Christianity Is The Bible Trust Worthy ?

[Kairos]

Hey Kairos ji,

Once again though there is wiggle room here no?

John 10:9. Is this instruction to all mankind or just Christians?

Acts 4:12. The same question?

Acts 17:11. The same again?

I think that the sad truth is that the Christian bible is so fraut with the words of mankind, that the word of God has been pulloted by man for his own ends.

Biblical texts and links to evangelistic sties have been deleted.

We have enough evidence that the Bible is trust worthy :

http://www.faithfacts.org/search-for-truth/maps

Manuscript Evidence

"Astounding" number of ancient manuscripts extant: 5,000 Greek manuscripts, 10,000 Latin and 9,000 other--totaling over 24,000 manuscript copies or portions of the New Testament. These are dated from 100 to 300 years after the originals. (There are no original manuscripts ["autographs"] extant, but the number and similarity of copies allows scholars to reconstruct the originals.)

Archaeological Evidence

The New Testament mentions specific individuals, places, and various official titles of local authorities, confirmed by recent archeology. Luke sites exact titles of officials. (Titles varied from city to city so they are easily checked for accuracy.) Lysanias the Tetrarch in Abilene (Luke 3:1)—verified by inscription dated 14-29 A.D. Erastus, city treasurer of Corinth (Romans 16:23)—verified by pavement inscription. Gallio—proconsul of Achaia (Greece) in A.D. 51 (Acts 18:12). Politarchs ("city ruler") in Thessalonica (Acts 17:6). Chief Man of the Island on Malta (Acts 28:7). Stone Pavement at Pilate's headquarters (John 19:13)—discovered recently. Pool at Bethesda— discovered in 1888. Many examples of silver shrines to Artemis found (Acts 19:28). Inscription confirms the title of the city as "Temple Warden of Artemis". Account of Paul's sea voyage in Acts is "one of the most instructive documents for the knowledge of ancient seamanship."


Prophetic Evidence

2,000 prophecies including some 300 prophecies and implications about the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.
There are no prophetic failures.
While there are both obvious and subtle prophecies, most are very detailed and specific.
No other religion has specific, repeated, and unfailing fulfillment of predictions many years in advance of contingent events over which the predictor had no control.
Studies of psychics show only around 8% of their predictions come true and virtually all of these can be attributed to chance and a general knowledge of circumstances.
Mathematicians have calculated the odds of Jesus fulfilling only 8 of the Messianic prophecies as 1 out of 1017 (a 1 followed by 17 zeros). This is equivalent to covering the entire state of Texas with silver dollars 2 feet deep, marking one of them, mixing them all up and having a blind-folded person select the marked one at random the first time. For more on this, see What Are The Odds?
Fulfilled prophecy is powerful evidence that the Bible is divine rather than human in origin.

Statistical Evidence

The Bible contains 66 books, written by approximately 40 different writers, over 1600 years, on 3 different continents, in 3 different languages, on thousands of different subjects, yet with one central theme—God's redemption of mankind from sin won for the whole world by the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

 

[spnadmin]

Let's begin this thread with some guidelines for discussion. Sikh Philosophy Network is a Sikh forum, not an interfaith forum. If the guidelines are not followed then the thread will be closed.

Keep in mind that SPN permits comparative discussion of religions and interfaith dialog. SPN TOS do not permit efforts to convert individuals to another faith by proselytizing. To be blunt, the forum is not a place where members of other religions are free to preach tenets of their faith to the mass Internet audience.

The following types of content in posts/replies will be edited or deleted, or the thread may be closed.

1. Teaching by openly pursuing the "Great Commission of Jesus" as stated in the Gospel of Matthew: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
   
2. Linking to sites whose mission is evangelism or proselytizing, without stating that that is the site mission, and misleading readers into thinking that the linked site explains rather than preaches.
   
3. Preaching or offering sermons to SPN members and/or using SPN threads to preach to the mass Internet audience, with the objective of spreading "good news" i.e., salvation through the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth proclaimed to be the Son of God.
   
4. Promoting similar messages through private messaging.
   
5. Witnessing - Using passages from the Hebrew or Christian testaments for purposes of saving members of other faiths.
   
6. Preaching with the intent of promoting one's own religion.

Keep in mind that Sikhs do not actively attempt to convert others to Sikhism. Therefore, when a member of another faith carries out any activity such as teaching or preaching, evangelizing or witnessing it can be particularly annoying to Sikhs.

Moderators or admin may delete any message without notice if he/she believes that proselytizing has occurred.

 

[Seeker9]

Dear Kairos Ji

I must commend you on your tenacity as I can see this is your third attempt at this sort of thread

Perhaps you would do me the courtesy of replying to my post which I have posted twice on your other two threads and a third time here

In order to answer your question, I would say not entirely and my reasons for that view are in the post below.....here goes again..third time lucky perhaps....
===================================================
My Dear Kairos Ji

I can see nothing further to debate as we have been going in circles on that thread. (For benefit of those reading this thread, that thread was titled "Why is Sikhism the true religion")

Here's one of my posts from that thread to which you have yet to respond:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kairos (Why is Sikhism the True Religion?)
the apostle Peter said :

“ Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”


i believe, God provided the precise thought to the human author, and he then wrote it down in terms of his own vocabulary, culture, education, and writing style.


http://www.allabouttruth.org/who-wrote-the-bible.htm

I see you have returned to quotes and hyperlinks

In this case, an out of context quote to backup a feeble hypothesis

And where's the holy spirit in all this, which you elaborated on in a recent post about the Gospel of John?

So let me help you out here...from God to scripture perhaps this is what happens:

God tells the Holy Spirit
The Holy spirit tells the human
The human, despite being graced with divine knowledge still chooses to put his own spin on things

All this happens (sometimes decades) after the events (strange how God did not think it appropriate to inspire, despatch the Holy Spirit at the time the events occurred)
and voila, we have the Scriptures

Over time, entire texts are removed, only to be found again centuries later and they appear to offer a different view from the "official" Bible

What complete and utter RUBBISH!

 

[Seeker9]

Biblical texts and links to evangelistic sties have been deleted.

We have enough evidence that the Bible is trust worthy :

http://www.faithfacts.org/search-for-truth/maps

[COLOR="rgb(0, 100, 0)"[COLOR=Blue]]Dear Kairos Ji
Whilst I wait with baited breath for your defence of the indefensible as per my earlier post, here's some more comments from me[/COLOR]:[/COLOR]

[B]Manuscript Evidence[/B]

"Astounding" number of ancient manuscripts extant: 5,000 Greek manuscripts, 10,000 Latin and 9,000 other--totaling over 24,000 manuscript copies or portions of the New Testament. These are dated from 100 to 300 years after the originals. (There are no original manuscripts ["autographs"] extant, but the number and similarity of copies allows scholars to reconstruct the originals.)

What exactly does this prove? That the Bible exists? That doesn't need proving surely. If folk translate/re-write something 10000 times over a 1000 years, doesn't mean much if the original text was deeply flawed. What do I mean by deeply flawed? Well, my earlier post to which you have failed to reply 3 times refers.....

Archaeological Evidence

The New Testament mentions specific individuals, places, and various official titles of local authorities, confirmed by recent archeology. Luke sites exact titles of officials. (Titles varied from city to city so they are easily checked for accuracy.) Lysanias the Tetrarch in Abilene (Luke 3:1)—verified by inscription dated 14-29 A.D. Erastus, city treasurer of Corinth (Romans 16:23)—verified by pavement inscription. Gallio—proconsul of Achaia (Greece) in A.D. 51 (Acts 18:12). Politarchs ("city ruler") in Thessalonica (Acts 17:6). Chief Man of the Island on Malta (Acts 28:7). Stone Pavement at Pilate's headquarters (John 19:13)—discovered recently. Pool at Bethesda— discovered in 1888. Many examples of silver shrines to Artemis found (Acts 19:28). Inscription confirms the title of the city as "Temple Warden of Artemis". Account of Paul's sea voyage in Acts is "one of the most instructive documents for the knowledge of ancient seamanship."

Yes so these places and some of the key players really existed! But where is the hard archaeological and historical evidence for the Garden of Eden? Moses parting the Red Sea? Any of the miracles of Jesus??

Prophetic Evidence

2,000 prophecies including some 300 prophecies and implications about the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.
There are no prophetic failures.
While there are both obvious and subtle prophecies, most are very detailed and specific.
No other religion has specific, repeated, and unfailing fulfillment of predictions many years in advance of contingent events over which the predictor had no control.

ABSOLUTE DRIVEL!! How many of these prophecies were transcribed before the event occurred? Certainly nothing in the NT and most of the OT texts were written decades to hundreds of years after the events they portray. Please don't continue to insult our intelligence by referring to prophecy. It is no more prophetic than my writing next year about the winners of the last World cup and then claiming that I prophesied a victory for Spain!!

Studies of psychics show only around 8% of their predictions come true and virtually all of these can be attributed to chance and a general knowledge of circumstances.
Mathematicians have calculated the odds of Jesus fulfilling only 8 of the Messianic prophecies as 1 out of 1017 (a 1 followed by 17 zeros). This is equivalent to covering the entire state of Texas with silver dollars 2 feet deep, marking one of them, mixing them all up and having a blind-folded person select the marked one at random the first time.

HAH HAH HAH...Now that is really funny and made me laugh out loud. Can we see the computations underlying this impressive display of maths??

For more on this, see What Are The Odds?
Fulfilled prophecy is powerful evidence that the Bible is divine rather than human in origin.
I guess it could be if there was any genuine prophecies. My idea of a prophecy is something that is forecast before the event occurs, not written as such decades after the event

Statistical Evidence

The Bible contains 66 books, written by approximately 40 different writers, over 1600 years, on 3 different continents, in 3 different languages, on thousands of different subjects, yet with one central theme—God's redemption of mankind from sin won for the whole world by the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

I don't get the significance of this. What statistics are you referring to? As for God's redemption of mankind... clearly this involves a wrathful vengeful God presiding over mass raping of women and murdering of babies.....if you don't mind..I think I'll give it a miss...
winkingmunda

 

[Lee]

Kaios ji,

Bearing in mind Narayanjot's warning, yes there is some evidance that some contents of the Bible can be said to be trustworthy, but let me give you my reasoning so that you can understand my viewpoint. Not exclusivly on the Christian Bible but all which we would deem holy scripture.

It is my belife that there is one God, who created the creation and set in motion all of the rules which we may term scientific laws. God is also a loving God, so any dogma which I find contradicts the idea of a loving God I simply cannot see as coming for the mouth of God(for want of a better expresion).

It is obviouse that humanity differs from location to location, that culture and our differing cultures play a huge part in shaping who we are as individuals and citersens of which ever country we find ourselves born in.

Some of these differances are great, some not so, but differances there are. In the way we think , in our POV's in our concepts of manners and morality. This must I think you'll agree all be acording to Gods plan.


Assumption:

So either we must belive that God has choosen a specific 'race' to 'save' of that God has given all of humanity the chance to reach God.

I firmly belive the latter.

If this is true then why would God give only one way? If theer are multitudes of differant kinds of people, of mindset, then I believe a loving God would create many ways for the whole of humanity to reach God.

In Sikhi it is considered as a mark of respect that one covers the head in a place of worship, this is extended to wherever Gods presenace is. God is prevalant throughout the creation and so Sikhs keep their heads covered at all times. Yet in my English culture it is considered impolite to cover the head when in a place of worship, we remove our hats before stepping into a church.

Both of these are really little more than cultural mores. Which one then is correct for they both can't be right? Or can they?

Yes I would say both are correct, I don't really belive that God minds the head covered or uncovered the important part is respect. Whatever then is a valid show of respect in your cultureis what God asks of you.

We can see then that some dogma is either misunderstood, not the word of God or has been deemed more important than it should be.

All written words are open to many interpretaions, and so the chance of misunderstanding or improper interpretations is I think high.

 

[gurbanicd]

"mere man har upar kijey bharwasa"

Without going in detail of this topic This is a topic which I think should not be discussed at all

"Saanjh karijey gunah keri"

If we trust Guru Granth Sahib ji our Guru then
IS there any quote in gurbani to discuss this.

Naam bina Sabh Koor gaali hochian"

"Bhulan chukan di khima"

 

[spnadmin]

"mere man har upar kijey bharwasa"

Without going in detail of this topic This is a topic which I think should not be discussed at all

"Saanjh karijey gunah keri"

If we trust Guru Granth Sahib ji our Guru then
IS there any quote in gurbani to discuss this.

Naam bina Sabh Koor gaali hochian"

"Bhulan chukan di khima"

gurbanicd ji

I understand your concern and you are not the only individual to express such a view. However Sikh Philosophy Network from its beginning was open to interfaith debates and discussions of other scriptures. SPN was not designated for discussion of gurbani only. This thread is posted in Interfaith Dialogs/Christianity, where it should be located. Our hope was to provide a platform for a serious approach to comparative religions. Sometimes we succeed very well and the result is learning on both sides. Other times it is more difficult.

 

[gurbanicd]

Kaurji

Dhanvaadji

I may be wrong and perhaps I have not come across some shabad of Gurbani where Sikh and Sikh philosophy should discuss other religions.
Apology once again

 

[spnadmin]

Kaurji

Dhanvaadji

I may be wrong and perhaps I have not come across some shabad of Gurbani where Sikh and Sikh philosophy should discuss other religions.
Apology once again

gurbanicd ji

That is OK. No problems whatsoever. Discussing other religions is permitted per the SRM. Veneration of other scriptures is not permitted. But that is a discussion for a different thread. Our willingness to permit discussion often leads to troublesome situations which often make me think we should be hardliners and not permit it at all. But that is my failing as a human being.

 

[BhagatSingh]

:seriousmunda:Hmm... I don't think its the trustworthiness of the Bible you have to worry about...

YouTube- Atheist Experience - Tallying God's kill count in the Bible (Part 1)
"Killing Spree!"

YouTube- Atheist Experience - Tallying God's kill count in the Bible (Part 2)
"Running Riot!" :firing:

God PWNS Satan! 2,017,956 to 2!

 

[Seeker9]

love the smileys ! going to save those

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Kaurji

Dhanvaadji

I may be wrong and perhaps I have not come across some shabad of Gurbani where Sikh and Sikh philosophy should discuss other religions.
Apology once again

Gurbanicd ji,

Guru Fateh.

I beg to differ with you. Gurbani talks about both Hindu and Islamic mythology. Sidh ghost is one of them. Parables like Prahalad and many more are in the SGGS, our only Guru.

Gurbani is the best tool box for comparative religious studies and the prevalent religions at that time were Hinduism and Islam in India and it also does mention the other two Semitic religions a bit.

Namjap ji can help you find the right Shabads. He is the best in this.


Regards

Tejwant Singh

 

[gurbanicd]

Gurfatehji

Baba aakhey hajia subh amla bajhon doven roi
Baba replied to the pilgrim hajis, that, without good deeds both will have to weep and wail.
********************

Aval Allah noor upaaeiaa kudrat ke sab bandey ||
Ek noor te sab jag upajaiaa koun bhalae ko mande ?
logaa bharam n bhoolahu bhaaee ||
khaalik khalak.. khalak mehi khaalik poor rahiou srab thaii....

Shabad from Sant Kabeer starts here.

First, Allah created the Light;
then, by His Creative Power, He made all mortal beings.
From the One Light, the entire universe welled up.
So who is good, and who is bad? ||1||

O people, O Siblings of Destiny, do not wander deluded by doubt.
The Creation is in the Creator, and the Creator is in the Creation,
totally pervading and permeating all places. ||1||Pause||

The clay is the same,
but the Fashioner has fashioned it in various ways.
There is nothing wrong with the pot of clay
- there is nothing wrong with the Potter. ||2||

The One True Lord abides in all;
by His making, everything is made.
Whoever realizes the Hukam of His Command,
knows the One Lord.
He alone is said to be the Lord's slave. ||3||

The Lord Allah is Unseen; He cannot be seen.
The Guru has blessed me with this sweet molasses.
Says Kabeer, my anxiety and fear have been taken away;
I see the Immaculate Lord pervading everywhere. ||


Ang 1349/1350 and thanks for fixing it. Narayanjot Kaur

Bhulan chukan di Khima

 

[BhagatSingh]

Gurfatehji

Baba aakhey hajia subh amla bajhon doven roi
Baba replied to the pilgrim hajis, that, without good deeds both will have to weep and wail.

Gurbanicd ji, is that quote from Sri Guru Granth Sahib? I am unable to find it on Srigranth.org

 

[gurbanicd]

gur fateh ji

varan bhai gurdas ji


Link removed


bhulan chukan di khima

This is not taking us where we need to go. Please post the vaar and ang number for the vaar, to include the English because the transliterations are not helpful.Use a common search engine, such as srigranth.org.
Please don't post from the Sikhnet media center. Thanks Naryanjot Kaur

 

[spnadmin]

Bhagat ji

These appear to be tuks from different shabads threaded together to form a single composition

For example,

ਮਾਟੀ ਏਕ ਅਨੇਕ ਭਾਂਤਿ ਕਰਿ ਸਾਜੀ ਸਾਜਨਹਾਰੈ ॥
maattee eaek anaek bhaanth kar saajee saajanehaarai ||
The clay is the same, but the Fashioner has fashioned it in various ways.

This one is from Ang 1350, and the other 3 are from different shabads.

The other thing needed is for the poster to always make a connection between the discussion and the shabad.

So I have deleted the other 3 tuks. YOu can post them gurbancd ji again, but the entire shabad is needed with you understanding.


But you have made an excellent observation. We need entire shabads and Ang numbers to draw conclusions. So gurbanicd ji, Please repost the relevant shabads with Ang humbers.


Also, Bhagatji When you search transliterations chances are you are not going to find what you are looking for. They are too variable, especially when compared to spoken PUnjabi transliterations.

 

[gurbanicd]

Bhagat ji

These appear to be tuks from different shabads threaded together to form a single composition

For example,

ਮਾਟੀ ਏਕ ਅਨੇਕ ਭਾਂਤਿ ਕਰਿ ਸਾਜੀ ਸਾਜਨਹਾਰੈ ॥
maattee eaek anaek bhaanth kar saajee saajanehaarai ||
The clay is the same, but the Fashioner has fashioned it in various ways.

This one is from Ang 1350, and the other 3 are from different shabads.

The other thing needed is for the poster to always make a connection between the discussion and the shabad.

So I have deleted the other 3 tuks. YOu can post them gurbancd ji again, but the entire shabad is needed with you understanding.


But you have made an excellent observation. We need entire shabads and Ang numbers to draw conclusions. So gurbanicd ji, Please repost the relevant shabads with Ang humbers.


Also, Bhagatji When you search transliterations chances are you are not going to find what you are looking for. They are too variable, especially when compared to spoken PUnjabi transliterations.

<?"urn:fficeffice" /><o> </o>
puCn gl eImwn dI kwzI mulW iekTy hoeI] (1-33-1)
vfw sWg vrqwieAw lK n sky kudriq koeI] (1-33-2)
puCx Kol ikqwb nUM vfw ihMdU kI muslmwnoeI] (1-33-3)
bwbw AwKy hwzIAW SuB AmlW bwJo dovyN roeI] (1-33-4)
ihMdU muslmwn doie drgih AMdr lYx n FoeI] (1-33-5)
kcw rMg kusuMB kw pwxI DoqY iQr n rhoeI] (1-33-6)
krn bKIlI Awp ivc rwm rhIm kuQwie KloeI] (1-33-7)
rwh SYqwnI dunIAw goeI ]óó] (1-33-8)

No one can read these fonts!