But did the jews listen? No.. they just shook their heads, God didn't stop them, its their choice to listen to the one who gave them the thing they're obeying in the first place. Would it only make sense to obey the government when it makes a new law, not just the old laws, and says the old laws are done, gone, passed away?
Because, we currently have no hard evidence showing that he wrote it. (unless we assume that god exists without evidence) God said to move on from the old covenant in the New Testament, which they believe is false. If tomorrow, you found a 'Newer Testament' in your local library, which claims that Christians should move on from the New Testament, and instead accept the 'Newer Testament', you would (just as with the New Testament) have to accept the book's claims, and leave your old religion behind. 1: I was saying rinse and repeat to show that the two statements can continue to exist into the future, and won't change until somebody can prove that god exists through some other method. 2: In the second scenario, I am assuming that god exists. Point 3 says that we must assume there is no god, because in that scenario, we have no proof of god. Either way, we must assume there is no god. The bible can't be used as evidence for god's existence in the way you used it.
No. The "Qu'ran" states that Jesus was a prophet, and we believe Jesus is God. Everyone has their own God, so they refer to it as "God" but the Qu'ran version of God and our version is mutually exclusive. In this case, we are referring to the religion, unless you'd like us to say Judaizers, but that's kind of outdated imo.
We have more evidence that He does than that He doesn't. And again, if the Jews REALLY DID BELIEVE AND TRUST IN GOD, they would've listened to Him when He wrote the new testament, people don't just naturally shun down the source of their beliefs, and then continue to believe it. 1: You don't find Bibles in the library, as far as I know 2: There is no more testament after the new testament. Prophecies in the OT state that Jesus would come again. This is the basis for the start of the new covenant. Once God's plan is fulfilled (the covenant IS His plan) God need not write anymore, because I'm pretty sure after the end of the earth we won't be here anymore, the only people around will be believers of Christ, and the rest burning in the lake of fire. Also, the new testament does not hint at another testament/ covenant soon to come, in fact quite the opposite, it states that the end is to come. After the end of something it is over, right?
What if the devil wrote the new testament so he could tempt followers away from the REAL religion... Judaism? !!! The point here is, you have no idea who is right. Once you accept the fact that your religion is not right no matter what, this will all disappear.
You still don't realize that there is no proof that the New Testament is actually inspired by god. It could be completely falsified, and the Old Testament could be the latest holy book.
Have you not gotten the point? God makes the Bible, if God makes a new one and says to follow it, its quite obvious that the new one is the one you should follow, specifically when he says its time to move on from the old one! Same goes for your second statement. Now I ask you for proof, since you ask us enough. What makes our religion not right no matter what? (Actually a very biased statement you've made there, nice job. And stop trying to evade the question. There is no way to prove God's existence, the Bible states we live by faith and not sight, like you people do. When the end time comes, I GUARANTEE YOU, that so many people, will say, "aw shoot, if only I wasn't so ignorant, and just listened to what other people said for once." You can take it or leave it. When you are reading a book, do you ask for evidence if the book was written? No, because its obvious. Why can't the planet be the same way? Is it the ignorance of creation? @Zergling: Its got just as much proof as the old testament, if not more. And based on the logic of your last statement, couldn't we just as easily say that the law of superposition is false because the latest holy book is older? Wow, flawed logic isn't it. If God wrote the new testament, it is just as true as the old testament, which he wrote also.
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF Assuming you don't believe the boogey-man is real... If a stranger came up to you and said he saw the boogey-man, who has to prove it: him or you? Whoah, hold on. When you read a book, you know the author was human. Assuming you lived in the same time as him, you could hypothetically walk up to him and shake his hand. You can't do that with god. The author, as far as we're concerned here, is possibly nonexistent.
You simply cannot argue on matters that are based on opinions, you can try, but you will get no where. The bible is one of the most controversial topics and it is so that you cant simply say one way is right or another is wrong, all you can do is try. Once you try you can see what this means to you and group yourself with people who see the same way. Now, in reality is there factual proof that the bible is indeed God's word and truth? No, If you disagree I would like too see how. There definitely is opinionated proof, oh yes much of that, but not any hard evidence. Now it comes down to what you believe. Many refute the bible, some only ally themselves with parts of it, and many believe all that is within this cornucopia of mysteries and semi-facts. Opinions, opinions, opinions, we all have them. So how should we say who is right and who is wrong then, answer me this and I will further my opinion.
Would co-author work for you then? Ooh I love how you used bold text in this..........................
What proof do you have that it's actually god writing the new one, though? What question am I avoiding? What makes your religion not right no matter what? There isn't one thing. God is not 100% guaranteed to not exist. There is a tiny, tiny, sliver of a chance that he does exist. The reason why I say he doesn't is simple: If somebody asks me if there is a tiny, invisible teapot orbiting Pluto, I say no. In reality, there is a tiny, tiny, sliver of a chance that there is actually a teapot orbiting Pluto, but the chance is so small that it is nonexistent in everyday life. In fact, its probably more likely that there is a teapot orbiting Pluto than a omnipotent, all-knowing creator. Please, please, explain to me how I am ignorant. I do my best to look at the facts and the evidence when I attempt to find truth, not at superstition and stubbornness. In order to answer this, I guess I will also have to refute your prophesy evidence. The prophesies you linked to before all had a few problems. First, they weren't all that specific. While many of them mentioned Israel, that was really the only thing that was clearly present. Second, they were extremely broad. One could say that Israel will be birthed again pretty confidently. In a region of the world so full of turmoil, it is bound to happen. Third, they could have been self fulfilling. Since the prophesies could just as easily be used as directions, they could have easily been intentionally carried out. What logic is saying that the law of superposition is false because the latest holy book is older?
I'm unaware if you've read the previous posts. We're arguing over the fact of Jews not moving to the new testament. Now, you could say Christianity itself is an opinion, but that would be incorrect context. Or, you could say you are a Christian and take what God says and believes. Even furthermore, you could create your own version of the Bible, as done by denominations. If you're a Christian, you can't just believe and pick and choose what parts of the Bible you want. That's like picking which part of God does exist or not, but still saying yes or no. They don't coincide. Now if you're going to the means of telling me that what God told us to do is merely an opinion OF MY OWN, you're wrong. Oh, and on that contradiction. Let me pick it out for you. "The bible is one of the most controversial topics and it is so that you cant simply say one way is right or another is wrong" "Many refute the bible, some only ally themselves with parts of it, and many believe all that is within this cornucopia of mysteries and semi-facts. As far as logic goes, you can't ally with something and then say you can't pick out some things you can agree with. Please refrain from contradictions. Also, when you say cornucopia, you may want to reword that sentence. Cornucopia, as far as I and other trusted dictionaries know, is a horn, probably referring to zeus. If you're attempting to say that many believe in the many religions of the planet, then you are totally correct. "So how should we say who is right and who is wrong then, answer me this and I will further my opinion." After all, it is a debate so we can figure out who is right or wrong. If right or wrong is an opinion according to your logic, then to your first statement we can also say that this opinion of right and wrong will go nowhere, and that neither party is right or wrong. Read what Nitrous said earlier. For simplicity purposes I will restate it. If someone tells you to write something, they are technically the writer. God wrote the Bible, we published it.
Yeah, but I'm pretty sure he also said that the book is subject to the opinion of the writer regardless of what the "director" says (in this case God). Tainted info is not a great thing to put lots of faith into.
We have just as much proof that he wrote the new one as the old one. In the old one he stated a new one would come. Enough proof, I would hope. That sliver of a chance that you state is likely larger than the statement I had posted earlier. A book that came out more recently than an older one is obviously newer. But you attempted to disprove that logic by saying that the old testament could be more recent than the new testament. If the law of superposition states that older layers of strata are at the bottom, based on the logic I just restated for you, you could say the oldest strata was newer. Also, i'd like to remind you that carbon dating doesn't work for more than a decade of a thousand years, and the amount of C14's in the atmosphere back in these eras was far too vast for carbon dating to be plausible otherwise. Just because the oldest rock will be on bottom, that doesn't mean it will be millions of years old.
As said by Nitrous himself: If he's inspiring someone he's writing through him, otherwise, his word would be subject to the author's opinions. If you are believer you have to accept that god wrote the bible for that very reason. Even if the author didn't deviate from what god told him to write, the message is exactly the same as god wanted it to be so he might as well have written it himself. It's just easier to say it the other way. Next time, read what he said before having a guessing game on what he thinks. @ Diablo: If you're going to mock my beliefs, you may as well give me a source to refute.
So like he said, why didn't God just write the bible himself? He zapped the 10 commandments onto stone tablets for Moses didn't he?
Moses wrote them, like I said, God doesn't intervene with us, unless it is part of His covenant. God then wouldn't need to write it himself, according to His plan.
I didn't know you were so chummy with God. I want to know his plans too, but all I have is this bible to make guesses from...