Why God's Word The Bible IS Infallible!

reply to post by edmc^2


You wrote:

["Like I said, the Bible interprets itself."]

And how will you shoot this out with those bible-interpretators disagreeing with YOUR interpretation? And what has that to do with your basically 'objective' claim of infallibility?

Quote: ["There's no special formula to interpret it. In fact once we put our spin on it that's when we get into trouble."]

You have been 'in trouble' from square one on this thread.

Quote: ["Take for example the post by 'werewatchingyouman'."]

Why are you addressing this to me? Wawym's arguments are his, and he can better stand for them himself. It looks like another diverversionary effort from the direction I take.

Quote: ["like God is love and there's no badness in him or God can't lie."]

Which is amongst the assumptions you try to prove, not a self-evident axiom, demonstrated through circle-arguments.

Quote: ["What made it worse is that it was put together with the intention to portray God as wicked and a liar."]

As you may be aware of, I have a similar impression of the OT character Jahveh as a schizoid sociopath.

Quote: ["Here let's do simple test if you're up for it. Let me ask you a question about Gen 3: God, Adam and Eve."]

I have an even better idea. Let's continue what we initially started with, before you skip direction for the umpteenth time.

Quote: ["If you say yes, explain why - back it up with the scriptures if you can."]

I don't operate with the bible as an authority, I use objective procedure. Shall we regress the reasoning-chain once more, and consider the implications of the word 'infallible' in a context of subjective vs. objective. With all respect, it appears to me, that you have no idea of what these two concepts mean.

reply to post by bogomil


You won't get very far with this guy bog...

I mean haven't you had a JW come to your door before? Fear based conversion techniques with very few if any explanations. This is how they're trained my friend. Brainwashed by fear into believing things that don't even exist in any other bible but their own, which was of course written by their own people to push their beliefs.

I've delt with them many many times, and though its always amusing to say the least... they rarely can answer the simplest of questions about the bible without breaking into a sermon. Though im sure its much easier for this guy because hes on the internet while hes posting.

yet somehow they're still very persistant that their way is Gods way, even after you show them otherwise.

reply to post by Akragon


You wrote:

["You won't get very far with this guy bog..."]

I know, and it doesn't bother me the least, because I also know, that no-one ever 'wins' an internet-debate. What I can do is to give him the option of manifestedly go around in circles and evade inconvenient questions.

That's a kind of statement and 'goods-declaration' in itself. And I've learned to have much patience.

Quote: ["yet somehow they're still very persistant that their way is Gods way, even after you show them otherwise."]

It's my third thread-'round' with our esteemed author, and I have small doubt, that he will be back eventually, starting from square one again. But as the sermon(s) basically are the same, only slightly rephrazed, it will ofcourse follow the standard patterns of: "Is, isn't, is, isn't...." without anything new or any refinements of the basic theist postulates.

Ofcourse resulting in terminal boredom in readers, who have seen it all before. Which really isn't a problem for me, as I sometimes get a possibility of joining more constructive threads as a compensation.

reply to post by bogomil

You won't get very far with this guy bog...

I think you should take his/her advice...many had tried but failed.

Just like the title of this thread - God's Word Is Infallible - that I'm 100% sure.

You can't debunk that.

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by bogomil

 

You won't get very far with this guy bog...

I mean haven't you had a JW come to your door before? Fear based conversion techniques with very few if any explanations. This is how they're trained my friend. Brainwashed by fear into believing things that don't even exist in any other bible but their own, which was of course written by their own people to push their beliefs.

I've delt with them many many times, and though its always amusing to say the least... they rarely can answer the simplest of questions about the bible without breaking into a sermon. Though im sure its much easier for this guy because hes on the internet while hes posting.

yet somehow they're still very persistant that their way is Gods way, even after you show them otherwise.

edit on 6-8-2011 by Akragon because: (no reason given)

"Fear based conversion techniques with very few if any explanations."

I hope I did not scare you there Arkragon...didn't mean to.

But something is quite puzzling to me - you believe in the Bible while bogomil does not yet you seem to agree with him/her.

Reminds me of Jesus - when he was put on trial, being accused of things he did not do.

Is this what happening here?

You people say that I don't address the Qs yet you keep changing the topic.

And when I answer the QUESTIONS - with scriptural backing - you say it's a sermon. Yet when I don't back it up with the scriptures - I get accused of twisting.

If I use different Bible versions I get accused of cherry picking but if I used just one - it's not accepted because

"one of the most altered and mistranslated version of the bible that exists"

so you need to make up your mind - which is it then?

btw - are u a Christian?

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by edmc^2
reply to post by Akragon

 

Obviously NWT
ASV
DBY

and the rest on occasions (for further clarification):

www.blueletterbible.org...
biblos.com...

I usually refer to the ones that used God's name - less confusion.

Ahh i see, one of the most altered and mistranslated version of the bible that exists. Published by your religion

Im starting to understand where you're comming from now... This is why you use whatever bible you need to prove your belief. Your religion made its own alterations to that bible to conform to what fits your beliefs.

See the difference in john for example....

John 1
1 In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, andthe Word was a god.

KJV
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

18 No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is in the bosom [position] with the Father is the one that has explained him.

KJV
18No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.


Not to mention the hundreds of other alterations that don't even conform with the greek translation. Notice anything missing here?

Mat 18... Your bible
10 See to it that YOU men do not despise one of these little ones; for I tell YOU that their angels in heaven always behold the face of my Father who is in heaven. 11 ——

12 “What do YOU think? If a certain man comes to have a hundred sheep and one of them gets strayed, will he not leave the ninety-nine upon the mountains and set out on a search for the one that is straying?


KJV
10Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.

11For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.

12How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?

Theres at least 47 verses that have been completely removed from YOUR bible...

Yet in your own bible you'll find this little verse...

2 YOU must not add to the word that I am commanding YOU, neither must YOU take away from it, so as to keep the commandments of Jehovah YOUR God that I am commanding YOU.

NOT to mention of course....

Every word of God [is] pure: he [is] a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

And your little cults favorite book....

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.


Interesting eh...

JW's bend what is in the bible to whatever meaning they need at the time. Your bible has been revised several times and does not translate the original texts.... they mearly paraphrase, meaning once again... Your bible is not infallible, and is not the complete word of God as you claim.

I call Shenanigans on you!

My reply to you - you should heed your own advice:

"You won't get very far with this guy bog... "

Unless you're up for an intellectual discussion of which version is the most accurate.

I see that you prefer the KJV - is the 1611 version?

Just to let you know I'm very familiar with this version - fair warning.

reply to post by edmc^2

I hope I did not scare you there Arkragon...didn't mean to.

But something is quite puzzling to me - you believe in the Bible while bogomil does not yet you seem to agree with him/her.

I didn't say i believe in the bible. I believe in the words of one man in the bible... not the complete book.

Reminds me of Jesus - when he was put on trial, being accused of things he did not do.

Is this what happening here?

When you make the claims you're making in this thread you can usually expect this kind of response...

You people say that I don't address the Qs yet you keep changing the topic.

And when I answer the QUESTIONS - with scriptural backing - you say it's a sermon. Yet when I don't back it up with the scriptures - I get accused of twisting.

If I use different Bible versions I get accused of cherry picking but if I used just one - it's not accepted because

"one of the most altered and mistranslated version of the bible that exists"

so you need to make up your mind - which is it then?

I haven't accused you of anything, i mearly ask questions. I question your bible because it contradicts itself. I question you because your claim is illogical when you use every bible known to man in your posts.

If Gods word is "infallable" does that mean every bible is Gods word?

If your religion believes in every word of its own bible, why are verses missing... when your Gods commanded you not to take away from the book?

btw - are u a Christian?

No im not...

reply to post by edmc^2

My reply to you - you should heed your own advice:

"You won't get very far with this guy bog... "

Unless you're up for an intellectual discussion of which version is the most accurate

Somehow i expected that answer.... Its your thread man, take it in any direction you want. Dancing around questions won't get you any bonus points though.

I see that you prefer the KJV - is the 1611 version?

Just to let you know I'm very familiar with this version - fair warning.

Yes i prefer the KJV, i think its beautifully written.

Originally posted by edmc^2
reply to post by bogomil

 

You won't get very far with this guy bog...

I think you should take his/her advice...many had tried but failed.

Just like the title of this thread - God's Word Is Infallible - that I'm 100% sure.

You can't debunk that.

Maybe a bit pernickety on my part, but:

First of all, the quote you use here is from Akragon, and as you apparently have missed some of my answer to him, I'll repeat the essence of it.

I'm not here to 'win' or to convert anyone. Peoples' private religion is their business. My reason for being here is to join a public debate, hopefully adding a dimension of objectivity into the many subjective and often invasive missioning attitudes presented by missionaries here.

I could write quite a lot about that, but an extensive presentation is besides the point now.

Quote: [" Just like the title of this thread - God's Word Is Infallible - that I'm 100% sure."]

I don't doubt, that YOU are sure about that. But that's however not the point of my participation here. I'm here because you, imo somewhat confused, try to make your subjective opinion/position appear objective.

Quote: [" You can't debunk that."]

Ofcourse I can't debunk that YOU believe in something subjectively. And why should I?

I'm opposing you, when you postulate, that this is something objective.

It's been fun... I'm going to take a break... I may be back in a couple of days if I feel like banging my head against a brick wall again....



...

reply to post by wearewatchingyouman


Hope to see you back, Dude. Without a sore head.

The knack is to sort out the semantics; there is practically no 'hard' facts involved, you can hurt yourself on.

reply to post by wearewatchingyouman

It's been fun... I'm going to take a break... I may be back in a couple of days if I feel like banging my head against a brick wall again....


YouTube Link


...

Well thanks for participating - friendly advice - get a deeper understanding of the scripture and no need to bang urhead against the brick wall...

reply to post by Akragon

Not to mention the hundreds of other alterations that don't even conform with the greek translation. Notice anything missing here?

Mat 18... Your bible
10 See to it that YOU men do not despise one of these little ones; for I tell YOU that their angels in heaven always behold the face of my Father who is in heaven. 11 ——

12 “What do YOU think? If a certain man comes to have a hundred sheep and one of them gets strayed, will he not leave the ninety-nine upon the mountains and set out on a search for the one that is straying?


KJV
10Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.

11For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.

12How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?

Theres at least 47 verses that have been completely removed from YOUR bible...

Yet in your own bible you'll find this little verse...

2 YOU must not add to the word that I am commanding YOU, neither must YOU take away from it, so as to keep the commandments of Jehovah YOUR God that I am commanding YOU.

Sorry to say but you have no idea what you're talking about - here let me show you.


SO who added v11 in the first place?

KJV - Mat 18:11 - For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
© Info: - King James Version 1769 Info


NKJV - Mat 18:11 - "For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.*
Footnote:
* NU-Text omits this verse.

© Info: - New King James Version © 1982 Thomas Nelson


NLT - Mat 18:11 - No text available.
© Info: - New Living Translation © 2007 Tyndale House Foundation


NIV - Mat 18:11 - No text available.
© Info: - The Holy Bible, New International Version© 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society


ESV - Mat 18:11 - No text available.
© Info: - English Standard Version © 2001, 2007 Crossway Bibles


RVR - Mat 18:11 - Porque el Hijo del Hombre ha venido para salvar lo que se había perdido.
© Info: - Reina-Valera © 1960 Sociedades Bíblicas en América Latina


NASB - Mat 18:11 - ["*For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.]
© Info: - New American Standard Bible © 1995 Lockman Foundation


RSV - Mat 18:11 - Other ancient authorities insert verse 11, [For the Son of man came to save the lost.]
Footnote:
* Other ancient authorities insert verse 11, [For the Son of man came to save the lost.]

© Info: - Revised Standard Version © 1947, 1952.


ASV - Mat 18:11 - [For the Son of man came to save that which was lost.]
© Info: - American Standard Version 1901 Info


YLT - Mat 18:11 - for the Son of Man did come to save the lost.
© Info: - Robert Young Literal Translation 1862, 1887, 1898 Info


DBY - Mat 18:11 - For the Son of man has come to save that which was lost.
© Info: - J.N.Darby Translation 1890 Info


WEB - Mat 18:11 - For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
© Info: - Noah Webster Version 1833 Info


HNV - Mat 18:11 - For the Son of Man came to save that which was lost.
© Info: - Hebrew Names Version 2000 Info



VUL - Mat 18:11 - venit enim Filius hominis salvare quod perierat
© Info: - Jerome's Latin Vulgate 405 A.D. Info


TR - Mat 18:11 - ἦλθεν γὰρ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου σῶσαι τὸ ἀπολωλός
© Info: - Jerome's Latin Vulgate 405 A.D. Info


mGNT - Mat 18:11 - No text available.

www.blueletterbible.org.../11


Note:

Lexicon / Concordance for Matthew 18:11


18:11 ἦλθεν γὰρ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου σῶσαι τὸ ἀπολωλός

English (KJV) Strong's Root Form (Greek) Tense
For g1063 γάρ gar

the Son g5207 υἱός huios

of man g444 ἄνθρωπος anthrōpos

is come g2064 ἔρχομαι erchomai

to save g4982 σῴζω sōzō

that which g3588 ὁ ho

was lost. g622 ἀπόλλυμι apollymi


This verse is omitted in many Greek texts.

www.blueletterbible.org.../11

reply to post by edmc^2


Yet again you're completely missing the point.

It doesn't matter which bible you use, they've all been changed over time. Altered by various "authorities" all through out history.

The fact is your innital premise is flawed simply because theres no possible way that any bible(no matter which version) is the exact translation, and thus NOT the complete word of God. We can't even prove any of the authors of any of the scriptures were the actual authors. Its based upon assumptions and of course "faith". Revelations, your religions favorite book, was written by an old man in a cave, through "divine inspiration" which sounds and reads nothing like Jesus in the other 4 gospels. The actual identity of John of patmos has been debated for centuries, some believe he was John the appostle, many believe it was a completely different person.

Your bible is just one of the many versions altered by a specific religion to suit their beliefs.

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by edmc^2

 

Yet again you're completely missing the point.

It doesn't matter which bible you use, they've all been changed over time. Altered by various "authorities" all through out history.

The fact is your innital premise is flawed simply because theres no possible way that any bible(no matter which version) is the exact translation, and thus NOT the complete word of God. We can't even prove any of the authors of any of the scriptures were the actual authors. Its based upon assumptions and of course "faith". Revelations, your religions favorite book, was written by an old man in a cave, through "divine inspiration" which sounds and reads nothing like Jesus in the other 4 gospels. The actual identity of John of patmos has been debated for centuries, some believe he was John the appostle, many believe it was a completely different person.

Your bible is just one of the many versions altered by a specific religion to suit their beliefs.

edit on 8-8-2011 by Akragon because: (no reason given)

And to this perspective from the 'inside' I can repetitively (this is a repetitive thread) once more add MY perspective from the 'outside'. The implied objectivity of the use of 'infallible' (ulrimately and universally 'true') is still after some twenty pages only a claim, supported by "because".

I can do this, as long as I stay on ATS; ..... going on with "Why?"....."Because".

reply to post by bogomil


Hey at least i give a reason for what i claim as truth...

This guy can rabble on about claims of Gods "infallible word" but the holes in his arguements are far to vast to even consider being without flaw.

Though as i've stated in previous threads, there is a truth in the bible that is infallible. And though you've said before "i catagorize love as a universal truth across all religions" i still believe it to be true.

Unfortunatly saying the word and putting it into practice are two different issues.

maybe when the bible was first written is was an account of what happen.
but it has been re written hundreds of times. and altered.
have you seen the new one? its a mess.
and why only 4 of the 12 disciples?
you are a blind sheep.
the powers that be.
use religion as a tool to control you.
follow your hart. not a fake book.

Originally posted by buddha
maybe when the bible was first written is was an account of what happen.
but it has been re written hundreds of times. and altered.
have you seen the new one? its a mess.
and why only 4 of the 12 disciples?
you are a blind sheep.
the powers that be.
use religion as a tool to control you.
follow your hart. not a fake book.

who are you talking to?

I am anything but blind to the teachings of the bible... Unlike others i don't concern myself with who wrote what, and what contradictions are in the book. Or even what has been changed over the millenia.

There is a message in the book which you call "fake"... It holds true even to this day, yet very few see it.

Perhaps instead of stateing the obvious, you might look for that meaning...

reply to post by Akragon


You wrote:

["Hey at least i give a reason for what i claim as truth..."]

It was not my intention to include you as a target for criticism in my last post. If it can be read that way, I apologize.

Quote: [" Though as i've stated in previous threads, there is a truth in the bible that is infallible. And though you've said before "i catagorize love as a universal truth across all religions" i still believe it to be true."[

There are different ways and levels of disagreements. Ours have for a long time been friendly 'academic'. No worries, mate.

PS (addition): I believe, that anyone calling him(?)self 'Buddha', probably is familiar with the concept compassion.
And I believe, the post was addressed to the thread-author (just a guess).

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by Akragon

 

You wrote:

["Hey at least i give a reason for what i claim as truth..."]

It was not my intention to include you as a target for criticism in my last post. If it can be read that way, I apologize.

Quote: [" Though as i've stated in previous threads, there is a truth in the bible that is infallible. And though you've said before "i catagorize love as a universal truth across all religions" i still believe it to be true."[

There are different ways and levels of disagreements. Ours have for a long time been friendly 'academic'. No worries, mate.

PS (addition): I believe, that anyone calling him(?)self 'Buddha', probably is familiar with the concept compassion.
And I believe, the post was addressed to the thread-author (just a guess).

edit on 8-8-2011 by bogomil because: addition

lol, no worries my friend. I know you never mean any insult towards me.

Things like this just tend to erk me...

you are a blind sheep.

After years of study i tend to pounce on people who try to make such statements towards me. Though im unsure if it was directed at me... which is why i asked him who he was talking to. I've seen his posts many times before, and though im quite sure he meant no insult towards myself... again i tend to defend myself just in case.

old habbits and such