As a Christian, I don’t believe the Bible because I agree with it and like it. I believe in it because I’m convinced it’s true. Kinda sounds like to me “pro vaccine are so hateful! Saying if I don’t take the vaccine I’ll get sick and die!”
Genuine question. What convinces you that Bible is true? And among Abrahamic religions, why is this particular book true? Why do you accept “update” to Torah (that is, the Christian Bible), but not “update” to the Christian Bible (Quran)? Or do I miss the point?
Glad you asked! I’ll start with the Torah. One of the central purposes of Judaism was and is waiting for the Messiah. It even makes its way into modern day Judaism. The likes of Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 are clearly about Jesus of Nazareth. The records we have about Jesus consistently show to Him being perfect, doing miracles, being a good teacher, claiming to be the messiah and even God, and then He was crucified in the most humiliating way, died, and was buried. But on the third day He rose again from the dead and was seen by quite a few, who were so convinced they ended up entering a world of persecution and difficulty, many died. Because they refused to renounce that they had seen Him risen.
As historical records go- the Bible is pretty comprehensive for records of its time. Most other people we know about have their records dating to hundreds of years after their existence. Jesus’ records were written within the lifetime of people who would have known Him. And they’re pretty consistent, unlike legends which rapidly evolve with time. The Bible has been pretty much the same. Give or take some less important passages, though.
Now, there are a load of problems with Islam and the Qur’an, but I’ll keep it concise to how the Qur’an disproves itself. The Qur’an makes these points:
The Gospel is the word of allah: 3:3-4
No one can change allah’s words: 18:27
Strongly implies that the Christians had the Gospel when the Qur’an was written: 7:157
Christians should judge by the Gospel: 5:47
The Qur’an also denies the death of Jesus and His divinity, which the Bible claims. So it’s in obvious contradiction. So judging by the Gospel, Islam is false. And the Gospel cannot be corrupted as the Qur’an recommends the Gospel and claims allah’s words cannot be corrupted.
Paul also gives us this warning:
Galatians 1:8
But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.
Considering the Qur’an apparently was revealed to Mohammed by an “angel”… Yeah…
Also possible that a good dude who preached love and kindness went into a coma when the tyrants put him on a cross, and then woke up a few days later, with no involvement whatsoever from the creator.
So you’re suggesting a guy who was ruthlessly beaten and crucified , then stabbed in the side revealing that his lung had collapsed, simply recovered after two nights in a tomb and pushed a boulder out of the way, without the armed guards noticing? And who were the dudes just chilling there? And how do you explain the ascension into heaven?
religion was/is just a way to explain the unexplainable for lack of science.
and since we have gotten so much better in recent modern times of explaining things, religion is just some antiquated relic people hold onto from ancient times, further pushed by the fact that someone wrote it down a long time ago.
the difference is that in science there is peer review, such as the scientific method and the ability to reproduce, verify/review and publish results.
whereas in religion it’s a lot of opinions on things that may or may not have happened.
but hey, if it makes you a better person and love thy neighbor and sticketh to they 10 commandments and all that, then more power to you. to each their own.
but not when you start pushing your beliefs onto others or blowing shit up or waging all out war.
This is known of the idea of a “god of the gaps”, a strawman that claims god is simply an explanation for an origin of life. But that’s basically a few chapters in the Bible. We wouldn’t need any more than that if it was just a creation narrative.
Natural science and theology are two separate things. That’s like saying the American Constitution is unneeded because of science. It doesn’t make any sense why the two are compared. Apart from the very vague and likely figurative creation accounts in the beginning of Genesis, there’s not much else pertaining to science in the Bible. Tidbits here and there, like how we now know Jesus likely had a collapsed lung, but still tidbits.
As a Christian, I don’t believe the Bible because I agree with it and like it. I believe in it because I’m convinced it’s true. Kinda sounds like to me “pro vaccine are so hateful! Saying if I don’t take the vaccine I’ll get sick and die!”
Genuine question. What convinces you that Bible is true? And among Abrahamic religions, why is this particular book true? Why do you accept “update” to Torah (that is, the Christian Bible), but not “update” to the Christian Bible (Quran)? Or do I miss the point?
Glad you asked! I’ll start with the Torah. One of the central purposes of Judaism was and is waiting for the Messiah. It even makes its way into modern day Judaism. The likes of Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 are clearly about Jesus of Nazareth. The records we have about Jesus consistently show to Him being perfect, doing miracles, being a good teacher, claiming to be the messiah and even God, and then He was crucified in the most humiliating way, died, and was buried. But on the third day He rose again from the dead and was seen by quite a few, who were so convinced they ended up entering a world of persecution and difficulty, many died. Because they refused to renounce that they had seen Him risen.
As historical records go- the Bible is pretty comprehensive for records of its time. Most other people we know about have their records dating to hundreds of years after their existence. Jesus’ records were written within the lifetime of people who would have known Him. And they’re pretty consistent, unlike legends which rapidly evolve with time. The Bible has been pretty much the same. Give or take some less important passages, though.
Now, there are a load of problems with Islam and the Qur’an, but I’ll keep it concise to how the Qur’an disproves itself. The Qur’an makes these points: The Gospel is the word of allah: 3:3-4 No one can change allah’s words: 18:27 Strongly implies that the Christians had the Gospel when the Qur’an was written: 7:157 Christians should judge by the Gospel: 5:47
The Qur’an also denies the death of Jesus and His divinity, which the Bible claims. So it’s in obvious contradiction. So judging by the Gospel, Islam is false. And the Gospel cannot be corrupted as the Qur’an recommends the Gospel and claims allah’s words cannot be corrupted.
Paul also gives us this warning: Galatians 1:8
Considering the Qur’an apparently was revealed to Mohammed by an “angel”… Yeah…
The Islamic dilemma explained in a YouTube video
I hope this makes sense
Interesting - will read more about that Quran contradiction. Thanks!
Also, to clarify, the reason you believe that Bible holds actual historical value is that, unlike legends and stories, it is more or less consistent?
Also possible that a good dude who preached love and kindness went into a coma when the tyrants put him on a cross, and then woke up a few days later, with no involvement whatsoever from the creator.
So you’re suggesting a guy who was ruthlessly beaten and crucified , then stabbed in the side revealing that his lung had collapsed, simply recovered after two nights in a tomb and pushed a boulder out of the way, without the armed guards noticing? And who were the dudes just chilling there? And how do you explain the ascension into heaven?
It is possible, but I’m not buying it
“2000 year old goat herder fairytales are more real to me than consistently tested and verified modern scientific findings”
And what do modern scientific findings say?
Here is a very brief summary…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science
Nothing in that article about Christianity
Shocker.
So how is it relevant?
Christianity? It’s not.
religion was/is just a way to explain the unexplainable for lack of science.
and since we have gotten so much better in recent modern times of explaining things, religion is just some antiquated relic people hold onto from ancient times, further pushed by the fact that someone wrote it down a long time ago.
the difference is that in science there is peer review, such as the scientific method and the ability to reproduce, verify/review and publish results.
whereas in religion it’s a lot of opinions on things that may or may not have happened.
but hey, if it makes you a better person and love thy neighbor and sticketh to they 10 commandments and all that, then more power to you. to each their own.
but not when you start pushing your beliefs onto others or blowing shit up or waging all out war.
(imo)
So science is a religion or…?
This is known of the idea of a “god of the gaps”, a strawman that claims god is simply an explanation for an origin of life. But that’s basically a few chapters in the Bible. We wouldn’t need any more than that if it was just a creation narrative.
Natural science and theology are two separate things. That’s like saying the American Constitution is unneeded because of science. It doesn’t make any sense why the two are compared. Apart from the very vague and likely figurative creation accounts in the beginning of Genesis, there’s not much else pertaining to science in the Bible. Tidbits here and there, like how we now know Jesus likely had a collapsed lung, but still tidbits.
One of these things is not like the other…